As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him. She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said. But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!” “Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed—or indeed only one. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.” (Luke 10:38-42 NIV)
This is one of my favorite passages because it speaks to me on so many levels. Frankly, some days I'm Mary, but more often, I'm Martha. Perhaps you can find yourself in this story, too.
To fill in the details of the story, we need to look at John 11: 1-2 where we find that Mary and Martha were the sisters of Lazarus, of Bethany, who later would be raised from the dead. Mary was the woman who anointed Jesus' feet with ointment and wiped His feet with her hair. Jesus knew this family well and there was much love between them.
Matthew Henry (my favorite theologian from the 1600-1700's) says that Martha was likely a widow who kept the home where she had lived with her husband (or possibly was housekeeper in Lazarus' home), and that Mary lived with her. Since Jesus was not rich in money, he was dependent upon the hospitality of His friends. Matthew Henry says that "Jesus often invited Himself to them" because He knew he was always welcome at the home of Martha and Mary. "Though it was expensive to entertain Christ for He did not come alone, but brought His disciples with Him, yet she would not regard the cost of it. How can we spend what we have better than in Christ's service?"
Perhaps the reason for Martha's fretting and worrying was not that everything be perfect but that she be able to serve her Lord at all. For a widow of limited means, entertaining thirteen hearty men was no small undertaking. The food alone would have been a considerable effort and expense.
Until today, when I thought of Martha and Mary, I have generally thought of them in a 1st century version of my house. If Martha wanted to cook something, she would just go to my pantry or out to the freezer, get it and cook it right up. Nothing could have been further from the truth! The typical meal was likely bread, olive oil, dried fruit, and dried legumes of some sort, either beans or lentils. Bread was likely cooked fresh every day. If Martha wanted to make bread, she had to grind the grain. If Martha wanted to cook beans, she soaked them and likely cooked them for hours. The arrival of Jesus and his disciples meant that, if Martha was going to feed them, she had to get to work and to get busy about it. (Of course, Jesus could have just done a miracle and fed them with the little she had on hand, but it appears that she wanted to provide for Him from her own resources.)
In 1st century Israel, there were no telephones, cell phones, fax machines, or postal service home mail delivery. Without a runner going ahead to say He was coming, Jesus had no way to notify Martha that He was en route. The willing generosity of Martha toward the Lord and His disciples should be an example for us. There is no indication that Martha served grudgingly or under compulsion. Instead, it is clear that she was eager to serve well and to do it on the spur of the moment. There is no greater honor than to have the Lord of Heaven and Earth present in our homes and, in recognizing that, Martha longed to give honor back to Him with her service.
What about us? Are we willing to serve Christ on the spur of the moment, without regard to the amount of effort or expense required? Would we, like Martha, welcome Jesus and all the people who journeyed with Him into our home? Would we be ready to entertain at a moment's notice?
Jesus visited often in the home of Martha, Mary and Lazarus and felt free to bring His friends along, because He knew He would always be welcome. Can He say the same of us? of our homes? Let's be sure that we are as welcoming to our Lord and those He sends our way as Martha, who willing shared the little she had with all who came her way.
____
Please be in prayer for Congressman Alan Nunnelee, who is seriously ill and in desperate need of miraculous intervention, as well as his family and friends.
Showing posts with label loving your neighbor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label loving your neighbor. Show all posts
Sunday, February 1, 2015
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
How to inherit eternal life, part 19: the Samaritan
And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands? " And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same." (Luke 10:31-37 NASB)
The priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan all saw the wounded man but only the Samaritan saw with his heart. He was moved by compassion for the man's needs and did all he could do for him. The actions of the Samaritan are remarkable on many levels, but especially because he was on a journey, headed to a destination where he would stay, likely for several days. "When I return", he told the innkeeper, he would settle accounts for all that had been needed in the care of the man. With that, the Samaritan committed himself to an ongoing involvement in the life of the wounded man that would continue until the man was able to care for himself.
The Samaritan did not stop at merely bandaging the hurt places. He committed himself to the man's recovery and provided what was needed for that to happen. Truthfully, I prefer the one-time handout. I'm happy to send blankets to homeless people, but I'm not so quick to involve myself in the lives of those same homeless people, helping them until they are back on their feet. It's the same with those who have a myriad of overwhelming needs. Just like them, I am easily overwhelmed by their need. Not seeing how to deal with all the problems, it's easier to deal with none of them.
What I've come to realize is the very thing the Samaritan understood all along. He was not responsible for helping every person with trouble along his journey, but he was responsible for one. When he saw with his eyes and his heart, he responded by doing what he could, and it was enough. In that same way, we will never be able to respond to every need our eyes see, but, when God moves our heart with compassion, we can respond to the need of one.
I think the kind Samaritan was accustomed to helping people along the journey. He had a relationship of trust with the innkeeper that made the man's care possible, so perhaps he had done the same thing for other wounded people along his way. He was the kind of neighbor God has called us to be, responding, one at a time, with all the compassion and care and commitment we can until the injured one has recovered enough to care for themselves.
May we look at the great need around us and allow God to move our hearts with compassion and our hands with action, commitment, and care. Let's not hold back from the one who needs us the most, but love and give as the kind Samaritan, staying involved until the need is completely met. After all, that is exactly what Christ has done for us.
The priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan all saw the wounded man but only the Samaritan saw with his heart. He was moved by compassion for the man's needs and did all he could do for him. The actions of the Samaritan are remarkable on many levels, but especially because he was on a journey, headed to a destination where he would stay, likely for several days. "When I return", he told the innkeeper, he would settle accounts for all that had been needed in the care of the man. With that, the Samaritan committed himself to an ongoing involvement in the life of the wounded man that would continue until the man was able to care for himself.
The Samaritan did not stop at merely bandaging the hurt places. He committed himself to the man's recovery and provided what was needed for that to happen. Truthfully, I prefer the one-time handout. I'm happy to send blankets to homeless people, but I'm not so quick to involve myself in the lives of those same homeless people, helping them until they are back on their feet. It's the same with those who have a myriad of overwhelming needs. Just like them, I am easily overwhelmed by their need. Not seeing how to deal with all the problems, it's easier to deal with none of them.
What I've come to realize is the very thing the Samaritan understood all along. He was not responsible for helping every person with trouble along his journey, but he was responsible for one. When he saw with his eyes and his heart, he responded by doing what he could, and it was enough. In that same way, we will never be able to respond to every need our eyes see, but, when God moves our heart with compassion, we can respond to the need of one.
I think the kind Samaritan was accustomed to helping people along the journey. He had a relationship of trust with the innkeeper that made the man's care possible, so perhaps he had done the same thing for other wounded people along his way. He was the kind of neighbor God has called us to be, responding, one at a time, with all the compassion and care and commitment we can until the injured one has recovered enough to care for themselves.
May we look at the great need around us and allow God to move our hearts with compassion and our hands with action, commitment, and care. Let's not hold back from the one who needs us the most, but love and give as the kind Samaritan, staying involved until the need is completely met. After all, that is exactly what Christ has done for us.
Go and do the same.
______
If you have not yet ordered your copy of The Waiting: When the Answer to Your Prayer is Delayed and Your Hope is Gone, you can get yours here, or go to leannahollis.com/online-store.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
How to inherit eternal life, part 18: The obedient one
But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' (Luke 10:33-35 NASB)
In order to understand the reference to the Samaritan, and to fully understand the richness of this parable, the last two posts have looked at how the problem between the Jews and the Samaritans developed. You can read those two posts here #1 and here #2.
The parable of the Good Samaritan is incredibly rich on multiple levels, and it also gives us a glimpse into the humor of God. He loves using the unlikely to do the unexpected, especially when He can plant an ironic and deeply profound lesson in the midst of things.
Remember that the trouble with the Jews and the Samaritans began with what was essentially a civil war in Israel. Because of Solomon's idolatry, God tore the kingdom from his descendants and promised it to Jeroboam if he would only wait, listen, and obey. Eventually, Solomon died, and his son Rehoboam inherited the kingdom. Rehoboam made it clear that he would be a tough taskmaster, taking more from the people than his father, Solomon. The people of Israel would have none of Rehoboam, and they made Jeroboam king. Only the tribes of Judah and Benjamin stayed with the Davidic line and Rehoboam. For the most part, the kings of both kingdoms (especially the Northern Kingdom) were ungodly and led people into idolatry and heinous sin, however, we must not forget that God initiated the severing of the kingdom.
The tribes of Judah and Benjamin, ruled by Rehoboam, became known as the Southern Kingdom and the people were called Jews. The other ten tribes, ruled by Jeroboam, became known as the Northern Kingdom, (with their capital in Samaria) and the people were called Samaritans. Both kingdoms were filled with people who were typical people. Just like us, they were arrogant and thought they knew it all. Just like us, they thought they were God's favorites. (We tend to forget that God loves everyone!)
Of course, the Jews still had access to the temple and Jerusalem and they felt that they were the keepers of the law. Oddly enough, the word translated as "Samaritan" is Samareia and literally means "guardianship" or "guardian". There became a sense that they were the guardians of the law (Remember, it was God who tore the Kingdom apart, so they thought they had a special dispensation, despite the fact of the incredible idolatry of the nation.) There are still several hundred Samaritans today. They have their own Torah and they believe that they are the guardians of the law. Needless to say, the Jews did not believe the Samaritans were guardians of the law or that they had anything "right" at all. Over time, the Jews had come to hate the Samaritans.
With all that as background, look at this parable again. Jesus was talking to a group of Jewish people. The question that prompted the parable was, "Who is my neighbor?" Jesus told the story of a man, likely a Jewish man, who was traveling on a dangerous road and was accosted by robbers. They beat him, robbed him, and left him for dead. A Jewish priest and a Jewish Levite walked past, saw the man, and kept going. They did not stop and they did not help the man in any way. The Samaritan (guardian) came down the road, saw the injured man who was, in a sense, his enemy, and at great expense and considerable inconvenience, helped the man.
Jesus asked the lawyer to whom he was speaking, "Which of these three proved to be a neighbor to the injured man?" Because the discussion had revolved around the law, Jesus was essentially asking, "Which one of these three kept the law?' We cannot even imagine what it must have felt like for the lawyer, the expert in the law, (as well as the crowd) to admit that the Jewish people, who considered themselves keepers of the law, had totally failed at loving their neighbor, while the Samaritan man, who turned out to actually fulfill the law concerning his neighbor, had done the good they failed to perform. The Samaritans were not their worst enemy, but they were despised and rejected, and it must have stung.
What Jesus showed the lawyer, the crowd, and those of us reading today was that they, who considered themselves as God's favorites, were not as godly as they presumed. The priest and the Levite were only thinking of themselves. The Samaritan thought first of the man on the road and it caused him to intervene. Our actions often demonstrate what is in our heart, and the Samaritan's actions demonstrated the compassion in his heart.
When I look at this parable, I cannot help but think about all the times I've been a priest or a Levite instead of a Good Samaritan. The problem is not just that my actions have been more like the priest and Levite, but that my attitude has also been one with theirs. "It's only natural", we say, and that is right. The natural man cares first for himself, does first what he wants. It is the transformed-by-the-blood of the Lamb, obedient, godly man who cares for the things of God, the people of God first, and who first does what God wants rather than satisfying his own desires.
Dear ones, we are not called to be "natural", we are called to be men and women of God, obedient and self-sacrificing, loving our neighbor as we do ourselves. Our actions will never be what God intended until our attitudes are right, and that requires a heart change, a relinquishing of our pride and our judgmental spirit. Let us, then, make it our goal to have the heart of God toward our neighbors, the heart of the Samaritan to those in need - despised, rejected, yet giving of ourselves to those who cannot help themselves.
In order to understand the reference to the Samaritan, and to fully understand the richness of this parable, the last two posts have looked at how the problem between the Jews and the Samaritans developed. You can read those two posts here #1 and here #2.
The parable of the Good Samaritan is incredibly rich on multiple levels, and it also gives us a glimpse into the humor of God. He loves using the unlikely to do the unexpected, especially when He can plant an ironic and deeply profound lesson in the midst of things.
Remember that the trouble with the Jews and the Samaritans began with what was essentially a civil war in Israel. Because of Solomon's idolatry, God tore the kingdom from his descendants and promised it to Jeroboam if he would only wait, listen, and obey. Eventually, Solomon died, and his son Rehoboam inherited the kingdom. Rehoboam made it clear that he would be a tough taskmaster, taking more from the people than his father, Solomon. The people of Israel would have none of Rehoboam, and they made Jeroboam king. Only the tribes of Judah and Benjamin stayed with the Davidic line and Rehoboam. For the most part, the kings of both kingdoms (especially the Northern Kingdom) were ungodly and led people into idolatry and heinous sin, however, we must not forget that God initiated the severing of the kingdom.
The tribes of Judah and Benjamin, ruled by Rehoboam, became known as the Southern Kingdom and the people were called Jews. The other ten tribes, ruled by Jeroboam, became known as the Northern Kingdom, (with their capital in Samaria) and the people were called Samaritans. Both kingdoms were filled with people who were typical people. Just like us, they were arrogant and thought they knew it all. Just like us, they thought they were God's favorites. (We tend to forget that God loves everyone!)
Of course, the Jews still had access to the temple and Jerusalem and they felt that they were the keepers of the law. Oddly enough, the word translated as "Samaritan" is Samareia and literally means "guardianship" or "guardian". There became a sense that they were the guardians of the law (Remember, it was God who tore the Kingdom apart, so they thought they had a special dispensation, despite the fact of the incredible idolatry of the nation.) There are still several hundred Samaritans today. They have their own Torah and they believe that they are the guardians of the law. Needless to say, the Jews did not believe the Samaritans were guardians of the law or that they had anything "right" at all. Over time, the Jews had come to hate the Samaritans.
With all that as background, look at this parable again. Jesus was talking to a group of Jewish people. The question that prompted the parable was, "Who is my neighbor?" Jesus told the story of a man, likely a Jewish man, who was traveling on a dangerous road and was accosted by robbers. They beat him, robbed him, and left him for dead. A Jewish priest and a Jewish Levite walked past, saw the man, and kept going. They did not stop and they did not help the man in any way. The Samaritan (guardian) came down the road, saw the injured man who was, in a sense, his enemy, and at great expense and considerable inconvenience, helped the man.
Jesus asked the lawyer to whom he was speaking, "Which of these three proved to be a neighbor to the injured man?" Because the discussion had revolved around the law, Jesus was essentially asking, "Which one of these three kept the law?' We cannot even imagine what it must have felt like for the lawyer, the expert in the law, (as well as the crowd) to admit that the Jewish people, who considered themselves keepers of the law, had totally failed at loving their neighbor, while the Samaritan man, who turned out to actually fulfill the law concerning his neighbor, had done the good they failed to perform. The Samaritans were not their worst enemy, but they were despised and rejected, and it must have stung.
What Jesus showed the lawyer, the crowd, and those of us reading today was that they, who considered themselves as God's favorites, were not as godly as they presumed. The priest and the Levite were only thinking of themselves. The Samaritan thought first of the man on the road and it caused him to intervene. Our actions often demonstrate what is in our heart, and the Samaritan's actions demonstrated the compassion in his heart.
When I look at this parable, I cannot help but think about all the times I've been a priest or a Levite instead of a Good Samaritan. The problem is not just that my actions have been more like the priest and Levite, but that my attitude has also been one with theirs. "It's only natural", we say, and that is right. The natural man cares first for himself, does first what he wants. It is the transformed-by-the-blood of the Lamb, obedient, godly man who cares for the things of God, the people of God first, and who first does what God wants rather than satisfying his own desires.
Dear ones, we are not called to be "natural", we are called to be men and women of God, obedient and self-sacrificing, loving our neighbor as we do ourselves. Our actions will never be what God intended until our attitudes are right, and that requires a heart change, a relinquishing of our pride and our judgmental spirit. Let us, then, make it our goal to have the heart of God toward our neighbors, the heart of the Samaritan to those in need - despised, rejected, yet giving of ourselves to those who cannot help themselves.
Monday, January 26, 2015
How to inherit eternal life, part 17: More on the Samaritans
But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.' (Luke 10:33-35 NASB)
Understanding how a problem developed helps us understand the reference to it, so, in the previous post, we began a look at how the problem with the Samaritans developed. You can click on this link .
Because of Solomon's unrepentant rebellion and idol worship, God "tore" the kingdom from him, promising ten tribes to Jeroboam. All he had to do was wait, listen, and obey. He was excited about this, as we probably would have been, and he obviously told some people about the prophecy and began to make a conspiracy to make himself the king, because word got back to Solomon, who tried to kill him. He fled to Egypt to avoid assassination, and stayed there until Solomon died and Rehoboam became king in his father's place.
When Jeroboam heard the news, he hurried back from Egypt, leading all the people to beg Rehoboam to ease the severe treatment of the citizens by his father. Rehoboam laughed. "Ha. You think my daddy was bad. I'm going to be tougher than my daddy ever was!" Those words were all the people needed to justify rebellion, and the ten tribes rejected Rehoboam as king, split the nation, and made Jeroboam king over those who rebelled. The new nation was called the Northern Kingdom and Judah became known as the Southern Kingdom. Jeroboam established his capital in Shechem in the region of Samaria, but the capital was later moved to the city of Samaria.
As you might expect, there was a great rivalry because those who were in the Southern Kingdom felt that they had an edge on the basis of the lineage of King David. Those in the Northern Kingdom felt that they had an edge because God had torn the kingdom from Solomon and his descendants. All Jeroboam had to do to gain a lasting kingdom was to wait, listen, and obey, but he quickly proved that he would not do what God had said.
Jeroboam was afraid of losing his newly-gained kingdom because of the need to go to the temple in Jerusalem to offer sacrifices. He feared that, in going to Jerusalem to the temple, the people's hearts would soften and they would return to the house of David. Rather than ask God what to do, he made a solution of his own. In an unbelievable turn of events, Jeroboam instituted the very behavior that had caused Solomon to lose the kingdom. Jeroboam set up two golden calves and announced that these golden calves were the gods that had brought the people out of Egypt. To make matters even worse, the people followed his leadership and began to worship those despicable golden calves. Things quickly went from bad to worse, and soon they were a nation filled with idolatry. Two centuries later, they were carried into captivity by the Assyrians, which was essentially the end of the Northern Kingdom.
Jerusalem and the temple were located within the Southern Kingdom. Despite the sin of the Southern Kingdom, they generally made at least a show of worship in the temple, in contrast to the open idolatry of the Northern Kingdom. Because the Southern Kingdom was basically just the tribe of Judah, these people began to be called Jews. The Northern Kingdom was situated in the area of Samaria and the capital of the Northern Kingdom was the city of Samaria. These people, from the ten tribes, began to be called the Samaritans.
We will look once more at the rivalry between the Jews and the Samaritans in the next post, but for today, let us ponder what happens when we act without consulting God. Rehoboam tried to prove himself by being tough and lost a kingdom. Jeroboam tried to save himself by making his own brand of religion, and ended up losing his kingdom, as well. Both lost the legacy God offered them because of their rebellion. How heartbreaking is that?
Dear ones, God is serious about obedience and generously rewards us when we obey. He is also serious about disobedience. (For more on this see Deuteronomy 11:13-15, 26-28, 30:1-20.) His instructions in Deuteronomy 30, had they been heeded, could have saved the kingdom, and we would do well to take note of them today. God gives us a choice, with blessings on one side and discipline on the other. The choice is ours. Let us consider carefully the life we want, and choose well. Our life and the legacy we leave behind depends upon it.
"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (Deuteronomy 30:19-20 NASB)
Understanding how a problem developed helps us understand the reference to it, so, in the previous post, we began a look at how the problem with the Samaritans developed. You can click on this link .
Because of Solomon's unrepentant rebellion and idol worship, God "tore" the kingdom from him, promising ten tribes to Jeroboam. All he had to do was wait, listen, and obey. He was excited about this, as we probably would have been, and he obviously told some people about the prophecy and began to make a conspiracy to make himself the king, because word got back to Solomon, who tried to kill him. He fled to Egypt to avoid assassination, and stayed there until Solomon died and Rehoboam became king in his father's place.
When Jeroboam heard the news, he hurried back from Egypt, leading all the people to beg Rehoboam to ease the severe treatment of the citizens by his father. Rehoboam laughed. "Ha. You think my daddy was bad. I'm going to be tougher than my daddy ever was!" Those words were all the people needed to justify rebellion, and the ten tribes rejected Rehoboam as king, split the nation, and made Jeroboam king over those who rebelled. The new nation was called the Northern Kingdom and Judah became known as the Southern Kingdom. Jeroboam established his capital in Shechem in the region of Samaria, but the capital was later moved to the city of Samaria.
As you might expect, there was a great rivalry because those who were in the Southern Kingdom felt that they had an edge on the basis of the lineage of King David. Those in the Northern Kingdom felt that they had an edge because God had torn the kingdom from Solomon and his descendants. All Jeroboam had to do to gain a lasting kingdom was to wait, listen, and obey, but he quickly proved that he would not do what God had said.
Jeroboam was afraid of losing his newly-gained kingdom because of the need to go to the temple in Jerusalem to offer sacrifices. He feared that, in going to Jerusalem to the temple, the people's hearts would soften and they would return to the house of David. Rather than ask God what to do, he made a solution of his own. In an unbelievable turn of events, Jeroboam instituted the very behavior that had caused Solomon to lose the kingdom. Jeroboam set up two golden calves and announced that these golden calves were the gods that had brought the people out of Egypt. To make matters even worse, the people followed his leadership and began to worship those despicable golden calves. Things quickly went from bad to worse, and soon they were a nation filled with idolatry. Two centuries later, they were carried into captivity by the Assyrians, which was essentially the end of the Northern Kingdom.
Jerusalem and the temple were located within the Southern Kingdom. Despite the sin of the Southern Kingdom, they generally made at least a show of worship in the temple, in contrast to the open idolatry of the Northern Kingdom. Because the Southern Kingdom was basically just the tribe of Judah, these people began to be called Jews. The Northern Kingdom was situated in the area of Samaria and the capital of the Northern Kingdom was the city of Samaria. These people, from the ten tribes, began to be called the Samaritans.
We will look once more at the rivalry between the Jews and the Samaritans in the next post, but for today, let us ponder what happens when we act without consulting God. Rehoboam tried to prove himself by being tough and lost a kingdom. Jeroboam tried to save himself by making his own brand of religion, and ended up losing his kingdom, as well. Both lost the legacy God offered them because of their rebellion. How heartbreaking is that?
Dear ones, God is serious about obedience and generously rewards us when we obey. He is also serious about disobedience. (For more on this see Deuteronomy 11:13-15, 26-28, 30:1-20.) His instructions in Deuteronomy 30, had they been heeded, could have saved the kingdom, and we would do well to take note of them today. God gives us a choice, with blessings on one side and discipline on the other. The choice is ours. Let us consider carefully the life we want, and choose well. Our life and the legacy we leave behind depends upon it.
"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (Deuteronomy 30:19-20 NASB)
Saturday, January 24, 2015
How to inherit eternal life, part 15: Serving God by serving others
Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. (Luke 10:30-32 NASB)
"Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.' Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.' "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.' Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' (Matthew 25:34-45 NASB)
The lawyer asked Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?" and our Lord painted a word picture to help him understand. The one with the greatest need, in the most inconvenient place, who will interrupt our day and disrupt our plans is our neighbor, just as the ones we love and desire to help. Once we understand that we are to love the least convenient and most unlovely, and actually do something about it, then loving the lovely becomes even easier.
As we can see from the story of the Good Samaritan, even the most righteous among us have trouble doing the right thing. The priest didn't do it. The levite didn't do it. The truth is that, all too often, we don't do it, either. When we read this passage from Matthew, however, it puts it in perspective. When we refuse to love our unlovely neighbor, our inconvenient, difficult neighbor, we have refused to love our Lord, and He has some hard words to say about that decision.
The lawyer asked Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?" and our Lord painted a word picture to help him understand. The one with the greatest need, in the most inconvenient place, who will interrupt our day and disrupt our plans is our neighbor, just as the ones we love and desire to help. Once we understand that we are to love the least convenient and most unlovely, and actually do something about it, then loving the lovely becomes even easier.
As we can see from the story of the Good Samaritan, even the most righteous among us have trouble doing the right thing. The priest didn't do it. The levite didn't do it. The truth is that, all too often, we don't do it, either. When we read this passage from Matthew, however, it puts it in perspective. When we refuse to love our unlovely neighbor, our inconvenient, difficult neighbor, we have refused to love our Lord, and He has some hard words to say about that decision.
"To the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me."
Selah. Pause and consider.
That verse is a game-changer when it comes to loving the unlovely and inconvenient, isn't it? Loving the neighbor that is the most difficult to love is, admittedly, not easy. It's also not optional. When we love them and care for them, when we become a friend to them, however, our Lord says we have loved Him and cared for Him at the same time, so let us love for Jesus. Let us care for Jesus. Let us serve for Him, and by so doing, let us serve Him.
Friday, January 23, 2015
How to inherit eternal life, part 14: Walking past the need
Jesus replied and said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. (Luke 10:30-32 NASB)
In the previous post, we looked at the city of Jericho. (click on the link to read that post in a new window)
The word translated here as "going down" is katabainō and means "to descend". As we saw in the previous post, there is a significant difference in altitude between Jerusalem and Jericho, so that a traveler literally "descends" when he travels from Jerusalem to Jericho. There have been some who suggested that the priest did not want to be defiled because of his duties as the priest, but he was clearly traveling katabainō, descending, which makes it obvious that he was traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho and away from the temple, just as the wounded man had been doing. That fact suggests that the priest had completed his priestly duties, performed in Jerusalem, and was heading to Jericho, possibly for the night. Matthew Henry references a historian (Lightfoot) who says that many of the priests lived in Jericho. If so, perhaps he was going home for the night.
Let's think for a moment about the position of priest. It was a highly visible leadership position. People would have looked to him, expected obedience to God from Him, and taken guidance from the priest's behavior. He was to set the example for righteousness because it was the job of priests to minister to the Lord in the temple on a continuing basis. Because of that ongoing ministry before God, one might expect them to understand something of the heart of God, the compassion of God, but apparently that was not the case in this particular priest.
Why didn't the priest stop? Either he saw the wounded man or he did not. Jesus made it very clear that he saw the injured victim. Since he knew the man had a need that was obviously going to be tremendous, why didn't he stop? There are many potential excuses. Perhaps he didn't know what to do and thought he might cause more harm than good by trying to help. Perhaps he was concerned about the ritual cleansing that would be required after caring for this man and wanted to avoid that effort. Maybe he was headed home, running late, and didn't want to be delayed. God, however, is much more concerned with compassion than ritual cleansing or delayed dinners.
There are many potential excuses, but perhaps Martin Luther King's interpretation is the best one yet. He said that the priest, as well as the Levite, asked the wrong question. They asked, "What will happen to me if I stop?" when they should have asked, "What will happen to him if I do not stop?" MLK suggested that their fear of what would happen stopped them from helping. That may be true, and, frankly, I hope it is. Equally as likely, though, is the possibility that the reason the priest failed to stop to help the wounded man was pure selfishness. He was concerned about himself and not the man lying, half-dead, on the side of the road. He was likely concerned about the things that would be delayed by stopping, the additional trouble he would encounter by stopping, and the risk to himself by stopping. He was only concerned about himself.
It is this selfishness that prevented the priest from loving his neighbor and caring for him, and that same kind of selfishness prevents us from loving our neighbor, as well. This passage suggests that, when we see a need, Jesus expects us to meet it, not walk by on the other side. The problem, then, becomes one of meeting one need or the other, either our own selfish desire or the one in greater physical or spiritual need.
Perhaps the appropriate response today is to look at our own actions with regard to the needs of others. How quick are we to respond with aid to those in need? How consistently do we respond to need? How generously? Would Jesus view the kind and amount of aid we give as He did the priest and the Levite or as He viewed the Samaritan? When people look to us for an example of righteousness, do they see the kind of generous, compassionate lifestyle that they would do well to emulate, or not?
Let us resolve, then, to give like the Samaritan, who risked himself for the one in need.
In the previous post, we looked at the city of Jericho. (click on the link to read that post in a new window)
The word translated here as "going down" is katabainō and means "to descend". As we saw in the previous post, there is a significant difference in altitude between Jerusalem and Jericho, so that a traveler literally "descends" when he travels from Jerusalem to Jericho. There have been some who suggested that the priest did not want to be defiled because of his duties as the priest, but he was clearly traveling katabainō, descending, which makes it obvious that he was traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho and away from the temple, just as the wounded man had been doing. That fact suggests that the priest had completed his priestly duties, performed in Jerusalem, and was heading to Jericho, possibly for the night. Matthew Henry references a historian (Lightfoot) who says that many of the priests lived in Jericho. If so, perhaps he was going home for the night.
Let's think for a moment about the position of priest. It was a highly visible leadership position. People would have looked to him, expected obedience to God from Him, and taken guidance from the priest's behavior. He was to set the example for righteousness because it was the job of priests to minister to the Lord in the temple on a continuing basis. Because of that ongoing ministry before God, one might expect them to understand something of the heart of God, the compassion of God, but apparently that was not the case in this particular priest.
Why didn't the priest stop? Either he saw the wounded man or he did not. Jesus made it very clear that he saw the injured victim. Since he knew the man had a need that was obviously going to be tremendous, why didn't he stop? There are many potential excuses. Perhaps he didn't know what to do and thought he might cause more harm than good by trying to help. Perhaps he was concerned about the ritual cleansing that would be required after caring for this man and wanted to avoid that effort. Maybe he was headed home, running late, and didn't want to be delayed. God, however, is much more concerned with compassion than ritual cleansing or delayed dinners.
There are many potential excuses, but perhaps Martin Luther King's interpretation is the best one yet. He said that the priest, as well as the Levite, asked the wrong question. They asked, "What will happen to me if I stop?" when they should have asked, "What will happen to him if I do not stop?" MLK suggested that their fear of what would happen stopped them from helping. That may be true, and, frankly, I hope it is. Equally as likely, though, is the possibility that the reason the priest failed to stop to help the wounded man was pure selfishness. He was concerned about himself and not the man lying, half-dead, on the side of the road. He was likely concerned about the things that would be delayed by stopping, the additional trouble he would encounter by stopping, and the risk to himself by stopping. He was only concerned about himself.
It is this selfishness that prevented the priest from loving his neighbor and caring for him, and that same kind of selfishness prevents us from loving our neighbor, as well. This passage suggests that, when we see a need, Jesus expects us to meet it, not walk by on the other side. The problem, then, becomes one of meeting one need or the other, either our own selfish desire or the one in greater physical or spiritual need.
Perhaps the appropriate response today is to look at our own actions with regard to the needs of others. How quick are we to respond with aid to those in need? How consistently do we respond to need? How generously? Would Jesus view the kind and amount of aid we give as He did the priest and the Levite or as He viewed the Samaritan? When people look to us for an example of righteousness, do they see the kind of generous, compassionate lifestyle that they would do well to emulate, or not?
Let us resolve, then, to give like the Samaritan, who risked himself for the one in need.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)