Today's reading from the Chronological OT/NT Reading Plan is Leviticus 15-16; Mark 8:22-38.
I find it interesting that once again our readings from the OT and NT are related. In the OT we read about the Day of Atonement - an annual event which occurred on the 10th day of the 7th month. A day when everyone was to be cleansed from their sin by the sacrifice of a bull, a goat, and a scapegoat being released in the desert. In our NT reading today, Jesus begins teaching his disciples about what will happen to him - the Day of Atonement that would cleanse those who believe from sin once and for all.
For those who are interested, there is various information regarding the scapegoat, which I was curious about so I looked up some information. A Google search brought up a number of different articles, basically coming down to two schools of thought, mainly because of the debate of the translation of the word for "scapegoat". There is information from both sides on Truth or Fables website talking more about the translation of the word itself and how this debate came to be.
1) One goat dies because without shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sin and the scapegoat then carries the "wickedness and rebellion" (Lev. 16:21) of the people out into the wilderness, "where God would remember their sins no more" (from the article Christ, the final scapegoat). In other words, one goat for "forgive" and one for "forget". Jesus' death on the cross took the place of the entire sacrificial ritual, being both the blood shed and the removal or carrying away of sin.
2) One goat represents Jesus (whose blood was shed) and the other represents Satan, on whom the sins of the saints at the end of the world will be heaped, and he will bear the final penalty. Or, alternatively, the second goat was sent out into the wilderness to a fallen angel, Azazel (the word that is the root of the translation debate), to be a witness that the sins of the people have been removed from them, or to pacify him, depending on which article you read.
Those are, of course, very compacted versions of the information available on this subject. Perhaps it is because I've always been taught that Jesus' shed blood not only atoned for our sin but also removed it from us that doesn't allow me to seriously consider option #2 as valid. Suggesting that Jesus' sacrifice itself was inadequate to completely wash away sin and introducing that Satan's participation is also required is abhorrent to me. Not to mention the many verses in the New Testament that declare that Jesus' blood washes away our sin completely.
Hebrews 10:11-13 says
11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. 14 For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. (emphasis mine)
Now, moving on...
Mark 8:38: "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."
It stood out to me that Jesus referred to the society they lived in as adulterous and sinful, when it seems that our society is so much worse. In some ways it may be worse today, but I don't think it was as much better then as we sometimes think. I know that sinful nature hasn't changed and that people then were greedy, adulterous, lustful, deceitful, and so on, and yet somehow in my mind it's difficult to reconcile that their society was "adulterous and sinful" when they didn't have all the media that we have now. And then I remind myself that sin comes from the inside. Our human nature is the same today as theirs was in Jesus' day.
I also felt a jab of conviction when I read this verse, as I sometimes choose to keep my beliefs to myself in order to avoid having to defend them. Not quite the same thing as being ashamed, but not far off either. I don't know about anyone else, but I sometimes find it hard to talk about my faith and the things that go along with it in certain company. Usually it's because I'm afraid that someone will possibly ridicule my faith - not me personally, but what I believe in - and I'm worried that I won't know how to respond. Alternatively, I may be concerned about offending someone by saying, for example, that homosexuality is wrong, and I'd prefer to allow people to remain ignorant of what I believe rather than offend them.
Sin is accepted and glorified more in our society, on television, in movies, and in music, but I find it hard to distinguish between how the real people in our society actually feel about these things and how they are portrayed. Because one sees things like homosexuality or transgender modification being applauded as "living your truth" and abortion as a valid "personal choice", movies and television shows where everyone cheats on everyone else, magazines and fashion shows where the exterior appearance is all-important, music that talks about sex as a recreational activity, does that mean that these attitudes or beliefs are generally accepted by the majority of people in our society today, or does it seem that way because it's what we hear more often? And has the seeming general acceptance of society actually changed the way the people in your family, church, neighbourhood, or community feel about them? Are we afraid to admit to the things we believe, fearing to offend someone?
I know I often subscribe to a kind of "live and let live" mentality, which I admit is sometimes too apathetic. While shouldn't judge others as people, we also shouldn't allow those whose beliefs differ from ours to be the only ones expressing them. Somehow we must endeavor to denounce the action without vilifying the person. Not easily done, especially since many people automatically take personal offense to being told that something they do or believe is wrong.
I REALLY don't want Jesus to be ashamed of me "when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels." I've discovered that a simple way to open a conversation about God or Christianity is to mention going to church. Some people will just let it pass without commenting on it and others will ask about it, giving you an opportunity to share with them. There are actually acquaintances that I'd had for several months and not known that they were Christians until I mentioned church one day. I'm sure they didn't know I was a Christian either. That doesn't make me too happy with myself. I should want people to know that I am a Christian and it should be such a big part of my life that it comes up naturally in regular conversation. Maybe not the people I see in the grocery store or pass on the sidewalks, but certainly people I talk to on a semi-regular basis.
I welcome your thoughts and opinions. Have a great day!
Tomorrow's passage: Leviticus 17-18; Mark 9:1-29.
8 comments:
That's a post packed with thoughts to consider Miriam. Thanks! I agree with the struggle to judge/not judge/live out the truth/openness about my faith and beliefs etc. It is a constant struggle how to share my beliefs when they go against the stream of culture and society. I read Philip Yancey's book "What's so amazing about grace" years ago, and this post makes me want to re-visit that book. He talks a lot about loving the people behind the sin/pain/hurt and through that loving we can extend the grace that we too have been extended.
We are definitely to judge fellow believers, in order to keep them accountable.
we are not to judge non-Christians. Obviously we are to acknowledge their sin, but because they are in sin, we can't expect them to have the same moral compass as we have. They need love and grace, the Spirit can take care of the convicting.
And, yet, on the other hand, society extends "love" and "grace" (cheap versions) in the name of tolerance and that's certainly not bringing about change. So maybe we do need to "judge" or at least, call out the sin - and then share the Rescuer with love and grace.
Oh, and I agree with you on option #1 for the scapegoat.
My Life Application bible says...
"The two goats represented the two ways God was dealing with the Israelites' sin: (1) he was forgiving their sin through the first goat, which was sacrificed, and (2) he was removing their guilt through the second goat, the scapegoat that was sent into the desert...Jesus Christ's death replaced this system once and for all. We can have our sins forgiven and guilt removed by placing our trust in Christ."
I'm with scapegoat option #1, too. I love the symbolism of the "forgive and forget" goats. Never thought of it that way before ~ thanks!
Sin and media consumption is something of an issue for me and I believe it has indeed worn down the "badness" of sin in our society and in our churches. I think it's particularly noticeable when watching old TV shows that were once considered risqué and frowned-upon by conservative Christians; now I find myself thinking that they're wholesome viewing because the "degree of badness" in my mind is lower than many current shows. Mary Kassian says studies show modern women spend an average of SEVEN HOURS A DAY consuming secular mass media in its various forms ~ I think we're lying to ourselves if we claim we aren't influenced by that to some degree.
Wait, I got my numbers wrong. Just double-checked them and it's even WORSE than 7 hrs/day ~ it's TEN!!!!! I know that seems extremely high and I was shocked when I first heard it, but when I think about how much time I spend here at the computer and the couple of hours of TV in the evening, it starts to add up. I like to think my focus is not on secular media, but it can't be completely avoided, even though I spend most of my time on Christian blogs and other sites.
Sorry, not quite done...
It doesn't really matter if we think we're putting "wholesome" stuff into our brains, it's still taking up valuable time. Our constant pursuit of entertainment has dulled our sensitivity to sin. It has taken the place of time spent with God and time fellowshipping with other Believers, and as a result, has become our chief worldview influence.
NOW I will dismount from my soapbox! ;)
Guilty of the media consumption problem as well and I think it does influence our level of tolerance...especially in regards to divorce, homosexuality, and premarital sex. I struggle with sharing my faith as well, especially since my circle includes many Christians. I think I haven't had to practice sharing my faith in the same way than if I worked in a non-Christian environment or had more non-Christian friends.
Post a Comment