Good stuff gone bad

As I read through the Old and New Testaments simultaneously, I am sometimes struck by the odd juxtapositioning of verses. Today I read through the dedication of the temple in 1 Kings. What an amazing event where the glory of the Lord filled the temple. From that moment on, Jerusalem and Judaism would never be the same. Then I read Luke 19 where Jesus spoke against the temple’s effects and chapter 21 where Jesus predicted the total destruction of the temple. So was the temple a good thing or a bad thing?

Perhaps the answer is “yes”. There was a time when the temple served a great and noble purpose; it united God’s people in worship as the central theme of his people. Later it served only as a distant reminder of worship while primarily serving as a tool for swindlers and false leaders.

The result on me is that I walk away with two ideas in my head.

1. Rules are not static. As conditions change, rules might change. What the Father calls “good” in one case, he might not call “good” in another. What he knows is a blessing to my neighbor might be a curse for me. The way the Father deals with us is fluid and dynamic, not static.

2. He might take away something I think is still good. Personally, there are many things in my life that I cherish and consider to be a blessing from the Father – health, family, resources, etc. Yet the truth is that over time, I can convert any of those into an idol. Rather than remind me of the Father, they remove me from the Father. When that happens, he might – and hopefully will – remove those former blessings from my life.

I wonder what “good” thing has gone “bad” in my life and is about to cast out next?

David: we would have kicked him out of church

When David finally brought the ark of the covenant into Jerusalem, he did so with great fanfare. He offered sacrifices during and after the process, was accompanied by a host of people shouting and playing trumpets and danced in an ephod - a sort of one piece linen tunic. He finished the day blessing the people and distributing food in the name of the Lord. It was quite the celebration.

Three sets of onlookers were present. David's wife Michal refers to the slave girls who were watching; no other comment is made about them. Michal herself was watching and had a very negative reaction. She snubbed the worship of David. It was unorthodox and embarrassing. When she confronted David with her cutting remarks about it, he responded vehemently that the worship was never intended for her pleasure but only for the Lord's.

This brings the last onlooker into the conversation - the Lord. He explained that he had not ordered a temple to be built and that David was not the person qualified to build it. Despite both of those objections, he blessed David's intent. He lavished promises onto the one who had gone beyond what was commanded and who had humiliated himself publicly in the Lord's name. Not only that, but the Father apparently closed the womb of Michal (6:23). Childlessness was reason for a loss of face or shame in her day. Michal intended to shame David for his public worship but the Lord shamed Michal for her private thoughts.

David would not fit into most of the churches with which I have been associated. He committed two infractions that fly in the face of most conservative Christians - he publicly worshiped in humiliating ways and went well beyond what was commanded in the first place (orthodoxy). Yet in both cases, he was blessed while those who looked down upon his actions were not. This leads me to question myself.

Do I respond more like David or like Michal when it comes to worship? What do I privately think about those who go beyond orthodoxy? How do I view those who would worship publicly in ways that I consider humiliating?

Honestly, its probably good I was not there that day.