Paradox of responsibility

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 12 – Launching the church

Paradox of responsibility

[Bible references: Jeremiah 3:1-9; 31:1-4; Zechariah 8:16; Ephesians 4; Philippians 2:1-18]

This then is our paradox; we are given the responsibility of correctly handling the Truth of God even when we cannot completely understand what that Truth is. For instance, how can we understand that there is one person, God, and yet have God revealed in three personalities:  God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit? How can the God who exists outsides the confines of time and space, confine Himself to a particular space and time and come to be born and then to live and die as a normal human being? How can these things be?

As we look across the breadth of the history of the church, we see the church wrestling with these paradoxes and others. The result of that wrestling sometimes has gotten downright ugly with the church sometimes quite literally killing each other about it, not only with those outside the church but within it. In fact, if one were to look across the world at the state of Christianity, it might seem to one of the most fractious and divided groups ever.

How can it be that God would entrust this church with the task of bringing that His Truth to others and from one generation to the next, the church that has from time to time seemed to fail the apostle Paul’s challenge to be “one in the Spirit.”

Reflect

When children are not compliant as they grow up, do we just give up on them?

Observe

Read Zechariah 8:16; Ephesians 4; Philippians 2:1-18. What should the church look like as it handles its responsibility to presenting the truth of God to each other and to the world?

The Divided Kingdom

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 1 – Shadows of the Kingdom – Chapter 8– Kings and kingdoms

The Divided Kingdom

[Bible references: I Kings 11:11-13, 26-40; 12:1-24; 2 Kings 12]

Solomon’s divided heart ended up dividing the kingdom. When Solomon’s son Rehoboam succeeded him on the throne, Rehoboam foolishly followed the advice to increase taxes, causing a revolt. Yahweh, who knows all things, had already selected Jeroboam to lead the revolt. The result was that ten tribes (the Northern kingdom, commonly called Israel) followed Jeroboam, leaving only two tribes (the Southern kingdom, commonly called Judah) to follow Rehoboam. With only a few exceptions, most of the kings in the divided kingdom participated in idolatry and the associated practices of the surrounding communities, earning God’s wrath. These two kingdoms were in continual conflict with each other until each came to an ignominious end.

Reflect

God’s discipline of Israel was a slow process as God was at work carrying out his plans for them. Does it comfort you to know that in all circumstances God is carrying out his will for you?

Observe

Read 2 Kings 12. What should we learn from Rehoboam’s mistake?

Messy family life

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 1 – Shadows of the Kingdom – Chapter 8– Kings and kingdoms

[Bible references: Deuteronomy 17:14-20; 2 Samuel 13:1-21; 2 Samuel 13:23-29; 15:7-23]

David did have many wives and concubines, but unlike Solomon, the king who reigned after him, David’s polygamy would not lead him to worshiping other gods. The Bible doesn’t explicitly condemn David for his polygamy, but it seemed to exasperate a weakness in David. David had many children through his wives and concubines, but he failed to discipline them. His inability to discipline his sons resulted in rape of one of his daughters by one of his sons, who was murdered by another son to avenge the rape, and who then attempted to dethrone David. This all meant that the path to succession to David’s throne would not be straightforward, but in the end, David selected his son Solomon to succeed him.

Observe

Read Deuteronomy 17:14-20. What should a king do to keep himself from going astray?

The War King

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 1 – Shadows of the Kingdom – Chapter 8– Kings and kingdoms

The War King

[Bible references: 1 Samuel 15-16; 2 Samuel 1-24]

In time, Saul did die, and David became king, although it would be in phases. Initially there was a civil war as people that were loyal to Saul did not pledge loyalty to David but to another king. As in many conflicts, in addition to overt conflict, there was much subterfuge and political intrigue as well which would have consequences later. Then, even after uniting the kingdom, David had to lead Israel through constant warfare as he expanded the kingdom. So even though David was called and anointed to be king, that did not mean that there was a clear path to becoming king and it did not mean that there would be no conflicts once he became king. It also did not mean that David would be perfect.

Reflect

Being called to a ministry or task does not mean that there is no waiting for God’s timing or that there will be no conflict involved. How does one then determine when you are being called to a ministry or a task?

Observe

Read 2 Samuel 24. Similar to Exodus, this chapter is out of order, possibly happening before 2 Samuel 13 when David’s family problems start to become highlighted. What does the placement at the end of 2 Samuel tell us about David?

Testing and waiting

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 1 – Shadows of the Kingdom – Chapter 8– Kings and kingdoms

Testing and Waiting

[Bible references: 1 Samuel 13:14; 26:11; 1 Samuel 24:1-7; 26:1-12; Acts 13:22]

Meanwhile, God had selected David, someone who was described as “a man after God’s own heart,” to be the next king. However, David’s reign did not begin until many years later. This meant there was going to be a long and difficult in-between time of testing:

  • Saul’s heart continued to be tested as he was rejected by God, but it would be a long time before the end of his reign. In the meanwhile, he had his duties to perform.
  • David had been anointed to be the next king, but it would be many years before it happened. In the meanwhile, there would be much conflict in which David had to trust God and do what he thought he needed to do. David didn’t test God by unnecessarily putting himself in harm’s way, rather he looked to God for wisdom and acted accordingly. When David had opportunities to kill King Saul, he refused to do so and instead waited for God to act.

This is an area where we typically fail: Adam and Eve could not wait for God to give them knowledge so they grabbed for it; Abraham and Sarah could not wait for God to give them a son through Sarah and so they used Hagar; Jacob could not wait for his inheritance so he and Rebekah had to trick Isaac; Moses could not wait for God to provide water by just speaking to the rock and so he had to strike it. In contrast, to be obedient, David was willing to wait for God to replace Saul and did not take advantage of the opportunities he had to kill him.

Reflect

How can we gain a sense of when we should act vs. when we should wait for God?

Observe

Read 1 Samuel 26:11; Acts 13:22. What did God say that David was “a man after my own heart?”

Dynamic Tension

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 1 – Shadows of the Kingdom – Chapter 2 – The God who created

[Bible references: Luke 17:1-10; Ephesians 2;1-10]

Dynamic Tension

When we encounter Biblical statements that seem to conflict with each other, we need to hold to one of the principles of biblical interpretation, we need to examine any interpretation in the light of all other scripture – that is, let scripture interpret scripture. Even so, our best interpretations may still leave us with tensions between apparently conflicting statements. In those cases, we should acknowledge and accept those tensions rather than try to force those statements to a particular resolution.

The study of biology may provide good analogues in dealing with those tensions. For instance, in biological life, it seems that there are no simple formulas, no simple rules. While there are underlying precisely defined processes like the laws of chemistry and physics, there are also overlying complex and variable biological processes that are adaptable to circumstances around them.

Even more, living organisms by themselves are noted by intricately balanced but unstable processes that, if the balance between processes fails, there is a most certain death. One of the standard definitions of life is that living things must evade the decay to equilibrium while at the same time maintaining internal order and organization.[1]  One example that we live with all the time is with our skin – every day our skin is shedding cells and creating new cells such that, on average, every 27 days an entire layer of skin is being replaced. Our skin seems “stable” and seems to stay the same even though entire layers of skin are constantly being replaced.

That type of process holds true for all the processes happening in all the cells of living organisms; The internal structures seem to be stable, while matter and energy are constantly flowing through them and the materials within the internal structures are being constantly refreshed. More remarkably, if we examine all of this activity, we discover that this activity is sustained by an array of complex sets of interdependent processes where one set of processes feeds off the by-products of other processes and visa-versa. All this activity is delicate in one sense, if some processes fail at one point the result can be death. In another sense, the processes are flexible, allowing an organism to live in a wide variety of circumstances (environments). Thus, we have a paradox of systems that are simultaneously fragile and robust.

This dynamic tension can be seen on another level with the interactions of bone and muscle. In a given skeletal muscle, some fibers are attached to one bone in one direction and some fibers are attached to another bone in another direction. For instance, in your bicep muscles, some fibers attach to the shoulder and the other fibers attach to the elbow. As the fibers within a muscle pull against one another the bones they are attached to move. You can see this activity when you “make a muscle.” As you draw your forearm towards your shoulder, you see the biceps start to bulge in the middle as the opposing fibers pull into each other.

Exactly which way the bones move is determined by the creature that controls the muscles as the creature interacts with the environment, determining what direction to go or what task to do. While it seems at one level that in a given muscle the fibers are working against one another and seem to work opposite to one another, they are in fact on a larger scale working with each other to accomplish particular tasks.

All of this seems to reflect what we see in spiritual life. On one level, the attributes we see in the living God, His holiness, grace, etc. never change although they are constantly interacting with different circumstances. As circumstances change, although it may seem that God’s responses may change, it is not because God has changed, only that God’s dynamic response to different circumstances, whether globally or locally, has changed.

So, as we consider this, it may seem that some of God’s characteristics conflict with each other or seem to pull against one another. For instance, how is God’s perfect desire for justice able to be reconciled with God’s grace? Or how is it that He can be the Lord of all and able to also be the Servant of all? In fact, God is interacting with the world, determining what He wants to do and then coordinating His attributes to do what He desires. For example, although God’s authority and servanthood seem to be in tension with one another, He is coordinating them to deal with our individual circumstances. These apparent tensions are resolved, strengthened and harmonized in God himself.

I call this interaction, Dynamic Tension; a process controlled by a person or an organism in which the attributes seem to be pulling in different directions but are in fact working in concert with one another to accomplish particular goals. These tensions carry over into many areas of theology. We see that as different congregations wrestle with apparently conflicting issues, they make decisions based on their particular situations. Different congregations in different situations will come to different resolutions.

We are blessed to have both God’s creation itself and God’s revelation available to us as we try to try to learn about the living Creator. Fortunately, it is to our blessing that we don’t have to know everything about God for us to know or understand him, because we can at best only know Him in part. But meanwhile we have some paradoxes about God for us to examine and we will start exploring some of those paradoxes now.

“… many of the great theologians and leaders of the church—including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Origen of Alexandria, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley—in various ways believed that Creation bears witness to the glory and truth of its Creator and that this witness is fully compatible with the witness of Scripture.” [2]


[1] Weber, Bruce. “Life” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 7 Nov 2011, plato.stanford.edu/entries/life

[2] Mann, Mark H. “The Church Fathers and Two Books Theology” Biologos 4 Nov 2012 biologos.org/articles/the-church-fathers-and-two-books-theology

Observe

Read Luke 17:1-10; Ephesians 2:1-10. Verse 10 in both of these passages seems to say the opposite thing. How does the context of Luke 17:10 and Ephesians 2:10 help to resolve these two verses?