I had a really interesting conversation this last week on the subject of what proportions of sermons here should be on which parts of Scripture. (I said that I try to aim at 1/3 each of Old Testament, Gospel, and rest of New Testament - after using some weeks for the occasional topical series).
Yesterday, I had two very interesting conversations after church services, which set off the following thoughts. (What follows is not something I said to either person, although it might have been helpful if I had done).
Many English Bibles print the words of Jesus in red.
Oh, the pain of leaving things out.
I'm preaching on 1 Kings 11-12 on Sunday. As is always the case with preaching, the aim is to help people to hear what that part of Scripture is saying to us today. And in order to be clear, you have to be ruthless. So often, there are all kinds of really interesting things you've learnt and discovered in the text, and they have to go on the proverbial cutting-room floor.
I'm preaching on 1 Kings 2 this Sunday, and it's a trickier passage than it first looks.
David had previously overlooked two murders committed by his commander in chief, Joab, and pardoned the insolent Shimei.
Then the time comes to hand over the kingdom to Solomon. (So thank you to King Juan of Spain for choosing this week...). He urges Solomon to bring justice to these two.
So here's the question: Why did David change his mind?
If I'm right, the so-called "story of the widow's mite" (Mark 12:41-44) is one of the most abused passages in the New Testament.
We must read this story in its context.
As you read the 4 gospels, there are a number of pressure points: Will Jesus and his disciples be faithful to how God says the world should be saved? Or will they turn from God's way of doing things?
These all seem to happen in threes.
I've never noticed this before. Sometimes, you notice something in the Bible, it's then so obvious that you wonder why you didn't see it there before. That's a good sign that it's on the right track - it's noticing what's there, rather than reading in things that are not there. It also means it's highly likely that lots of other people have seen it before, and that I'm just playing catch-up - so there are no claims to originality here.
The opening of the book of Samuel anchors the book firmly in its context, as a book following on from Judges.
I'm not sure what to conclude from this data, but I've just looked through the 4 gospels to identify the occasions on which Jesus was offered wine to drink, in one form or another.
It seems that he was offered wine 4 times. He refused it the first time, we're not told what happened on the second and third times, but he drank it the fourth time. On the first occasion, the wine was mixed with gall (an analgesic); on the other three times it was soured wine (wine vinegar).
Anyway:
Did you know that Leviticus 20:21 was partly responsible for starting the protestant reformation in England.
In Acts chapter 13, Paul meets a magician on Cyprus.
I wonder if, as you read that, you found yourself thinking this was familiar. Ah yes, there was another magician in Acts chapter 8. There, Simon the Magician met with Philip, and then with Peter. Here Bar-Jesus or Elymas met with Paul.
There are differences between them. Most notably, Simon was (superficially, at least) converted; Elymas was not.
Nevertheless, this is one of those passages in Acts that gives the reader a sense of deja-vu.
Recent comments