It’s All in a Handshake

It’s All in a Handshake

by | Jan 7, 2017 | Fellowship

Picture

The custom of shaking hands is known in many parts of the world and is far older than most people realize. Archaeological artifacts and works of art depicting people shaking hands  have been found dating back to as early as the ninth century B.C. (the Assyrian King Shalmaneser III sealing an alliance with a Babylonian ruler), and the practice may be much older.  The custom was known in ancient Greece and Rome and may well be what is meant in the New Testament when the apostle Paul says that fellow disciples “gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship” (Galatians 2:9).  Most researchers believe handshaking was not widespread in the Western world, however, till the 17th Century when Quakers seem to have popularized the simple clasping of hands as a better alternative to bowing when meeting someone.

But whatever the origins of the practice, shaking hands has been used as a way of greeting people, confirming agreements, sealing contracts and for many other things.  In all these situations, however, handshaking is based on making a connection with another person.  The simple act helps us relate to people and establish a rapport with them whether we are meeting them for the first time or we are greeting old friends.

Today, those who are particularly health conscious sometimes claim that shaking hands and other hand greetings such as “high fiving” tend to spread illnesses through the transfer of bacteria.  Some of these people urge simple “fist bumping” as a “healthier alternative” greeting, and while this may help curb the spread of disease between sick people and healthcare workers, most of us continue to shake hands as people have done for centuries.

Other forms of greeting are used in various areas around the world, of course, and some were clearly in existence in biblical times.  Paul advised the Christians in several congregations to “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20), and Peter likewise encouraged his readers to “Greet one another with the kiss of love” (1 Peter 5:14).

The point that we should take from this is that however we greet people – with handshakes, fist bumps, or “holy kisses,” we should focus on the act of connecting with others.  Peter and Paul were not advocating some religious ritual; they were simply stressing that we should greet others with Christian sincerity and love.  So often our greeting of others can be a formality that is hardly noticed – like asking someone “How are you?” when we see them, and perhaps not even expecting or waiting for an answer to the question.

The principle of greeting one another with the kiss of love suggests that every Christian should put more into a handshake than simply clasping hands.  Do our eyes meet with those we greet and do our eyes show our sincere interest in them?   It may be a small thing, but research has shown that when we greet people for the first time, they form most of their impression of us in the first five seconds of meeting us.   If we are truly desirous to let our light shine, we should remember this.  But it is not a matter of just making an impression of interest and concern – a  handshake may be the first and best opportunity we have to begin to show the Christian love we have for others.  

The Gifts of Cain and Abel

The Gifts of Cain and Abel

by | Jan 1, 2017 | Giving

Picture


 “… Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil.  In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord.  And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering,  but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor…”  (Genesis 4:2-5).

Many people believe that in this prelude to the story of the first homicide, God did not accept Cain’s offering because it was not a true sacrifice involving the slaying of an animal as we find in the later Mosaic sacrifices.  According to this view, God had instructed the first man and woman in how to sacrifice when  he made clothing for them from the skins of animals (Genesis 3:21).   But however logical this view might seem, it is, of course, speculative in that the Bible does not say this or even mention sacrificial offerings at all before this point.
​
The sacrifices of Cain and Abel described in Genesis 4 are not depicted in any way as being made to cover sin or to seek atonement. In fact, we should note that the Hebrew word used for the offerings of both individuals is not one of the specific words for animal sacrifices found later in the Old Testament; it is minhah – which is usually translated a “gift” or “offering” of any type.

But although this scripture does not clearly indicate that the difference between the two offerings was one of blood sacrifice and non-blood sacrifice, it does give us important clues to what the problem was with Cain’s offering and the lesson we can learn from it.
​  
First, we should notice that the text tells us that Cain brought “some” of the fruits of the soil as his gift (vs. 3).  There is nothing in the Hebrew to suggest anything special about this offering – the word “some” could connote randomly selected items, or even items selected that were of no particular distinction. 

This is contrasted with what we are told of Abel’s offering – that it was an offering of “fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock” (vs. 4).  In Abel’s case we see that the same word “some” is qualified with “of the firstborn of the flock.”  Giving of the firstborn was a principle that was later incorporated into the Mosaic sacrifices because even apart from any symbolic aspect, to give the firstborn was a greater sacrifice in the sense that it meant those giving the offering had to wait to obtain the next cycle of animals for themselves.

Additionally, we are told that Abel gave from the “fat portions” of some of these firstborn animals. The meaning is clear – Abel was highly selective – he offered the choicest parts of selected firstborn animals as his gift to God – a description which is very different from the fruits Cain offered which were merely “some” of those available to him.  Clearly, Abel’s gift was a generous and appreciatively chosen one, while Cain’s gift was not at all special and possibly even an inferior one.
 
But we must notice that God’s reaction to Cain and Abel was not primarily toward the gift – which would have been the case if Cain’s offering had been of the wrong type – but toward the givers:  “…The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor…” (Genesis 4:4-5).  The Hebrew stresses it was primarily with Cain that God was displeased and this is made clear in the following verses:

Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?  If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it” (Genesis 4:6-7).

Genesis 4 paints a picture then, not of improper sacrificial ritual, but of the very different attitudes exhibited by Cain and Abel – between the generous and sacrificial spirit of Abel and the less generous and unsacrificing attitude of Cain.

The lesson for all of us, as we read this story, goes far beyond any point of sacrificial form to one of sacrificial intent.  As always, God looks more closely at the heart of the giver than at the gift.

Why Bethlehem?

Why Bethlehem?

by | Dec 18, 2016 | The Life of Jesus

Picture

Every Christian knows that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem, but many do not know why.    There are actually two reasons why Jesus was born in that tiny Judean village, and both can be found in Scripture. 

First, it was foretold that the Messiah was to come from the house of David – to be a descendant of the young shepherd who became king of ancient Israel 1,000 years before the time of Christ. This was promised to David himself:
 
“When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom … and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son … Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever” (2 Samuel 7:12-16).

This prophecy could not have been completely fulfilled by David’s physical descendants, but only by a Messianic king who could rule “forever” (vss. 13, 16).  That is why in the New Testament it was foretold of Jesus:  “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David” (Luke 1:32), and why, of course, Jesus is called the “Son of David” throughout the Gospels.

So the Davidic sonship of the Messiah was one reason for his eventual birth in Bethlehem – the place where David was born (and crowned) and his ancestral home (1 Samuel 17:12).   As a descendant of David, Joseph, the husband of Jesus’ mother Mary,  was required to travel to Bethlehem for a Roman census: 

“In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.)  And everyone went to their own town to register. So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David” (Luke 2:1-4).

But there is another reason for the Bethlehem nativity. The Old Testament Book of Micah contains a fascinating prophecy of what was to occur in the fulfillment of God’s promise of the Messiah:

“And you, O tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you shall it come, the former dominion shall come, kingship for the daughter of Jerusalem … But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days. … And he shall stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the Lord, in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God. And they shall dwell secure, for now he shall be great to the ends of the earth. And he shall be their peace” (Micah 4:8, 5:2-5).

This prophecy tells us that the Messianic ruler who would shepherd his people was, like David, to come from Bethlehem and that he would eventually reign “to the ends of the earth.”  But notice another detail.  The prophecy begins “And you, O tower of the flock …” for which the Hebrew is migdal eder, literally “Tower of Eder.” This tower is first mentioned in the Book of Genesis.  It stood on the outskirts of Bethlehem  where  the patriarch Jacob’s wife Rachel (Genesis 35:18-19) gave birth to her son “Ben-Oni” (meaning “son of sorrow”), whose name was changed to Benjamin (“son of the right hand”).  In New Testament times, the tower was a watchtower used to guard the flocks of sheep that were pastured in that area.

The Jewish Mishnah (Shekalim vii. 4) indicates that sheep in the fields around Migdal Eder were controlled by the Temple in Jerusalem and were used to provide the animals sacrificed in the temple rituals.   A number of biblical scholars have pointed out that if the prophecy of Micah 4:8 was fulfilled literally, then Jesus may well have been born in some building in this general part of the outskirts of Bethlehem.  The word translated “manger” where the infant Jesus was placed (Luke 3:7) could also be translated as “stall” or any holding area for animals.

More importantly, have you ever wondered why the Gospel of Luke tells us that at the Nativity, angels appeared to shepherds? The heavenly host could have appeared, of course, to a group of soldiers, priests, travelers, or any other individuals, but we are told that they appeared to shepherds who were grazing their flocks in the area where Jesus was born (Luke 2:8-15).  If Jesus was born in the area of Migdol Eder, the area where the sacrificial lambs were born and raised, the shepherds would naturally have been the people present in that area.

But regardless of the details of its fulfillment, the intent of the prophecy of Micah is clear.  The promised Messiah who was the Lamb who would be sacrificed for his people (John 1:29) would also be their future Shepherd (Matthew 2:6).  We see this principle throughout the Gospels, which speak of Jesus in both his initial human and later divine roles – as both the Servant and the future promised King, the Captive and the future Warrior, the Judged and the future Judge (Matthew 25:32, etc.).  In every case, at his first coming Jesus fulfilled the lesser role, and at his second coming he will fulfill the greater role.
 
And there is a lesson in this for us.  As we read the Gospel accounts and reflect on the life of Jesus, we should look carefully at how he carried out the lesser roles he fulfilled as a human being.  These roles are recorded so that our present lives may be modelled on his – just as he promises to eventually share his greater roles with us  if we are faithful in the lesser ones we have now (Luke 16:10).

The Romans

The Romans

by | Dec 11, 2016 | History & the Bible

Picture

The story of the Gospels is inextricably connected with the story of the Romans in Judea from the account of the decree that was sent out by the Emperor Augustus that the Roman world should be taxed – leading to the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem – to the story of the Roman centurion who stood by the cross at Christ’s death.
 
In the decades before the life of Jesus, the Roman Empire increased its influence in the eastern Mediterranean, and by 40 BC the land of Judah became a province of the Roman Empire ruled by Jewish puppet kings. When King Herod the Great died in 4 BC, the emperor Augustus divided Herod’s kingdom among his three sons: Antipas, Philip, and Archelaus, who ruled Judea and Samaria. Archelaus ruled so badly that the Jews and Samaritans both appealed to Rome, and in AD 6 Judea became part of the larger Roman province of Syria, ruled by a Roman Governor.

As we read the Gospels, we find many references to the influence of the Roman occupiers. The Romans encouraged the development of several cities with heavy Greek and Roman influence, such as Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast which the Romans used as the administrative capital of Judea, and Tiberias – called after the emperor of that name – a city in Galilee mentioned in the Gospels.

A number of Roman soldiers were stationed in the province of Judea to keep order and to suppress the ever-present threat of rebellions – which occurred frequently and were just as quickly and brutally put down. Two cohorts (with about 500 men in each) were stationed in Jerusalem (Acts 23:23-32) and a third cohort guarded the capital Caesarea (Acts 10:1).  An additional two cohorts served throughout the province (Acts 27:1) along with a squadron of cavalry (Acts 23:23-32).

The rank and file soldiers of the Judean Legions were sometimes Roman (Acts 27:1), but many – possibly including a number of the soldiers who participated in Christ’s execution – were recruited locally. At least two and perhaps more cohorts in Judea were composed of Samaritans.

The military officers were mainly centurions (each commanding 80 rather than 100 men as often supposed). Seven of these centurions are mentioned in the New Testament, and two are particularly prominent in the Gospels – the one who asked Jesus to heal his servant (Matthew 8:5-13), and another who watched Jesus die on the cross and exclaimed “Truly this was the Son of God” (Matthew 27:54). Despite being Gentiles looked down upon by most Jews, the New Testament shows many of these men to have been honorable and accepting of the truth.

The Roman governors of Judea were also military men chosen for their rank and experience. They oversaw local government, taxation, and some building projects.  They also served as judges and, as Rome’s governing authorities in the area, they alone had the power to execute criminals.  While several of the Roman governors are mentioned in the Gospels, only one – Pontius Pilate – is pictured in some detail.  Although he is mentioned over fifty times in the New Testament as well as in a number of historical documents, and archaeological evidence of his governorship was discovered in 1961, not much is known about him. The Gospels make it clear that Pilate was weak in dealing with the Jews regarding the false charges brought against Jesus, but they show that he was equally unwilling to execute him and tried repeatedly to avoid this.   What happened to Pilate?  Within a few years of the death of Jesus, the Roman Governor was recalled to Rome in shame due to his handling of an uprising among the Samaritans.  He died soon after, in AD 39.
 
Although Pilate is doubtless the most infamous example we meet in the Gospels, a great many of the events of New Testament history involved upstanding Romans.  It is perhaps not surprising that the Book of Acts shows the devout centurion Cornelius was the first Gentile converted to Christianity (Acts 10), and despite the Romans’ reputation for brutality among the Jews, the Gospels show that both Jesus and the early Church fully accepted the individual Romans who turned to God – sometimes with greater faith than that found among the Jews themselves.

A Friend in Need

A Friend in Need

by | Dec 4, 2016 | Prayer

“Then Jesus said to them, “Suppose you have a friend, and you go to him at midnight and say, ‘Friend, lend me three loaves of bread; a friend of mine on a journey has come to me, and I have no food to offer him.’  And suppose the one inside answers, ‘Don’t bother me. The door is already locked, and my children and I are in bed. I can’t get up and give you anything.’  I tell you, even though he will not get up and give you the bread because of friendship, yet because of your shameless audacity he will surely get up and give you as much as you need” (Luke 11:5-8).
 
The parable of the Friend in Need (or the Friend at Midnight) appears in the Gospel of Luke immediately after Jesus gives his disciples the “Lord’s Prayer” and is clearly a continuation of his teaching on how to pray.  Three cultural aspects help explain the details of the parable. First, in the ancient Near East, ovens were fired and bread was usually baked in the early morning hours before the heat of the day – so by nightfall there might well be no bread left in a home, and people would borrow from their neighbors if more was needed. 

​Second, and also because of the heat of the days, it was not unusual for people to wait till evening to set out on a journey and to arrive at their destination later in the night. Finally, Near Eastern custom was such that if someone arrived at one’s home after a long journey, it would be regarded as shameful not to offer the person food.  This seems to be the situation in which the man in the parable finds himself, so he goes to his friend’s house late at night to request food for his guest.

The obvious lesson in the parable is that of persistence in prayer, something Jesus taught on multiple occasions, and in other parables such as that of the Persistent Widow.  But perhaps we may find other lessons in this particular parable as well.  For one thing, we see in the action of the friend that he was doing everything he could do himself – going to a friend’s house, even late at night, and asking tirelessly until he received a positive answer.

The Greek word which is translated “boldness” or “persistence” in some translations, regarding how the man continues to ask his friend’s help, is well translated as “shameless audacity” in the NIV – it really does convey an attitude that goes beyond simple persistence to a level which might even seem audacious or rude.  This, Jesus tells us, is the kind of persistence we should have in prayer — a confident boldness we also see in the story of the woman of Syrophoenicia who persisted in asking Jesus’ help till he rewarded her for exactly this attitude (Mark 7:25-30, Matthew 15:21-28 and see also Hebrews 4:16). 

But we should also remember a final detail of this parable: that it is not based on the friend needing bread for himself, but for someone else.  So an additional lesson we can  draw from this story is that we can often be the answer to someone else’s need.   That is what intercessory prayer is all about, and this small parable reminds us to pray for others not only tirelessly, but also with true boldness.