his eyes said yes, but his wife said no

On Wednesday, for small group, we were going over Ephesians 5:21-33 (you know…that one passage on marriage). In the discussion questions, the application ones were pretty much geared toward married people (which our group conveniently has none of), so…what exactly were we to do? Well, one of our guys suggested altering the question to how can we support those in Acacia that are married.

Of course, for me, this presents challenges when it comes to practical application. After all, aside from going up to billy or geo and saying in the deepest voice I can muster while avoiding direct eye contact: hey bro…I support you …what other ways can I apply this? Then dave brings up a point that I never really thought before. A lot of times, we will do things without thinking about potential downstream effects on a buddy’s marriage. For example, if I say: hey let’s play some board games to everyone around me. It could be very possible that I can see that Geo may really want to go, but I also see Lisa is shaking her head because maybe that day was their weekly scheduled his/hers pedicure day. Well, that difference of opinion could easily cause (unintended) tension at home.

So how do you remedy that? One possibility suggested was to go straight to the wife (or husband). Now granted, this does sound like the start of a ball-and-chain joke, but here me out here. If you approach the other person first…just to check before asking your buddy, then, if there’s a prior engagement, you won’t be causing any tension by asking the guy.

Another possibility is to maybe not give the guy a hard time. I know…for us guys it’s easy to give our friends grief for being married (i.e. ball-and-chain jokes)…sometimes it’s unintentional, sometimes not. But I’ll bet at the heart of that laughter, that kind of joking could still get really annoying for said married guy. I guess I never really worried about this kind of stuff before, but now that more of my friends are married…this does come up quite often these days. I dunno…just an observation that was sitting on my mind since Wednesday night.

gettin' along.

Can you think of a time where you had a petty disagreement with someone at church? It maybe be about how the worship set should go, or who leads the next study, or whose small group brings drinks to the next potluck. What if, many years from now, your role in that disagreement about fellowship refreshments or who does the vaccuming on friday night is the only record of your existence?

This is what we see in Philippians 4 - Paul calls on Euodia and Syntyche to stop fighting with each other (incidentally the only mention of them in scripture). Since he didn't mention the actual argument, or take sides, I'm guessing it wasn't very important (if it was a matter of faith or theology, he'd probably pick a side or set them straight). What was important, was that their behavior was creating a distraction within the church in Philippi. Of course, Paul being Paul, handles this with tact. He urges them to agree in the Lord, asking a yokefellow (awesome...) to assist in mending the rift.

When I was young, I was of the opinion that disagreements within the church body was to be avoided, since we're meant to love each other aren't we? However, the more I observe fellowships and church folk, the more I realize that disagreements are a natural part of any community, churched or not (yes, we're still meant to love each other). We are a community made up of people of all different lifestyles, experiences, temperaments, etc. With these differences, there is bound to be friction. I feel Paul is pointing these two ladies toward commonalities rather than differences. The next verse changes direction, extolling the two to rejoice in the Lord. He points them to the joy we have in Jesus Christ and the peace of God which will guard our hearts and minds in Jesus. In view of the joys we have in Jesus, the petty disagreements (whatever they may be) don't seem as big. Finally, in one of the most oft quoted passages in Philippians, Paul exhorts the church to focus on the good:

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. (Philippians 4:8)

In the midst of prepping for this study on Phil. 4, I've started a new book called Team of Rivals (Doris Goodwin), which dives into the background behind Abraham Lincoln and the men that make up Lincoln's cabinet, particularly William Seward (secretary of state), Salmon Chase (secretary of treasury), Edwin Stanton (secretary of war), and Edward Bates (attorney general), all accomplished men in their own right. It's fascinating to note that these men that Lincoln chose to surround himself with, the ones that are to become among his closest friends and most trusted advisors, were all his political rivals only a few months before their appointments. Seward, Chase, and Bates all ran for the 1860 republican presidential nomination, and were all expected to place above the dark horse Lincoln. Set during Lincoln's presidency, the book focuses on Lincoln's process for reconciling conflicts and bringing together these men and their political differences as the country is thrown into the midst of the Civil War. The book brings out the internal friction within the administration, and the growing pains that occured in order for them to function together in running the country.

I see similarities in how Lincoln resolved the conflicts among these men and how Paul resolved the conflicts in the early churches. He holds together the group of men (and their personalities) by soothing egos, appealing to their sense of duty, and dealing with the numerous challenges to his leadership, all for the sake of the greater good. I'm still on the earlier chapters of the book (it's a looonngggg book), but I look forward to finding out more about how he dealt with conflict internally while dealing with the larger conflict that threatened to pull the country apart.

This post is a bit of a mish-mash of random thoughts, which help me go through the frustrations of prepping for the study (shameless plug: tomorrow - 7:30pm at dccc), especially in dealing with the tyranny of the blank page. Hopefully I'll have a sheet filled with questions, a general direction to follow, and a keen sense of timing (i'm horrible at keeping track of time). We'll see how it goes!

a life worth nothing

As I prep for Wednesday’s small group study through Acts 20, I came across something that puzzled me. In the passage, Paul meets with some Ephesian elders for the last time, before heading across the Mediterranean Sea to Jerusalem. As he speaks with them, he remarks that he doesn’t know what’s in store for him in Jerusalem, only that wherever he goes, the holy spirit has assured him that prison and hardships await. But that’s ok, because he considers his life worth nothing.

Paul was fully aware that any day could be his last and, to him, that didn’t matter at all. In Philippians 1, Paul is torn between dying and being with Christ, and living and working for Him. He realized the opportunity to stay here and serve God was good as well. I suppose this is the best way to live. He fully understood his mortality, and the value of both living and dying for Christ. When our purpose is to glorify God, we can do it both on earth, and in a more perfect way in Heaven.

Paul states pretty plainly that he values his life at nothing except for what God has tasked him to do. He is completely focused on the task at hand and nothing more. How come I can’t be as focused as that? Sadly, at this point in my life I’m most certainly not of that mindset. Regardless of how I describe my walk with God, I’m still of the mindset that I have my plans for my life, even though God has plans for my life as well. Having the stubborn personality that I do, I need to learn that God’s plan is much greater than mine.

I guess what puzzled me was that the concept I’ve always had of how to discern what God's will for me is, essentially to be faithful in prayer and wait for God to open doors and reveal His will. I’ve had this notion that if something is God’s will, that he will open doors and things will go smoothly, and yet, here Paul says that he doesn’t know the details of what lies ahead, but the only thing he knows is that things will be hard and painful every step of the way. Hard and painful. There’s no smooth sailing, there’s no “if it’s God’s will things will just work out”. He says that he doesn’t know what will happen to him, but that the only thing the Holy Spirit has assured him, is that wherever he goes he will face prison and hardships.

In my flawed mindset of what I want vs what God wants, I think my interpretation of God’s will is tainted by my own sinful desires. Paul’s mindset in Acts 20 is very clear. I consider my life worth nothing to me; my only aim is to finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me—the task of testifying to the good news of God’s grace. (vs. 24) And that’s why he is perfectly fine with facing the prison and hardships that the Holy Spirit assures him he will face.


**shameless plug: if you're interested, please join us tomorrow night for small group (7pm) where we will meet for dinner and go through Acts 20**