Part of my traditional New England upbringing was to learn to maintain boundaries between private issues, family matters, and public information. When I asked my parents what they were talking about, at times I heard, “Well, it doesn’t concern you.” Nothing gruff, like “it’s none of your business,” no “you wouldn’t understand.” Just, “if you needed to know, we’d tell you.” It’s the polar opposite to the tell-all autobiography, the Kardashian, Povichian, let-me-show-you-where-my-appendix-scar-is-itchin’ culture in which we daily bathe. That probably explains my reticence about sharing the details of my private devotional life, which I’m as eager to declare publically as I would be to tell you what I whisper to the missus.
Nevertheless, I’ve been learning that to teach others to pray is one must provide an example. Much of what I know about prayer has been by listening to older believers as they approach God (this teaching method is sometimes called mimesis). So, if I blog or teach, I’m not just to communicate “doctrine” but also demonstrate prayer.
Let me share some principles that guide me, and then the personal details:
- I go to devotions repeating to myself, “There is nothing remotely more pressing on my agenda than what I’m about to do.” Not preaching, not teaching, not writing.
- I spend a lot of my day preparing classes, teaching, preaching or writing. I mean sometimes 10 hours in the Word. It’s not enough. Sometimes I run into preachers who tell me that preparing their sermon or praying at meetings gives them all the spiritual nutrition they need. I remain doubtful, but I guess it’s between them and their Maker; I for one don’t see how it could work. My own Bible study is “just for me.”
- I have a “Devotions in Progress” sign for my door; I’m talking with the King of the Universe, for goodness’ sake.
- Whenever one opens the Bible, it is with the Spirit working through the heart and the mind, at the same time: There is no such thing as “devotional” Bible study that neglects careful reading in context. There is no true Bible study that doesn’t include meditating on its meaning for life.
- I usually put all of my reading time into the Bible rather than devotional books. Occasionally I’ll add on Spurgeon’s Morning and Evening, but other books (Bonhoeffer’s Cost of Discipleship, for example) are not for devotional time per se but for later.
- Sometimes my Bible reading includes a psalm or a New Testament reading in the original languages, but only if it doesn’t become a distraction.
- Meditation is meditation on God’s truth. Good meditation also requires a quieted mind, but not an emptied one. Nor is yoga Biblical meditation.
- Prayer must include at the least praise, confession of sin and repentance, petition for God to intervene in specific ways, and grateful thanks for what he has done.
- Reading and praying aloud is more suitable than doing it all in one’s head: that’s a long-standing tradition, and educational specialists are now beginning to confirm that what we say aloud “sticks” better.
- I have no firm opinion on this, but with regard to technology: having devotions on my laptop is a distraction; having them with my iPad is a completely positive experience. A principle might be: If you have devotions with computer, smart phone or iPod, will you say “excuse me” to God and answer some random text or Tweet? Then I suggest you find another way to have devotions. Some Christians turn off all technology.
- If I miss a day? I tell God I’m sorry; I salvage what can be salvaged for today; and get myself ready for our next time together.
- And finally: although I regard a solid daily devotional time as a crucial for my ministry – the most important thing I can do for my students –, I would like to think that I would do the same if I were not in Christian work. I’m at a stage of my life where we don’t have small children to draw our attention; nevertheless, this is similar to plans I’ve followed in other years.
And now for the details. My devotional life gets a refit usually every New Year, so 2012 resembles not at all what I did in 2011 or 1995:
Morning. I spend between 30-60 minutes (usually around 45) in prayer and Bible reading. Bible study: Because I hadn’t done it for a while, this year I’m following a “Bible in One Year” program that I really like; it involves 3-4 chapters a day. I try to slow down and if it’s possible read aloud in order to keep myself paced. Prayer: I maintain a prayer log on an iPad app (see below), where I write down the names of all my students, my co-workers, family members, unsaved people, ministries that Karen and I are involved in, specific requests for ESEPA, issues of my own spiritual walk, etc. I keep a running list of specific requests about my own heart, mind and soul. I keep another diary where I write down what I’ve read, commented on my prayers and write down other lessons of the day. Besides requests which I’ve put in a calendar, I pray for other things which the Spirit brings to mind. My written list is the minimum, not the total, of what I’ll pray for.
During the day. I try to pray at random times, and in particular before doing new tasks and also at mid-day.
Evening. This additional devotion time happens maybe 5 times a week, when I spend another period of time in prayer and the reading of Psalms, perhaps for 30 minutes. In the evening I read less Scripture, but read it deeply and repeatedly: first, going through it to gain its general meaning in context; then meditating on its meaning for me, asking the Spirit to guide me as I read slowly; then using the text as the basis for prayer. Some people use the term Lectio Divina, while others argue (wrongly, I believe) that LD is per se a “New Age practice.” What I do isn’t New Age by any stretch, so let’s call it “meditative Bible reading.” If my Bible reading is faster-paced in the morning, it’s quieter and more reflective in the evening. I believe both methods are valid.
What else can I tell you? Probably the most interesting point is that, despite a Baptist background that doesn’t use much liturgy, I have used the Book of Common Prayer for the last decade (sometimes the version by the Reformed Episcopal Church). I also use the wonderful collection of Puritan prayers called The Valley of Vision – that might help my Reformed comrades to accept the usefulness of written prayers. Many believe that prayer which is spontaneous and unplanned is more authentic or more likely to be Spirit-led. This has certainly not been my experience, nor am I convinced by Scripture that if we pray with no agenda the Spirit will infallibly guide us to pray right. By following a guideline, I’m pushed more deeply in prayer. For example, when a person confesses sin, it tends to run, “Now, what did I do wrong today?” The BCP disciplines me to remember before God, “We have not loved you with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbor as ourselves.” That puts “sin” on a whole other level of nuance, in the category of “things we have left undone.” It’s relatively easy to say “I have no known sins on my conscience”; it is impossible to say: “Today I have loved God as I should.” The BCP also reminds me to pray for missions, people in government, the unemployed, the people in prison, for addicts, for world peace, you name it.
That is a general description. I hardly regard it as the Gold Standard for devotions; I have friends who spend far more time in prayer than I do. But it is what we’ve put together for 2012, and I’m highly blessed by what I receive, the biblical instruction and the intimacy it helps create with God.
RESOURCES:
Tools are only tools, and I have never found a bag of tricks to guarantee a good time of devotions. I like the following, maybe you will too:
Read through the Bible: some years I read a short passage every day, some years I read through the whole Bible. This is the cleverest Bible in a Year Program I’ve ever encountered: “Bible Reading Program for Slackers & Shirkers.” It assumes you will occasionally miss a day, so it has a built-in safeguard against getting discouraged. I’ve tweaked it a little for myself (See http://ransomfellowship.org/articledetail.asp?AID=378&B=Margie%20Haack&TID=7).
Book of Common Prayer: for many years I have used Mission St. Clare’s program. This is a Protestant website. You click on the day in the calendar, and it provides prayers, Bible readings, hymns complete with words and music. Go to http://www.missionstclare.com/english/, click on Rite II and Calendar on the left-hand side.
A collection of prayers by Puritans: The Valley of Vision, ed. Arthur G. Bennett (http://www.amazon.com/Valley-Vision-collection-Puritan-Devotions/dp/0851512283/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329943055&sr=8-1). Also available from Amazon in leather-bound for a good price. There is a companion website that I thought was helpful, called Walking through the Valley of Vision (http://www.joethorn.net/valley/). By the way, I would not recommend the similarly-themed book A Treasury of Prayers by Fortosis.
Prayer Journal. Pocket Prayer Pro HD is a fantastic app, with plenty of flexibility. You can add pictures, arrange a prayer calendar, mark down when prayers are answered. It takes just a couple of minutes to learn it. http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-prayer-pro-lite-prayer/id359866395?mt=8
Journal. I use the nice and simple My Daily Journal app to write down when I had devotions, what I read, how I prayed, what I learned.
Online Hymns. There are several sites; the one I like is The Cyber Hymnal at http://www.hymntime.com/tch/ It gives lyrics and plays the music.
“How I have Devotions,” by Gary Shogren, Professor of New Testament, Seminario ESEPA, San Jose, Costa Rica
How I have devotions
Can stay-at-home Dads be “real men”?
I guess I came in late for this controversy: from 2008 there’s a YouTube clip of a famous preacher and his wife, responding to the question: “What are your thoughts on stay at home dads if the woman really wants to work?”[1]
“Too many guys take too little responsibility” was part of the answer, one with which I fully resonate. We have a culture where men play at being boys well into their adult years. At a time when their fathers and grandfathers had buckled down to marriage and a job or were off fighting Nazis, some guys focus on playing the field or playing paintball until they’re, well, practically my age. The women are complaining and they oughta be. These guys need to hear a Word about their behavior.
But let’s put them to one side, since the gist of their response was something else: If men are not the primary bread-winners in the family, they are not doing “what the Word says.” Parenting must be done principally by the mother, not just “anyone,” not even the father. The idea of a father staying at home to focus on raising children is a perverted idea, taken from our modern culture, not the Bible. These men are “conformed to this world.” Such behavior would even by “a case for church discipline.”
Okay, let’s see “what the Word says.” (more…)
The 99% Solution
At times long-lost Greek manuscripts pass by my desk. They add a bit of class to the place, to counter-balance the Oreo wrappers, orphaned keys, and cats who like to see if they can type out their names.
I put on my special mittons and saw that this particular manuscript is from Luke 15. It starts off properly enough:
So Jesus told them this story: “If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them gets lost, what will he do? Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others in the wilderness and go to search for the one that is lost until he finds it? And when he has found it, he will joyfully carry it home on his shoulders. When he arrives, he will call together his friends and neighbors, saying, ‘Rejoice with me because I have found my lost sheep.’ In the same way, there is more joy in heaven over one lost sinner who repents and returns to God than over ninety-nine others who are righteous and haven’t strayed away!
Then mysteriously this manuscript states, “And he asked his disciples, saying…” (̓Ηρωτήσεν δε τοῖς μαθηταῖς λεγών) and adds these additional lines:
And he asked his disciples, saying, “So, what do you think?”
One disciple consulted a chart and answered, “That was all very well under the Law, but it doesn’t apply to us. It’s not for this age.” He carefully rolled the chart back up and put it in its protective tube. (more…)
What was the real name of Jesus? Was it Yeshua?
A reader writes in: What really was Jesus’ name? Wasn’t it Yeshua? Is it an insult to him if we do not use his “real name” with the ancient pronunciation? Do we lose out on salvation if we call upon the wrong name?
First, it is highly probably that his given name was Yeshua, a Hebrew and also a Aramaic version of the Hebrew name Yehoshua o Hoshua (Joshua) in the Old Testament. We know that Jesus in general spoke and taught in Aramaic, so Yeshua (like Barnabas, Thomas) was probably meant to be an Aramaic name. Many people had names from different languages: Peter had a Greek name Petros, and an Aramaic one, Cephas bar-Jonas. Many had “rhyming” names in the second language: Paul was Sha’ul in Hebrew and also had a Latin name Paulus, similarly Silas/Silvanus; one Jewish co-worker of Paul had an Aramaic or Hebrew name Jesus, plus a Latin name Justus (Col 4:11); Joseph Barsabbas’ Aramaic name rhymed with his Latin one, Justus (Acts 1:23). Nowhere does the Bible indicate that the Greek or Latin names were “unclean” or wordly.
Jesus probably grew up with a knowledge of written Hebrew (the Bible). What’s more, it is very likely that he would have spoken in Greek from time to time, in order to speak with Gentiles (e.g., Matt 8:5-13, 15:21-28) or with Pontius Pilate. Two of his disciples had Greek names, Philip and Andrew. During his ministry, some may have addressed him using Greek form of his name, Iesous. After his resurrection and exaltation, the apostles went forth to proclaim his name, consistently using the Greek form Iesous. There is no reference to any other form of his personal name in the Greek New Testament. The Greek Testament was the original version, from which the Syriac, Latin and other versions were made. This means that when Luke wrote Acts 4:12, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved,” he did not write the name Yeshua, but the Greek form Iesous. We are not saved by pronouncing his name with an “sh” rather than an “s”, but because it is the Savior himself who is being named.
For that reason, that is no special benefit to be gained in saying “Yeshua” in place of “Jesus”. The church used this form from the very beginning, from the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached in Greek to Hellenistic Jews (Acts 2:22). “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Acts 2:21).
It is by calling upon his name, no matter in what language, that one is saved. There is no special “magic” in removing the final “s” from his name. According to the apostles’ example, it is perfectly acceptable to say Yeshua, Iesous, Jesu, Jesús, Yasu (Cantonese), Иисус (Russian) or – in English – Jesus.
By Gary Shogren, Seminario ESEPA, San José, Costa Rica
Does God have “his man” to pastor a church?
A friend writes in to ask whether a church should have a pastor or multiple leaders. I respond:
As I read it, the NT teaches that the apostolic churches were led by a group of elder/overseers. (more…)
Can the use of Greek help the preacher? An example
Should a preacher refer to Hebrew or Greek from the pulpit? In all but a few instances, emphatically not. In a week or so I’ll be blogging on this very theme (see below, “I Love Greek but never use it from the Pulpit,” where I invite the readers’ input).
The study of original languages, like all study of technical background, is to inform the preacher, not to impress the audience. The preacher takes that material and puts it into plain English (or Spanish, in my case). Unless the audience can read the biblical languages, there is no reason to mention them, and plenty of reasons not to. (more…)
I love Greek, but never use it in the pulpit
Well, almost never anyway.
I have spent my adult life studying the New Testament in the original, and also have taught Greek and Greek exegesis on a seminary level for many years. When I prepare a sermon, I go immediately to the text in the original Greek or Hebrew, praying that the Spirit would use those tools to lead me to all truth.
Yet one of my pet peeves is people who keep making reference to Greek or Hebrew when they preach. I’m planning on posting a blog in this spot, something like “Ban Greek from your Pulpit”. Does anyone have anecdotes, arguments, etc.?
Whether it backs up my position or not, please give feedback, and maybe I’ll use your information in the post.
What comes before the Day of the Lord: the final “apostasy” or the “departure” of the church?
According to 2 Thessalonians, Timothy brought Paul a question from a panicky church: Has the Day of the Lord come? Paul ties together language of the return of Christ from his own oral teaching, the Matthean tradition, Daniel and 1 Thessalonians. No indeed! he says, and I can prove it. Has the Man of Lawlessness appeared? Then no, the Day of the Lord has not come (2 Thess 2:3).
The other marker is more controversial: an “apostasy” or “falling away” (apostasia, ἀποστασία). The word might denote a political rebellion. Nevertheless, “falling away” in Judeo-Christian contexts usually refers to a spiritual apostasy. In the Apocrypha, many Jews apostatized from Yahweh in 1 Macc 2:15 (NRSV) – “The king’s officers who were enforcing the apostasy came to the town of Modein to make them offer sacrifice” to Greek gods. Paul himself was accused of teaching Diaspora Jews “apostasy from Moses” (Acts 21:21). The verb form also appears in a warning against apostasy in Heb 3:12 and in the Lukan version of the Parable of the Sower to speak of those who fall away because of persecution (Luke 8:13). Paul uses the verb (aphistemi, ἀφίστημι) of the end-time falling away once in 1 Tim 4:1; he uses the noun form (apostasia, ἀποστασία) only here in 2 Thess 2:3.[2] Most Bible versions render the term correctly: “falling away” (ASV, KJV, NKJV); rebel, rebellion (CEV, ESV, GNB, NIV, NLT, NRSV, RSV), revolt (GW, NJB), apostasy (HCSB, NASB).
But wait! A few Bible students have suggested that 2 Thess 2:3 should be translated not as the “apostasy” but as a “removal” or “departure.” That is, the church is taken away from the earth, with the rest of the population “left behind” for the tribulation.[3]
Can this interpretation hold up? (more…)
1 Thess 4:17 – “meet the Lord in the air” in the original Greek
Since the Rapture has made headlines lately, here are some observations.
The New Testament was written in Greek. Some argue that it was originally done in Hebrew, but they cannot provide ancient Hebrew (or Aramaic or Syriac) manuscripts to back that up. All of Paul’s churches used Greek as their principal language. Paul himself had grown up speaking a dialect of Greek known as koine. It is for this reason that many serious students of the Scriptures decide to study that language, just as many others study Hebrew.
Unfortunately, much of what we hear about Greek in books or from the pulpit is false or misleading. For example, some preach that the word agape means “divine love,” whereas phile means “human love or affection.” This is simply not the case, and the words are often interchangeable in the New Testament. I shudder every time I hear the words “I know that it says thus-and-such in your Bibles, but the Greek really says, etc.” Listen: English Bible versions – with a few exceptions – were carried out by leading experts in the field of the original languages, who have gone to great lengths to express the meaning of the original in English. You can trust your English Bible.
Yet, every once in a while there is a gem in the original Greek that is difficult to communicate in English. For example, the NIV of 1 Thess 4:17 has, “After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” The other versions are similar and equally reliable. In my forthcoming commentary on 1 and 2 Thessalonians (Zondervan) I opted to translate verse 17 as: “we who still live and remain will be taken up together with [those who were dead] in the clouds to welcome the Lord in the air.” “To meet,” a verb in most versions, represents a Greek preposition and noun, “for a meeting” (eis apantesin). Nevertheless, a verb in English captures the original Greek equally well.
But one might ask, what happens after the Christians meet the Lord in the air? Where do they go? (more…)
How does one choose a Bible commentary?
“When you’re deciding which commentary to add to your library, what are the most important things to consider?” So asked Logos Bible Software on Facebook? To summarize my response:
1. Careful attention to the text, not an “agenda” (I see too many famous “exegetes” who merely reiterate what they already “know to be true”). I’m Reformed, but also thoroughly enjoy Wesley, the Greek and Latin Fathers, Catholics, Pentecostals, so long as they’re really dealing with the text. An ability to see the Big Picture. A commitment to theology and praxis. Open to seriously consider new ways of looking at the text.
2. Date. I read a lot of ancient works; for my 1 Corinthian commentary, I was constantly in 1 Clement, Tertullian, Origen, John Chrysostom, Theodoret of Cyr and others. Nevertheless it’s hit-and-miss with the “classic” commentaries. Logos just put out a large group of century-old commentaries on 1 Corinthians for $40 – a great price, but I’ve used Goudge et al.in my own studies, and would have rather spent that same money on a single book, such as Fee, Thiselton or Witherington. Books are usually cheap for a reason – their copyright is expired. You will get what you pay for.
Look for value, not a bargain
There is a myth that “older is better,” but this simply is not so: older writers worked with much less reliable data than do modern writers; they were not necessarily more sound in their theology nor spiritually deeper. I could not imagine recommending, for example, the Pulpit Commentary.
3. Grasp of the Original Languages. A commentary is not reliable just because it refers to the Greek and Hebrew. There are plenty of works, especially those published before the 1960s, where the author shows a poor grasp of semantics. I found Ernest Best’s commentary on 1-2 Thessalonians to be very useful; nevertheless, it is sprinkled with misunderstandings about the meaning of the Greek verb system. I won’t list other commentators, but there are very popular preachers and writers who apparently have just a couple of years of seminary Greek, and it shows.
4. Doctrine of the Spirit’s Illumination. The more I study and write, always hoping I’m using a sound hermeneutic, the more I discard the idea of “don’t look to the Spirit for a true interpretation.” I was taught to read the Bible like I would read a newspaper, but now that idea is repellant to me. When I read a paper, I have no prior commitment to accept it’s spin on the news; if I don’t like an editorial, I feel free to shrug if off or to write a letter to the editor. When I read the Bible, I’ve already decided to believe it, AND obey it, AND share it with others. None of this is possible without the Spirit’s direct help. One of the reasons I like authors like, for example, Gordon Fee or J. I. Packer or the late John Stott, is that without flaunting their spirituality, they give the impression of, “Here is a believer who seeks the Spirit in his research.” Bible study is a science, but not purely a science. Click HERE for an article on prayer and preaching.
5. I also would add that there is usually excellent help in Tremper Longman’s Old Testament Commentary Survey; and D.A. Carson’s New Testament Commentary Survey. Both are regularly updated.
- Aramaic
- Bible
- Bible study
- Biblical languages
- Church history
- Commentaries
- Contemporary theologians
- Discernment
- Divine guidance
- God's Will
- Greek of the New Testament
- Hebrew
- Holy Spirit
- Illumination
- J. I. Packer
- John Chrysostom
- John Wesley
- Origin
- Original language Bible
- Prayer
- Preaching
- Tertullian
on February 9, 2012 at 3:26 pm Comments (2)Tags: Bible, commentaries