College and Career Sunday School Class

 Bulletin Board

 

Terrorist Plot Against Airliners Foiled by Arrests

The Sunday School Lesson for August 20, 2006

 

In the News

On Thursday, August 10, authorities in Britain and Pakistan broke up an alleged terrorist plot by arresting 24 suspects in Britain and as many as 17 in Pakistan. The terror cell members were allegedly plotting to blow up as many as 10 U.S.-bound planes using liquid explosives disguised as beverages and other common items. One of those arrested in Pakistan was Rashid Rauf, who officials in that country say had met with al Qaeda members recently. Rauf is thought to be the ringleader of the liquid-explosive plotters.

 

In response, security measures were increased at airports across the nation and in the terminals where flights to this country originate. Liquids and gels were banned completely from luggage in trans-Atlantic flights. On domestic flights, they were banned from carry-on bags. Because those restrictions were imposed suddenly when the news of the arrests broke, people waiting to board the flights to and within the United States were forced to unpack carry-on bags in the middle of the terminal and discard liquid and gel toiletries, beverages and any other liquid items they had packed.

 

Most travelers took the new measures in stride, realizing that their safety was at risk.

 

The suspects are all Muslims, so in seeking to understand the motivation of religious persons who would view wholesale murder as an acceptable act, The Wired Word interviewed the Rev. Timothy B. Cargal, Ph.D., who is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature and was previously a lecturer in Religious Studies at Western Kentucky University.

 

"We need to look at what they would have to believe about God and the possibility for redemption of the world," Cargal said. He added that while we consider their plans to be evil, "they see us as evil." Thus, if they have no theology of redemption, "the only solution is to destroy society and start over."

 

Cargal further said that the problem with a theology of destruction is that when you destroy a society, you destroy those in it. Thus Christianity, which also recognizes evil in society, instead has a theology of redemption. Christianity seeks to undo the power of evil from inside the society, to redeem those in it, so that whenever history ends, everyone has had the opportunity to be saved.

 

More on this story may be found at these links:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/16/uk.terror.plot.ap/index.html

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1225687,00.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TRAVEL/08/10/terror.passengers.ap/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14280416/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/recent/sept_11/changing_faces_01.shtml

http://www.voanews.com/uspolicy/archive/2003-08/a-2003-08-27-3-1.cfm

 

The Big Questions

Terrorism in general and the plot to murder hundreds by blowing airliners out of the sky, suggests the following questions:

 

  1. Do "good" motives ever justify evil deeds? Explain your answer.

 

  1. What, do you think, caused God to reject destruction as his means of relating to humankind?

 

  1. What role does destruction have in the coming of God's kingdom?

 

  1. What does redemption mean?

 

  1. What is the spiritual impact of divine redemption? What is the everyday impact of divine redemption?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

The following verses help us to understand God's preference for redemption over destruction:

 

Genesis 6:7

"So the LORD said, 'I will blot out from the earth the human beings I have created -- people together with animals and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.'" (For context, read 6:5-8.)

Genesis 8:21-22

"... the LORD said in his heart, 'I will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done. As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.'" (For context, read 8:20-22.)

 

According to Genesis, God once employed the "destroy and start over" method -- the great flood. Even there, however, God is pictured not as an angry and vengeful judge but as a grieving parent who regrets how his offspring have turned out. But as the two verses from Genesis 8 show, after the flood, God firmly rejected the "destroy and start over" method for "as long as earth endures."

 

God says he will never again "curse the ground." This curse was one of the consequences of the sin of Adam and Eve. At the time they were expelled from the Garden of Eden, God told the man that the ground would be "cursed" because of him (see Genesis 3:17). Thus the curse was the result of human disobedience. Now, however, following the flood, God declares an end to the curse. No longer will it be the decisive factor in God's relationship to the earth and those he has made to dwell there. Rather, redemption is God's way.

 

Question: When have you been aware that God was relating to you in a redeeming way?

 

Exodus 8:23

"Thus I will make a distinction between my people and your people. This sign shall appear tomorrow." (For context, read 8:20-24.)

 

This verse is from the account of the fourth plague upon the Egyptians because they would not let the Israelites leave slavery in Egypt. Through Moses, God tells Pharaoh that swarms of flies will descend on the land and afflict the Egyptians, but the flies will not bother the Israelites because God "will make a distinction" between the two peoples. The Hebrew underlying "will make a distinction" means "will set redemption" or "will put a deliverance" between them (many Bible versions include a footnote to v. 23 telling that).

 

The basic meaning of redemption is "deliverance." Thus later biblical authors use the deliverance from Egypt as a metaphor to explain the way in which God relates to people today. As he delivered/redeemed our spiritual ancestors, so he will deliver/redeem/save us to call upon him today.

 

Questions: In what sense is your spiritual commitment redemptive? From what specifically does it deliver you?

 

Daniel 7:11

"And as I watched, the beast was put to death, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire." (For context, read 7:1, 9-11.)

 

This comes from a vision Daniel had in which four beasts, representing four nations that would successively dominate the Jews, meet their ends or lose power. In the quoted verse, the beast representing the ancient Greek empire receives divine judgment and is destroyed.

 

In this Old Testament vision, nations as a whole are judged without taking into consideration righteous persons who might be among their citizenry. In other places in the Bible, including in the New Testament, there is a greater emphasis on individual judgment and redemption. But given this vision of Daniel's, it is perhaps not so difficult to see why other peoples sometime brand nations and cultures that do not fit their image of what society should be as "evil" or a "beast" to be destroyed.

 

Questions: To what degree do our "national values" reflect your personal values? Where do they differ?

 

John 3:17

"Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him." (For context, read 3:1-21.)

 

This verse, along with the well-known John 3:16 that precedes it, are primary statements of the gospel. Here Jesus himself restates the divine decision not to relate to the world on the basis of condemnation/destruction, but on the basis of redemption/salvation.

 

The verses that follow make clear that there is a judgment, but it is the judgment of "light," the light that reveals the evil we hide away in the darkness. If we come to the light of Christ, however, we can be saved, which is exactly what God wants us to do.

 

Question: What is personally appealing for you about the light of Christ?

 

1 Thessalonians 5:3

"When they say, 'There is peace and security,' then sudden destruction will come upon them, as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and there will be no escape!" (For context, read 5:1-11.)

 

The apostle Paul is here writing about the second coming of Jesus to the earth. For those who are among the "children of the light," the redeemed, that return will be the best of news. But for others, says Paul, despite their assumption that there is peace and security, there will be the sudden onset of destruction.

 

Two observations are important here.

 

First, in Paul's understanding, the return of Christ marks a critical moment that changes the equation. Divine destruction, which God had rejected as a way of relating to humankind, is then reinstated. It seems that the time for redemption will have passed for those who have rejected it.

 

Second, Christians are not called to be agents or instigators of that destruction. That is a crucial difference between Christian thought and the ideology of Islamic terrorists. If God chooses to end the world and destroy wrongdoers, it will be his action that brings it about, and not ours. In contrast, the terrorists apparently see themselves as triggermen for a god of destruction.

 

Rather than being triggermen, however, Christians are called to be "ambassadors for Christ" whose mission is to help the world be reconciled to God. As Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:20, "So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

 

Question: What Christian ambassadorial things do you do?

 

Revelation 21:1

"Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more." (For context, read 21:1-22.)

 

According to the Bible's closing chapters, beyond the end of history and the final judgment will be a new world populated by the redeemed and eternally lighted by the glory of God. In other words, God's final way of dealing with humankind will be not through destruction, but through the everlasting benefits of redemption.

 

Question: To what degree is envisioning the eternal future important for how we live today?

 

Questions for Further Discussion

 

  1. How should a culture that believes in redemption deal with people who consider destruction as a primary tool for imposing their worldview?

 

  1. Does labeling terrorists as "evil" help or hinder us in the effort to bring terrorism to an end?

 

  1. Should we pray for terrorists? If so, what should we ask God for? For their destruction? For their conversion to Christianity? For their acceptance of the peaceful teachings of mainstream Islam? Explain your answer.

 

Closing Prayer

O God, thank you for those who helped to stop this terrorist plot from succeeding. Please strengthen the hand of all those who truly work for peace, and change the hearts and understanding of those who work against it. Thank you for offering redemption to the world. In Jesus' name. Amen.

 

 

 

Six New Inductees Into the Pro Football Hall of Fame

The Sunday School Lesson for August 13, 2006

 

In the News

On Saturday, August 5, a crowd gathered in Canton, Ohio, to cheer six heroes of the game of football who were being inducted into the Football Hall of Fame. This year's inductees included three-time Super Bowl champion quarterback Troy Aikman, prolific quarterback, Warren Moon, two-time Super Bowl champ Rayfield Wright, inside linebacker Harry Carson and the irascible Coach John Madden.

 

Inducted posthumously into the Hall of Fame was former defensive star Reggie White. White died in December 2004 from a breathing disorder. His life on and off the field was lauded by the other inductees.

 

"I am saddened," said Troy Aikman, his voice breaking, "by the absence of Reggie White, a great player and a man who left us too soon."

 

The entire ceremony was filled with emotion. While all of the inductees made speeches and reflected on their time playing pro football, the event was especially poignant when it came time to induct Reggie White.

 

His son, Jeremy, served as White's presenter. Reggie's widow, Sara, made the acceptance speech.

 

"Reggie was an honest, humble, honorable, dedicated, determined, passionate and caring man," Sara White said. "He is inducted today not only because of his athletic achievements, but because he was a great player on the field in accordance with being a great person throughout life."

 

Though overcome with emotion, both mother and son shared a long hug after unveiling a bust of Reggie before a grateful and enthusiastic audience.

 

In an additional show of honor, many of the invited guests wore football jerseys from several different teams, but each one bearing White's number 92.

 

 

More on this story may be found at these links:

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/release.jsp?release_id=1953

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060805/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_hall_of_fame;_ylt=AvU_ayUTCll_MeIoQUOg.Eil24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3cm82NXAwBHNlYwM3NTU 

http://www.profootballhoffestival.com/

 

 

The Big Questions

This week's news suggests these questions:

 

  1. We intuitively seek ways to honor those who touch our lives in significant ways, and that includes those who influence us by their faith. What are the appropriate ways we have to honor those who go before us in faith?

 

  1. What are the qualities of character that we look for in determining that someone is a hero of the faith? Is it always the superstars, the highly visible? Are there lesser known heroes?

 

  1. Are there dangers associated with identifying and celebrating people of faith who help us, or teach us? Do we run the risk of celebrating their influence in our lives to the extent that we exaggerate their importance?

 

  1. Are there dangers in failing to acknowledge those whose lives have touched us and helped us on our journey?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

As we would expect, there are numerous examples in the Bible of heroes of the faith remembered and celebrated. Here is a sampling:

 

Hebrews 12:1-2

"Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God."

 

The context for this well-known portion of Scripture is Hebrews 11 which lists a number of biblical characters that are described as having achieved their significance "by faith." These characters comprise the great "cloud of witnesses." They stand before us as examples of what ordinary people can do when inspired and empowered by faith.

 

The writer of the letter to the Hebrews invokes these heroes of the faith to encourage his readers to remain steadfast in the face of suffering. He points to Jesus as the culmination of this faith venture as the ultimate example.

 

These verses both honor those who have gone before; acknowledging their significance for all people of faith, but it also provides us a way to understand the purpose of remembering those who have gone before. This is not "hero worship," or lauding the great simply to be lauding them. We remember and honor those who have helped us so that their lives may continue to be a source of instruction and inspiration for all of us.

 

            Question: Who inspires you to do great things?

 

2 Timothy 1:3-5

"I am grateful to God-whom I worship with a clear conscience, as my ancestors did-when I remember you constantly in my prayers night and day. Recalling your tears, I long to see you so that I may be filled with joy. I am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that lived first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, lives in you."

 

Romans 16:1-2

"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well." (The text down to verse 16 continues examples of Paul singling out people for praise.)

 

Luke 23:26

"As they led him away, they seized a man, Simon of Cyrene, who was coming from the country, and they laid the cross on him, and made him carry it behind Jesus."

 

Mark 10:46,52

"The came to Jericho. As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus, son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside.Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way."

 

We should note that all the people mentioned in the four passages shown above are ordinary people. Unlike the impressive list found in Hebrews 11, these are folks more like us. We find a mother and a grandmother faithfully instructing a young boy. We see a dedicated church volunteer whose service has touched the lives of many.

 

The two men mentioned from the Gospels may require some explanation. Many scholars believe that since Simon of Cyrene is mentioned by name, as is true for Bartimaeus, it is possible that these men had a continuing presence in the church after Jesus' death. Imagine how powerful it would have been for the worshiping community, as it listened to a sermon on the cross, to turn and see Simon sitting with them.

 

Sometimes our heroes, those who help us and encourage receive honor even in the midst of their ongoing presence in our lives.

 

            Question: Does your community of faith have a way of acknowledging those who give their lives in service and leadership?

 

Acts 9:39

"All the widows stood beside him, weeping and showing tunics and other clothing that Dorcas had made while she was with them." (For context, read 9:36-42.)

Another way we can honor those who have helped us or touched us is by keeping the things they gave us. In the case of Dorcas' friends, it was clothing. From others we may receive courage, integrity, wisdom.

 

            Question: What have you been given?

 

Acts 6:3

"Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task...."(For context, read 6:1-7.)

We also honor those who are significant to us by submitting ourselves to their service and leadership. It is one thing to say someone is important to us, it is quite another to actually follow their leadership.

 

Question: Among those whom you consider important leaders or teachers, do you allow them to actually teach and lead you?

 

Mark 14:6,9

"Let her alone; why do you trouble her? She has performed a good service for me.Truly I tell you, wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her." (See vv. 3-9 for complete context.)

Of all the examples of people who are lauded in the Scriptures, this woman's story may be the most poignant. Jesus uses words that are reminiscent of the Last Supper--in that the story of her kindness will be told "in remembrance of her."

 

And she is unnamed. This woman and her act of kindness remain anonymous. As such this unnamed woman stands as a reminder of all those who serve but their service is not acknowledged. It is not that we take them for granted. The problem is these folks are so humble and so quiet, that they serve us without our bothering to notice.

 

            Question: Who are we overlooking?

 

Questions for Further Discussion

 

1.         There is a fine line between creating cults of ego, and finding authentic ways to honor those who serve us. What are some examples of ways we can appropriately give thanks for teachers, leaders and helpers?

 

2.         Are there those in your world who serve out of sight? Think about the many people who give their lives in service to others? How can we honor them?

 

3.         Who are the people who make up your "cloud of witnesses?" Are you a hero to someone else?

 

4.         Honoring someone important does not necessarily require a ceremony. Are you caught up on writing your "thank you" notes?

 

Closing Prayer

O God, we give thanks for all those faithful servants you have sent our way. Help us to take proper note of them, and to honor them in appropriate ways. Help us also be prepared to be sent to others. Amen.

 

 

MTV, Turning 25, Seeks to Stay Young

The Sunday School Lesson for August 6, 2006

 

In the News

On Tuesday, the cable television network MTV turned 25, but wanting to stay forever young, the network made no big deal about the birthday. In fact, since the average age of the MTV audience is only 20, there's no point in reminding viewers that the network is older than they are.

 

"We made the decision when MTV was founded to always stay young and evolve with our audience. To do that, it has been important to serve our audience at that moment, not our audience of yesterday," an MTV spokesperson said.

 

Despite that disclaimer, however, the network is holding a birthday party of sorts this weekend, with some special programming of "star-studded shows that tell the story of the network from its very beginnings right through to the present day."

 

While many older people may not care about the fare MTV broadcasts, few can deny that that network has had an impact on pop culture. It pioneered reality television, made Madonna a superstar, turned music from a listening experience to a visual phenomenon as well, and gave youth and young adults a station on the dial that was uniquely theirs. For better or worse, the network also gave us "Beavis and Butt-head" and "Laguna Beach." Several noted film directors, including Spike Jonze, Michel Gondry and David Fincher, got their start creating music videos for the market MTV revealed.

 

MTV also helped to drive the demand for cable itself as kids across the nation insisted that their parents have it installed so they could watch the music videos.

 

Although MTV was originally shorthand for "Music TeleVision," and started out devoted almost exclusively to showing music videos of popular rock music, it has now shunted that duty to the offspring channels MTV2 and VH1. MTV itself now broadcasts a variety of non-musical hip programming aimed at its youthful target audience.

 

Throughout its format changes, MTV has remained effective in reaching its intended audience.

 

MTV went live August 1, 1981. The first music video it showed was "Video Killed the Radio Star" by The Buggles.

 

More on this story may be found at these links:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Music/08/01/mtv.at.25.ap/index.html

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/ae/content/entertainment/arts_entertainment/epaper/2006/07/30/a1j_mtv_25_0730.html

http://www.mtv.tv/mtv.tv/dynamo/shells/highlights.jhtml;jsessionid=JOPOQNFTAG5QBQFIAIJCFE4AVABA4IV0?article=80135414

http://www.mtv.com/music/yearbook/#/music/yearbook/index.jhtml?contentId=1535988 (This link offers videos samples from each of the 25 years MTV has been broadcasting.)

 

The Big Questions

Although many people above the age of MTV's target group may not have interest in MTV itself, the network's success in frequently reinventing itself to continue its appeal to youthful audiences suggest some questions with larger implications:

 

  1. One well-known hymn characterizes Christianity as "the Old, Old Story." What are the implications of that for how Christianity is presented to new generations?

 

  1. Should the MTV philosophy of frequent self-reinvention be translated to the church? If so, how?

 

  1. To what degree should the church embrace the methods of popular culture and "baptize" them for gospel purposes? What are the risks of doing so?

 

  1. Is the church called by God to be "effective"? If not, what is the church called to be?

 

  1. What is the role of tradition in spreading the gospel? Does tradition address only a world that few people inhabit anymore?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

The following verses help us think about the topic of innovation for the gospel's sake:

 

1 Samuel 3:10

"Now the LORD came and stood there, calling as before, 'Samuel! Samuel!' And Samuel said, 'Speak, for your servant is listening.'" (For context, read 3:1-10.)

 

Chapter 3 of 1 Samuel starts by saying that the visions from the Lord had been rare for a long while. Through Samuel, however, God was opening a new channel of communication with the people. Samuel would be the conduit for God's word. Visions had not been widespread, but change was afoot. God was breaking into their lives with a new beginning. This is not only a tale to remind us to listen for God; it is also a story that tells us that one of the ways God works is through change.

 

Questions: What is the biggest change you have seen in your lifetime in the methodologies used to present the gospel? Has the emphasis put on the message itself changed over that time? If so, how?

 

Isaiah 43:18-19

"Do not remember the former things, or consider the things of old. I am about to do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?" (For context, read 43:14-19.)

 

When the people of Judah were in exile in Babylon, the prophet brought these words of God to them. The words speak of newness because news of God's coming act might cause some to think it would be merely a rehash of an older idea: God's rescue of Israel through the exodus from Egypt centuries earlier. Now God is telling them that he is going to rescue them from Babylon. That is a new thing, however, because it would be not just one more rescue operation, not an old thing done again, but an act that was tailored to their present need. God was calling the people to turn from memory to hope.

 

Question: How is innovation connected to hope?

 

Zechariah 2:4-5

"Run, say to that young man: Jerusalem shall be inhabited like villages without walls, because of the multitude of people and animals in it. For I will be a wall of fire all around it, says the LORD, and I will be the glory within it." (For context, read 2:1-5.)

 

Zechariah was one of the prophets who preached to the people of Judah after they returned to Jerusalem from exile in Babylon. The verses above are from a vision Zechariah had. In that vision, Zechariah, accompanied by an angel, sees a surveyor going out with a measuring line in his hand. The man says he is going to measure the boundaries of Jerusalem -- apparently in preparation for rebuilding the city walls. A second angel appears and tells the man not to bother measuring the old boundaries because the new Jerusalem will be inhabited by so many people that they will not fit into the old city. And furthermore, says this second angel, new walls are unnecessary because God himself will be the protecting wall around the city.

 

Actually, Zechariah's intent was to get the people to rebuild the temple before rebuilding the city walls, but there were those among the returnees who felt that was backwards. First build the city walls for protection, they reasoned; then do the temple later when we are safe behind the walls. With this vision, Zechariah tells them that God will be their walls. Their first obligation is to restore their place of worship.

 

But on another level, Zechariah's vision is about another Jerusalem, an ideal city of God to come sometime in the future. There were, however, important things the people of Zechariah's day needed to learn for their present Jerusalem. One was that the people were restricting the future by not enlarging their vision. They were simply going to redo things as they had been -- measuring the old boundaries and rebuilding them, instead of considering that the old boundaries wouldn't do in a new age.

 

Questions: What "boundaries" in your church need to be enlarged? Which ones should never be moved?

 

Mark 2:22

"And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins." (For context, read 2:18-22.)

 

Jesus made this remark to some people who asked him why his disciples were not observing a certain religious fast while the Pharisees and the disciples of John were doing so. Jesus first explained that it was not appropriate for "wedding guests" (his disciples) to fast while the "bridegroom" (Jesus) was present. But then he went on to give this example about new wine. In that day, wine was kept in skin bags, but the fermenting gases from new wine would rupture old skins, which had lost their flexibility. This was a metaphor about the newness of the way Jesus was bringing, and how that way could not be contained in the old forms and traditions.

 

Questions: Even if you agree that the gospel needs to be presented in new ways to each generation, are there some new ways that should never be used? How do you make that decision?

 

Acts 15:28

"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials ..." (For context, read 15:1-29.)

 

This verse is from a letter a very early church council in Jerusalem issued. When Christianity began, it was a movement among Jews, but as the gospel was preached throughout the land, many Gentiles also responded. At that point, some of the Jewish Christians thought that the Gentile converts should also have to undergo Jewish initiation rites (circumcision). Paul and Barnabas, however, thought that such a requirement should not be made, and they plead that case to the mother church in Jerusalem. That church counsel agreed, and issued a letter making that decision "official."

 

This is an example of an established idea breaking down because of new experiences and of a new understanding breaking through. Now that Gentiles were clamoring to join the church, Christians had to consider what was happening. They concluded that God was in this situation and so some new direction and new action was essential.

 

Question: What might have happened if this church council had decided to insist on the Jewish rite as a prerequisite to Christianity?

 

John 10:16

"I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd." (For context, read 10:11-16.)

 

With these words, Jesus told his hearers that he had come not just to be the Savior of Israel ("this fold"), but the Savior of the world. The mark of this expanded flock is that they will all listen to his voice.

 

While Jesus was not here talking about methodology, he certainly was endorsing a flock that would be gathered using more than the traditions of Judaism.

 

Questions: What methods first helped you hear Jesus voice? Are there situation today where that method will not work?

 

Questions for Further Discussion

 

  1. Almost from it's inception in 1865, The Salvation Army made use of popular tunes -- including drinking songs -- to carry religious words to the masses. William Booth, the Army's founder, defended the practice, saying, "Why should the devil have all the best tunes?" He also wrote, "Secular music, do you say, belongs to the devil? Does it? Well, if it did I would plunder him for it, for he has no right to a single note of the whole seven. ... Every note, and every strain, and every harmony is divine. ... Offer them to God, and use them to make all the hearts about you merry before the Lord." Do you agree with Booth?

 

  1. The culture, but especially the youth culture, is a moving target. Sometimes it happens that just when the church adopts some "new" method, it has already become passé in culture. So is that an argument for moving more quickly or for not trying to compete with the culture? Explain your answer.

 

  1. Culturally speaking, the advent of MTV was an opportunity rift -- "a big tear in the fabric of the rules that we live by" -- and rifts are situations that create new winners and losers. What opportunity rifts are present in church life today?

 

Closing Prayer

O God, thank you for all the ways the gospel may be proclaimed. Help us to see and make use of the opportunities that come in cultural disguises for welcoming people into the faith. But also help us to be clear-eyed, so that we do not lose the message in the medium. In Jesus' name. Amen.

 

 

Song Banned for Imagining Religion-less World

Sunday School Lesson for July 30, 2006

 

In the News

On Wednesday, the administrators of a church school in Exeter, Devon (Great Britain), ruled that its pupils could not sing the John Lennon classic song "Imagine" at its end-of-term show because its lyrics were anti-religious.

 

This decision came despite the fact that the students at St. Leonards Primary School had been rehearsing the song for weeks.

 

The lyrics of the well-known song envision a world where peace, brotherhood and sharing reign, and where bloodshed, crime, inhumanity and the like do not exist. However, the song includes the words, "Imagine there's no heaven ... and no religion too." Those lines led to the decision to exclude the song from the school's program and replace it with a piece titled "The Building Song."

 

The Rev. David Harris, one of the governors of the school, explained, "The song expresses longing for a different world and for eternal happiness but says you can have this without religion.

 

According to Geoffrey Giuliano, author of the book Lennon in America, Lennon himself described the song as "an anti-religious, anti-nationalistic, anti-conventional, anti-capitalistic song." Lennon added that "because it's sugar-coated, it's accepted."

 

Although this decision at St. Leonards is little more than a minor footnote in the news of the day, the issue behind it -- the role of religion in the world -- is a major factor in many of the big news events of our day.

 

For example, many of the terrorists in our time claim religious motivation for their murderous actions. Earlier this month, Khalid Kelly, an Irish-Catholic turned Muslim said, "[Islam] is not a religion of peace, it is a religion of war at the time of war and peace at the time of peace."

 

For example, Christians who believe in the position known as Christian Zionism support the current warfare by Israel against Hezbollah in Lebanon because they consider it to be the fulfillment of religious prophecy.

 

For example, the bombing of the trains in India earlier this month appears to be the action of a group that identifies itself as Islamic. But that country has previously also had sectarian violence involving Hindus and other religious groups.

 

More on this story may be found at these links:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/5193816.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/07/07/schuster.column/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/21/india.trainbombs/index.html

http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/john_lennon/imagine.html

 

The Big Questions

This week's news suggests these questions:

 

  1. Does the fact that religion is often used to "bless" actions that the founders of those religions would find abhorrent mean there is a fault in the concept of religious belief itself? If not, where does the fault lie?

 

  1. Why can two people read the same religious material and arrive at opposite conclusions about what it requires for personal behavior? For example, many people who read Jesus' words about loving one's neighbor conclude that means working for peace whenever possible. Yet some people have taken Jesus' words as support for hate crimes.

 

  1. Are most of the problems blamed on a religion usually because of extremist positions that some of it adherents take or is there some problem in the religion itself?

 

  1. Is there any merit to the idea, suggested in Lennon's song, that the world would be better off without any religion? Explain your answer.

 

  1. What concepts and principles does Christianity contribute that are vital to the world today? In what ways would the world be impoverished without Christianity?

 

  1. Is it possible to be faithful to God without being religious?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

Naturally, the Bible has quite a lot to say about religion, but much of it is aimed at distinguishing true religion from false. Here is a sampling:

 

Deuteronomy 10:12-13

"So now, O Israel, what does the LORD your God require of you? Only to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments of the LORD your God ..." (For context, read 10:10-22.)

Hosea 6:6

"For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." (For context, read 6:1-6.)

Mark 12:33

"... 'to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength,' and 'to love one's neighbor as oneself,' -- this is much more important than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." (For context, read 12:28-34.)

 

Religion is often defined as "A set of beliefs, values and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader," but here, the Bible itself offers a better definition: what the Lord requires of you. This is an important wording because the Bible does not present a single, monolithic set of beliefs, values and practices. Not counting the religions of the pagan nations described in the Bible, there are still at least three different sets of beliefs, values and practices that at different time periods are deemed acceptable in Scripture.

 

One set was the cultic Hebrew religion of ancient Israel that centered on the sacrifices offered on the altar, first in the tabernacle and later in the temple. The belief of that period was that the various kinds of sacrifices were necessary for persons to be made right with God, to be in covenant relationship to him.

 

Another set was the rabbinic Judaism that began in the Babylonian exile after the temple was destroyed, and was further developed as Israel had to learn to live as a vassal region under foreign powers. In rabbinic Judaism, the understanding grew that religious life did not depend on a functioning sacrificial system but on ethical and penitent action.

 

The third set, of course, was Christianity, which relied not on a sacrificial system, but on the sacrifice of Christ. And while it called for ethical living, it did not base salvation on that, but on Christ's saving action.

 

But what remained unchanged in all three sets, was the belief in one God and the requirement to love him and to love one's neighbor.

 

Question: What does God require of you today?

 

Deuteronomy 32:31

"Indeed their rock is not like our Rock; our enemies are fools." (For context, read 32:28-33.)

 

In this chapter from Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking about the troubles that have come upon Israel. In verses 28-29, he refers to a time when Israel was routed by a much smaller enemy force. In the verse quoted above, Moses is saying that the enemy's victory cannot be because their gods, their "rock" is better than Israel's "rock," the Lord God.

 

In speaking about their gods this way, Moses is showing the kind of thinking that is common in most religions: "Ours is superior to theirs, and they are fools for trusting theirs." While we agree that God is superior to any false god, it is very easy to move from that to, "Therefore the followers of that religion are not as worthy as we are," or even to, "It is okay to kill them."

 

Question: What do you do to guard against looking down on others based on their religion?

 

Psalm 78:35-37

"They remembered that God was their rock, the Most High God their redeemer. But they flattered him with their mouths; they lied to him with their tongues. Their heart was not steadfast toward him; they were not true to his covenant." (For context, read 78:32-39.)

 

Ah yes, here is one problem that religion reveals. Because religion defines right behavior, it also makes hypocrisy possible when people confess that religion with their months but deny it with their attitudes and actions.

 

Thus a world with no religion would be a world without religious hypocrites. But it would also be a world without right and wrong defined, and unredeemed human nature being what it is, it would not be a very good world in which to live.

 

Questions: What, other than religion, definitively sets the boundaries of right and wrong? On what authority do those definitions stand?

 

James 1:27

"Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world." (For context, read 1:19-27.)

Romans 10:9

"... if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (For context, read 10:5-10.)

 

James' overall concern in his book is that the actions of Christians should be right. It is not enough to be hearers of the word; one must also be a doer of the word. Thus his definition of religion is focused on right behavior rather than right belief. His words need to be taken with Paul's to the Romans about the necessity of belief in Jesus, but the two things together, right belief and right actions, would seem to encompass the New Testament's definition of the Christian religion.

 

Questions: Is there anything missing from that definition of Christianity? If so, what? Explain your answer.

 

1 Timothy 3:16

"Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great:

            He was revealed in flesh,

            vindicated in spirit,

            seen by angels,

            proclaimed among Gentiles,

            believed in throughout the world,

            taken up in glory." (For context, read 3:8-16.)

 

The six indented lines in this verse are probably a Christian hymn or an early Christian creed that Paul is quoting in this letter to his coworker, Timothy. It is an example of an attempt to put the essence of Christian religion into writing, so that the statement might become a foundational statement as new converts join the faith and children grow up in it. The Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed are other examples.

 

Question: Can the Christian religion actually be fully defined in doctrinal statements or creeds? Why or why not?

 

Questions for Further Discussion

 

  1. C.S. Lewis said this about religion: "God designed the human machine to run on Himself. He Himself is the fuel our spirits were designed to burn, or the food our spirits were designed to feed on. There is no other. That is why it is just no good asking God to make us happy in our own way without bothering about religion. God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing." Do you agree? Why?

 

  1. More than 300 years ago, Scottish pastor Henry Scougal wrote, "Thus are those things which have any resemblance of piety, and at the best are but means of obtaining it or particular exercises of it, frequently mistaken for the whole of religion ... But certainly religion is quite another thing .... religion is a union of the soul with God, a real participation of the divine nature, the very image of God drawn upon the soul ...." Is his definition correct? Why?

 

  1. Author George Weigel, writing about European humanism that denies God, said that without a religious dimension, a commitment to human freedom is likely to be attenuated, too weak to make sacrifices in its name. Why is that?

 

Closing Prayer

O God, help all the peoples of our world, in whatever religion they hold, to pursue the highest ideals of their faith and not to use religion as a justification for unholy acts. Heal our world, we pray, and help us to never tire in seeking to do the right thing. In Jesus' name. Amen.

 

 

Bush Vetoes Stem-Cell Bill

Sunday School Lesson for July 23, 2006

 

In the News

Exercising his veto power for the first time in his presidency, President George Bush this week blocked a bill passed by the Senate and the House that would have loosened restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research. Congress was unable to muster enough votes to override the veto.

 

Stem cells are cells extracted from human embryos created for fertility treatments but not used to produce children. The extracted stem cells potentially can be made to grow into any cell in the human body, making them an extraordinary resource in the fight against Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes and other diseases.

 

The bill would have allowed couples who have unused embryos that were frozen for fertility treatments to donate them for research rather than have them destroyed, as they usually are. However, because using stem cells derived from such embryos means getting benefit from the destruction of human embryos -- which are fertilized eggs in the early stages of development -- some people view the process as tantamount to abortion or even murder.

 

Although Congress fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to override Bush's veto, the measure had wide support there, across party lines. In fact, the bill was pushed by Senate majority leader Bill Frist, who is a heart surgeon himself and a member of the president's own party. Surveys show that two out of three voters favor the measure as well.

 

In 2001, Bush agreed to allow federal funding for research using the stem-cell lines that existed at that time. Though it was thought there were 62 lines then available, only about 20 were found workable, and some of them were old or contaminated.

 

Commenting on the veto, Frist said, "I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

 

A 2003 survey of fertility clinics found about 400,000 frozen embryos in storage. Of those, 86 percent have been designated by the patients for their own future use or the use of someone else. Some of those have been adopted by others, and to date, there are about 100 children born from adopted frozen embryos. They are often referred to as "snowflake kids." Less than 3 percent of the embryos have been donated for research.

 

President Bush explained his decision to veto the bill by saying, "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

 

There have been recent advances in research using adult stem cells and stem cells drawn from umbilical-cord blood. But most scientists say that it is too early to know whether these sources alone will lead to practical treatments

 

More on this story may be found at these links:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/18/congress.stemcells.ap/index.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1214969,00.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060719/cm_usatoday/balancescienceethics

 

 

The Big Questions

The embryonic stem-cell controversy suggests the following questions:

 

  1. Since unused embryos created in fertility clinics are normally discarded, is it really taking human life to use them as stem-cell sources?

 

  1. Is this issue really a case, as the president says, of a moral boundary that should not be crossed? On what do you base your answer?

 

  1. If research might lead to a cure for your parent's Alzheimer's or your child's diabetes, should that outweigh objections to the destruction of unused embryos?

 

  1. Are the issues related to embryonic stem-cell research the same as those related to abortion? If so how? If not, how do they differ?

 

  1. Should Christians' concern about the starting point of human life be greater than their concern about the extension and well-being of existing humans? Why or why not?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

Nowhere does the Bible make a specific pronouncement on this issue, but it provides plenty of verses to guide our thinking. Here is a sampling:

 

Job 33:4

"The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life." (For context, read 33:1-13.)

 

Elihu was a friend of Job, and he made the statement above while rebuking Job for insisting that God explain why Job, in his righteousness, had been afflicted. Elihu's point in saying this was simply to assert he was speaking to Job as an equal, a mere human being and not as God. But his words are also an assertion that God is the source of human life, and an affirmation of the radical dependence upon God for life itself that is the reality of each and every human being.

 

Further on in his argument, Elihu says, "I too was formed from a piece of clay" (v. 6). Thus he identifies life has having two components, "clay" (the physical body comprised of bones, tissue, blood, etc.) and "breath of the Almighty" (the soul, the spark of life itself).

 

Questions: Can embryos be thought of as simply the "clay" without the "breath"? Why or why not?

 

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." (For context, read 1:4-10.)

 

Jeremiah reports that this is what God said to him in calling him to be a prophet to the nations. In that context, the primary force of the statement seems to be predestination; God had selected Jeremiah for this role even before he was conceived. Yet it is not unreasonable to conclude that the verse also suggests that every human being starts not with conception, but even earlier, in the mind of God: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you."

 

Some people apply this understanding differently, however, arguing that until birth, the growing fetus is simply tissue, and that the soul or the "thought from God" that makes us human, is not instilled until we are actually born and take in the breath of life.

 

Question: If we all indeed begin as a thought from God, why do so many persons turn out to be so ungodly?

 

Micah 6:7

"Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" (For context, read 6:6-8.)

 

Though we might be tempted to read something about aborted embryos into this verse, that it not what it is about. Rather it refers to the hideous ancient practice of child sacrifice, offering one's firstborn child to the god one worships as a means of appeasing that god. Here, the prophet Micah is speaking on behalf of sinners in Israel and Judah, posing rhetorical questions about how to deal with their sins so that they may approach the Lord God.

 

In succession, Micah asks "Shall I bow?" "Shall I make burnt animal offerings?" "Shall I sacrifice herds of animals and rivers of oil?" "Shall I offer my firstborn?" The answer Micah wants his hearers to arrive at for each of those questions is "No!" He then goes on to give the right answer: "Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with God."

 

Although this verse is not about embryos, it is still possible to use it as a starting point for thinking about the matter, for a human embryo is the "fruit" of two bodies, male and female.

 

Questions: This verse rejects giving the fruit of one's body to expiate one's sin. But what about giving the embryonic fruit of one's body to possibly let others live? Do you think the divine answer would still be "No!"? Explain your view.

 

1 Samuel 14:45

"So the people ransomed Jonathan, and he did not die." (For context, read 14:24-46.)

 

This verse is an example of veto power in action, though here it is the king's decision that is overridden by the will of the people.

 

Following a battle in which Israel, under the leadership of King Saul's son Jonathan, was victorious, Saul issued a foolish command that none of his troops eat until the enemy had been wiped out. His son Jonathan did not hear the order and ate a little honey, inadvertently breaking his father's order. So Saul, fearing God would withhold his help from Israel because of this act, announced that he intended to put Jonathan to death. The people, however, vetoed the idea and saved Jonathan.

 

In the text, the "veto" is described as "the people ransomed Jonathan," but that includes the concept of overriding the decision of a legitimate governing entity, in this case, the king.

 

Questions: Is the veto a valuable tool of government? Why or why not?

 

Mark 1:41

"Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, 'I do choose. Be made clean!'" (For context, read 1:40-45.)

 

You cannot read far in the Gospels without seeing that Jesus spent a great deal of time and energy healing people. In this case, he was approached by a man afflicted with leprosy, which was a painful, degenerative and crippling skin disease, some forms of which led to death. Lepers not only suffered physically, but were also was shunted aside from the mainstream of life. Mark makes a point of saying that Jesus was "moved with pity." Jesus touched the sick man and healed him.

 

Question: Given that Jesus was so compassionate and spent so much time healing, do you think he would support embryonic stem-cell research? Defend your answer.

 

 

Revelation 12:11

"But they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they did not cling to life even in the face of death." (For context, read 12:7-12.)

 

This comes from John of Patmos' vision of a great battle in heaven where Satan and his angels are defeated by Michael and the other angels of God. Following the divine victory, a voice from heaven makes a proclamation, including the verse above.

 

The point we want to take from the verse is that, valuable as human life is, in the Bible, it is not the ultimate concern. The vision of Revelation was probably intended to strengthen those whose very lives were being threatened because of their profession of faith in Jesus Christ. There was something greater than clinging to their lives at all cost.

 

Questions: Those who died as martyrs because they remained faithful to Christ lost their lives, but gained something greater. What was it? How does that apply to the stem-cell controversy?

 

Questions for Further Discussion

 

  1. Senate majority leader Bill Frist identifies himself as "pro-life," yet he supports expanding federal funding of stem-cell research. Is that consistent? Why or why not?

 

  1. Since such research is taking place without restriction in other countries, what detrimental effect on scientific advances might the restriction cause here in the United States?

 

  1. Quite aside from religious and moral questions, what other problems does embryonic stem-cell research potentially raise? Do any of those by themselves justify halting such research? Explain your answer.

 

  1. To what degree is this issue a matter of weighing one life against another?

 

Closing Prayer

O God, source of all life, when Christians disagree about matters relating to the beginnings of human life, help us to listen carefully, thoughtfully and respectfully to each other. Let us not brand others as evil because they understand your will differently. But also help us to act responsibly and faithfully, according to the best light we have received. In Jesus' name. Amen.

 

 

Week of Conflicts Reflects Troubled World

The Sunday School Lesson for July 16, 2006

 

In the News

The week past has been marked by conflicts, acts of terrorism and saber-rattling in several locations around the world. While none of these things are new, they do appear to be on the upswing.

 

A sampling of the news offers these examples:

 

  • On Friday, July 7, a plot by Islamic extremists to attack tunnels between Manhattan and New Jersey was disrupted in the planning stages, and three people were arrested. The investigation that led to the arrests involved six foreign governments.
  • On Saturday, July 8, a bomb explosion in southwest Afghanistan killed a Spanish soldier and wounded four others.
  • On Sunday, July 9, Israeli air strikes hit targets in Gaza in the continued effort to free an Israeli soldier captured by the militant wing of the Palestinian group Hamas.
  • On Monday, July 10, The U.N. Security Council postponed a vote on possible sanctions against North Korea in response to a missile test that rattled the region last week.
  • On Tuesday, July 11, at least 185 people were killed as terrorist bombs ripped through crowded trains in Mumbai (Bombay), India.
  • On Wednesday, July 12, north of Baghdad, Iraqi security forces found the bodies of 20 bus drivers who had been kidnapped by terrorists.
  • On Thursday, July 13, fighting expanded between Israel and Lebanon following the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers by the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah earlier in the week.

 

Many observers consider all of these separate incidents as part of a larger conflict that is pitting radical terrorists groups and extreme dictatorial regimes against the Western world. Some say that the clashes are actually battles in a world war that is already under way.

 

More on these stories may be found at these links:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2186527

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2186687

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2182021

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/10/us.nkorea.ap/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202834,00.html

 

The Big Questions

The many acts of armed provocation around the world suggest these questions:

 

  1. Under what circumstances are defensive battles an acceptable response?

 

  1. Under what circumstances, if any, are first-strike attacks acceptable?

 

  1. Is there such a thing as a "just war"?

 

  1. Christians, by definition, are followers of the Prince of Peace. What obligations does that lay upon us in times of national threat?

 

  1. What tools or methods for peacemaking are available through the Christian faith?

 

  1. Are peacemakers who are unable to end conflicts despite their best efforts therefore fools or failures?

 

Confronting the News with Scripture

Here are some verses to help us think about issues of war and peace biblically:

 

Nahum 3:3

"Horsemen charging, flashing sword and glittering spear, piles of dead, heaps of corpses, dead bodies without end -- they stumble over the bodies!" (For context, read 3:1-7.)

 

"Piles of dead, heaps of corpses." That sounds like it could be a line from a news report following a terrorist attack on a civilian target in our own time. Instead, however, it was spoken by the Hebrew prophet Nahum as he envisioned the judgment that was to come upon the Assyrian city of Nineveh, which was known for its cruelty to others, including against Israel. (His prophecy came true, by the way, when Nineveh was destroyed by the Babylonians in 612 B.C.)

 

Although the prophet's words sound bloodthirsty, he was simply reporting what he envisioned was to come upon this enemy of Israel. Nonetheless, he does not sound particularly troubled by what he foresees. This is a primitive view that Christianity does not embrace, but it may help us to glimpse the mindset behind fanatical terrorism today when we realize that there was a time when our spiritual ancestors considered mass killings of noncombatants as acceptable to God.

 

Question: Should we ever take satisfaction in the death of an enemy group? Explain your answer.

 

Matthew 24:6

"And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not alarmed; for this must take place, but the end is not yet." (For context, read 24:3-8.)

 

Jesus made this statement in response to a question from his disciples about what would be the sign of his return to earth and of the end of the age. Jesus' reply suggests that there will always be conflicts and wars, and that they could be taken as signs of his impending return, but that to read them that way would be a mistake. Jesus was acknowledging the inevitability of wars -- "for this must take place" -- but we should not assume that his acknowledgment of their happening was a condoning of them.

 

He did seem, however, to want his followers to know that war is never the last word -- "the end is not yet."

 

Question: For Christians, what is the last word?

 

1 Samuel 17:45

"You come to me with sword and spear and javelin; but I come to you in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied." (For context, read 17:41-49.)

 

These words are from young David to the giant Philistine warrior Goliath as David, slingshot in hand, confronted the heavily armed soldier. "LORD of hosts" is a translation of a Hebrew name for God: Yahweh-Sabaoth. The first term, Yahweh is the most frequently used of the Old Testament names for God, occurring more than 6,800 times, and by itself means something like "He is."

 

But sometimes it is linked to other terms to refer to some characteristic of God. Literally, Yahweh-Sabaoth means "He who will be armies." This compound name, in English as "LORD of hosts," appears 235 times in the Old Testament, as well as a couple of times in the New Testament. Significantly, the very last time God identifies himself by a name in the Old Testament -- in the final chapter of Malachi (4:1, 3) -- is as the Lord of Hosts.

 

In the Bible, the angels are sometimes referred to as God's host. In other places host is used to mean the people of Israel. Occasionally it refers to creation itself or the heavenly bodies -- sun, moon and stars. And other times it refers to actual armies. This tells us that while Yahweh-Sabaoth is the commander-in-chief of the hosts, those hosts include not only human armies and heavenly warriors, but also whatever forces God chooses to use, from heaven or earth.

 

Questions: Does the Yahweh-Sabaoth name suggest that God views human conflict differently from how we view it? Why or why not?

 

Psalm 86:5

"For you, O Lord, are good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call on you." (For context, read 86:1-7.)

 

The Yahweh-Sabaoth name notwithstanding, the Bible does not describe God as a warmonger. To go to war is not his preferred activity. We have only to listen to such a verse as the one above to understand that. One who is abounding in steadfast love is hardly a warmonger. We should also note that one of the other names for God in the Old Testament is Yahweh-Shalom -- translated as "The Lord is peace" in Judges 6:24.

 

Questions: What state of relationship between humans does God prefer? How do you know?

 

Matthew 5:9

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." (For context, read 5:1-12.)

 

This is one of the Beatitudes, one of Jesus' statements in the Sermon on the Mount about the nature of blessedness. "Blessed are" is sometimes translated as "Happy are," but this statement is talking about more than a personal state of bliss. It actually means that those who work actively for peace are aligning themselves with the goals of God's kingdom. That's why the peacemakers are called "children of God."

 

Question: Peacemakers today often experience roadblocks, reversals and complete failures in their attempts to end conflicts. Are there ever situations in which they should just give up trying to make peace? Explain your answer.

 

Micah 4:3

"He[God] shall judge between many peoples, and shall arbitrate between strong nations far away; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more ..." (For context, read 4:1-5.)

 

Here, the Hebrew prophet Micah pictures the nations of the world at peace, with God himself as the peacemaker who arbitrates the differences between the countries. This visionary statement, with swords (and by extension missiles, tanks and bombs) remade into agricultural equipment, has a still-to-come ring about it, for we know it has not happened so far.

 

Yet we as Christians