25 July 2011

Psalm 56, 57, 58; 2 Sam 2.1-11; Acts 15:36-16:5; Mark 6:14-29

The succession isn’t clean. David is accepted as king of Judah but Abner, the commander of the army under Saul, takes Saul’s son Ish-bosheth and has him made king over Israel. This won’t be a permanent situation but it will show the future and the divided kingdom. The kingdom was never meant to be ruled by a man because men are fallible and imperfect. Saul’s failings opened the door for David and yet David failed with Bathsheba among other things and that failing opened the door for the division of the people. So long as there is power to be had, there will be abuse of power. There is no perfect system in a fallen world because it requires a perfect person to be the leader. David was a good king in almost every way but not in every way, so his kingdom didn’t last. Jesus’ kingdom, however, is eternal.

Herod had married his brother’s wife whom she divorced for the purpose of marrying Herod. The family was a mess. Herodias, the wife, was also a close relative, he was her half uncle, the son of her grandfather. (Complicated, huh?) There were many objections to this marriage within Judaism, immorality and illegality for instance, and to have such a one rule over them was a powerful insult. Herod was also, nominally, a Jew and therefore John was using the moral authority that Judaism gave him to speak into Herod’s life and this greatly displeased Herodias who gained much in her divorce and remarriage and had no interest in losing what she had gained. Herod apparently had a problem with lust for his step-daughter Salome, whose dance caused him to make a rash promise. John was an innocent man in the eyes of God whose death was due to the sins of others. The fallout for sin is everywhere.

Again, we see division due to sin. Paul is not ready to forgive John Mark for failing to persevere in the work with him. Barnabas, the one who brought Paul out his semi-exile state to build the church in Antioch, is prepared to restore John Mark to fellowship and the mission. They disagreed “sharply” over the matter and ultimately decided that they would not continue to work together because of this disagreement. Paul finds another young disciple for the work, Timothy, in Lystra. It is interesting that Paul feels the need at this juncture to avoid unnecessarily upsetting the Jews and circumcises Timothy in order to take their objection off the table. Is this a place where Paul determines not to offend what he refers to as the “weaker brother”? Where do we draw the line on such matters? Division is, unfortunately, a reality and we have to choose where we will allow ourselves to be divided, what are the principles on which we cannot compromise?

Crown Him the virgin’s Son, the God incarnate born,
Whose arm those crimson trophies won which now His brow adorn;
Fruit of the mystic rose, as of that rose the stem;
The root whence mercy ever flows, the Babe of Bethlehem.

Tune