IMITATION

Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. [1 Corinthians 11:1 (ESV)]

mockingbirdHearing the bird’s shrill harsh scream, I looked up expecting to see a blue jay. To my surprise, it was a mockingbird. Of all the beautiful songs it can imitate, I wondered why the mockingbird chose the strident call of the jay. Then, remembering how many blue jays inhabit our neighborhood, I realized their raucous “jaaaaay” is what the mockingbird frequently hears so that has become part of his song.

It’s not just mocking birds and parrots who mimic what they hear and see. Years ago, a retired friend told me about spending Christmas with his son’s young family in Minnesota. By December 26, he grew tired of hearing the three youngsters squabble over their new toys and this grandpa decided to enjoy some peace and quiet while shoveling the snow. When his young grandson insisted on helping, he gave the youngster a small child-sized shovel but the boy complained that he wanted the big one. Telling him it would be too heavy, Grandpa refused and started shoveling. When the child kept whining about using the big shovel, my friend used a few ill-chosen words before letting the boy give it a try. Of course, once he started with it, the child cried that it was too heavy. “$@#!&)%!” said Grandpa, “I told you so!” There were a few more profanities when the boy grew bored and started to toss snowballs. Eventually, however, the shoveling was finished. While taking off their coats in the house, the youngster proudly announced to his parents, “We just shoveled the whole $@#!&)% driveway!” You can’t blame him for the bad language; like the mockingbird, he was imitating what he’d heard!

Children never have been very good at listening to and obeying their elders but they are experts at imitating us. It’s been said that we should live in such a way that we wouldn’t be ashamed to sell our parrot to the town gossip (or have our youngsters answer questions like those asked by Art Linkletter in his 1960s show Kids Say the Darndest Things.)

Children mimic more than our words; they model our behavior, as well. For years, the kids and I watched my husband give two hard shakes to the handle after locking the front door to his business. Although he’d turn toward the car, before taking a step, he’d turn back around and give that door handle at least one more hard shake—just to make sure it was good and locked. When we returned north last May, I chuckled as I watched my son do the identical thing after locking the front door of the same business! Both our words and behavior get recycled to the next generation.

Children will imitate both the positive and negative aspects of our behavior. They can learn to be polite, considerate, positive, helpful, truthful, and modest or they can learn to be rude, selfish, negative, uncooperative, deceitful, and arrogant. Do we model the right kind of behavior—not just for youngsters but also everyone we encounter? As Christ’s followers, we should—regardless of how provoked, aggravated, or tired we may be.

My father-in-law, whose given name was Paul, was called “Bill” for most of his 96 years. When asked why, he explained that everyone called him “Bill” because he walked just like a man named Bill. Whose walk do we imitate? To be worthy of the name of “Christian,” we should be imitators of Christ and walk and speak as would He. Do we?

Whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked. [1 John 2:6 (ESV)]

Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.[Ephesians 5:1-2 (ESV)]

Copyright ©2024 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.

WEED OR FLOWER?

The land produced vegetation—all sorts of seed-bearing plants, and trees with seed-bearing fruit. Their seeds produced plants and trees of the same kind. And God saw that it was good. [Genesis 1:12 (NLT)]

Egyptian crowfoot grassWhen I saw a wildflower that looked like a helicopter’s rotors, I showed it to the park’s naturalist for identification. Not as impressive as Scarlet Hibiscus or as colorful as Butterfly Weed, she found the plant unworthy of name or notice and wrote it off as “just a weed!” What some people call “weeds,” I think of as wildflowers and a little research told me it was the floret of Egyptian Crowfoot Grass (Dactyloctenium aegyptium). Native to Africa and widely distributed throughout the tropics and subtropics, it is one of the most drought-resistant of grasses.

While Crowfoot Grass may be a weed to some people, it is relished by ruminants like sheep, cattle, deer, and their relatives. Suitable for silage, it makes valuable pasture, excellent hay, and its seeds are fed to poultry. The plant material is used for making paper and weaving mats and baskets. In traditional African and Asian folk medicine, decoctions of its seeds have diuretic, anti-inflammatory, analgesic, antipyretic, and antibacterial effects. Its highly nutritious seeds make it a “famine food” and, when food is scarce, those seeds are used to make porridge and cakes that can sustain people’s lives in times of need.

Ralph Waldo Emerson described a weed as “a plant whose virtues have not yet been discovered,” and the naturalist’s quick dismissal of the Crowfoot Grass was because she didn’t appreciate its unseen qualities. Nevertheless, some of God’s best work is evident in His unusual and underrated “weeds” and the same might be said about their human equivalents. Like the unimpressive and humble Crowfoot Grass, God’s prophets were out of the ordinary, overlooked, unappreciated, and rebuffed by many. Nevertheless, even though they were disregarded and disparaged as if they were weeds in a rose garden, they continued in faithful obedience to God.

Like Crowfoot Grass, Jesus didn’t meet people’s expectations or conform to the norm. To Pilate, Herod, Judah’s religious leaders, Rome, and many others in 1st century Palestine, Jesus was little more than a troublesome weed that needed to be eradicated. Appearances, however, are deceiving—that unpretentious weed was the Son of God, the Prince of Peace, and (like Crowfoot Grass) the Bread of Life!

Crowfoot Grass doesn’t look like much but appearances are deceiving. Just as the naturalist dismissed it as “just a weed,” I wonder if I ever do the same with people! Judging by appearance, do I fail to take the time to discover their hidden virtues? After all, a weed is simply a flower in disguise! Let’s never make the error of failing to look beneath the surface to appreciate the value and beauty of both the plants and people we encounter in God’s garden.

There is not a flower that opens, not a seed that falls into the ground, and not an ear of wheat that nods on the end of its stalk in the wind that does not preach and proclaim the greatness and the mercy of God to the whole world. [Thomas Merton]

O Lord, what a variety of things you have made! In wisdom you have made them all. The earth is full of your creatures. [Psalm 104:24 (NLT)]

Copyright ©2023 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.

MODESTY

Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive apparel, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. [1 Timothy 2:9-10 (NASB)]

peacockDo these verses mean I can’t wear my pearl earrings, diamond wedding ring, or gold cross to church? Do I have to say “farewell” to Nordstrom’s and start shopping solely at outlets and discount stores? Although my hair is short, it’s hard to believe my grand’s lovely French braids are inappropriate at church or anywhere else. What did Paul and Peter mean with their admonitions about women’s attire and modesty?

Let’s put the Apostles’ words into cultural context. The early church was a mix of Jew, Gentile, men, women, free, slave, wealthy, and poor. In the Roman Empire, jewelry and expensive clothing of linen, silk, and embroidered fabric were valued as much for the status they gave the owner as for their beauty. Behaving like a peacock by showing off one’s extravagant jewelry and lavish apparel was the ancient way of openly boasting about one’s position, bank balance, and investment portfolio. While it was as crass and insensitive in the 1st century as it is today, some members of the early church were doing just that!

More valuable than diamonds at the time, pearls represented both wealth and power. Rich women often embellished their clothing with pearls; the more pearls a woman wore, the richer and more esteemed she (and her spouse) were. Because only people of great wealth or high status wore them, pearls set the wearer apart from the rest of the public.

As for braids—when wealthy women plaited their hair during the Roman period, they’d entwine strands of gold, precious stones, and pearls into the braid. The Apostles’ issue with plaited hair wasn’t the braid; it was with the showy embellishments in the braid! Like lavish clothing, pearls, and excessive jewelry, such braids implied a sort of social “pecking order” or class system that was unacceptable in a community where all are to be one in Jesus Christ!

While we think of immodest dress as attire that leaves little or nothing to the imagination, neither Paul nor Peter were referring to things like cleavage, bare midriffs, miniskirts, or “booty” shorts; those things were not an issue in the 1st century. A woman’s lack of coverage wasn’t what concerned the Apostles nor were they establishing a “modesty patrol.” Nevertheless, taking these verses out of context, some denominations have established rules regarding women’s attire requiring things like hemlines below the knee and sleeves that extend to the elbow while prohibiting things like make-up, jewelry beyond a wedding ring and watch, and women’s slacks because “they immodestly reveal the feminine contours of upper leg, thigh, and hip.”

It wasn’t excess skin that concerned Paul and Peter; it was an excess in attire that demonstrated pride, self-importance, and arrogance! The modesty about which the Apostles were speaking was economic and social rather than sexual in nature. Addressing those who were flaunting their wealth and social status, the Apostles took issue with the ostentatious displays of opulence that threatened a sense of kinship and unity within the early church.

Rather than turn legalistic with an external set of rules regarding proper attire, Paul and Peter set a much higher standard for us all—that of godliness. Qualities like respect, humility, love, trust, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, self-control, and reverence are conditions of the heart—not an issue of clothing. The way we present ourselves to others isn’t supposed to point to us; it should point to Jesus. No matter how we’re attired, if we haven’t put on Christ, we’re not dressed properly!

Many come to bring their clothes to church rather than themselves. [Thomas Fuller]

Your adornment must not be merely the external—braiding the hair, wearing gold jewelry, or putting on apparel; but it should be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. … clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because God is opposed to the proud, but He gives grace to the humble. [1 Peter 3:3-4,5:5 (NASB)]

Copyright ©2024 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.

HATS OR NOT

A man dishonors his head if he covers his head while praying or prophesying. But a woman dishonors her head if she prays or prophesies without a covering on her head, for this is the same as shaving her head. Yes, if she refuses to wear a head covering, she should cut off all her hair! But since it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, she should wear a covering. [1 Corinthians 11:4-6 (NLT)]

I grew up attending the Episcopal Church at a time when women covered their heads during worship and the men worshipped bare-headed. While not a hard and fast rule in the denomination, it was a time-honored tradition. Women wearing head coverings in Episcopal and Catholic churches began to wane in the 70s and, by 1983, the Roman Catholic church no longer had rules regarding headwear for men or women. The last time I attended an Episcopal or Catholic church, the women were hatless and some of the men wore baseball caps! Although culture plays an important role in the way we dress and behave in church, how do we interpret Paul’s words today? Should I dig out my mantilla and must our pastor toss out his ball cap?

Kephalé, translated as “head,” meant both the body part on top of the neck as well as the master or person in charge and Paul used it in both senses in his letter. That is one of the reasons many scholars find this passage in 1 Corinthians 11 one of the most difficult in the New Testament to understand thoroughly. Leaving the semantics to the scholars, let’s look at Paul’s words about head coverings in their cultural context. 1st century Corinth was a cosmopolitan and prosperous city notorious for its corruption, idolatry, and immortality. The Corinthian church, a mix of men, women, rich, poor, slave, free, Gentile, and Jew, was jeopardized by various factions and spiritual immaturity. After attending to three specific problems within that church, the Apostle tried to unify this diverse community of new believers by addressing topics such as food sacrificed to idols, abuses at the Lord’s Supper, the Spirit’s gifts, the resurrection of believers, and proper conduct in worship.

Paul’s directive that men worship with bare heads and women with covered is better understood when we know that male officiants in pagan Roman rituals covered their heads with a fold of their togas when praying, sacrificing, offering drinks, and practicing divination. On the other hand, Gentile women participated in some cultic rituals with their heads uncovered and their hair unbound. With a large Gentile membership, such practices may have found their way into the new church. Worshipping Jesus in the same manner they’d worshipped gods like Apollo and Dionysus put Him in the same category as Rome’s idols and Paul disapproved of dishonoring Christ that way!

Paul’s main concern about women wearing head coverings probably had to do with propriety and respect. Although many upper-class Gentile Corinthian women found it socially acceptable to appear bare-headed in public, it was unseemly for Jewish married women to venture outside their homes without covering their heads. A woman’s covered head was a sign of modesty and regard for her husband and a wife who exposed her hair to the public dishonored her spouse. While an uncovered head was a sign of progressive freedom to a Gentile, it was a sign of impropriety and promiscuity to a Jew. Paul’s reference to the shame of a shaved head was because the Torah’s punishment for an adulterous wife was a shaved head.

In the Corinthian church, the issues of head coverings for both men and women caused discord between people of different backgrounds, social status, and spiritual maturity. Paul’s instructions were meant to ease those tensions and unify the church. Today, however, head coverings don’t carry the same meaning as they did in the 1st century Roman Empire. They’re little more than a fashion statement or a way to protect us from the sun. For today’s believer, Paul’s words aren’t as much about covered or uncovered heads at church as they are about dressing in a culturally appropriate way so that both our attire and demeanor in worship honor God, our spouse, and our fellow believers.

I appeal to you, dear brothers and sisters, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, to live in harmony with each other. Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. [1 Corinthians 1:10 (NLT)]

Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds us all together in perfect harmony. [Colossians 3:14 (NLT)]

 Copyright ©2024 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.

TRUE LOVE

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends. [1 Corinthians 13:4-8 (ESV)]

I was married fifty-seven years ago today. When I promised to love, comfort, honor, cherish, forsake all others, and to have and to hold my husband “for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health” until we parted at death, I had no idea just how bad “for worse” could get, how little money “for poorer” might be, or that sickness could mean much more than a case of the flu. I certainly never pictured us growing old with wrinkles, white hair, hearing aids, bifocals, arthritis, and the limitations that come advanced years.

My husband and I had known each other for less than a year when we made our vows. Although we took them seriously and sincerely meant every word we said, at 20 and 24, neither of us had any inkling of the challenges that would accompany parenthood or how difficult it can be to cherish someone whose words or actions hurt us or with whom we disagree. With 43% of all first marriages ending in divorce, we’re not the only ones who entered into marriage so naively. Since 60% of second marriages fail and 73% of third ones do, some people never learn!

Like many couples, we had 1 Corinthians 13 read during the ceremony. Paul, however, wasn’t writing to young lovers or for a wedding—he was writing to the church in Corinth. The word he used for love wasn’t eros, the Greek word for romantic or sexual love, nor was it philia, meaning brotherly love, or storge, meaning familial love. It was agape and describes the kind of love that comes from God (who is love) and the kind of love believers are to have for all their fellow travelers on this planet. Agape is an unconditional love that doesn’t depend on appearance, physical attraction, or emotions. Unlike eros, agape isn’t something we fall into or out of. Agape is more than a feeling; it is a deliberate choice (and one that must be made daily if any marriage is to survive)!

Although Paul was addressing his words to the church and specifically speaking about the necessity of love when using spiritual gifts, his description of agape love holds true in marriage, as well. In the decades since our wedding, we’ve experienced good and not so good times. There have been periods of plenty and sparseness, illness and well-being, tragedy and joy, fullness and emptiness, anger and forgiveness, excitement and tedium, labor and leisure, vulnerability and security, loss and gain, turmoil and peace, discontent and satisfaction. Although eros brought us together, eros alone couldn’t have gotten us through those times. Only agape love could have kept us together all these decades.

Agape mirrors the love God showed us on Calvary and, by the grace of God, our marriage survives because of agape! While Jesus’ sacrifice saved mankind, the sacrifices made in marriage save the unity of the relationship! The unrestricted, unrestrained, unselfish, and sacrificial love of agape is a conscious choice. None of us are loveable all of the time; we can, however, choose to be loving all of the time!

The love that is affirmed at a wedding is not just a condition of the heart but an act of the will, and the promise that love makes is to will the other’s good even at the expense sometimes of its own good—and that is quite a promise. … A marriage made in heaven is one where they become more richly themselves together than the chances are either of them could ever have managed to become alone. [Frederick Buechner]

So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love. [1 Corinthians 13:13 (ESV)]

Copyright ©2024 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.

MORE THAN THESE

sunrise - Cancun MexicoWhen they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” [John 21:15 (ESV)]

Following His resurrection, Jesus remained on earth for forty days during which He was seen by His family, disciples, and followers (more than 500 of them at one time). The time frame of Jesus’ appearances, however, is unclear. Some time after He appeared to the disciples Resurrection Sunday and again eight days later when Thomas was present, Peter told the others he was going fishing. The disciple wasn’t referring to an afternoon of sport fishing—Peter was going back to fishing for species like tilapia and sardines rather than men. The kingdom had not arrived and, unsure of what was next, the disciples were at loose ends. Leaving Jerusalem, Peter and at least six others went to back to their homes and livelihoods in Galilee.

Fishing on the Sea of Galilee was done at night so the fish wouldn’t see the nets. Although the disciples cast their nets several times that night, nothing was caught. As dawn approached and the men again pulled in an empty net, a man on shore called out and told them to cast the net from the other side. Whether it was the morning mist, low light, or sweat in their eyes, the men didn’t recognize the stranger. Nevertheless, after a fruitless night on the water, the discouraged disciples did as instructed. When their net got so full they couldn’t haul it in, John realized the man was Jesus! After all, this wasn’t the first time He’d filled their nets. That first time, the men left everything to follow Jesus to become “fishers of men” and this miracle repeated Jesus’ call to them.

Upon recognizing Jesus, Peter immediately jumped out of the boat to greet Him while the others brought their enormous catch into shore. After enjoying breakfast on the beach, Jesus asked Peter if the disciple loved Him “more than these.” He asked Peter that question three times and scholars and theologians have written hundreds of treatises about His questions and Peter’s answers. They discuss the relationship of Jesus’ three questions to the disciple’s three denials and ponder the significance of Jesus calling the disciple by his old name of Simon rather than Peter. They analyze the use of agape (sacrificial love) and phileo (brotherly love) in both questions and answers while some even try to find hidden meaning in the number of fish caught (153). I’ll leave those issues to them.

My attention was caught by Jesus’ first question to the man who would be the foundational “rock” of the new church: “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” Although Peter asserts that he loves Jesus after each question, who or what are the “these” to which Jesus referred?

Was Jesus asking Peter if the disciple loved Jesus more than any of the other men did? That last night, when Jesus predicted He’d be betrayed and deserted before night’s end, Peter seemed to think he loved Jesus the most. The cocky man even boasted that, “Even if everyone else deserts you, I never will.” Was the one who denied the Lord three times that night still so sure of himself?

Could “these” have been the other disciples? Was Jesus asking Peter whether he loved Him more than he loved his brother Andrew and the rest of the men gathered on the beach? Could his love for those men ever draw him away from following Jesus? If he had to decide between Jesus and family or friends like James and John, who would he choose?

Or, could “these” have referred to the boat, nets, and amazing catch of fish on the beach that morning? In Jesus’ day, the fishing industry was quite profitable and the day’s catch represented a great deal of money. Did the disciple love Jesus more than his life as a Galilean fisherman? Was Jesus asking Peter if he loved the Lord more than the world in which he lived?

It was after Peter’s third affirmation of his love for Jesus that the Lord predicted Peter’s violent death. By describing Peter with his hands stretched out while others girded or bound him and took him where he didn’t want to go, the Lord was describing a martyr’s death, likely crucifixion. After making clear the true price Peter would pay, Jesus repeated the words He’d spoken to Simon the fisherman three years prior: “Follow me!”

Indeed, for Simon the fisherman to become Peter the apostle and leader of the twelve, he had to love Jesus more than any of the other disciples did, had to love Jesus more than he loved his friends and family, and had to love Jesus more than his life as a Galilean fisherman. In fact, since he knew how it would end, Peter had to love Jesus more than his own life!

Repeating the call He made to Peter, Jesus tells us, “Follow me.” Peter did; will we? Do we love Him more than these?

Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him. [John 12:25-26 (ESV)]

Copyright ©2024 jsjdevotions. All rights reserved.