Author: kevingdrendel

I am sixtiesh, an English Literature major in college and an attorney by profession. Faith informs my life, and this blog is about my faith journey.

Mockery of the Offense and the Offended: the Opening Ceremonies in Paris

I want to be offended, but, I am caught up short by Paul’s admonition not to judge the world at this time – while people may still be saved.

kevingdrendelLeave a comment

Paul famously says in Roman 1:20 that people everywhere are without excuse in their denial of God and suppression of the truth because God’s invisible attributes and His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen and are understood through the creation. This is one of the most often quoted verses in the first couple of Chapters of Roman.

I have often quoted Romans 1:20 as a defense of the faith to unbelievers, but Romans 2:1 catches my eye today. It begins with same phrase, “Therefore, you are without excuse….” Except this verse is clearly directed to an audience of Roman believers.

I wonder how I have missed the parallel nature of this statement to believers. Just as nonbelievers are without excuse in their unbelief, Paul says believers are without excuse in a different sense:

“Therefore you are without excuse, whoever you are, when you judge someone else. For on whatever grounds you judge another, you condemn yourself, because you who judge practice the same things.”

Romans 2:1

I have to admit my own tendency to focus on Romans 1 and Paul’s statements that the world is without excuse, because God made himself known, and people in their depraved minds chose not to honor God, embracing sin instead. I tend to focus on the list of sins, including men and women trading natural relations for unnatural ones.

It seems that the world focuses on those things as well. Christians and non Christians alike, and this list of sins has become become a dividing line in the ongoing battle of a “culture war” that wages in the United States.

While Romans 1:20 and the list of sins that follow it seems to have captured our attention, I wonder today why we seem to glossed over what Paul says in Romans 2:1?

The parallel nature of the two verses demands some attention. We dare not focus on one half of the equation to the exclusion of the other half of the equation.

Paul says in Romans 1:14 that he is a debtor to Greeks and barbarians and to the wise and the foolish because the Gospel has the power for salvation. (Rom. 1:16) The righteousness of God is revealed in the Gospel from faith to faith. (Rom. 1:17)

Then, Paul says that the wrath of God is revealed against the ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth (Rom. 1:19) because God has made it plain to them…. Therefore, they are without excuse.

Paul doesn’t stop there, however, and neither should we. In Romans 2, Paul starts out saying that people who judge others are also without excuse! On whatever grounds we judge others, we condemn ourselves because we practice the same things.

This is a sobering statement, and one which we ignore to our detriment and the detriment of the preaching of the gospel.

Again, it’s important to note that Paul is talking to the believers in Rome. He is not talking to heathens and barbarians and people who are given over to their carnal desires.

Five chapters later Paul talks personally about believers’ struggles with sin (Romans 7:15-20), doing the things we don’t want to do and not doing the things we know we should do. Paul is brutally honest about the fact that sin is still a problem for the believer. If anyone ways he is without sin, he makes God out to be a liar! (1 John 1:10)

Of course, believers should resist sin and learn to overcome it. This is a lifelong process, and we only overcome by the work of the Holy Spirit in us as we yield to His direction in our lives.

Yet, the holiest of people – Paul – admits to failing from time to time and giving into or returning to some form of sin. It doesn’t what what the sin is. The sin that causes us to stumble may be different for each one of us. That fact is that we sin, even though we don’t want to sin anymore.

The import of this for the believer, Paul is saying, is that we, should not adopt a judgmental attitude toward anyone. Not even to those who God has given over to their carnal desires. In judging others, we condemn ourselves, says Saint Paul. Paul also days,

“What business of mine is it to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?”

1` Corinthians 5:122

The timing of this fresh revelation from my daily scripture reading is interesting. My social media feed has been full of judgmental tirades over the opening ceremonies at the Paris Olympics. I did not watch them, but I have certainly become aware of how everyone feels about those ceremonies, particularly Christians.

I know I am late to the discussion, but I have resisted the temptation to jump into the fray. It seems there is much to be offended about, yet the parallelism of Romans 1:20 and Romans 2:1 gives me pause. The judgmentalism of offended Christians screams for a response.

Continue reading “Mockery of the Offense and the Offended: the Opening Ceremonies in Paris” →

Current Lessons in the Parable of the Good Samaritan: Focusing on the Weightier Matters of the Law

We often fail to help people in need because we are focused on the good things we are doing

kevingdrendel1 Comment

I have been involved in the faith-based legal aid organization, Administer Justice, in different capacities for about 12 years. I am an attorney. AJ is an organization founded by an attorney, Bruce Strom, who left his lucrative law practice to provide pro bono (free) legal services for people who can’t afford a lawyer. AJ helps churches run Gospel Justice Centers.

Bruce’s book, Gospel Justice, describes his calling and the journey he began over 20 years ago. Gospel Justice follows the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan and what it means to love your neighbor as God commands. Implicit in the parable is the question: who is my neighbor?

I have learned recently, that parables were common in the rabbinical tradition of the time, and the set up of a priest, a Levite and a third person was a common parable structure. It is the equivalent to the modern set up for a joke: a priest, an Irishman, and a Scotsman walk into a bar…..

According to Marty Solomon of the BEMA Podcast, the third person (the one through whom the lesson is learned) was often a Pharisee in the rabbinical Jewish tradition of the First Century. Jesus turned the tables by making the third person a Samaritan.

Samaritans had Hebrew DNA. They were ancestors of the Israelites who were left behind during the exile. They had intermarried and changed their religious practices to accommodate their mixed marriages and life without the Temple. The Jewish remnant that returned to rebuild the Temple saw them as mongrels who abandoned the faith. For Centuries, Samaritans were despised by the Jews who rebuilt the Temple and carried on the traditions of the Mosaic Law.

The priests and Levites represent good, religious people and the devotion to traditional values. They represent respectable, hard-working people who have faithfully kept those traditional values through hundreds of years of faithful adherence in difficult times.

When the priest and Levite in the parable pass by the anonymous, injured man on the road, we react with modern sensibilities that are honed by two millennia of Christian thought, tradition, and conditioning to judge them. First Century Pharisees, however, would have viewed the situation differently.

The injured man had no identify. They might have wondered who he was. (Raising the question: who is my neighbor?) Pharisees and Sadducees may have disagreed on whether aid should be offered to Gentiles, but they would have agreed that the mongrel Samaritans did not merit their aid.

They also would have recognized that the priest and the Levite had good reasons to pass over to the other side of the road and keep going. Among other things, priests were forbidden to touch a corpse. (Lev. 21:1–3) Touching a corpse, or even being in the same space as a corpse meant impurity, and they needed to maintain purity to perform their duties.

The rules that governed these things were complex and nuanced. (See Introduction to the Jewish Rules of Purity and Impurity) Becoming impure meant that a priest could not attend to his ritual duties without going through a time of ritual cleansing. The risk that the injured man might be dead was no small consideration to them.

Perhaps, this seems like being generous to them, but their lives revolved around the rituals handed down centuries ago in the Torah. They were sacred, and their identity and their purpose in life revolved around maintaining those rituals, which they had done since the time of Moses, the great, great grandson of Levi.

If we think times and people are different now, they are, but less so than we might be tempted to think. Most modern Americans (even religious ones) do not practice ritual like First Century Jewish leaders did. We are less religiously ritualistic, perhaps, than ever before. Yet, we are no different, really, in our devotion to our own values and doctrines.

Continue reading “Current Lessons in the Parable of the Good Samaritan: Focusing on the Weightier Matters of the Law” →

A Meditation on Presidential Discourse

Writing for the Church, and not for the public at large…

kevingdrendel12 Comments

“You must not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people.”

Exodus 22:28 NET

These words from Moses were quoted by Paul when he was accused of insulting the high priest, Ananias. (See Acts 23:12-35) Paul had been hauled in front of the high priest when a mob of Asian Jews saw Paul in Jerusalem and sought to kill him for the things he was saying.

The Roman authorities had to employ an army of soldiers to save Paul from the mob, and the Romans gave him his day in court with the Jewish council and high priest. When Paul got a chance to speak, he said, “Brothers, I have lived my life with a clear conscience before God to this day.”

Paul barely spoke the words of introduction before the high priest ordered Paul to be struck on the mouth. Paul responded, saying, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Do you sit there judging me according to law, and in violation of the law you order me to be struck?”

That is when the mob accused him of insulting “God’s high priest”, and Paul acknowledged, “You must not speak evil about a ruler of your people.”

Some commentators have suggested that Paul really didn’t know he was in front of the high priest. When he found out, he apologized immediately.

Other speculate that Paul’s remarks were sarcastic. Maybe this was a backhanded compliment, false deference, a subtle challenge to the high priest’s authority, suggesting that he was not really God’s ruler.

In the Greek, the word translated “know” can also mean appreciate. So perhaps, Paul was saying he didn’t appreciate the fact that he was in front of the high priest when he said what he said. Perhaps, his outburst was a momentary lapse, and his response was an apology.

Whatever the actual nuance of the situation was, I take Paul at his word that he respected the words of Moses about respecting authority and God’s sovereignty that allowed rulers to rule. Paul would later write:

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.”

Romans 13:1

This is all by way of introduction to the things I want to write about today: the politics of the Church and of people who call themselves by the name of Christ. The disrespectful and polarizing political rhetoric of our times is understandable, given the tensions, emotions and level of disagreement in our country, but I maintain that the rhetoric of the Church and the people of God should be different.

Continue reading “A Meditation on Presidential Discourse” →

A New Donald Trump?

“I’m going to be watching to see if this was really a life-changing, life-altering moment….”

kevingdrendel46 Comments

This morning I watched two different videos about Donald Trump in the aftermath of the assassination attempt that came within millimeters of ending his life. Such an experience would sober the hardest of self-made men. Trump experienced the proof of the reality of personal mortality and the razor line between alternate fates.

The first video I might have ignored, but for the source. Capturing Christianity is a YouTuber who manages a thoughtful and circumspect apologetic presence online. He interviews good people and engages in civil conversation with people who disagree with him. I am attracted to people like that.

The video purported to be about a prophecy predicting the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. I don’t run after so-called prophecies. I am immediately skeptical when I see anyone claiming to be a prophet or to have some message from God.

With that said, I do not completely dismiss the idea that God could speak to or through anyone. If we believe anything in the Bible, we have to accept that God has spoken to and through people in the past. I also don’t see anything in the Bible that indicates God can no longer do that if He chooses to speak to or through people in the present.

I believe that skepticism is the right posture from which to consider any claimed prophecy, but I believe we also have to acknowledge and respect Paul’s admonition:

“Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast to what is good.”

1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 (ESV)

The title of the video is, Viral Trump Prophet Now Admits THIS. I don’t like clickbait headlines either, though I admit to being persuaded to click on them sometimes. When I do, my Spidey senses are always tingling, expecting to be disappointed by another bait and switch or overblown story that has little to no factual support, is (likely) full of misinformation and disinformation, and (maybe) even outright misleading information. I have seen it too many times.

I respected the source, however, so I clicked.

The 15-minute video walks through a purported prophecy published by one, Brandon Biggs, four days before the assassination attempt. Mr. Biggs seems very sincere and forthright, but many people can be sincerely and forthrightly wrong. I will let you discern for yourself:

The gist of the Capturing Christianity take is that Biggs got some things wrong, though he accurately predicted the assassination attempt.

Of course, anyone could predict an assassination attempt. I have personally heard people speculate that such an attempt might be made, given the current, polarized and tensely emotional political climate.

The video commentary includes clips of what Mr. Biggs claims he saw in a vision and his interpretation of it. Some of what he saw and reported days before the incident are generally accurate to the events that occurred. In particular, he saw a bullet whiz past Trump’s right ear. He saw blood coming from Trump’s right ear, and he saw Trump down on his knees.

As the commentary points out, anyone might predict an assassination attempt, but the details of this vision are remarkably close to what actually happened. The bullet didn’t whiz past the left ear. It didn’t whiz past the top of the head, or chin, or cheeks, or neck or chest. It whizzed past Trump’s right ear.

Biggs added that Trump’s eardrum was ruptured and that he was “radically born again”. This is where the reality differs. Donald Trump’s eardrum was not ruptured. We also have no way of knowing what happened in Donald Trump’s mind or heart.

The central point of the commentary focused on Mr. Biggs’s “admission” that he added to what he saw in the vision. Biggs says that he didn’t see the bullet pierce Trump’s ear, but he saw the blood coming from the ear. He also mentioned seeing sonic waves behind the bullet, as in the movie, Matrix.

(I am reminded in this comment that prophets are people who perceive things in the context of their culture, experience, and understanding. Food for thought as we read the Old Testament prophets – not that Brandon Biggs should be compared to an Old Testament prophet.)

Briggs admits that he assumed the bullet somehow caused Trump’s eardrum to burst. He added that part, because it seemed like be a logical conclusion to him from what he believed he saw. What he saw, and what he assumed are two different things.

I believe Biggs was sincere and forthright, as I said above, and he was humble in explaining these things. He wasn’t defensive. He didn’t seem intent on defending himself. In fact, he was apologetic and called himself “immature” in not recognizing the difference between what he saw and what he assumed.

So much for these basic facts. They aren’t what I want to focus on here.

As I stated just three days ago, the original prophecy about Trump being President (in 2011) and the miraculous escape from death this week (even if we admit God’s hand in the prophecies and the saving of Trump’s life) do not mean that Trump is God’s man and that Christians should uncritically support him in whatever he says and does.

Paul said we need to “test everything” (1 Thess. 5), so I think that is exactly what we should do. Some people may say that I am vacillating, but I am not. I am keeping an open mind in taking a closer look.

Continue reading “A New Donald Trump?” →

Favoritism in the Bible, The Here & the Hereafter

God’s mercy shows no bounds, and He is equally merciful to all of us.

kevingdrendel4 Comments

“Now in those days, when the disciples were growing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Greek-speaking Jews against the native Hebraic Jews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food.”

Acts 6:1

Even in the early church led by the 12 apostles who lived with Jesus and learned at his feet, the Church was susceptible to favoritism. The early church embraced a radical, communal life in which they pooled their resources, and everyone in need was taken care of. More or less!

The native, Hebrew widows were being taken care of, but the foreign, Greek-speaking widows were being overlooked. Things were not perfect then, and they never are. People are people, and we tend to fall short, even in our best moments.

People naturally tend to look after our own. “Me and mine”, as Pete might have said in the iconic Coen brothers film, O Brother Where Are Thou?

This human characteristic is not all bad. It prompts mothers and fathers to care for and look after their own children. It inspires family members to look after other family members and friends to look after friends.

At the same time, this human characteristic causes us to care more for our own children and families than for others and to care more for our friends than for our neighbors. It causes us to “take care of our own” to the exclusion of “others”, and that can lead to things like racial discrimination, nepotism, and a failure to have empathy for strangers.

James, the half-brother of Jesus, also deals with favoritism in his letter to the early Church. (James 2:1-13) He called the Church to account for showing “special attention” to men “wearing fine clothes” by giving them the best seats while making the poor churchgoers stand or sit on the floor. (James 2:1-4)

James called favoring the wealthy over the poor sin in no uncertain terms! (James 2:9) He described it as breaking the law of God – the law of loving your neighbor as yourself. (James 2:1-2)

James was clear that this kind of favoritism has no place in the family of God. If any favoritism is sanctioned by God, it is the kind of favoritism that focuses on the poor, the less fortunate, and the people that are marginalized by our human tendencies to show favoritism for our own, personal benefit.

When our favoritism is motivated by selfishness, it is sin. James was particularly strong in his condemnation of favoritism motivated by selfish desires. If we “favor” the marginalized, the vulnerable, and the ones who have less influence in this world, we do it without expectation of personal benefit, and we follow in the example of Jesus.

Continue reading “Favoritism in the Bible, The Here & the Hereafter” →