Adventures in the Word

This is a summary of a message that I spoke on Sept 23, 2007 at Nora Christian Fellowship

“. . . Then he saw a poor widow put in two pennies. He said, “The plain truth is that this widow has given by far the largest offering today. All these others made offerings that they’ll never miss; she gave extravagantly what she couldn’t afford—she gave her all!” – Luke 21:1-4 The Message

Taken from Luke 20:27–21:4

Divine Life Out of Death – Resurrection – continues to be the theme in Luke’s gospel. This passage has three ‘riddles:’ One spoken by the Sadducees and two by the Lord:

Riddle 1: “ . . . whose wife will she be in the resurrection?”

The Sadducees’ question, clearly intended to ridicule the idea of resurrection, backfired when Jesus clearly taught that marriage will simply not continue into that age. And this makes perfect sense because, in that age, there will be no more death either. And because death will expire, the need for conception, birth and children – the primary purpose of marriage – will also expire.
However, under the Sadducees’ program this pitiful widow would have no hope at all.

Riddle 2: “David calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?”

Jesus quotes Ps 110:1 and basically asks, since David calls the Messiah, his human descendant, ‘Lord,’ how can that be? In other words, he asks, “HOW CAN A HUMAN BEING BE GOD?” (We have to understand that, in the first century, the common assumption appears to be that the Messiah would be a normal human being, a descendant of David. They simply could not have imagined the God Man. )

And although Luke doesn’t reveal the answer to the riddle here before His resurrection, you can feel the anticipation! He doesn’t waste much time though: Read Acts 2:29–36. There you’ll find Luke quoting Peter saying that, David wrote this Psalm when he “ . . . fores[aw] this, [and] spoke concerning the resurrection of the Messiah (vs 31)” and “ . . . God made Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord (God) and Messiah (human).” The resurrection left no doubt that the human Jesus was divine! So the answer to the riddle is: once you witness the resurrection, you’ll see plainly that Jesus truly is both Lord (Divine) AND Christ (the expected human Messiah).

Riddle 3: How can the widow’s two mites be a bigger offering than all the others’?

Here Jesus re-introduces the Sadducees’ apparently hopeless widow and elevates her – a veiled reference to resurrection – above everyone. Jesus has just charged the Scribes with “devouring widows’ houses,” but now she has risen from her despair. Jesus answers the riddle by saying that she – out of her poverty – gave everything she had.

This ought to encourage us too, because, when we’re feeling the weight of the world on our shoulders, when our ‘gas tanks’ are ‘on E,’ and yet we choose to give – even if it seems to be such a small thing – Jesus tells us that it actually means a lot to Him and He sees and receives it for what it truly is: a huge gift. So it’s not the actual size of the gift that matters so much, but the amount of effort that it takes to give it, given the resources that we humanly have on hand.
May God fill you with the Resurrection Life of His Son!

In the last post I confessed that I disliked talking on the phone.

I procrastinate.
Sometimes I actually dread it.

I do everything except call ‘Bill,’ who’s been on my list to call for the last two weeks. (I’ll use the name Bill since I actually don’t know a Bill other than my Dad, and I never have any angst about calling him.)

And I know why I don’t call him too; and it’s not because I dislike talking to him and it’s not because I’m afraid of being rejected or hurt. I don’t want to talk to him ON THE PHONE!
I’ve pondered this for a while and I’m absolutely certain that THIS is why I don’t call – Ready?
Here ’tis:

I don’t like to call Bill because I hate the idea that I’m calling simply because I ‘need’ something:
• to borrow something
• to see if he can do something
• to remind him to do that something
• to [your ‘need’ here ]

I realize that all these are legitimate reasons to call, but I just feel really guilty that it happens to be the only time I will have talked to Bill in a long time. And for that reason the call feels like I’M JUST USING HIM.

One piece of evidence that I’m afraid of appearing to use Bill is, when I do call, I feel the sudden urge to ‘catch-up,’ or at least to say, “Hi, how are you?” – before I start plowing into what I need.

But no matter how sincere or attentive I may be at the beginning of our conversation it seems completely spoiled as soon as I bring up my need: “So . . . yeah, umm . . but, I guess the reason I called was . . . ”

UGH!

Then all that apparent sincerity over Bill’s well-being vanishes and I feel like a cad.

I don’t see any way to avoid the fragility of these disembodied conversations – I think we simply have trouble discerning sincerity without our bodies getting into the conversation too. All the communications experts say that our non-verbal body language, facial expressions, and gestures play a huge role in conversation. And since our voice has to do all of the heavy lifting in the phone conversation, we wonder how we’re being perceived. And the attendant anxiety over our potentially apparent caddishness doesn’t help us come off so smooth either.

Maybe all this just reveals my own insecurities; maybe all my words here are just a tempest in a teapot.

But I still don’t think I’m alone in this.

And we can’t use emoticons on the phone either.

Maybe I just need a little love.

Anybody want to give me a call?

[In an attempt to try to protect this person from embarrassment, I’m going to use the term ‘he,’ but it could actually be ‘she.’]

Several months ago one of my kids started coming home from work late and without planning to, we started just hanging out at the kitchen table. He’d usually fix himself something to eat and I’d maybe have something too, but mostly we just sat and talked and laughed – usually about nothing in particular.

Oh, occasionally we’d get into a more serious discussion, but mostly it was light and we just talked about . . . nothing.

But I noticed that I started to look forward to these apparently ordinary times and I think he did too. And I realized that this ‘purpose-less,’ ‘agenda-less’ talk was accomplishing something that purposeful and ‘fatherly’ talks couldn’t. I sensed that something good was happening between us, but it was subtle.

And I think the reason that our relationship grew with this kind of conversation was that I simply valued HIM — JUST for HIM! He didn’t need to say or do anything special at all – and that’s the very thing that made it so valuable! It’s a silent recognition that, what we have already is priceless as is because he himself IS priceless and our relationship is priceless. And without saying anything, I know and he knows that. This kind of conversation reflects and confirms that I love him as he is.

I think ‘purposeless conversation’ dips out large scoops of grace to our fellow human beings.

Maybe this has always been self-evident to you, but it certainly hasn’t been to me. I wish somebody had warned me a long time ago that my well-meaning, but contrived ‘fatherly talks’ were scaring people away.

Now . . . don’t get me wrong! Don’t assume that I think purposeful talk is bad or unnecessary. Of course it can be good and very necessary, but I’ll leave my thoughts on that for another day.

I really can’t point to any verifiable evidence that our relationship is better or deeper, but I can feel it! I know it sounds hokey, but when we just make eye contact and talk I somehow know that our love and respect for each other is growing.

Next time, in Part 3, I’ll talk about conversation and why I dislike the phone.
Yea, you heard me! I really don’t like the phone! And maybe it’s time for some of my fellow phone haters out there, to come out of the closet too!