So, yes, we are God's children, and by comparison, we're still pretty young children at that, so, we should take Jesus' words to heart and show our love truly by showing our willingness to obey our loving God.
Introduction
(Read once to be introduced to the series. After that skip this to go right to the good stuff!)
Welcome to my Devotions Series. This series features devotions based on the Scriptures of the Common Lectionary. The series is being prepared for eventual print publication.
By going to my Main Article List you can also find the complete collection posted on Gather, including the additional readings not posted to any groups. New Scriptures selections will be posted every Monday through Thursday to my main page and to my groups.
The series is also posted and regularly updated on my official blog every Monday, with the entire selections for the following Sunday: http://www.cedwardsellner.blogspot.com/
You can find a host of additional information, online resources and links to my other work there. This includes a cross-referenced Archive that lists the various Sundays, but then also lists all currently published Devotions by their sequence in Scripture as well as a Topical Index.
You can go directly to the Devotions: Archive by clicking here.
Each Scripture is also hyperlinked to the online Bible at Bible Gateway in the NIV version I used in preparing the series.
As I mentioned this series is being prepared for print publication, so I of course would welcome any and all feedback, either through Gather, or directly to cedwardsellner@aol.com
Lectionary Series Year A: Sixth Sunday of Easter
John 14:15-21 (Read it on Bible Gateway)
Love and Obey
As we continue in the Gospel of John, we come to this passage where Christ promises the Disciples that he will send the Holy Spirit to them. This follows his telling them of his impending death and his initial words of comfort to them in the face of that. These words are also filled with assurance and comfort, along with the promise of a continuing connection between the Disciples and the Divine, one that will be with them forever.
However, this particular selection both begins and ends with Christ making a very distinctive connection between two important aspects of faith: Love and Obedience. "If you love me, you will obey what I command," Jesus says to his Disciples, "whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me." Since this bookends this passage, and since we will be dealing a lot more with the Holy Spirit elsewhere, let's take a look at these phrases and explore their significance a little more.
Taken at face value, the teachings are pretty straightforward and simple: if you love Jesus you will obey his commands. Yet, the direct correlation between these two might make some people nervous, so it's fair to unpack them a little and see what we find.
First, God, through Jesus and beforehand, has clearly established God's love for us. That love has been embodied and reflected in numerous actions of grace and compassion throughout history and it can be found throughout the stories and teachings of the Scripture. So, God's love for us has been given substance, reality, through action. It's not just an empty promise of love never fulfilled. As a matter of fact, Jesus uttered these words mere hours from when he would begin the sequence of events leading to the ultimate act of his love for all of us...his crucifixion. So, this is not a case where one party in a love relationship, has expectations that are not backed by their own actions. Yes, Jesus is saying that if we love him we will obey him, but he says that being the ultimate embodiment of God's love to us, an embodiment in word, deed, and sacrifice.
Second, God has the authority and right to expect our obedience. We should not confuse this with a blind obedience to anyone who we may love, or the expectation that any person should be able to put this stipulation on the love of another for them. In other words God has a clear right to this expectation and that may not necessarily be true between any given two people. God was our Creator, who breathed life into humanity, who gave the creation to us to be stewards over. God lifted us up through the millennia and has continued to bless us as a species and as individuals. Likewise, God clearly has the knowledge, wisdom and insight that would establish God as the wiser and better knowing when compared with any of us. God knows more than we do, so we should bow to that expertise. Since we are God's creation, God's children, God has the right to expect this obedience from us and to link it with showing our love to be genuine.
Third, God has also shown clearly that any and all commands that come from God have only our best interests at heart, thus by obeying God we not only honor and show our love for God, but we also, in the long run, better honor ourselves and our own lives. God hasn't demanded unrealistic expectations, overwhelming guidelines or unfair rules. God hasn't commanded us to do, say, or be things that harm us directly or undermine our own well-being. As a matter of fact, God, and specifically Jesus' commands and teachings, universally are ones that hold our well-being at their center and are in no way some cheap power-trip on the part of our Lord. So in respecting God, we also respect ourselves, in doing good on God's behalf, we end up doing good on our own behalf, and often on the behalf of others. By following God's commands we may just find our life richer by far on many important levels.
The closest approximation here is the love relationship between healthy, balanced parents and their children. In those cases, parents establish their love in many ways. That love should be expressed in both word and deed, and would most likely be embodied as well in various sacrifices made on behalf of the child. Parents likewise have the authority and right to expect their children to obey. Again, when dealing with healthy, balanced parent-child relationships we have parents, who at the least, provide for their children, putting a roof over their heads, clothes on their back and food on their table. If the healthy parents are also the biological parents, then they were responsible for bringing the child into being. Finally, again, in healthy situations, parents have the best interests of their children at heart, thus are going to set rules that are for the child's benefit, growth and nurturing support.
Now for those of you who might have expected me to link this to the traditional vows of marriage where a woman swears to love and obey her husband, sorry, that's not my cup of theological tea. I believe marriage relationships should be much more a mutual partnership. Heck, some of the couples I've known, if there should be anyone swearing obedience to the other, it should be the husband to the wife as she has been the one with the brains.
When we are speaking of the relationship between us and God, we are speaking of a relationship with someone far beyond our meager abilities, far beyond our meager knowledge, and far beyond our meager understanding of life. So, yes, we are God's children, and by comparison, we're still pretty young children at that, so, we should take Jesus' words to heart and show our love truly by showing our willingness to obey our loving God.
For the complete listing of our Devotions, see our Devotions Archive
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 15
While it is pleasant and, to a certain extent, educational, to read everything and anything, when it comes to getting closer to the truth of an event or a subject, it is useful to find out what are the 'primary sources.' In a careful, truth-seeking, philosophical argument (that's one which is not a bitter shouting match but a calm, checking of the facts and seeing whether they make sense), it is important to ask questions which find out if the argument is a valid one, or, indeed, a sound one, that is, an argument which is logical and without 'grey areas.'
Belief systems are often clouded by doctrine. 'Learned' men within various branches of christian thought have, down the ages, discussed, agreed and disagreed with certain elements of theological thought, with labels for all sorts of metaphysical things, as if, putting a name on things will 'capture' and retain that non-existent item, and the labels will be accepted and understood by all, if not most, of those educated enough to read, write and discuss in those same theological terms. It would be reasonable to believe that, throughout earlier times, those who were articulate in the art of writing were, mostly, the wealthy or those sponsored by the wealthy. Artisans, like painters, for example, were paid by the kings and the nobility; materials were expensive and the wealthy were frequently, the only ones who could afford such ostentatious displays of wealth. Writers got their ability to write and understand those skills by education, not an inexpensive pastime. Those who were not so articulate or even educated at all were left bewildered about the views and speeches of the intelligencia, perhaps thinking that the mystery of 'creation,' of a 'god and his supposed powers,' of the 'devil,' of stories of crucifixion and of 'adam & eve'(originally myth), together with all the palaver and ritual of church routines were way beyond their simple comprehension. Indeed, the 'teachers' of the reading and interpreting of the collection of books known as the bible, which has been variously selected to suit different doctrines, they could not answer why their 'god' had allowed such awful things as famine, sickness, poverty and death, other than the 'will' of their 'god.' With the intensity of emotions engendered throughout the teachings, guilt through the concepts of 'sin' was probably a fierce and effective weapon for the leaders to use on the less fortunate in order to keep them quiet.
Therefore, primary sources of the historic, theological kind were, by virtue of the limited education of the time, restricted to extensions of the kind thought processes of the previous generations. All too frequently, it would have been difficult, or indeed impossible without severe punishment, to disagree with the political or religious (or both, in the case of emperors who believed in their own role of demigod) status quo. Nowadays, we can discuss openly what constitutes moral behaviour, that which is socially acceptible and that which is abhorent, without, one would hope, fear of one's own life. Unfortunately, with an estmated 25,000 various forms of what is known as 'christianity,' plus maybe four hundred other religions, and all of them thinking they are the 'right' ones, there are differences which, in spite of what we might suppose about the teachings of being a good citizen within each religion, which have created friction to the point of torture, slavery, murder and wars, with disagreements about territory being included.
Man is curious, partly because he needs reasons for everything, so there are no dark corners to be afraid of, no wild animals of extreme proportions which are going to jump out and savage him; perhaps it's that good old survival thing, inbred, instinctive because he is, after all, an animal. In his quest for satisfying his curiosity about all things, he has come up with some strange and interesting answers. The world was just as far as he could see, then as far as he could travel on foot, then in a boat. The 'Mediterranean' is not just a place of sunshine and lots of water, it is so named because early thinking was that this was the 'centre of the earth.' Until a few years ago (and I stand corrected, there may still be some out there), people believed that the Earth was flat. Throughout the ages, Man has evolved his thinking, developed his world, has understood more about the weather, physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology, archaeology, and a whole lot more. But there is always more to find out, to discover.
It could be said that Man is like a passenger on a bus journey; he lives now, having just got on the bus, he doesn't know all the details of where the bus has been and, really doesn't KNOW where the bus is going. Has he invented someone who is the driver and has a plan of the bus journey, simply because it is what he expects? Or, is it the case that the bus is going on and on...without a driver, because that's the way it is! Is Man ever in touch with all the facts? I suggest not. Could the knowledge of yesteryear be seen as naivety tomorrow?
Does it matter what book of rules some other generation has written in another time, another culture, another way of life? Do we go back to the good old days of, for example, the Colosseum and the brilliant and varied ways the Romans had to see off their prisoners and gladiators to their deaths, with fancy dress, weapons, specially imported wild animals in a bizarre and bloody ordeal of a public spectacle?
Or do we start writing a book of our own values, today, now?
Peace.
Well, you certainly put a lot out there for thought, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm a bit confused.
Yes, I well understand and know what the definition of primary sources are, thanks. I had thought you were addressing specific points of this particular article and thus was not sure where you bringing them up applied specifically.
This is a Devotions series which presupposes a few things...
First, as most Devotions series, by the definition of the term, it accepts the Scripture as the inspired Word of God, thus having more significance than a mere historical document, more authority than a human manifesto, and more truth than a distorted single viewpoint. The specifics of what 'inspired' means exactly will run the gamut from those who believe God 'dictated' Scripture to those who feel its a more general underlying inspiration.
Second, also by the definition of its type, it is primarily aimed at a Christian audience who will be coming to the readings holding a similar viewpoint in regards to God, Scripture and its truths.
While your points are intriguing and I daresay invite just a ton of debate, I don't really feel this is the forum for that particular debate as this is not the purpose of these readings. I'm not saying they aren't valid, nor that they are not up for discussion, simply that to do so here would sidetrack and distract from the purpose of this set of articles.
I thought you were commenting on the specific content of the article, when in truth, it seems you would rather discuss or debate the fundamental foundation for the entire series and all others like it.
You obviously are coming from either an athiestic or agnostic perspective and, at best, questioning, if not outright denying the existence of God. Further it seems you have a rather set view of 'religious' types, and it would seem a rather unflattering view at that. Again, totally your call, but there it is.
So, this feels to me a bit like a derailment of the intent, spirit and purpose of the series. So, while I respect your views, I think such academic, philosophical debate on faith itself, its validity, the historical context and other such issues most likely has more than sufficient venues to carry on that discussion where that is the intent and purpose of the forum.
I would like to keep this more focused on the purpose and intent of Devotions. Yes, if someone wants to debate a particular theological view, or point, or bring other Scripture to bear on an issue raised, that I wholeheartedly invite, as I believe that remains within the spirit and intent, but your generalized issues could apply equally to any and indeed every article in the series I've published.
We have no way of knowing what 'god' dictated in the paragraphs, if, indeed 'he' did, or if the scribe taking down the words was tired, ill, halucinating or simply making it up himself. You see, the poetic metaphores used in some religious documents, or in their defence, is refreshingly questionable today. The hand of the 'god' was aided and abetted by, usually, men, trained in the ways of thinking of the time, repeating the same phrases without questioning the deeper meanings.
Then there is the business of translation, many nuances will be lost in the search for appropriate words. Further, there is the differences of cultures; we no longer see women as chattels, as property to be used and sold or given away. Today, they naturally expect respect, equality, rather than being subservient assistants to the man of the household.
My last observation in my previous reply was a little tongue in cheek; but why, indeed, don't we start a 21st. Century book, with all our beliefs and principles of moral behaviour, taking into account a wide variety of views?
I'm not suggesting 'unlawful' behaviour, but I would argue that the concept of 'sin' is a social weapon we should do without. Who exactly decides what is a 'sin' and how does he or she arrive at that conclusion? If he a fellow human being and all men are created equal, why should we listen to his views rather than anyone else's?
It may be that 'blind faith' just doesn't get to the heart of the problems and merely adds to them.
Peace.
I'm not arguing with your points, I was simply pointing out that you're arguing something at a significant tangent to the purpose of this series and thus the theme of this particular forum and to thus respect the intent and spirit here, that's all.
I am sure there just has to be arenas on Gather where your desired theme is being discussed, and if not, you certainly should create one. That would then be the place to make your case and post any future thoughts on these issues.
I agree that this being a "series" with a certain "intent" is NOT the place to bring in the great questions Jerome asks ... which interest me personally more than I can say, on the spiritual and philosophical levels of discussion, subjects I devote most of my time to ...
So I will let this go for now and send a connection request to Jerome to see if maybe we can communicate on another level/forum ... :-)
As for "Commands" vs. "Suggestions"...
Whatever we call them, and whatever Jesus specifically called them, they still amount to directives we have the free will to choose or not choose. Even here the analogy for me holds in the parenting realm. Parents may issue what they see as commands, meaning, they are serious and believe strongly in the advice they've given and part of them expects and wants their child to follow that 'command'. But any good parent who has a child of oh, say...2 or older, knows they really are strongly voiced suggestions.
The child is going to make his or her own decision. Now, the parent may set consequences for the child if they don't obey, to protect the child, or, especially as the child gets older, may indeed let them suffer the consequences they bring on their own head, thus creating exactly what you set out. So, the end result is the same.
God certainly doesn't strike us with lightning when we fail to listen else there would be a lot more people struck by lightning every day. Christ stressed we are always welcome to come to him genuinely, even if we haven't been genuine before, we will be forgiven and still embraced.
To put it another way, while I'm not a parent, I've mentored dozens of youth. Some of those relationships were very much 'big brother.' For others however, where there was not a strong parent in the picture, I sometimes was far more involved and played more the role of a surrogate parent figure.
Coming from that angle, I see a difference between suggestion and command, but it is in terms of conviction or importance.
For example, I suggested MANY things to my kids over the years. I suggested mission opportunities I thought would help them grow. I suggested trying out for certain sports or other groups they might have shown a liking or interest in. I suggested that pink hair may not really be the way to go. I often suggested some things to think about when investing and setting limits in dating relationships. Suggestions to me were things that I didn't feel as strongly about, but felt they had some merit and weight and appreciated the times when those kids seem to take those suggestions and run with them. However, I never felt offended when they did not. It even felt better when those kids sought out my suggestions or advice on issues, it made me feel important.
Now, other things, such as teenage sex, drinking, drug use, doing their best in school, etc. I wouldn't qualify as 'suggestions' though Lord knows most of them saw them as such and some, at times, easily discarded those suggestions. But these were issues I felt strongly about and knew many of them carried high price tags if not done right.
Some of their choices resulted in nothing more than us having to 'talk' about the issue. Others, unfortunately, ended up with higher price tags brought down directly by those choices. Doesn't mean I stopped loving them or even that it impacted how much I loved them at all.
However, on some of those things, I think I would have to say that the weight they gave to what I felt were strong convictions did show me to some degree how much love and respect they had for me.
There were times many of my kids let me know they did not agree with something I asked of them, or a limitation set, but they were mature enough to respect it. Especially since I worked in partnership with the actual guardian parents in these situations, the parents and I were 99% of the time on the same page, so, I made it clear that since their parents provided A, B,C, and D, and I provided E, F, and G, that we felt they owed some due diligence in respecting those guidelines. Some got that and honored it, even though they would let me know, sometimes often, their feelings about it. For some, we even got to where we would joke about it, so these weren't constant tensions.
A few youth I worked with as a mentor, I found totally discarded everything suggested, strongly or not, yet still wanted the benefit of being a mentee. Those relationships struggled the most, because after a time you can't help but feel your being used and that the youth is not really entering into a caring relationship nor getting a caring relationship out of it.
I think this is where Christ was coming from. Many people claim to love God but never give any weight to what God expects. That's ludicrous. How many relationships like that between two people last or are truly genuine? Why should it be different between us and God?
As it is there are too many "institutions" vying for our allegiance and some of them are not even telling us the truth and most all the others are claiming more than they offer ... so most people have little trust in those OUTside sources ... seldom being advised to trust their own 6th sense of INtuition ... our direct connection to the Spirit of God ... IMnsHO.
I sent a connection request to jerome but Gather said I already had one ... I have lost track of others also that I have connected with where neither of us disconnected ... Gather does strange things sometime ... :-(
Look forward to such discussions ... :-)
Humanity may someday be able to rise to that utopia, but it won't be in our lifetimes I'm afraid. I agree with your assessment of how some in authority abuse that and some institutions have reached points where they have either become mired in the past, or too concerned with their survival. Unfortunately, I think humanity as a species has yet to reach a critical point that will trigger this spiritual growth and evolution.
Maybe someday.
I also attempted to connect with Jerome, but no response.
1. Who told us that there was a 'god'?
2. Where did that information come from?
3. Who told us we were all 'children of god.'?
4. What qualifications did he/she have in order to claim such things?
You've been very clear, allow me to be as well...
There are plenty of forums where this discussion is being held, plenty of content which more directly deals with these topics. This is a Devotional Series that does not have the intent of academically or philosophically questioning the authority or place of Scripture and faith, but instead offers insights on a direct encounter with the Scripture for those who already believe.
As such, and based on your content, I know you just aren't 'asking' these questions, but will debate the veracity of any response that addresses them, it is a derailment of the intent and spirit of this series and I am kindly asking you to not do that.
I don't think I can be much more concrete or clear. Any further comments that seek to turn this into something it isn't, I'm going to delete, no offense, or issue with you personally just my intention for this series to stay focused where its supposed to be.
As I suggested, perhaps a group dedicated to these kinds of questions, if one or more does not already exist, would be far more preferable. If you create such, let me know, I will definitely join and debate when I have time.
As an aside, if you are truly interested in researching the topic, one of the best books I can suggest is A History of God. I forget the author off the top of my head, but it is a book that looks at the historical development of the faiths of Judiasm through to Christianity, through to Islam. It would answer a lot of those questions in far more detail than possible here.