ISSL Reflections October 15 2023 Galatians 2:11–21 Post 1

Posted on by
Reply

I.
As I read (and listen) to Paul in what follows, I am impressed by the passion he brings to these words. Do you hear it? Do you feel it?

Some might call it “energy“.” Some might call it “anger.”

What do you hear?

II.
Galatians 2:11-21 (NRSVue)

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood self-condemned, for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction. And the other Jews joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the gentiles to live like Jews?”

We ourselves are Jews by birth and not gentile sinners, yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through the faith of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law. But if, in our effort to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have been found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! But if I build up again the very things that I once tore down, then I demonstrate that I am a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.

III.
Did you notice,

“… I opposed … stood self-condemened … drew back … led astray …”

There is a vividness to his description of those events that, to me, speaks of the passion/emotion with which he recalls the encounter with Peter.

Why?

Does it lead Paul to recall an essential part of the Gospel he speaks of on every occasion when he recalls his work to proclaim this Gospel? When he thinks of what he has now given his life to?

How would you describe what leads Paul to such passion?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections October 8 2023 Romans 7:1–12 Post 1

Posted on by
Reply

I.
In our Scripture for this week Paul sets his focus on “the law.”

As you spend time with this passage, set your own focus on what says about “the law.” Pay attention to what he might say about the positive and negative aspects of “the law.”

II.
Romans 7:1-12 (NRSVue)

Or do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only during that person’s lifetime? Thus a married woman is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives, but if her husband dies, she is discharged from the law concerning the husband. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she belongs to another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she belongs to another man, she is not an adulteress.

In the same way, my brothers and sisters, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code.

What then are we to say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died, and the very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good.

III.
As you read Paul’s words about “the law,” did you notice that he said, “you have died to the law … so that you may belong to another.”

In part I want to ask myself “What is the law to me, if I am dead to it?”

But then I want to ask myself, “Who do I belong to?” And “What difference might it make?”

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections October 1 2023 Romans 2:12–24, 28–29 Post 3

Posted on by
Reply

VII.
Let’s go to a couple of things Paul wrote in other epistles.

“… even though I, too, have reason for confidence in the flesh. If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.” (Philippians 3:4-6)

“Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I.” (2 Corinthians 11:22)

And here, he can write,

“For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not the written code.” (Romans 2:28-29)

What does it take to move a person from such confidence in the “outward” to such confidence in the “inward,” the “heart.”

VIII.
Romans 2:12-24, 28-29 (NRSVue)

All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged in accordance with the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight but the doers of the law who will be justified. When gentiles, who do not possess the law, by nature do what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, as their own conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them on the day when, according to my gospel, God through Christ Jesus judges the secret thoughts of all.

But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relation to God and know his will and determine what really matters because you are instructed in the law, and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth, you, then, who teach others, will you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who forbid adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by your transgression of the law? For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles because of you.”

For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not the written code. Such a person receives praise not from humans but from God.

IX.
Did you notice,

“[Gentiles] show that what the law requires is written on their hearts …” (Romans 2:15)

Is there always a witness to the Law in the conscience? Of both Jew and Gentile?

If there is perhaps a “universal” witness to the law, I wonder if there is a “universal” witness to grace, to lovingkindness, to mercy.

Has God placed within the reach of all, the opening to an understanding of grace and even how we can live into God’s grace?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections October 1 2023 Romans 2:12–24, 28–29 Post 2

Posted on by
Reply

IV.
Did you hear, “… will you not teach yourself?”

Take some time to slowly read this passage and take note of what Paul thinks his readers should be able to “teach” themselves.

V.
Romans 2:12-24, 28-29 (NRSVue)

All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged in accordance with the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight but the doers of the law who will be justified. When gentiles, who do not possess the law, by nature do what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, as their own conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them on the day when, according to my gospel, God through Christ Jesus judges the secret thoughts of all.

But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relation to God and know his will and determine what really matters because you are instructed in the law, and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth, you, then, who teach others, will you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who forbid adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by your transgression of the law? For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles because of you.”

For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not the written code. Such a person receives praise not from humans but from God.

VI.
What did you notice that the disciple of Jesus should “teach” themselves?

Something about “the law,” “your relation to God,” “know [God’s]will,” being “a guide to the blind.”

What else?

Read the passage one more time and this time look for what Jesus (and Paul) might want you to “teach yourself.”

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections October 1 2023 Romans 2:12–24, 28–29 Post 1

Posted on by
Reply

I.
As we begin our reflections on this week’s focus passage, let’s start with “… a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something external and physical.”

Literally that is not true.

What does the above statement lead you to expect from this passage?

II.
Romans 2:12-24, 28-29 (NRSVue)

All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged in accordance with the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight but the doers of the law who will be justified. When gentiles, who do not possess the law, by nature do what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, as their own conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them on the day when, according to my gospel, God through Christ Jesus judges the secret thoughts of all.

But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relation to God and know his will and determine what really matters because you are instructed in the law, and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth, you, then, who teach others, will you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who forbid adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by your transgression of the law? For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles because of you.”

For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not the written code. Such a person receives praise not from humans but from God.

III.
What “paradoxes” do you find in this passage?

Where do you find Paul pushing us beyond the written and literal law to another standard?

Sometimes we hear of the contrast between “the letter of the law” and “the spirit of the law.”

Do you hear that contrast here?

Is it easier to follow “the letter of the law” or “the spirit of the law”?

Are there any problems associated with ignoring “the letter of the law” so as to abide by “the spirit of the law”?

Two last questions – What is the most encouraging thing and the most discouraging thing in this week’s passage?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections September 24 2023 John 8:1–11, 56–59 Post 3

Posted on by
Reply

VII.
Let’s read again this week’s Scripture focus. As you read it, what do you notice about those who seem eager to stone another, and what do you notice about Jesus?

VIII.
John 8:1-11, 56-59 (NRSVue)

… Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and, making her stand before all of them, they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”

Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad.” Then the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

IX.
Why do we want to stone others? Oh, wait, should I have said “Why did they want to stone others”?

I guess that in one way is more true to this text. But is it what we should take away from their encounter with Jesus and our encounter with Jesus?

When might I be on the side of those who want to “test” Jesus and the Gospel as to how strongly it upholds my view of what is right and wrong? What Christ-like love calls us to?

When might I be on the side of those who “picked up stones to throw at [Jesus]” when Jesus asks me to consider how authoritative his word is in my life?

When can I drop the stones and walk away as “the elders” did?

When can I acknowledge that I am not perfect? That I sin?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections September 24 2023 John 8:1–11, 56–59 Post 2

Posted on by
Reply

IV.
In the first post we considered the situation of the woman accused of adultery and brought to Jesus by the scribes and Pharisees.

Today let’s consider the second paragraph in this week’s reading and what brings some of the crowd to the point of wanting to stone Jesus.

V.
John 8:1-11, 56-59 (NRSVue)

… Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and, making her stand before all of them, they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”

“Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad.” Then the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

VI.
We probably need to read some of what is recorded as leading up to this part of the conversation between Jesus and a group of Jews (probably “scribes and Pharisees” as mentioned earlier in the chapter).

In John 8:33-55 we hear a back and forth conversion between Jesus and some in the crowd.

What in this conversation do you think leads these folk to picking up stones to throw at Jesus?

Maybe Jesus’ claim that he came from God? Jesus’ suggestion that they are not from God and their Father is the devil? Or, that they do not know God?

Do they feel that Jesus has so attacked and threatened their faith and their Law/Torah, they must silence him?

Maybe for them all of the words of Jesus add up to blasphemy and Jesus certainly deserves death for that?

What do you think has brought these folk to the point of picking up stones?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections September 24 2023 John 8:1–11, 56–59 Post 1

Posted on by
Reply

I.
This week we focus our attention on two incidents recorded in John 8. The link between the two is the possibility of stoning someone.

In each account notice who is speaking to Jesus, who might be stoned, why they might be stoned, and what Jesus says or does in each setting.

II.
John 8:1-11, 56-59 (NRSVue)

… Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and, making her stand before all of them, they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”

Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad.” Then the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

III.
You might want to read Leviticus 20.10, Deuteronomy 22.22, Deuteronomy 17.7 to find some background on the issue of adultery and stoning.

Who is missing when the woman is brought before Jesus? What are your thoughts about that?

Can you think of other reasons the woman is brought before Jesus other than the accusation of adultery?

Jesus tells the accusers, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”

Why do you think the accusers leave?

When Jesus says to the woman, “Go your way, and from now on do not sin again,” do you think Jesus is too easy on the woman? Should he have punished her?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections September 17 2023 John 7:14–24 Post 3

Posted on by
Reply

VII.
Let’s take the last phrase in our reading for this week and spend time taking notice of any words or actions that help us to …

“… judge with right Judgment.”

VIII.
John 7:14-24 (NRSVue)

About the middle of the festival Jesus went up into the temple and began to teach. The Jews were astonished at it, saying, “How does this man have such learning, when he has never been taught?” Then Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own. Those who speak on their own seek their own glory, but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is nothing unjust in him.

“Did not Moses give you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why are you looking for an opportunity to kill me?” The crowd answered, “You have a demon! Who is trying to kill you?” Jesus answered them, “I performed one work, and all of you are astonished. Because of this Moses gave you circumcision (it is, of course, not from Moses but from the patriarchs), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath. If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath in order that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because I healed a man’s whole body on the Sabbath? Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”

IX.
Might this passage even give us an example of judging with the wrong judgment?

Those at the Temple hear Jesus teach and ask, “How does this man have such learning, when he has never been taught?”

What of that statement is right judgment and what is wrong judgment?

This suggests to me that they know what Jesus teaches is true. Hence right judgment.

Then in saying “… he has never been taught,” I hear them suggesting his “learning” comes from a source outside the normal and expected channels for a rabbi to be trained. Which we can regard as right judgment. But, I find an implication in their words that Jesus’ teaching is not to be trusted since he hasn’t been taught by recognized religious authorities. Am I reading too much into their words?

Then we hear from the crowd, “You have a demon! Who is trying to kill you?”

Can we agree that accusing Jesus of having “a demon” is wrong judgment?

How do we move beyond judging “by appearances” to “right judgment”?

Do we come back to Jesus’s statement that –

“Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own.”

And then he adds –

“Those who speak on their own seek their own glory, but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is nothing unjust in him.”

He speaks of “right judgment” from two sides. First, those who “resolve to do the will of God;” and second, “Those who … seek their own glory.”

Might be say – obedience and humility?

Or, should we say – disobedience and pride?

One more question for today. What is involved in “resolving to do the will of God”?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}

ISSL Reflections September 17 2023 John 7:14–24 Post 2

Posted on by
Reply

IV.
What do you see as the overarching theme of this passage of Scripture?

Is this about teaching, healing, healing on the Sabbath, Mosaic law (circumcision), ritual observation (habit), the Temple, Jerusalem/The Holy City or right judging/perception/understanding?

Is it about all this?

Has our Gospel writer put these together to confront certain members of the religious establishment on multiple fronts?

V.
John 7:14-24 (NRSVue)

About the middle of the festival Jesus went up into the temple and began to teach. The Jews were astonished at it, saying, “How does this man have such learning, when he has never been taught?” Then Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own. Those who speak on their own seek their own glory, but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is nothing unjust in him.

“Did not Moses give you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why are you looking for an opportunity to kill me?” The crowd answered, “You have a demon! Who is trying to kill you?” Jesus answered them, “I performed one work, and all of you are astonished. Because of this Moses gave you circumcision (it is, of course, not from Moses but from the patriarchs), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath. If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath in order that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because I healed a man’s whole body on the Sabbath? Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”

VI.
Did you notice –

“Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own.”

Could it be that easy? On the other hand – is that really easy?

Which comes first? Jesus mentions “resolving to do the will of God.” Then “… will know the teaching is from God.” Of course, doesn’t that presuppose you have “heard” his teaching

Where do you find you begin on this journey?

charles
{ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est}