Monday, February 28, 2011

March 2011 Newsletter

News From Dave and Debbie
March 2011


Dear Friends

Itineration Time has been flying since we returned to itineration last October.  We have been in Michigan most of the time, with other services in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, California, and Washington state.  Aside from services, we’ve been doing lunches and coffee with pastors and attending sectional and district meetings as the opportunities arise. 

One such opportunity was the annual minister’s conference in Michigan which, as usual, took place at the lovely Grand Traverse Resort in Acme, MI, near Traverse City.  The Holy Spirit blessed us with his presence in each of the services and fellowshipping with friends over food was wonderful.  The fitness center even had weight lifting equipment, so Dave was thrilled to have the opportunity to keep up his strength-building routine!   

In March we will focus on Michigan and northern Ohio.  We will join the sectional council tour in Michigan and expect to connect with many of you during that time. Thankfully, the Michigan district has condensed twelve sections into six meetings so we don’t have quite so many places to go as in the past, but it will still be a full schedule!  Our dear friend and former pastor, Wayne Benson, will be our speaker, and we are really looking forward to seeing him again.

On this itineration we have enjoyed quite a variety of formats, more than what we remember from the past. For example, in October, we participated in a sectional, round robin missions convention in northern Michigan. In addition to the preaching services, we spoke in a number of home groups.  In other places we have done preaching (Dave’s first love in ministry), Q and A, and missionary windows.  All have been fruitful, and we deeply appreciate these opportunities to share our passion for Jesus and Filipinos.

We still have a few openings for services and tons of personal appointment times available.  If you would like to schedule us for either a service or appointment, please call Dave right away at (616) 558-1889.  We hope to return to the field in June or July.
 
Budget Mountain We still need to raise thousands of dollars in cash for evangelistic outreaches and church planting, as well as about $2,000.00 in monthly pledges.  If you can help us, visit www.daveanddebbiejohnson.com for a pledge form or to give online (one will be attached in the online edition of this newsletter).   You can also send your offerings to AGWM
1445 Boonville Ave. Springfield MO 65802
, designated for Dave and Debbie Johnson, account 225600.  If you are a member of an Assemblies of God church, please support us through giving to your church’s missions program.  We cannot leave for the field until these funds are raised.

Vision For The Next Term Over the last term, we were involved in evangelism, church planting, and Bible school and mission field leadership.  For the next four years, we intend to focus on evangelism and church planting—especially house churches.  We have received word that the house church planting movement that Debbie helped to start in Bicol is continuing to grow and needs our attention. We estimate that 50-100 house churches have been planted, and we expect the numbers to dramatically increase as the potential for growth is nearly unlimited!  We have been told that the movement has grown to the point that it may either explode or implode, and that we need to hurry back.  Obviously, we are praying for an explosion!  To God be the glory!


Writing God has laid it on Dave’s heart to do more writing in the areas of theology, missions, and spirituality.  His articles are available online at www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com.  When you visit his blogspot, you can receive automatic notifications of new posts by simply signing up to be a follower.  If you would like to be placed on mailing list and receive them directly, please contact Dave directly at dave.johnson@agmd.org. 
 
Internet Connections We are pleased to offer more ways to connect.  You can now also reach us at:

Prayer Requests (Our urgent prayer requests are posted on Facebook)
1.  More of Jesus!
2.  Continued personal renewal.
3.  That God will minister to the needs of the members of Dave’s evangelistic team as they carry on the work.
4.  That God would raise up more prayer and financial partners in our work.

In His Grip,

Dave and Debbie Johnson





Thursday, February 24, 2011

At the Burning Bush: Moses and the Gods of Egypt Part I

At the Burning Bush: Moses and the Gods of Egypt Part I
By Dr. Dave Johnson

This is the first in a series of blogs that deal with Moses and his confrontation with the gods of Egypt.  Again, comprehending the polytheistic and animistic religious context is critical to the background and understanding of our story.  As we did in the story of Abraham, we shall again see that God spoke powerfully and clearly to Moses, Pharaoh, and the peoples they served within their cultural context. But in order to better understand the impact of Moses’ confrontation with the gods of Egypt through the ten plagues we need to look first at Moses’ own encounter with God on Mount Horeb in the Sinai desert.

A brief sketch of Moses’ early years is given in Exodus 1-2.  Born a son of Abraham, a Levite by lineage, at a time when Pharaoh had ordered the practice of infanticide, a forerunner of the current abortion practices, Moses was set adrift by his mother in a basket in the Nile river where he was picked up and adopted by an Egyptian princess.  He was reared in the palace and given the best education in his day (Acts 7:22)—an education steeped in the idolatry and witchcraft that is part of polytheism.  After killing an Egyptian, he fled into the wilderness, where he married Zipporah and tended his father in law’s sheep for forty years.  Where and how Moses became aware of the God of his ancestors is a tale we are not told.  At the burning bush, God introduced himself.

A closer look at the burning bush episode reveals some interesting insights.  In Exodus 3:4, God calls Moses by name, and Moses answers, giving no hint of surprise that a voice was coming from the burning bush.  Messages from the otherworld were fairly common as the ancient Near Eastern religions were steeped in divination, and Moses may have assumed that something like that was happening to him.

 In 3:5, God tells Moses to take off his sandals.  To Moses, the ground surrounding the bush was nothing more than desert dirt and the unconsumed bush a heretofore unseen phenomenon that had aroused his curiosity.  God’s command to remove his sandals focused Moses’ attention immediately on this supernatural situation.  Removing one’s sandals when entering a holy place was a Near Eastern practice that preceded Moses and continues today in Islam, again demonstrating God’s willingness to communicate with man within familiar cultural norms.

In verse 6, the Lord introduces himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Moses’ forebears.  It is not difficult to understand Moses’ fear.  Standing in the presence of the Holy One of Israel must have filled him with dread.  In every other case in the Bible were God revealed himself to someone, the reaction was much the same.  But did Moses really know who God was at the time?  In verse 13, he asks for God’s name.  One writer suggested that this may mean that Moses thought he was one of the gods of the Egyptians, and he wanted to know which one (Gailyn Van Rheenen, Missions: Biblical Foundations and Contemporary Strategies: Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996, 13).  While this is by no means certain, the possibility cannot be easily dismissed given Moses upbringing in the palace—Pharaoh himself being regarded as descended from the sun-god.

God’s response in verses 14-15 is telling and is one case where the English language, nay, probably any human tongue, fails to carry the impact the impact of word meanings. Here, God reveals his personal name, spelled YHWH in the original Hebrew, and known in theology as the Tetragrammaton.  In time, orthodox Jews came to see the name as so holy that they would not say it, fearing that any usage of the name would violate the third commandment and bring God’s condemnation.  YHWH is normally spelled Yahweh, but the correct spelling is not exactly certain because vowels were not written in the original Hebrew.  Older English versions such as the KJV render it Jehovah, following the Latin tradition.  Modern translations such as the NKJV and NASB usually render it as LORD, placing it in all capital letters to separate it from other names for God that also call for the use of the English word lord.

In Moses’ day, names were given that described one’s character, and the names of God are no exception.  In short, YHWH means the one who is eternal, self-existent, all-powerful, and one who keeps his covenants. The idea of God keeping his covenant, as we shall see in a moment, is the focal point of God revealing it to Moses at this point in time.  The other attributes of God described in his name here also relate to his covenant keeping ability.  In order to keep his covenants, God has to be eternal.  If he were not, how could he keep a covenant made with Abraham more than four hundred years earlier?  The idea of being self-existent means that God needs nothing outside of himself to maintain his own existence.  If this were not so, how could he be eternal?  And if he were not all-powerful, how could he guarantee that he could keep his covenants?  That he did deliver Israel from Egypt is evidence that he is who he claimed to be.

Moses’ response is recorded in 4:1. He asked for evidence that YHWH had spoken to and was guiding him.  God’s reply in 4:2-9 again reveals his ability and willingness to communicate within the worldview of humans.  While the animistic worldview of the Egyptians and, to some extent, the Israelites, will be explained more fully in the next blog, the role of supernatural power must be noted here.  Gaining and maintaining supernatural power was and is the name of the game to the animist.  This is quite foreign to the rationalistic thinking that predominates Western cultures.  To demonstrate proof of his existence and concern for his people, God did not use rational arguments and evidence because these were not valued by the people.  Evidence of his power, however, would certainly get their attention and give Moses a hearing with them.             

In the first sign, God displayed his power over nature by turning Moses’ rod into a snake.  Much of the animistic religion of the Egyptians revolved around the worship of animals, and God was teaching Moses who the master of the universe really was.  In the second, turning Moses temporarily into a leper, God revealed his power to curse and restore human beings, a slightly different type of miracle.  God would do a similar thing in the ten plagues by smiting the Egyptians with boils and killing the firstborn of every household.

Verse 10 suggests that Moses got the point and had no more questions about God’s power.  He moved on to another in his litany of excuses but eventually went to Egypt. The Israelites believed Moses, at least initially, but Pharaoh was a bit harder to convince, and the stage was set for the greatest power confrontation recorded in the Old Testament.

What lessons might be learned from Moses’ encounter with God?  First, God revealed himself.  It’s the only way that he can be known.  Second, he is both willing to and capable of keeping his promises.  If he could keep his promise to Abraham by brining his descendents back to the promised land, he can keep his promises to us.  Third, he is all powerful and perfectly capable of setting his people free. Fourth, his motivation was his love for his people.  But in order to accomplish his goal, God had to deal with Pharaoh.  And to that story, we turn next.

PLEASE NOTE: Permission is hereby given to forward, print, and post this blog as long as it is done as a complete blog and its authorship is acknowledged. Thank you for your cooperation.  For automatic notification of future blogs please visit, www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com and click on “follow.”

Copyright 2011 Dr. Dave Johnson 

Friday, February 18, 2011

The Seed--God and Abraham Part IV

The Seed: God and Abraham Part IV

This is the fourth and final blog in the series of God and Abraham.  In the first blog, I attempted to describe how Abraham would have understood God in the polytheistic context in which he lived.  In the following blogs, I described how Abraham likely understood and responded to the promises of God in Genesis 12:1-3 that relate to the land that God would give him and the progeny that God would send through Sarah.  In every case, we have examined how Abraham would have understood God’s promises within his cultural context—which is the only way any of us can understand God’s word.  In this blog, we examine the meaning of the phrase found in Genesis 12:3 that in Abraham “all the families of the earth will be blessed” (NKJV).  We will try to learn, if possible, how Abraham would have understood this phrase but, in this case, because the Messiahship of Christ is rooted in the idea that he was a son of Abraham, we will also go beyond Abraham and look at how Paul understood God’s blessing through Abraham’s seed, particularly in his exposition of the Abrahamic Covenant in Galatians 3:6-16.

Abraham’s understanding of this phrase would have been deeply rooted in the overlapping concepts of family, lineage, and inheritance.  Abraham’s concept of family, like the other clans and nations of his time as well as much of the world today, meant his extended family or clan.  All cultures have what anthropologists call kinship systems that explain how the families in any given culture relate to one another as well.  Most kinship systems are either patrilineal—meaning that the family bloodline runs through the males and the family relates primarily to the man’s family, matrilineal—meaning that the bloodline flows through the mother’s side of the family, or bi-lateral, where the bloodline flows through both sides—American culture being a good example.

A quick look at Abraham’s family tree in Genesis 11:10-29 reveals that it was patriarchal.  Few women are even mentioned.  Abraham, like Terah, his father, and his other male ancestors, was the head of his clan.  In our day, it is common to look on the genealogies in the Bible, such as the one recorded in Genesis 11:10-19, and wonder why it was necessary to include them in the Scriptures.  We must remember that the Bible was written for people of all ages, not just us.  Abraham would have grasped its importance immediately.  Being listed in the genealogy meant one was part of a family and, therefore, had a place in history.

That Abraham valued his family tree is clear from the fact that he did not separate from his family until he was 75 years old, and then only because God directly ordered him to do so (Genesis 12:1-5).  He even kept his nephew, Lot, with him as long as possible, even though by this time, Lot was a grown man.  Had Terah and Nahor, Abraham’s brother, expressed a desire to accompany him, as they had originally planned to migrate to Canaan, it is inconceivable to think that Abraham would have refused them.  When it came time for Isaac to marry, Abraham sent a trusted servant to his family in Haran to find a wife for him (Genesis 24).

Because Abraham’s culture, no doubt stemming from Ur, was patrilineal, the rights of inheritance, birthright, and blessings, normally flowed through the first born son, although there were some notable exceptions such as Jacob and Esau (Genesis 24:33), Reuben and Levi and Judah (Genesis 49:1; Numbers 3:12, 13: 8:18; 1 Chronicles 5:1), and Ephraim and Manasseh (Genesis 48:8-20).  The eldest son became the priest of the family, was allotted a double portion of the father’s inheritance, and, at least in the case of the kings, was granted judicial authority (2 Chronicles 21:3) (http://www.bible-history.com/eastons/B/Birthright/accessed%2007%20February%202011). The eldest son also had considerable authority within the family.  In Genesis 24, Abraham’s servant negotiates for Rebekah’s with her eldest brother, Laban, who was apparently responsible for her in the absence of their father, Bethuel. 

However, whether the privileges of the first born applied to Ishmael is not clear since Hagar was a concubine, not a wife.  Genesis 21:10 implies that Ishmael had at least some of the rights of the firstborn, and Sarah wanted to make sure that he had no opportunity to exercise them.  While God make clear to Abraham that Ishmael was not the one through whom his promises would be fulfilled, he did promise to bless him and make a nation from his progeny (Genesis 21:13) because his was also the son of Abraham.  In this sense, Ishmael also participated in the fulfillment of Genesis 12:2. 

With all of this in mind, we move on to Paul’s comment in Galatians 3:16 that the promise of God to Abraham referred to one seed—Jesus Christ.  Abraham most likely never understood this part of the promise.  There is no hint in the Genesis record that Abraham ever knew that one of his seed would be the Messiah.  In no way, however, does this invalidate Paul’s statement. 

For Christ to be the seed of Abraham meant that he had have an established lineage as one of Abraham’s descendents.  The genealogical lists of Matthew 1:1-18 and Luke 3:23-38 are critical to Paul’s argument.  The Matthew list traces the lineage of Mary, Jesus’ biological mother.  The second gives that of Joseph who, though not Jesus’ literal father, was his legal one.

Paul’s statement that Christ was the seed of Abraham must be seen in the context of his argument of justification by faith rather than through the law (the Ten Commandments) in Galatians 3:1-4:7.  His point is that the covenant that God had made with Abraham could not be nullified under any circumstances. The purpose of the Ten Commandments was to reveal our sin.  God’s purpose in Christ, according to Paul, was to reveal God’s mercy and forgiveness.  Throughout the ages, multiplied millions of people, representing many ethnic backgrounds from all over the world, have believed in Christ—the Seed of Abraham and received God’s blessing.  God’s promises to Abraham have been fulfilled.


PLEASE NOTE: Permission is hereby given to forward, print, and post this blog as long as it is done as a complete blog, and its authorship is acknowledged. Thank you for your cooperation.  For automatic notification of future blogs please visit, www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com and click on “follow.”

Copyright 2011 Dr. Dave Johnson 

Thursday, February 3, 2011

The Promise of a Progeny: God and Abraham Part III

The Promise of a Progeny: God and Abraham
Part III
By Dr. Dave Johnson

This is the third in a series of blogs regarding the relationship between God and Abraham.  We have already covered the stark contrast between Abraham’s monotheism and the polytheism prevalent in the tribes that surrounded him, and from which he, himself, came.  We have also covered God’s promise to Abraham that his descendents would inherit the land of Canaan. 

In this blog, we will examine Abraham’s understanding of the promise that God would give him descendents that would outnumber the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore.  When God first promised his descendents, he was already seventy-five years old, and Sarah was sixty-five.  Given the life-span of the people of his time, having children at this age was quite normal.  But the promise was not fulfilled until after another twenty-five years, when they were both no longer fertile.  The Genesis record does show that on a few occasions the Lord reminded Abraham of the promise, but a quarter of a century is a long time to wait, and we may not assume that God continually repeated his promises, which is one of the reasons that the Bible accords great faith to Abraham. 

While the biblical text records only five occasions in this time period when God reminded Abraham of his promise (Genesis 12:7; 13:13-18; 15:1-6; 17:1-27, and 18:1-19), each one of them is significant.  In Genesis 12:7, God repeated the promise when Abraham first arrived in Canaan.  This is the first time that the promise of a progeny is directly tied to the land that Abraham would inherit.  In 13:13-18, the promise is repeated after Abraham divided the land with Lot.  The significance of repeating the promise here is to give Abraham the assurance that his future descendants, not Lot’s, would inherit the land.

The third occasion, recorded in Genesis 15, came after Abraham’s coalition had rescued Lot and others from the Chedorloaomer, the king of Elam, and his friends, who had raided south eastern Canaan and taken plunder and hostages, including his nephew, Lot.   In this raid, it became obvious to Abraham that the promised land was vulnerable to outsiders.  The loose federations of clans, tribal groups, which included Abraham’s household of 318 persons, and city-states that populated Canaan was not strong enough to withstand attack from the outside.  God’s reassurance here must have bolstered Abraham’s faith. 

The dialogue between God and Abraham in Genesis 15 is quite revealing.  First, God tells Abraham not to fear for God himself would be Abraham’s protector and rewarder.  Abraham responded essentially that there wasn’t much worth protecting since God had not given him an heir.  But God patiently repeated the promise, and Abraham believed. 

But believing does not mean that there are no questions.  In v. 8, Abraham simply asks “how?” God responds in a manner that seems odd to Westerners but was quite natural to Abraham.  What transpires in the following verses takes the form of a Hittite suzerainty treaty, a common type of treaty between two parties, undoubtedly quite familiar to Abraham—again reflecting God’s willingness to communicate with mankind through human cultures.

A suzerainty treaty, however, was not a treaty among equals, but one between a superior lord and a vassal.  Abraham clearly understood who played what role.  What is different from a normal suzerainty treaty here is that God not only laid out the terms of the treaty, he alone would be the one to execute it.  In the normal treaty procedure, both parties would walk between the slain animals.  But in this case, God, symbolized by the smoking pot and burning torch, walked alone, signifying that he was both the originator and the guarantor of the covenant.  Only he would be bound by it.  Abraham would do nothing to fulfill the covenant beyond having sexual relations with Sarah and rearing the child.  He could either accept or reject the terms but could not change them.  There were no negotiations. Abraham accepted.

How did Abraham and Sarah deal with this promise?  In Genesis 16:1-2, Sarah, who by now was probably nearing the end of childbearing age, reminded Abraham that she was barren.  This account must clearly be seen in conjunction with the events of chapter 15.  Sarah’s offered her maid in an honest effort to see the promise of God fulfilled.  But there may be more in view here than doing the will of God.  Cultural mandates and peer pressure cannot be ignored.  Barrenness was a major social disgrace because continuing the family tree was considered very important.  Sarah may have been desperate and was surely at least partially motivated by a desire to remove this social stigma.  Having an heir would assure Abraham’s place in history and establish his legacy. 

There were at least two ways that ancient Near Eastern cultures dealt with infertility.  One was by appealing to the gods for help by performing religious rituals, including prostitution.  (http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/mandrake_harrison.pdf).  The other was by using a servant as a surrogate mother.  While the first would have been reprehensible to Abraham, the second did not present any issues of conscience for him.  We must remember here that Abraham had no knowledge of the Ten Commandments as they had not yet been given.  Consequently, while God did not condone his action, he also never rebukes Abraham for having a sexual relationship with Hagar or holds him responsible for what has happened between the descendents of Ishmael and Isaac.

For thirteen years Abraham and Sarah thought that God’s covenant would be fulfilled through Ishmael.  In Genesis 17, God again appeared to Abraham and revealed that, in her old age, Sarah herself would indeed bear a child.  At this point, God did two things.  First, he changes their names from Abram and Sarai to the plural forms Abraham and Sarah, conveying the promise that they would be the progenitors of a multitude—even though, as yet, they had no child between them.  Why God did this now and not before is not explained, but it may have been to give Abraham and Sarah confidence that he would enact his will and fulfill his promise through Sarah, not Hagar.  Since names were given to describe a person’s character, the neighbors likely mocked them, reminding them that the “father of a multitude” had only one son, and that by a concubine.

The second thing that God did here was to institute the sign of the covenant, circumcision, as the seal of his agreement that the descendents of Abraham’s coming child would be God’s forever.  Circumcision was commonly practiced among the nations of Canaan, although the Philistines were an exception.  While the exact purpose of circumcision among other groups cannot be established for certain, it was most likely religious since marking one’s body was common in Canaanite religious practices.  It should be noted that while Ishmael was required to be circumcised and God would bless him because of Abraham, Ishmael was not considered a son of the covenant (17:19-20) and would not participate in the covenant blessings. What set Abraham apart from his neighbors was the intent of the circumcision as a sign of his special relationship with God.  By becoming circumcised, Abraham signified his ratification of the covenant.

Genesis 21:1-21 records both a blessing and a tragedy.  The blessing was that God finally kept his promise and gave Isaac to Abraham and Sarah.  What a joy his birth must have been to their old hearts.  In his birth, they saw the beginning of the fulfillment of God’s covenant promises.  But the arrival of Isaac also drove the final nail in the coffin of Sarah’s relationship with Hagar and Ishmael, and she demanded that Abraham throw them out.  Reluctantly, he did so, with a promise from God that he would also bless Ishmael.

Blessings from God also come with tests, and the blessing of a son from a covenant keeping God was no exception (Genesis 22:1-19).  One day God called Abraham to take his son to Mount Moriah.  While some scholars hold that the land Moriah was the same as Mt. Gerizim, in northern Israel, most hold that it was within the area of Mt. Zion, which was in Jerusalem, the site where David later pitched his tabernacle and placed the Ark of the Covenant, and the place where Solomon’s temple was later built.  At the time, Abraham was living in Beersheba on the southern border of modern Israel, so the necessity of a three day journey is not surprising.       

We are not told why God chose the land of Moriah.  Its, choice, moreover, does not appear to have surprised Abraham.  From time immemorial and the world over, mankind has seen mountains as viable places of worship.  While Abraham was surely appalled at the idea of sacrificing his son, human sacrifice in general, though rare, was known in Mesopotamia and possibly Egypt at the time.  In most cases it appears to have had religious connotations or some connection to the afterlife.  That God would ask Abraham to sacrifice any human, and especially the son through whom the covenant would be fulfilled, is revolting.  While the Bible is filled with God executing his justice through war and destruction, there is no other record in Scripture of God ever calling anyone to sacrifice a human life, save for giving his own Son on the cross.  Whatever Abraham may have felt, the point is that he responded in obedience, apparently without hesitation.

Why God would test Abraham is not clear from the text, but why God would test him in this manner can be easily discerned.  Isaac was not just any child, he was the one through whom God’s promises to Abraham would be fulfilled.  Abraham and Sarah had waited all of their married lives for this boy.  If he honored God’s command to kill the promised son, how would God fulfill his promise?  Was Abraham strong enough in his faith in God to withstand the test?  Was his allegiance to the one, true God whole and complete? The writer to the Hebrews answers the first question by stating that Abraham believed that Isaac would be resurrected (Hebrews 11:19).  Abraham’s confidence that he would not have to go through with the dastardly deed is hinted at in Genesis 22:9-10, although he may simply have answered Isaac in this manner in order to avoid telling him the truth as long as possible.  Thank God that Abraham passed the test and, after he had done so, God again reiterated the covenant (vv.15-19).   

There are several lessons that we might learn from Abraham’s life as he awaited the fulfillment of God’s promise.  First, God honors his promise on his timetable, not ours, and he does so for his own glory.  Had Sarah given birth to Isaac during her childbearing years, it would have seemed less than a miracle.  As it was, God’s hand giving her a child at the age of ninety was unmistakable.  Second, we should see Abraham as a great example of a godly man who waited patiently for God to fulfill his word.

Third, God keeps his promises in his own manner.  Again, it is tempting to say that Abraham and Sarah took matters into their own hands when Abraham had sex with Hagar, but the text gives no hint of this.  God never condemned them for what they did because they did not have the Ten Commandments.  At the same time, however, God made it clear that Isaac, not Ishmael (Genesis 17:17-21) was the son of the promise, even though Ishmael was required to be circumcised since he was a male member of Abraham’s household.  The achievement of God’s purposes was neither derailed nor delayed by what Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar did.

Fourth, living out God’s promises may not be understood by those around us, as when God changed the names of Abraham and Sarah prior to Isaac’s birth, and may lead to ridicule and even persecution.   In such cases, we are called to choose whether we prefer the honor of God or that of men.

Fifth, our faith in God will be tested. While this is not a new idea to anyone in Christ, we tend to ascribe the blame for our trials and temptations on the Devil.  Scripture, however, does not allow for such a narrow view.  In this passage, the trial is clearly from God.  When the trials from God come our way, the proper response is to seek to understand what message he is trying to give us or what he is trying to do in our lives.  Debbie and I recently passed through a major time of testing from the Lord that caused us much private pain but has led to much inner healing and liberation from a number of things that were holding back our spiritual growth.  These times can be richly rewarding if we will go through them trusting in God for the outcome.  Again, Abraham is a great example.  He may not have known what the outcome of his trip to the land of Moriah would bring, but he acted in obedience, trusting in God that all would be well in the end.       

Sixth, the fruit of Abraham’s life continues to this day.  Indeed, the number of his descendents, both literally and spiritually, cannot be counted.  Three major religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam honor his name.  If we will be faithful to walk out the will of God for our lives, both being the people he has called us to be and doing what he has called us to do, he will bless us and we will leave a great legacy to those who follow in our footsteps. 

In looking at every text where God restated his promise to Abraham regarding a progeny, we can now see his hand at work because we are seeing it in hindsight.  Abraham had no such vantage point, making his faith truly admirable.  But while Abraham did not live to see the number of his descendents become a multitude, he did live to see Jacob and Esau, who were fifteen years old when he died.   He may have also seen Ishmael’s descendents as they apparently lived nearby and became traders with merchants of Egypt, which required passing through Canaan.  He had a number of children with his second wife, Keturah, and may have seen their offspring.  One of his descendents, whose parentage came from the line of Isaac, was the seed who would bless the nations.  How Abraham would have understood that part of the promise and its fulfillment is the subject of the next blog. 

PLEASE NOTE: Permission is hereby given to forward, print, and post this blog as long as it is done as a complete blog and its authorship is acknowledged. Thank you for your cooperation.  For automatic notification of future blogs please visit, www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com and click on “follow.”

Copyright 2011 Dr. Dave Johnson  

Friday, January 21, 2011

God and Abraham Part II

God and Abraham
Part II

This is the second in a series of blogs that deals with God and his relationship with Abraham, focusing on how Abraham would have understood God and his ways within his own cultural context.  In the first blog, we explored Abraham’s monotheism in contrast to the polytheism of the ethnic groups around him.    In this blog, we will begin to look at how Abraham would likely have understood his call, as recorded in Genesis 12:1-3. Abraham’s call had three components.  God promised to give him land, make him a great nation, and that through him all of the nations of the earth would be blessed.  Here, we will focus on the promise of land.

Understanding Abraham’s call within his context requires a closer look at both Genesis 11:27-12:4 and Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7:3-4.  Stephen clearly states that God’s call came to Abraham when he was still in Ur.  But the command to leave his father’s relatives apparently did not necessitate leaving all of his family behind, at least at first, as it is clear that his nuclear family of origin, along with Lot, his nephew, were part of the party who traveled as far as Haran (Genesis 11:29-32), which was located in northern Mesopotamia (part of modern Turkey, not Lebanon as I erroneously suggested in the last blog).  This passage also denotes that Terah, not Abraham, was the leader of the group since he was the head of the clan.  There is no need to assume that this in any way contradicted God’s will.  Rather, it demonstrates God’s willingness to enact his will within human cultures.  Life in ancient Mesopotamia, like most non-Western cultures today, was heavily centered on the extended family led by a patriarch.  What matters here is that Abraham packed his tent and responded to God’s call.

Furthermore, there is no reason to think that Abram moved outside of the current social movements of the time.  Many scholars date the life of Abraham at around 2,000 BC.  Around that time, there was a migration of people from southern Mesopotamia into Canaan, and Abraham’s family may have been part of that migration.  Both Haran and Canaan were along the major trade route between Ur and ancient Egypt, but Abraham did not know that Canaan was where God was leading him until he actually arrived there (Genesis 13:7). 

Terah’s goal was to move the family to Canaan but stopped when he got to Haran and put down roots there.  Jewish tradition holds that Terah was an idol maker and, in light of Joshua 24:2, there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of this tradition.  Since sons normally followed in the footsteps of their fathers, this may also have been Abraham’s occupation before he encountered the one, true God.  We are not told why Terah did not continue with his plan to migrate to Canaan.  Since Haran was a local center of trade and commerce and had contact with other ancient trading centers such as Tyre, Terah may have thought his trade could be more lucratively practiced there (Haran, Wikipedia, accessed January 17, 2011).

How long Abraham lived in Haran is not clear but his stay may have been lengthy.  Since he did not know at this point that God was leading him to Canaan, he may have even perceived that Haran was the place to where God wanted him to be until God repeated the call in Genesis 12:1-3.  Here, God adds that he will give Abraham the land to which he is sending him, along with a posterity, and that his seed will bless the whole world.  When Abraham received this word from the Lord, he folded his tent and moved.  At this point, the Genesis narrative and the Acts passage conflict.  Stephen asserts that Abraham did not move from Haran until after Terah died, but a careful reading of the Genesis account indicates that Abraham left Haran while his father was still alive.  The issue of the Bible’s infallibility is not an issue here since the doctrine of infallibility would only insist that it was Stephen who made the statement in Acts 7:4.  Whatever the case may have been, at this point, Abraham severed ties with all of his family, except for Lot.

Abraham’s first stop was in Shechem in Genesis 12:6-7.  This city would come to have great significance to Abraham’s descendents.  It was located between Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, where the children of Israel would gather to re-ratify their covenant with God right after entering the Promised Land.  It later became a Levitical city of refuge and served at Israel’s first capital (Genesis 34:2-26; Joshua 8:32-35; 21:21; 24:1). It was also the scene of Levi and Simeon’s notorious avenging of their sister, Dinah’s, rape.

For Abraham, too, Shechem was a place of great significance.   Here, God revealed for the first time that, at long last, he had arrived in the land to which God had called him.  Abraham’s response was to build an altar and worship, which must be seen as an act of gratitude.  Building an altar for worship would not have seemed strange to his Canaanite neighbors as they did the same.  What set him apart from the others was that his altar had no images of God, and it was not used for appeasing sacrifices as their’s were.  The Canaanites appeased the gods to get them to do their will.  Abraham worshiped the Lord, accepting the promise of HIS will. 

From Shechem, he went down into Egypt to avoid famine.  After his unfortunate escapade in Pharoah’s court, which led to his being kicked out of the country, he returned to Canaan and called upon the name of the Lord (Genesis 13:1-3).  From this point onward, while he continued in a semi-nomadic lifestyle, he never again left the land of Canaan.  Genesis 13:3 is the first reference to Abraham’s livelihood and social stature.  We are not told how he gained his wealth.  How and when an urban dweller from Ur became a shepherd we do not know.  It is possible that he had always had herds that were kept in the pasture while he himself lived in the city.  What we can know directly from the text is that Abraham was extremely wealthy, which accorded him high social status among his neighbors.  This wealth and that of his nephew Lot’s, however, created some logistical problems between them and necessitated their separation.              

After he separated from Lot, he moved to an area near Hebron.  Here, God again appeared to him and restated his covenant (Genesis 13:14-18).  By this time, Abraham was already at least 75 years of age and still had no children.  The situation looked impossible, but he believed that God would keep his promises.  Abraham had the assurance that no matter where Lot went, it would Abraham’s, not Lot’s, descendents who would inherit the land of Canaan.  It is interesting to note that both after he separated from his father and then again from his nephew, God appeared to him to assure him of his covenant promises.  To separate completely from one’s kindred would have been rare in Abraham’s time when closely knit clan relationships ruled the day.  This assurance from God must have given him great peace. 

Abraham never tried to conquer Canaan by force; he merely planted roots where God told him to stay and trusted God to keep his promises.  At the time, land in Canaan, at least the pastureland needed for his flocks, appears to have been communal—open to anyone. There were no complaints recorded that he ever treaded on someone else’s property nor is there evidence that Abraham ever owned any of the land upon which he dwelt, except the family burial plot at the cave at Machpelah, just outside of Hebron (Genesis 23). 

What lessons might we draw from Abraham’s example here?  First, Abraham responded to God’s call, as he understood it, while still in Ur, and began to follow it.  Later, while he was in Haran, God repeated the call, giving greater detail and clarification.  Again, Abraham responded in obedience.  He followed God’s call, in faith, to the best of his ability.  Like Abraham, God’s entire plan may not be obvious to us in the beginning.  But as we walk in obedience, God gives further guidance, direction, and sometimes, promises of blessing.  Our challenge, then, is follow Abraham’s example of obedience.

Second, Abraham’s obedience resulted in God’s blessing.  Had Abraham remained in either Ur or Haran, there is no assurance that God would have blessed him with land and posterity.  Because he obeyed, God kept his promises and, throughout history, Abraham’s name has been revered the world over not only by followers of Jesus, but also by Jews and Muslims.  The fact that Abraham did not live to see the fulfillment of the promises mattered little.  He received the promises of God by faith (Hebrews 11: 8-13).  While we may never be famous, obedience to God’s word does bring us his blessing and leads to a contented life.  If we do not live to see all of the promises of God fulfilled, we can be rest assured that the One who kept his promises to Abraham will also keep his promises to us—in God’s time. 

Third, Abraham’s response to God’s blessing was to worship (Genesis 13:7).  After four thousand years there has still never been a better way to respond to a word from the Lord.  Let gratitude and adoration also be our response to his blessing, and let us always seek to honor and glorify him.  As the old Christmas carol expresses it, “O come us adore him, Christ the Lord!”

In the passages mentioned above, there is a direct connection between God’s promise of land and his promise to make Abraham a great nation. The promise of the land could not be fulfilled until Abraham had a sufficient number of descendents to fill the land that God had promised.  This aspect of God’s promise will be the subject of the next blog.

[To receive personal notification of my blogs, please go to www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com and click on “follow.”]  

 

Saturday, January 15, 2011

God and Abraham Part I

God and Abraham
Part I

This is the first in a series of blogs that attempts to describe Abraham’s relationship with God within Abraham’s own cultural setting.  This blog will focus specifically on Abraham’s monotheism in contrast to the polytheism of the ethnic groups that surrounded him.  Future blogs will deal with issues such as his relationship to Hagar, his use of the Hittite covenant in Genesis 15, the implications of God’s promises to him in his own time, and the sacrifice of Isaac on Mount Moriah, etc.  Each blog will draw some lessons that can be learned in our daily lives in the 21st century.

Abraham was born and raised in Ur of the Chaldees, which was located in the Tigris-Euphrates valley, between what is now the modern city of Baghdad and the head of the Persian Gulf (http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/sites/middle_east/ur.html, accessed January 4, 2011). It was the most developed and sophisticated city of ancient Mesopotamia. Ur was also a pagan city where many deities were worshiped.  The ruins of the main altar, known as a ziggurat, still stand today.  One writer, citing the Jewish Talmud, says that Terah, Abraham’s father, worshiped at least twelve gods, which is consistent with Joshua 24:2 (www.searchgodsword.org/enc/isb/view, accessed January 4, 2011).

How and when Abraham became aware of the one, true God, and worshiped only him, is not recorded in the Genesis account.  What is clear is that Abraham’s monotheism was in stark contrast with the polytheism and animistic practices of his day.              

When he arrived in Canaan, Abraham found a number of tribes or ethnic groups living there, each with their own gods or goddesses.  Some practiced a form of polytheism known as henotheism, the belief the one god was the supreme ruler of all the lesser gods and goddesses.  Not many specifics are known about the Canaanite religious practices in the time of Abraham, but the practices of Baalism and worship of the Asherahs in period of the monarchies give some strong hints.

Generally speaking, Canaanite religions gave allegiance to the gods who were believed to control the land, rain, crops, and human fertility.  Religious rituals involving fertility rites were heavily sensual, involving both prostitution and homosexuality, giving an early indication that there is a connection between idolatry and sexual immorality.  Sacrifices were offered to appease the gods, not worship them in biblical sense of the term.  The guiding philosophy behind the sacrifices was to get the gods to do what humans wanted them to do, bless the crops and the fruit of the womb, keep disaster and disease at bay, curse one’s enemies, and keep the universe in balance.  In other words, the practices were done for the benefit of people, not for the glory of the gods.

As at Ur and Haran, Abraham’s relationship to the one true God, who allowed no image of him to be made and who required no rituals to be performed, was unique.  The focus was also radically different.  Everywhere he went Abraham built an altar to the Lord except in Beersheba, where he planted a tree in God’s honor—a common practice of the time.  While we are not told what his altars looked like, it is reasonable to assume that the altars may have been ziggurats, such as he would have known in Ur, or they may have resembled the altars of the Canaanites, minus the images.  What is significant is that it was dedicated to the Lord, the true Creator of heaven and earth.  Abraham’s focus on worshiping one God, whom he believed to be the creator and controller of everything, rather than on the local gods who were held to be territorial deities, was part of what set him apart from his neighbors.  While his neighbors worshiped the gods because of what they could get from him, Abraham worshiped the Lord in order to honor and glorify him. 

On at least one point, however, Abraham reflects at least some commonality with the Canaanites.  The rite of circumcision, which God gave to Abraham in Genesis 17:10-14, was a well known practice in the ancient Near East, although the Philistines were an exception.  The origins and intent of the practice among Abraham’s neighbors is not certain, but marking the body was often a part of their religious rituals.  Therefore, it is safe to assume that circumcision had religious connotations even for pagans.  What separated Abraham from his neighbors was God’s intent.  The Genesis passage is clear that God intended it as a sign of his covenant relationship with Abraham and his posterity.  From then on, Abraham was a marked man!

What lessons might be drawn from Abraham’s life?  First, in order to follow the Lord, Abraham had to reject the false ideas about God.  Namely, God is one, not many.  Also, he requires no images and, at least in Abraham’s day, required no rituals.  To follow him was to be counter cultural.  How might this apply to us?  False ideas about God abound in today’s world.  The New Age Movement and the teachings of moral relativism are but a couple of glaring examples.  Some are subtle and some are blatant.  All are deceptive.  In addition to false religious ideologies, the gods of money, sex, and power vie for our patronage on a daily basis.    Abraham’s response to the temptations of his day was to built altars and worship the Lord, focusing on the beauty and glory of God, and following only him.  We would do well to follow his example, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2)—knowing his will for our lives and, like Abraham leaving Ur and Haran, following Christ with reckless abandon.    

[To receive automatic notification of future blogs, please go to www.drdavejohnson.blogspot.com and click on “followers.”]

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Remembering Mom

Sunday morning, December 5, 1999, was a day I will never forget.  At 3am that morning, the lady who ran the missionary boarding house in Manila where Debbie and I were living pounded on our bedroom door, “Dave, your dad is on the phone!”  That call changed my life.  As I went to take the call, I vaguely remembered that dad said he was taking Mom back to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, for more medical tests.  On the way, they decided to stop and visit my younger brother, Tom, and his family.  Dad’s troubled voice pierced my sleep addled mind, “Dave, Mom has had a stroke.  The doctors don’t expect her to live.”  Nine agonizing hours later he called back to say that she had gone to be with Jesus, and we flew home for the funeral.

Eleven years have passed and the grieving process, while much easier, continues.  Since Mom died during the holiday season, this time of year provides an excellent opportunity to reflect on her legacy.  My mom taught me a lot about God and life. 

By her example, she taught me to love God above all else.  Mom loved God, her husband, her children, her church, and her fellow man, in that order.  The Psalms were her favorite part of the Bible, and I learned to cherish them as well.  Mom taught me that the greatest truth I could ever learn was that “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.”  She played the piano by ear and loved the great hymns of the church.  Her piano still sits in my dad and stepmother’s house, a now mostly mute but beautiful memorial of her.  Her love for playing the piano never caught hold with any of us kids, but the hymns resonate deeply in my spirit today.    

She was a devoted wife and mother, working hard daily in the home to care for us.  Mom taught me to respect my father and to see his working to provide for our needs as an expression of love for us.  She also taught us to respect others, especially our elders.  The little things in life were important to mom.  She constantly reminded us to say please and thank you and to wipe our feet off on the doormat when entering the house.  She also made me button my shirt, comb my hair, and brush my teeth, which was never important until I discovered girls!  She also taught me to love my brothers, Steve, who was older, and Tom, the youngest of the clan.  It seems that I needed to be reminded often because whenever there was a fight between us, I was almost always involved and usually the instigator!  She insisted that I share the rocking horse with Steve, and that I be nice to Tom.  Apparently I wasn’t perfect! 

Mom also taught me to love reading, a real asset when I entered Bible college and then seminary.  I am a passionate reader and this has contributed to my commitment to being a lifelong learner.  In this regard, I will always be in school!

Like Dad, Mom believed that sparing the rod would only spoil the child.  In our house, the line between right and wrong was clearly drawn, and I crossed it often!  On the other hand, she modeled the idea that the rod of judgment could occasionally be meted out with mercy and sometimes not meted out at all.  Once in awhile we could even get away with bribing her with promises to behave better the next time in order to escape the impending doom of imminent judgment! 

But life was hardly perfect.  Mom also dealt with a bi-polar disorder known today as manic-depressive and was hospitalized for it at least fifty times, from anywhere from two weeks to ten months at a stretch.  The unintended effect was that it destabilized our family—although Dad’s faithfulness and heroic efforts went a long way towards mitigating the loss.  We dealt with it as best we could, although, while I’m not sure I was totally conscious aware of it at that time, I had to deal with feelings of abandonment—which have had consequences in my own search for significance and contributed to my own battle with depression.  Like Mom, I, too, have found grace and healing in Christ—a healing that is still in process to this day.

The positive fruit of her struggle was that Mom learned to care deeply for others and touched many lives in a way that perhaps not many others could have done.  During her hospitalizations, she met several women who became lifelong friends—and they knew that she loved them dearly.  During this time, she learned the powerful value of a kind or encouraging word, and she used that lesson to minister to others who were hurting.  Throughout the course of her life, she sent hundreds, if not thousands, of cards to people when she thought they needed an emotional lift or to celebrate a birthday, anniversary, or for no particular reason at all.  Hallmark loved my mom!  In short, she taught me that people matter.      

In reflecting on my mother’s legacy, I have learned many lessons. But the greatest lesson I have learned is that unconditional loving with all of one’s heart is what truly matters in life.  I can only hope that I have learned that lesson well.

[To receive automatic notification of future blogs, please and click on "following" above.]