Leviticus: rules or heart?

In Leviticus 10, there are two stories about ignoring God’s commands – one results in death and the other is blessed.

Nadab and Abihu took unauthorized incense into the sanctuary. The result was “fire came out from the Lord and consumed them”. The same fire that just consumed sacrifices in approval, consumed priests in disapproval. Then Aaron refused to eat consecrated meat but Moses – and God - accepted his actions.

We don’t know what was in the heart of Nadab and Abihu. Why did they disobey the commands? Was it from neglect, arrogance or something else? We will never know. Yet with Aaron, it was on purpose. He refused to obey the command because of his grief. The sacrificial meat was to be eaten in celebration but his heart could not rejoice after losing his sons. Thus he ignored the commands because his heart could not fulfill the command to rejoice. In these stories I find the balance of law and grace. When God’s law is violated without reason – or for poor reasons – there are consequences. When the spirit of God’s law is honored – even though the superficial action might actually be a violation – there is grace. 

Our God is an eternal Father. He knows his children and takes into account the heart behind the action. The question is do I? Or do I get so caught up in rule keeping that I only judge by actions? Would I have condemned Aaron that day? He disobeyed and he did it on purpose. How would I have responded? More importantly, how will I respond to the next Aaron in my life?

Genesis: Angry God?

In the second century, Marcion proposed that the Jewish God of the Old Testament and the God represented by Jesus were not the same god. Marcion did not stay in favor with the church for long - he was excommunicated. Yet his idea lives on in many of us. In the past month I have heard church leaders refer to the "harsh Old Testament" and give thanks for the mercy now available to us through Jesus.

But if Jesus is God, then Jesus is also the God of the Old Testament. Either he changed - which scripture says he does not - or I missed something. And I think the "something missed" is an unbiased - or at least less biased - reading of the Old Testament. After years of confronting this in myself and starting over once again reading through the OT for the New Year, I am struck by the mercy of the Old Testament God.

Consider this -
EDEN: Rather than come down in anger at the first sign of sin, God comes walking in the garden, asking questions, clothes the offenders and does not end their lives physically.
CAIN: God gives him advice ahead of time, comes asking questions and marks him so that others will not kill him.
FLOOD: Instead of total annihilation and starting from zero, God delays for years and saves a family who found favor in his eyes.
SODOM: God appears to Abraham ahead of time, explains that he has come in response to outcries, allows Abraham to bargain with him, rescues Abraham's family in Sodom, and even allows them to bargain for a different escape route.

If Jesus per John 1, John 17, and Colossians 1 and the Holy Spirit per Genesis 1:2 were per-existent to creation, then prior to creation our God was relational. It is his nature to come seeking, asking, connecting and showing mercy. Its what relationships are all about.

If this is who God is and if scripture has not changed for thousands of years, then the real question here is not about God but about me. Why do I come to scripture and fail to see mercy? How can I look at a series of events where mercy is lavished on people and be blind to it? Why do justice and punishment jump off the page while mercy can go completely overlooked? What does it say about my outlook on life? What does it say about my heart?

When I practiced veterinary medicine, an older doctor once told me, "I look for today, what I diagnosed yesterday." Perhaps we can't see what we don't look for. And we don't look for that which is not significant or valued. So when I look but do not see the mercy of God, I am confessing my values. Thus in the revelation of a merciful and relational God, I find reflected a revelation of my own heart.

And I do not always like what I see.

Acts 14; Only Human

We tend to idolize or at least idealize Biblical people. We build Paul up to be the perfect missionary and attribute him with special gifts and blessings that we could only imagine. Yet, this chapter reads very much like a normal human caught in some tough situations.

To begin with, Paul could not convince everyone in Iconium anymore than the next missionary. When he was informed that a plot was afoot to kill him, he fled. Idolized leaders don't do that; real people do.

In the next city Paul and Barnabas were afflicted by the Achilles heal of many missionaries -- language. The people responded to their message by shouting out in the local language; Paul and Barnabas had no idea what was going on. It went on long enough that he priest outside of town had enough time to gather sacrifices and come into town. Finally they understood what was happening but even then had trouble stopping the progression of worship to them.

Scholars often mention that Paul might have been blind or became blind. He mentions problems with his eyes and writing in big letters. So added together we come up with a man who fled from danger just like us, struggled with intercultural communication just like us and had personal physical problems just like us. So much for the ideal. Yet knowing this should only lead us back to admire his conviction and effort. Instead of praising all of his methods and blindly idolizing the man, let us recognize his shortcomings and appreciate his heart. Yet perhaps most importantly, let us recognize once again that just like with Noah whose first act after the flood was to get drunk, Abraham whose first act after the call was to lie about his wife or David the man after God's own heart who committed adultery, we have this story recorded for us not to teach us about a great man but rather to lead us to the great God who was working through and in spite of the man.

Joshua 18-19; Initiative

“How long will you wait before you begin to take possession of the land that the LORD, the God of your ancestors, has given you? Interesting question. It highlights the Divine-Human interaction. God gave but they had to "take possession". They were not to sit in camp and wait on God to do everything. They were to respond to his promises.

There are big issues where this idea has been lost. I have no idea how many church fights, debates and articles have been generated by the grace - works debate. I think Joshua would have weighed in on the debate saying "yes" to both sides. By grace God gave them the land; by works they took possession of it. So, "yes" to both.

It would be easy to scoff at those who spend hours in these debates were it not for the fact that we all live out the debate personally. Do I pursue a career or wait on God to drop an opportunity on me? Do I exercise disciplines to become holy or does holiness come as a gift from God? If I believe God wants me to move somewhere, change jobs or talk to someone, then do I wait on him to do it or do I start working?

There seems to be a fine line between religious laziness and waiting on God. Likewise there is a fine line between religious fervor and not waiting at all. To take action in God's name without listening to him is disastrous. To take no action because we are always in a state of waiting is negligence. To do both is the goal of the Divine-Human interaction.

Romans 12:3-21; Faith Response

All of life is a faith act. Our self view is to be an act of faith. The way we respond in good times and in bad is to be an act of faith. Faith involves every aspect of life.

Evil, suffering, the needs of others, persecution, social structure and injustice are all mentioned in this passage. Rather than expound on any one of these, Paul was led to clump them together. In each case, his concern is responding in faith to the grace given us. Rather than react to pain and evil, I am to respond to grace. Rather than get angry or attack, I am to respond to grace. Every situation in life is to be a response to grace.

If all Christians lived every minute of every day as a response to grace rather than limiting Christianity to a Sunday assembly, I wonder what our society would think of Christians and how different our world would be?

favor and grace

Luke 1 makes two references to the favor of God and the grace of God. One is a proclamation by the angels of peace on earth to men "on whom his favor rests" and the other is that Jesus was filled with wisdom and the "grace of God was upon him."

Sounds like a easy life and all that makes the nativity story sweet . . . until you look at the context. Jesus was in a cave lying in a feed trough before the first statement. His parents were on the way to Jerusalem to offer the Jewish sacrifice for the birth of the firstborn prior to the second. The text clearly says they were to offer a pair of doves or pigeons; that is the sacrifice of the poor according to Leviticus 12. The rich offered a lamb. So favor and grace resting on someone doesn't mean anything about socio-economics. In this case, favor and grace were upon a kid born into such poverty that they had no home, no proper clothes for him and could only offer the poorest of sacrifices.

So what does favor and grace mean to me? Am I so North American that I have come to believe that the American dream is God's grace to me? Am I so materialistic that I think that divine favor means middle class riches? Is it possible for me to view the world through God's perspective and not look at wealth as a measure of anything spiritual?

Grace and favor . . . I don't think they look like what we think they do.