Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 26, 2011, the Thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Genesis 22:1-14
v. 1 Is this why we pray, “lead us not into temptation”? What was the alternative response, “I am not here”?

v. 2 How has this verse informed the Christian understanding of John 3:16? How has john 3:16 influenced how Christians read this passage of Hebrew Scripture?

v. 4 “On the third day.” Very Interesting! I am not sure I have ever noticed its presence before. Have you?

v. 5 Was Abraham lying, or prescient, when he said to the young men “we will come back to you”?

v. 7 I find it interesting that Abraham responds to Isaac with the same words he uses to responds to God.

v. 8 Again, was Abraham lying or prescient when he told Isaac “God will provide the lamb for a burnt offering.?

v. 9 Thus the usual way of referring to this passage: The Binding of Isaac”. What was the age of Issac when this took place? Do you think Isaac physically resisted when his father started to bind him?

v. 11 Is the “Angel of the Lord” the same as God? Earlier, God called to Abraham once. Earlier, Isaac addressed his father once. Why does the “Angel of the Lord” address Abraham twice?

v. 12 How do you understand the word “fear”? Do you “fear” God?

Some of called this the most dangerous, and scariest verse, in the whole Bible. What do you think?

Psalm 13:1-6
v. 1 If this Psalm is in the lectionary today to function as a response to or interpretation of Genesis 22:1-14, then I would rather God forget me than call me to sacrifice my only child (if I had a child). What does it mean for God to hide the divine face?

v. 2 A verse that resonates with my soul. You?

v. 3 What is the “sleep of death”?

vs. 5-6 What in the world is going on with the verb tenses here?

Romans 6:12-23
v. 12 I hate it when lectionary readings, especially from the Pauline corpus, start with “Therefore”.

v. 12 and v.14 How do you reconcile these two verses?

v. 16 How do we deal with this slavery language?

v. 19 “Natural limitations”? I would say more , but I feel limited by my human nature.

v. 23 Let’s cut to the chase and simply quote this verse

Matthew 10:40-42
v. 40 A welcoming verse for a welcoming church.

v. 41 In the name of?

v. 42 Who are these “little ones”? Which disciple’s name would you like to affix to the water fountain? What is the reward that won’t be lost?

ADDENDUM
In addition to serving as the half time Designated Pastor of North Church Queens  and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time. If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check our my WyzAnt  page and follow the appropriate links.

Go Fish!: "Where are the churches?"

“Where are the churches?”

That was my question as several hundred people swirled around me at the recent 8^th annual Craigslist Foundation Boot Camp in San Francisco.

Boot Camp is a one-day conference for staff and volunteers from a wide variety of nonprofit organizations. It includes speakers and workshops designed to give nonprofits the tools and skills needed to help communities. It’s also a great place for like-minded people to network and collaborate.

One of the amazing things that struck me was that in the sessions I attended was that I heard a government official and leaders of secular community groups say they wanted to collaborate with churches. They encouraged their audiences to invite congregations into partnerships to bless (my word) surrounding neighborhoods.

Yet, as I met people and heard people introduce themselves in the workshops, I wasn’t hearing or seeing representatives of churches or faith-based groups. That’s not to say they weren’t there, because they might have been and I just didn’t see them.

About mid-afternoon I thought, my church should be here. Which led me to my question above: “Where are the churches?”

Here were secular folks, the ones we often think don’t want to work with us, and they were encouraging other secular folks to reach out to churches.

One reason given for why government, nonprofits, churches and businesses need to work together is that the problems we face right now are too big for any one entity to solve them. Only through partnership and collaboration can we make communities whole and healthy again.

Toward the end of the day we broke up into groups to reflect on what we had learned during the day. One woman shared that she experienced an epiphany.

“As a librarian I go to a lot of library conferences,” she said. “I realized today I’m sick of going to library conferences because we talk to each other and never grow.”

Whoa.

Her words hit me hard. I could have taken out the word “library” and inserted “church.”

I go to a lot of church conferences. We talk to each other and we never grow.

I’m not suggesting that we stop going to church conferences. We need to come together, worship together, learn from each other, and be encouragers of each other.

But I would say don’t only go to church conferences. Seek out the places local government, community groups and businesses are hanging out together. Start brainstorming how all of you can work together to bless your community.

Just before I went to Boot Camp, I reported on an amazing community event put together by a faith-based organization called Beautiful Day. It’s a prime example of how churches, local government, and nonprofits can work together. More than 2,400 volunteers worked on 17 projects to refurbish schools and homes, help the homeless, minister to disabled youth, and more.

If you’re interested in learning more, you can see the two stories I wrote. One is about the event itself. The other is focused on one project, in which two retired police officers commanded 600 volunteers to refurbish an entire neighborhood. The photo above is from that project.

Where are the churches? Let's answer that question out in our communities by saying "Here we are!"

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 19, 2011, Trinity Sunday (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Genesis 1:1-2:4a
For once, the lectionary prescribes that the First Reading of the Day begins where the Bible begins, “In the beginning” at Genesis 1:1. This is also, perhaps, one of the longest Readings in the lectionary outside of Lent and the Passion narrative. Am I stating the obvious when I note that this is the “first” creation account? I take the Bible too seriously to take it literally. Thus, I read Genesis 1:1-2:4a as a mythopoeic reflection on human origins rather than a scientific explanation of them. Can we read and interpret this passage without reference to Genesis 2:4bandfollowing? How does reading this on Trinity Sunday influence our understanding and interpretation of the passage and how does this passage inform our understanding of the Trinity?

v. 1 What is the better translation, “when God created” or “when God began to create”?

v. 2 What is a “wind from God”? How else might we translate the Hebrew word sometimes translated “wind”?

v. 3 Creation ex nihilo! Can we read this without also thinking of the prologue of John?

v. 4 What would have happened if God saw that the light was NOT good?

v. 5 Are you familiar with this three tiered cosmology?

v. 15 The roots of both astrology and astronomy.

v. 16 So where did the light come from in day one if God did not create the Sun until day four?

v. 22 Who, or what, are told to be fruitful and multiply?

v. 24 Note that sea creatures and birds are told to be fruitful and multiply in verse 22, but here, animals of the earth are NOT told that.

v. 25 Us? There is that “dominion” word that has caused us so many environmental problems and which we will encounter again in Psalm 8:6.

v. 28 Note that we are not told that God blessed any other creatures or parts of creation. In light of how we have historically interpreted and applied the admonition to “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion,” I think this has been more of a curse than a blessing as far as we “exploit neighbor and nature, and threaten death to the planet entrusted to our care.”

vs. 29-30 It sounds like we have been given plants to eat, but not animals.

v. 3 Another blessing. So what did God do on the eighth day?

Psalm 8:1-9
v. 1 “O LORD” = Tetragrammaton. Are Christians bound by the Hebrew tradition of not pronouncing the majestic name of God?

v. 2 What do babes and infants speak other than gibberish?

v.3 Is there a difference between “creating” and “establishing?

vs. 3-4 I will never forget my sense of awe and wonder the first time I looked through a telescope and saw for myself the rings of Saturn. I think I have heard it said that the Hubble telescope enables us to look back through time to the first moments after creation.

v. 6 Need I say anything about “dominion” other than that an ecological awareness forces us to abandon outdated understandings?

2 Corinthians 13:11-13
This short Second Reading and the short Gospel Reading compensates for the long First Reading.

v. 11 Final words.

v. 12 What is a “holy kiss”?

v. 13 Is this verse, a Trinitarian blessing, the only reason this Reading appears on this day, Trinity Sunday?

Matthew 28:16-20
v.16 Which mountain would that be?

v. 17 Some of the eleven doubted? Doubted what? Doubted whom?

v. 19 Is this Trinitarian baptismal formula the only verse that commends this reading as appropriate for Trinity Sunday?

v. 20 What and when is the end of the age? What is an age? When did the age begin?

ADDENDUM
How much does this being Trinity Sunday influence our interpretation and application of these Readings? In other words, would we read these passages any differently if we were reading them on any other Sunday than Trinity Sunday?

In addition to serving as the half time Designated Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time. If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check our my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

Lectionary Ruminations for for Sunday, June 12, 2011, the Day of Pentecost (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

The Day of Pentecost offers a variety of readings with several possible permutations. Here are the options
First Reading: Acts 2:1-21
Or alternate First Reading: Numbers 11:24-30
Psalm: Psalm 104:24-34, 35b
Second Reading: 1 Corinthians 12:3b-13
Or alternate Second Reading: Acts 2:2-21
Gospel: John 20:19-23
Or alternate Gospel: John 7:37-39

I will ruminate only on the four passages I will be using.

Numbers 11:24-30
v. 24 Is there anything special about the number 70? Is there any story like this in the New Testament?

v. 25 In the NRSV the “Lord”, not LORD, comes down. Does this make any difference? Why did the Lord take some of the spirit that was on Moses and put it on the seventy elders? Was there not enough Spirit to go around, so it had to be rationed? What does it mean to prophesy?

vs. 26-29 OK, PC(USA) Presbyterians, this would have been an argument for the the passage of 10-A, but now that it has already been approved, I will not go there. Why are these two men named when the seventy are not named? Why might they have remained in the camp? Registered?

v.27 A young filer of complaints.

v. 28 And this be Moses’ successor?

v. 29 Indeed, would that all. We can only hope and pray that it be so.

Psalm 104:24-34, 35b
v. 24 How could this verse serve as an interpretive lens for Numbers 11:26-29?

v. 25 The sea kayaker and sailor in me is nodding his head.

v. 26 Was this verse Thomas Hobbes’ inspiration for the title of his political treatise?

v. 29 What does it mean for God to hide God’s face?

v. 29-30 I love the juxtaposition of these two verse, especially the imagery of breath/death and spirit/creation.

v. 32 Storm God imagery.

vs.33-39 Even these are the concluding verses of today’s Psalm, they could easily be adapted to function as a Call to Worship.

Acts 2:1-21
v. 1 What was the day of Pentecost before the coming of the Holy Spirit?

v. 2 This verse might be especially poignant in light of recent devastating tornados.

v. 3 What is a divided tongue? How does a tongue, even a tongue, as of fire, rest on someone?

v. 4 What does it mean to be “filled with the Holy Spirit”. Rosetta Stone, eat your heart out!

v. 5 So?

v. 6 Have you ever been bewildered? What bewilders you?

v. 7 Similarly, amazed and astonished?

vs. 9-11 Lay readers, and even some clergy, hate reading these verses. I think, however, that this list serves a very important theological purpose.

v.11 What are God’s deeds of power?

v. 12 Earlier it was bewildered, amazed and astonished. Now it is amazed and perplexed. What does this mean?

v. 13 Thus most PCUSA Presbyterians shun offering fermented wine at communion, for fear of appearing to be filled with new wine. Instead, we are filled with Welches grape juice, a nice, safe alternative void of all power and warmth, like the spirit in most of our congregations (note to self: get off your soap box).

v. 14 Peter, always the first to open his mouth.

v. 15 Like people are not drunk at 9:00 AM? Some people are just coming home from all night parties at that time.

v. 16 You cannot go wrong by quoting from Jewish prophets when your audience is filled with devout Jews.

vs. 17-21 Is this a case where a prophecy in the Hebrew Scriptures prefigures a later event, or where a prophecy is used as an apology for a later event?

John 7:37-39
v. 37 And what festival would that be?

vs. 37-38 Is it at all problematic that today’s readings are mixing fire, wind and water metaphors?

v. 38 What Scripture passage does Jesus quote and what is the original historical and literary context of that passage?

v.39 Did the author of the Gospel know this at the time Jesus quoted scripture, or does this comment make sense only in hind sight?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Designated Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time. If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check our my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

Grounded Scriptures: Kick those Cans

Bold statement of the day: storing up too much extra food can be theologically dangerous.

I’m talking about those cans and boxes in your pantry. Yes, you. Your little Annie’s Mac & Cheeses, lentil soups, refried beans, ricearonis, whatever it is you store up. Theologically dangerous. Yes, I said it. Watch out.


I wouldn't counsel utter foolishness, of course. I know a good deal when I see one. As a matter of principle I won’t say no to 75% off. And certain places can really get me going. When I’m house shopper (we divide it up – one person to the farmer’s market, one to TJ’s, one to Safeway) I find it much harder to shop at Safeway than the farmers’ market. At the farmer’s market, you look around and see what’s good, and guess how much a hungry household will eat in a week, and I almost never have a problem with going over budget. We can only eat so much in a week. At Safeway I’m constantly tempted. They know how my brain works. They offer 50% off sales, or even worse, they say “buy one get one FREE” and my brain sees “free” and says “well it would be a sin to leave that to go to waste, I’d better help them out here.” I end up spending way over the weekly budget and we end up with stacks and stacks of 60-percent-off pasta. We eat it, eventually, of course.

There is a theological side of this story. Ellen Davis talks about the “manna economy” of the desert, and the “empire economy” of Egypt. When the Israelites were enslaved, they looked around and saw silo after huge silo of stored grain. They may not have had direct access to it, but it was there in case of famine, courtesy of Pharoah’s food policy programs. In the desert it was the polar opposite – their manna was not physically capable of being stored. It would rot overnight. Forget building a silo – you'd have to live day to day. The manna story shows the economic implications of relying on your food directly from the hand of God – if there is no storing it up, there is no taxing it either, or running an overpriced supply chain out of Pharoah’s silos. Everyone gets what they need - no more, no less.
The manna economy does not come easily in the real world. We are keepers, storers, hoarders - and recently TV shows have shown us the dark underside of that strain that runs through our culture. It is not that unusual for people to have cans in their closet that end up expiring before they can eat them all – because so many sales have convinced them they absolutely MUST take this cheap little can of food home with them, store it up, feel secure against potential disasters.
It’s a funny philosophy… to think that God would somehow love the perishable food more than the imperishable… and might even want us to face the world without a prudent reserve… but it must come from something like the same theology that says “blessed are the poor” and other such backwards things.
What is your personal food theology? What does your pantry or fridge say about your relationship to God? Or have you intellectualized it out of that realm completely?

Notes of a Biology Watcher

There are many quite good books about science and religion around these days. (Not to mention several not so good ones). This month I want to call your attention to an author from the ‘70s, Lewis Thomas. Thomas was a physician and a cancer researcher who began writing essays for the New England Journal of Medicine. Those essays were collected and published as several books, the first of which was The Lives of a Cell. You can read more about Lewis Thomas in his New York Times obituary and in this article by Roger Rosenblatt.

What was cutting edge scientific discovery when Thomas wrote these essays is now “old” science. Some of it may have been significantly modified by more recent research. What hasn’t changed is how amazing our world is and the way scientists feel about their work. And this is why I want to suggest that you read a bit of Dr. Thomas’ work. He doesn’t write about “science and religion”. I’m not sure if he would have considered himself a Christian, all though I don’t think he did. But if you want insight into the way biologists feel about biology, no one does that better than Lewis Thomas.

I read Lewis Thomas’ books years ago when they were first published. They have sat in my bookcase for many years. A friend’s post on Facebook caused me to remember Dr. Thomas and to take his books off the shelf and dip into them once again. I was in high school when The Lives of a Cell was published ( 1974). My aunt gave me a copy because she thought I might like the book. It was, for a high school student, a somewhat challenging read because Thomas was writing for fellow physicians and assumed a certain knowledge base. But he wrote so beautifully. This book was the first time I encountered someone who gave voice to my developing sense of the beauty and wonder of biology. He, in many ways, gave me the courage and permission to think about science as more than mere facts. His work nudged me to begin thinking more holistically and less compartmentally about my life and my work. It took me decades to work much of this out, but Lewis Thomas’ sense of the complexity and interconnectedness of the world opened my eyes.

Some things are difficult to explain. Faith can be hard to explain to those who don’t believe. That biology as a scientific discipline that is full of beauty and worthy of our absolute amazement can be difficult to explain. If you are not a scientist ( or even if you are), I encourage you to read one –or more- of Lewis Thomas’ books. You will receive a wonderful insight into the mind of a scientist. Few scientists are as articulate as Lewis Thomas was. In fact, few essayists are as articulate as he was. He spoke eloquently of the experience that is common to his colleagues.

Let me leave you with an excerpt from his essay, “On Embryology” found in The Medusa and the Snail: More Notes of a Biology Watcher. This essay was written just after the birth of the first “test tube” baby. Lewis reminds us that the technology shouldn’t amaze us as much as the biology should.

For the real amazement, if you want to be amazed, is the process. You start out as a single cell derived from the coupling of a sperm and an egg, this divides into two, then four, then eight, and so on, and at a certain stage there emerges a single cell which will have as its progeny the human brain. The mere existence of that cell should be one of the great astonishments of the earth. People ought to be walking around all day, all through their waking hours, calling to each other in endless wonderment, talking of nothing except that cell. It is an unbelievable thing, and yet there it is, popping neatly into its place amid the jumbled cells of every one of the several billion human embryos around the planet, just as if it were the easiest thing in the world to do.

If you like being surprised, there’s the source. One cell is switched on to become the whole trillion-cell, massive apparatus for thinking and imagining and, for that matter, being surprised….

No one has the ghost of an idea how this works,and nothing else in life can ever be so puzzling. If anyone does succeed in explaining it, within my lifetime, I will charter a skywriting airplane, maybe a whole fleet of them, and send them aloft to write one great exclamation point after another, around the whole sky, until all my money runs out.

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 5, 2011, the Seventh Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Acts 1:6-14
Will you handle this verse differently depending on whether or not your community observed and celebrated Ascension Day last Thursday?

v. 6 Who has come together?

v. 7 Take that, prognosticators of May 21being the end of the world!

v. 8 Do you have the power? Note the progression from the local to the global.

v. 9 In the NRSV, the action is in the passive. Must we read “lifted up” as a physical reference? In English, we occasionally say we “lift up” things without physically touching them or physically moving them. What might the cloud symbolize?

v. 10 Were the two wearing white robes really men?

v. 11 A good question. Is this a reference to the coming of the power and Holy Spirit mentioned in verse 8, or the second coming?

v. 12 Is the mount of Olives really a sabbath’s day’s journey from Jerusalem? What is a Sabbath day’s journey?

v. 13 What is the significance of the naming?

v. 14 Constantly? Who might the other women have been in addition to Mary? His brothers?

vs. 13-14 That eleven men are named, but only one woman, in my mind makes this a sexist and patriarchal passage. What would your reaction be if the passage read, “When they had entered the city, they went to the room upstairs were they were staying. All of them were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, the other Mary, Martha, and Salome, as well as his brothers.”?

Psalm 68:1-10, 32-35
v. 1 Is this Psalm paired with the First Reading only because of the “Let God rise up” language?

v. 4 Now we have “cloud” imagery to pair with the First Reading.

v. 8 When was the last time you heard someone begin a prayer with the address “God of Sinai” or “God of Israel” rather than “Father”?

v. 32 Not only Israel but “kingdoms of the earth” are called to sing praises to God.

vs. 33-24 Here we have “rider in the heavens” and “skies” language to add to the “rise up”language of verse 1 and the “cloud” imagery of verse 4.

v 35. My God is “awesome”! How do you understand this affirmation? What does it mean to be “awesome”?

1 Peter 4:12-14, 5:6-11
v. 12 What is meant by ‘the fiery ordeal”? Shall we read this any differently in light of the Holocaust/Shoah? Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

v. 13 “Rejoice”? Really? Is this supposed to a pep talk?

v. 14 I find this verse easier to take than the one before it.

v. 7 What would a Psychiatrist say about this verse?

v. 8 In other words, “Pay attention. There be Lions” and tigers, and bears.

v. 9 “all the world”? Really?

v. 10 Now I hear a word of hope rather than resignation.

John 17:1-11
v. 1 What “words”? Ah Jesus, can you not just once in a while pray using more inclusive language when you address God? What “hour”? Quid pro quo?

v. 2 Jesus referring to himself in the third person?

v. 3 I like this image of eternal life more than eternal habitation on clouds playing harps.

v. 5 Jesus had glory in God’s presence before the world existed? Oh, that is right. I forgot. This is the Gospel According to John.

vs. 7-8 I think Jesus is attributing more knowledge and understanding to his followers than they really possessed at the time, or now.

v. 10 How has Jesus been glorified in others?

v. 11 God has given a holy name to Jesus? What was that name? How can those for whom Jesus pray in any sense of the word be “one” as Jesus and “his Father” are one?

ADDENDUM
In addition to serving as the half time Designated Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time. If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check our my WyzAnt  page and follow the appropriate links.

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, May 29, 2011, the Sixth Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.)  Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Acts 17:22-31

v. 22 Last week we learned that Paul stood by while Stephen was stoned.  Now, Paul is preaching in Athens before the Areopagus.  The transition and the symbolism are startling. 

v. 23 If Paul were to walk through  one of our cities, what would he identify as the objects of our worship?

vs. 24-29 What is the content of Paul’s preaching?  What does he not say?  Is Paul’s sermon more Theistic than Christocentric?

v. 24 Can we still talk about God, who made the world and everything in it, without positing a six day creation and getting sidetracked into the creationism/evolution debate?

v. 26 Who is this ancestor?

v. 27 What does it mean to search and grope for God?  Is this still a valid argument in the post-modern world?

v. 28 An appeal to secular/pagan poets.  Have we in the church forgotten how to employ the artistic expressions of contemporary culture?

v. 31 Bote that Paul refers to a “man” God raised from the dead.  Paul seems not to here assert any divinity to this “man”.

Psalm 66:8-20

v. 8 This sounds like, and could be used as, a Call to Worship.

v. 10 What does it mean to be tested and tried? What testing and trials might the Psalmist be referring to?

v. 11 Last week the net was hidden.  This week, the people have been in the net.

v. 12 What and where is the spacious palce?

v. 13 What does it mean to pay vows?

v. 16 Another Call to Worship? What does iot mean to fear God?

v. 20 Does God ever reject prayer?  Can steadfast love ever be removed?

1 Peter 3:13-22

v. 13 Is this a rhetorical question, or what?    It sometimes seems, in life, that no good deed goes unpunished.

v. 14 Who are “they”?  What do “they” fear?

v. 15 How does one sanctify Christ in their heart?

v. 17 Does the reason for suffering in any way affect the moral value of our suffering?

v. 18 What does this verse say about the nature of the resurrection?

v. 19 “He descended into hell”?  “He descended to the dead”?

v.21 Some interesting words about baptism.  Just as there are many understandings of the Lord’s Supper, are there also many understandings of Baptism?

John 14:15-21
v. 15 A big “if”?  What is the nature of this love?  What are Christ’s commandments?

v. 16 Is Christ’s intercession contingent on our keeping his commandments?  Why, in the NRSV, is “Advocate” capitalized?  Can we read and interpret this verse without being informed by the Doctrine of the Trinity?

v. 17 Notice that in the NRSV “Spirit” is capitalized.

v. 18 “Orphaned” could be an often overlooked but powerful image. Is Jesus talking about the coming of the Spirit, the Second Coming, or something altogether different?

v. 20 What day is “that day”?

v. 21 Is this free grace or does there seem to be an element of works righteousness, an element of conditionality?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Designated Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time.  If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check our my WyzAnt  page and follow the appropriate links.

Go Fish!: What Are We Known For?

“And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love,

Yes they’ll know we are Christians by our love.”

-- Peter Scholtes, “They’ll Know We Are Christians By Our Love”

What am I known by? Do people know I’m a Christian? If they do, what face of Christianity am I projecting to others? The face of Christ? Or something different? Am I known for love? If not, what am I known for?

It’s scary to think about, because when it comes down to it, we may have to take responsibility for actions (or inactions) we aren’t always proud of. Of course we can’t completely control others’ perceptions of us, but we can control our own decisions and actions that can take a role in shaping perceptions.

I am a member of “The Media”, and I grow tired of people blaming “The Media” for a litany of woes. To me it often smacks of “killing” the messenger. Sometimes we (as the public) just don’t like what’s being reported, because it brings uncomfortable situations and truths to light. By blaming those who report those situations, we avoid having to take responsibility for our own actions.

While covering a local city council meeting recently, an official chastised “The Media” for focusing on a particular point he didn’t like. I knew he was referring to something I had written; I was in fact “The Media” he was referring to. But I didn’t make the point up; I was quoting directly from something another public official had said both in a public meeting, and an open letter. He didn’t like the fact I had reported it, because it cast his agency in an unflattering light. Rather than take responsibility for the issue, he was blaming "The Media" for bringing it into the light for the public to see.

Earlier this week I listened to a podcast by a national Christian leader I respect and admire very much, but I winced when he commented that “The Media” had given Christians a bad name. While I’ll admit there are those in “The Media” who have openly criticized and been disparaging of Christians, and portrayals of Christians on television and on film are not always flattering, I think we need to confess that Christians have in fact given media organizations some fodder over the years.

One of the most egregious recent news examples include the man who claims Judgment Day is tomorrow, May 21. To many of my Facebook friends and Tweeps, he comes off as completely nutty. Another tragic example is the church from Kansas that protests at military funerals in an utterly offensive way.

More subtly, the infighting that often goes on within and between denominations also paints an unflattering picture to the public, whether we realize it or not. Instead of projecting love, we project disharmony and disunity. Not attributes people would be attracted to.

We need to ask ourselves honestly: “What are we known for?” Or better yet, we need to ask nonbelievers and listen to what they say.

Some have already asked for us, like Dan Kimball, They Like Jesus, But Not the Church, or David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons, Unchristian. They report a pretty good list of some unflattering things Christians are known for.

I can’t control how our larger denomination, or other denominations act and portray themselves to the public. I can only control my own actions of sharing God’s love with others, or help my church to share God’s love with the community.

This weekend in my area there’s a community organization, spearheaded by a church, which is sharing God’s love in a big way through numerous acts of service. From a blood drive, to fixing up local schools, to electronics recycling, to helping a homeless encampment, this group is helping thousands of local residents over the next few days. They are sharing Jesus’ love, his servant’s heart, with those who are in need of that love.

It would be great if “The Media” would report on all these actions the organization is doing, but even if it doesn’t get widely broadcast, thousands of folks in this area will still be touched, and on Sunday morning (if we’re all still here) hopefully those folks will have a better idea of who the followers of Jesus are.

“We will walk with each other, we will walk hand in hand

We will walk with each other, we will walk hand in hand


And together we'll spread the news that God is in our land


And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love


They will know we are Christians by our love”

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, May 22, 2011, the Fifth Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore. 

Acts 7:55-60
v. 55 This verse offers us the opportunity to enter into all sort of speculation about the Holy Spirit. When reading this for worship, you may want to substitute “Stephen” for “he”. Do people in the Bible Study and in the pews need to be reminded what “right hand of God” symbolizes; the absolute superiority of right handedness and right handed persons and the total degenerate nature of left handedness and left handed persons?

v. 56 can you spell r-e-d-u-n-d-a-n-t? What purpose does this verse serve?

v. 57 Is this a literal or a figurative covering of ears?

v. 58 If we knew nothing about the rest of the story, would we even notice that a young man is named? Note that this young man casts no stones.

v.59 Certainly the prayer of a martyr. Is this not also the prayer of anyone near death?Is it not the prayer of all Christians?

v. 60 what does the mention that Stephen “cried out in a loud voice” remind you of? Take a look at Luke 23:46. Compare the conclusion of verse 60 with the conclusion of Luke 23:46.

Psalm 31:1-5, 15-16
By the Lectionary pairing this Psalm with Acts 7:55, are we to read this Psalm as a commentary on what else might have been going through Stephen’s mind but not recounted in the Acts passage?

v. 1 What is “refuge”? The most contemporary example I can think of is a “wildlife refuge”.

v. 2 “Incline your ear”? Is this a petition? How can a rock be a refuge? Is there such thing as a weak fortress?

v. 3 Rock/fortress and lead/guide seem to be poetic constructions.

v. 4 What is the imagery here? How can one be taken out of a net if the net is still hidden?

v. 5 Does this verse sound familiar? Where else are we used to hearing it?

v. 16 What does it mean for God’s face to ‘shine” on a person?

1 Peter 2:2-10
v. 2 What is a “babe in Christ”?

v. 4 How can a stone live? Come to think of it, I do remember one episode in the original Star Trek series where stones were living. How can we be built into a spiritual house? Is there such a thing as an unholy priesthood? What sort of sacrifices are spiritual?

vs. 6-8 Is this proof texting or the imaginative play and interplay of biblical images from several sources?

vs. 9-10 These are two of my favorite verses of Scripture. Where Does Peter get these images?

John 14:1-14
vs. 1-7 I have probably read these verses more at more Services of Witness to the Resurrection than at Services for the Lord’s Day. Maybe it is time we hear them in the context other than one related to death.

v.2 What do make of there being “many dwelling places” in God’s house?

v. 3 If we are reading this in worship on Sunday, May 22, that will mean that Jesus did not return the day before to take us to himself. Of course he did not return at that time. All along, I have known that he will return at five minutes after 5:00 am on the tenth day of October in the year 2020, Jerusalem time.

v. 6 Another one of the “I am” sayings” found in John. So much for universalism!

v. 8 How can Philip say this after what Jesus says in the previous verse? Is Philip dense?

v.9 Apparently Jesus thought the same way about Philip as I do.

v. 11 Do we take Jesus at his word or do we need works?

v.12 This formulaic phrase, “Very truly, I tell you” (Αμήν Αμήν λέγώ ύμίν in Greek) is found 25 times in John’s Gospel and nowhere else in the Bible. What do you make of this fact?

vs. 13-14 Whatever? Really? I want a new car, new house, and to win a major lottery prize, even though I do not play the lottery. What does it mean to ask in Jesus’ name?

ADDENDUM
My comments pertaining to the right hand of God in Acts 7:55 and the return of Christ in John 14:3 are obviously tongue in cheek and meant to see if they motivate anyone to take me to task with a comment.

Grounded Scriptures: Scandalous Food

Ask any of my housemates, my favorite greek word is σκανδαλιζομαι! With lots of exclamation points at the end. “Scandalizomai” – I am scandalized (by whatever gross or otherwise inappropriate thing has just been said)!!!
The Greek word has the sense of “scandal” in the sense of something offensive. But it also has the very concrete meaning of something which causes others to trip and fall. A “stumbling block,” if you will. My housemates don’t necessarily feel hurt if I say I’m scandalized by them – Jesus was scandalous too (1 Cor 1:23) – and still is a stumbling block to many.

Food is a scandalous subject, laden with cultural assumptions. Any new vegan who has gone home at Christmas knows this. What, Grandma’s roast isn’t good enough for you? Whattayawant, anyway? It goes the other way, too – try asking for a burger in a vegan household. We are scandalized by one another’s choice in food.

In a great passage of 1 Corinthians 8, Paul talks about food choices. The choice, in those days, was whether to eat meat (slaughtered in pagan temples) or to be vegetarian (hence not touching idol-tainted meat). My anti-vegetarian friends love to quote this one because it says “those whose conscience is weak eat only vegetables.” Paul was NOT putting us vegetarians down, though. His point is that those who are fully convinced that there is no such thing as a god other than God will not be upset by eating pagan meat. Paul is in that category. He has no moral qualms about meat. However, he is VERY careful not to scandalize his friends.

Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “no idol in the world really exists,” and that “there is no God but one.”… It is not everyone, however, who has this knowledge. Since some have become so accustomed to idols until now, they still think of the food they eat as food offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. “Food will not bring us close to God.” We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if others see you, who possess knowledge, eating in the temple of an idol, might they not, since their conscience is weak, be encouraged to the point of eating food sacrificed to idols? So by your knowledge those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed. But when you thus sin against members of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall.


To me, another question comes up. What about the members of our family who are workers in meatpacking plants? Meatpacking is one of the most dangerous jobs around, due to the speed of the line and the risk of disease. Or what about the members of our family who pick pesticide-laden crops, day after day? Would they be scandalized if they saw us carelessly eating the cheap burgers and strawberries for which they labor? If they saw us preaching “we are all one in the family of God” on Sunday, and saying “$2/pint is way too much for strawberries” on Monday? If we sin against these brothers and sisters, we sin against Christ.

Next time you complain about the price of food, think about the brother or sister (for whom Christ also died) who grew, harvested, processed, or served you the food. If they food should be cheap - are they worthless too? What does your theology say? What does your budget say?

Grounded Scriptures: Be Ye Idealistic

Idealism gets a bad rap. A bunch of us well-meaning community gardeners and other such rabble were on a Presbyterian Hunger Program webinar recently, talking about the Manna Economy, and the desert experience which taught Israel how to eat. In this economy, and in stark contrast to Egypt, food is gathered locally rather than stored in huge silos, each family has what they need, no more, no less, and there is no way to exploit another by stealing their food. You can only eat what comes down from the sky each day. You get your food from the hand of God.
Beautiful stuff. But it's idealistic, so we shove it aside. No one wants to be called idealistic. A fate worse than rotten tomatoes. Pie in the sky dreamers? No thanks. We want to be realists, grounded in cruel, cold, reality, because it will make us strong and Correct.

BUT GUESS WHAT. THE BIBLE IS IDEALISTIC.
Take a look at this zinger of a passage: Deuteronomy 15
At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts. This is how it is to be done: Every creditor shall cancel any loan they have made to a fellow Israelite. They shall not require payment from anyone among their own people, because the LORD’s time for canceling debts has been proclaimed. You may require payment from a foreigner, but you must cancel any debt your fellow Israelite owes you. However, there need be no poor people among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you, if only you fully obey the LORD your God and are careful to follow all these commands I am giving you today.

I will contend that God, too, MUST be idealistic - if she's rash enough to say something like "no one should have to be poor."
Hear that? Bible says. No one should have to be poor. If you follow God's ways, even that ridiculous idea of "canceling all debt" every seven years, each of you will be protected from falling into desperation. If you eat what falls out of the sky into your outstretched hands each day, and remember the rhythms of Sabbath, you will not go hungry. If you use the land gently, remembering who your divine Landlord is, you will not face deprivation.

Be ye idealistic. Believe that God has a positive vision for this world, where no one is poor. Take part in building that world. Allow God's gentle grace in, to take the place of that cruel and cold "realism." What is really real is in God, and God is an idealist - hallelujah for that!

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, May 15, 2011, the Fourth Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Acts 2:42-47
v. 42 Greek Scholars; is it the apostles’ teaching and the apostles’ fellowship, or the apostles’ teaching and fellowship? In other words, does “Apostles’’” modify both teaching and fellowship or just teaching? Regardless, I consider these the four marks of the church. Against them, how do we measure up?

v. 43 How do you understand “Awe”? Are the wonders and signs the same thing as miracles,or something different?

v. 44 Pure communism?

v. 45 “All” means whom? Does the answer to that question depend on what the meaning of the word “is” is?

v. 47 Note the distinction between what was happening in the Templeand what was happening in homes. How do you understand “day by day”?

Psalm 23:1-6
What can we say about the most popular passage in the Bible that we have not already said, like just six weeks ago on April 3, the Fourth Sunday in Lent? Whu does this Psalm appear twice in the lectionary in such a short span of time?

v. 1 Does it serve any theological and homiletically purpose to point out that “The LORD” is not a reference to Jesus but to the LORD God? How many Christians hear this Psalm as a Psalm about Jesus rather than a Psalm about God?

v. 4 Do you prefer the “darkest valley” of the NRSV or the “valley of the shadow of death” of the KJV and RSV?

v. 5 What does it mean to have one’s head anointed with oil and one’s cup overflowing. Can we really speak of overflowing cups when in the Eucharist we barely fill little plastic cups containing less than a shot glass? Can we speak of being anointed with oil when most congregations rarely, if ever, practice it? I argue for anointing with oil at the time of Baptism as well as the laying on of hands associated with prayers for healing and wholeness. If we practiced more anointing with oil, this popular Psalm might actually mean even more to some people.

v. 6 What does it mean to dwell in the house of the LORD all one’s life? Is “house of the LORD” a reference and/or allusion to the Temple, or something else?

1 Peter 2:19-25
v. 19 I would rather not receive this credit. What about you? What does it mean to be “aware’ of God?

v.20I understand this within its context, but in ou context, can this lead to and feed a martyr complex?

v. 21 I thought we were called to love one another, even to serve, but to suffer?

v. 22 Where is this quote from?

v. 23 So much for an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

v. 24 The first part of this verse often serves as a call to confession. How is anyone healed by another’s wounds?

v.25 Is this the verse that motivated the creators of the lectionary to make Psalm 23 the Psalm for this day? I like the “guardian of our souls” language.

John 10:1-10
v. 1 A formulaic opening to yet more sheep and shepherd imagery. Whom do you think Jesus/John had in mind?

v. 3 This verse seems to suggest that there are sheep of more than one shepherd in the sheepfold.

v. 4 What shall we make of the “voice”?

v. 5 Is there any correlation between the Stangers of this verse and the thief and bandit of verse 1?

v. 6 And want made John think that we would understand?

v. 7 Again the formulaic phrase. Why the change of metaphor from shepherd to sheepfold?

v.8 This verse seems to refer back to verse 1. Whom is Jesus referring to?

v. 9 I am fascinated by the “come in and go out” language, suggesting movement rather than stasis. If I understand the imagery correctly, we come into the sheepfold at night to find protection, but during the day, we go out into pasture to find nourishment. What was Jesus talking about?

v. 10 Who is the thief?

Science and Religion

There are many things that fuel the so called conflict between science and religion. Based on my experience, one of the biggest problems is Biblical illiteracy and the concomitant lack of Bible interpretation skills. If folks had better interpretive skills and knowledge about the Bible, a significant amount of the science and religion pseudo conflict would vanish.

It seems to me there are three basic concepts that people miss which then can send them off into odd interpretive places.

First is the very common idea that the Bible is some sort of instruction manual, guide book or set of lessons with practical applications. Can we go to Scripture and find wise advise for how to live our lives? Of course. But that is not, in my estimation, the primary reason we have been given the Bible.

The Bible is the story of God's relationship with us. It is story in the most honest and truthful sense of the word story. The Bible tells God's story, the story in which we find our place and is not the answer book given to solve all our personal problems.

The second concept is the idea that the only serious, faithful reading of scripture is a literal reading. I have been surprised at the number of well education Christian people I know who do not realize the church has a long, very long tradition of faithfully reading the Bible using a variety of interpretive methods. Long before Darwin and the Scope's Trial and Creationism and Intelligent Design, people realized that there were other ways of reading Genesis 1 and 2 than as historical fact. Reading Genesis in a way other than as the recitation of historical scientific facts about creation is not a modern accommodation of evolution but a way of engagement of the text with a long tradition in the church.

These are two rather significant shifts in the way one reads the Bible. There is no way around that. This entails some major relearning for some people. For other people, these two concepts open up a way of faithful, serious engagement with the Bible that can be liberating.

This is what I tell people, who ask, about Genesis 1 and 2- These chapters are not about science. These chapters are not given to us to tell us how the world was created. These chapters are given to us to tell us about the Creator of the world. The text isn't interested in proving that God created the universe. The text assumes that God created the universe. And the text wants to tell us about that God. Who that God is, how that God acts, the ways that God relates to all that was created.

To believe that these chapters in Genesis are not a historical accounting of an event is not to believe theses chapters are not true. Which brings us to the third idea that aids Biblical interpretation. The truth is not merely equivalent to the facts. This is a difficult idea for modern people, people who were raised in the age of science. Our assumption is that if we know the "facts", we will know the truth. But somethings are not reducible to facts. For example- Love. Beauty. Justice.

Dick Murray in his book, Teaching the Bible to Adults and Youth, suggests that we ask three questions when we read the Bible.

What does this tell us about God?

What does this tell us about the relationship between God and humans?

What does this tell us about the relationship between humans?

The order is important and the questions are deceptively simple yet incisive. They are questions that help us think about truth rather than facts.

All three of these concepts deserve a more complete discussion than I have given them here. But as a starting point, what do you think? Is this a useful approach to help lessen the idea of a conflict between science and religion?

******

This is more than an academic exercise, my friend Bill Tammeus writes about the important of science and religion to work together in health care.

********

There are three books I recommend on the topic of Biblical Interpretation, Eugene Peterson's Eat This Book, Chapter 5 of N. T. Wright's New Testament and the People of God (Actually I hope you read the entire book but chapter 5 is what this post is about), and Micheal W. Goheen and Craig Bartholomew's The True Story of the Whole World: Finding your Place in the Biblical Drama. What would you add to this list?

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, May 8, 2011, the Third Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Acts 2:14a, 36-41
v. 36 Why “both” Lord and Messiah?

v. 37 What does it mean and feel like to be “cut to the heart”? When was the last time you were “cut to the heart” and what precipitated it? Is there any significance to the fact that the crowd addresses Peter and the other apostles as “brothers”?

v. 38 How do we reconcile the Trinitarian baptismal formula with Peter’s admonition to be “baptized in the name of Jesus Christ”?

v. 39 In this context, we might know who “you” and “your children” are, but who are those “who are far away”?

v. 40 I would love to hear all those “many other arguments”.

v. 41 Is there any significance to the number three thousand?

Psalm 116:1-4, 12-19
v. 3 What are “pangs”?

v. 4 This is perhaps the shortest prayer in Scripture.

v. 12 A good question to ask when talking and thinking about stewardship.

v. 13 What is “the cup of salvation”?

v. 14 What does it mean to “pay” “vows”?

v. 15 In what sense is death ever “precious”?

v. 16 What bonds have been loosed?

1 Peter 1:17-23
v. 17 This sounds a lot more polished than what we heard from Peter in the First Reading. Is this an argument for works righteousness? What is “reverent fear”? What exile is being referred to?

v. 18 Is there any other way to read this verse other than through the lenses of a ransom theory of the atonement?

v. 19 This verse seems to presume a preexistent Christ.

v. 23 The being “born anew” sounds like John’s being “born from above”, but what is this “not of perishable but of imperishable seed”?

Luke 24:13-35
v. 13 What day is it? Is there any significance to the fact that Emmaus was seven miles from Jerusalem? Who are “them”?

v. 14 What thungs?

v. 16 How can one’s eyes be kept from recognizing Jesus?

v. 17 Was this a rhetorical question?

v. 18 Do we know anything else about Cleopas? What an ironic question.

v. 19 Another rhetorical question. Only “prophet”?

v. 21 Notice the past tense.

v. 22 “Some Women”? Do they not have names? Is there a difference between “seeing angels” and “seeing a vision of angels”?

v. 24 Who are “those who were with us”? Who are “us”?

v. 25 Now the truth comes out. How often have you wanted to preach something similar?

v. 26 A rhetorical question?

v. 27 The Law and the prophets but no writings.

v. 29 What does the time of day have to do with anything?

v. 30 Déjà vu

vs.30-31 The best argument for frequent—even every Sunday—celebration of the Eucharist that I know.

v. 31 Read this in light of verse 16.

v. 32 Is there any relation between the opening of the scriptures and the opening of the eyes?

v. 33 Is “hour” any more than a simple reference to the chronological time of day? So these two are numbered among the eleven.

v. 34 Appeared to Simon? No one else?

v. 35 Does this offer new or additional meaning to the Eucharistic remembering?

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, May 1, 2011, the Second Sunday of Easter (Year A)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references are linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.) Lectionary Ruminations is also cross posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

Acts 2:14a, 22-32
v. 14a Whom is Peter addressing?

v. 22 Are “deeds of power”, “wonders” and “signs” synonyms?

v. 23 “Definite plan and foreknowledge” – This does not sound like the same Peter portrayed in the Gospels

vs. 25-29 Where does David say this? How would you grade Peter’s interpretation of David’s words?

v. 30 Since when has David been considered a prophet?

v. 32 Is Peter arguing for the resurrection, or something else?

Psalm 16:1-11
v. 3 Who are “the holy ones in the land”?

v. 4 Whom is the Psalmist referring to?

v. 5 What is a “chosen portion”?

v. 6 I find this an interesting verse in light of the recent political history of the Middle East, especially regarding borders

v. 7 How does the heart instruct during the night? Is this a reference to dreams?

v. 10 What is the Pit” being referred to?

Why does the Psalmist seem to alternate between direct address to God and speaking of God in the third person?

1 Peter 1:3-9
v. 4 Is this “imperishable, undefiled, and unfading” inheritance being implicitly compared to any other inheritance?

v. 5 What does this verse say about Peter’s eschatology?

v. 6 what trials is Peter referring to?

v. 8 Is this verse evidence that Peter is writing to perhaps second generation Christians?

John 20:19-31
v.19 This reading might be for the First Sunday After Easter, but the narrative is from the events of Easter day. What is the significance of Jesus’ words?

v. 20 Did the disciples not recognize Jesus until after he showed them his wounds?

v. 21 How did the Father send Jesus?

v. 22 Did the disciples receive the Holy Spirit? If so, was it Jesus words or his breathing on them, or both, that allowed them to receive it?

v. 23 How shall we protestants deal with this verse?

v. 25 Would Thomas have said this if it were not for what is described in verse 20?

v. 26 Now we are dealing with events on the same schedules as we are, a week after Easter.

v. 27 Jesus invites Thomas to touch his wounds, but does Thomas do so? Was just being invited to do so enough to ignite Thomas’ belief?

v. 29 Whom is this verse referring to when it speaks of “those who have not seen and yet come to believe”?

v. 30 I wonder what “other signs” are being thought of. I think there is a novel or two waiting to be inspired by this verse. Perhaps Dan Brown will take up the challenge. I find it interesting that this Gospel refers to itself as a “book”.

v. 31 Who is the “you” being addressed?

Monday Blog Club - Easter!

Good morning!

Apologies for my absence. . . I was off doing this:

But now I'm back and happy to welcome the newest members of our web ring, Laila and Liz from Four for a Year!

"We are a Presbyterian pastor and a marketing consultant attempting to follow Miguel Ruiz's "Four Agreements" for one year. The agreements are: 1. Be impeccable with your word. 2. Don't make assumptions. 3. Don't take anything personally. 4. Always do your best. The agreements are about seeking truth and love in everything we do. They are not a religion in themselves, but they in fact dovetail beautifully with our Christian identity. We seek to follow Christ and to incorporate "love your neighbor as yourself" into our daily living, and the agreements can be a powerful tool to help us along that path. We initially began trying to follow the agreements while training for a half-marathon together. We'd choose one for a week and, in the wee hours of the morning as we ran, we'd talk about the experience. This task was surprisingly difficult and life changing. So life changing that we committed to following the agreements for one entire year. We decided to blog about it as a means to keep ourselves on task and to hopefully encourage others with honest (and often humorous) accounts of our experiences as we move toward a more positive and love-filled way of being."

Happy Easter!