(from Good Word Online):?

Memory Text: Psalm 34:18 The Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.

What causes depression and how might Christians best address it?

• Is depression the result of lack of faith in God?
• The lesson suggests genetic predisposition and chemical imbalance in the brain may indicate the need for professional help. Can confidence in God overpower genetics and chemistry without medication or therapy?
• Does acknowledging genetics and brain chemistry give excuse to lack of faith? (c.f. Psalm 42)

Does Christianity offer a viable alternative to depression or does it just rename and deny reality?

• How can you hope in God’s deliverance when apparently God let you end up in this fix in the first place? (c.f. Micah 7:1-7)
• What does the SDA view of “The Great Controversy” add to this subject?
• What can we learn from Jesus’ struggle with extreme sorrow and despair on the cross?

How can we overcome ongoing feelings of guilt and sadness/depression, even when we have confessed our sin and done what we can toward restoration?

• Is appropriating forgiveness just a mind game?
• When you convince yourself that God has really forgiven you, is your act of convincing yourself your way of saving yourself?

What are the implications of the lesson’s statement “feelings are not a good barometer of faith”?

(from Good Word Online):?

Memory Text: Philippians 4:8 Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

Our thinking impacts us and our words impact others.

• Bible memorization a positive influence
• Choose to reflect on positive things. (Philippians 4:8)
• Is optimism a choice, a personality characteristic or a genetic predisposition?
• How can you “allow Christ into your thinking process” as the lesson admonishes? (see Romans 8 and Colossians 3, etc.)
• How can we “bring every thought into obedience to Christ?”
• What makes that difficult or distracts us?
• What can we do to make this more likely?

(from Good Word Online):?

Memory Texts: Psalm 130:3, 4 If you, Lord, kept a record of sins, Lord, who could stand? [4] But with you there is forgiveness, so that we can, with reverence, serve you.

Guilt responses

• Adam hid then blamed the serpent and Eve
• Joseph’s brothers rehearsing their wrong
• David’s confession about Bathsheba (Ps 32) relieved physical as well as psychological symptoms
• Peter’s betrayal of Jesus brought despair

Is confession necessary to alleviate guilt?

• Jesus asked God to forgive those who killed Him, before they confessed.

God’s forgiveness

• What is reasonable (“let us reason together” Isa 1:18) about God’s radical forgiveness?
• How does one convince oneself that God has forgiven them when they don’t feel forgiven?
• If we have confessed our offense to the one we have wronged, why do we need to confess to God and seek God’s forgiveness?

(from Good Word Online):?

Memory Text: Matthew 7:12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Why include “relationships” in a series of studies about emotions?

• Are relationships an emotion or the source of emotions?
• Clearly, people can incite negative emotions or prompt positive emotions.

David, Nabal and Abigail

• Was David’s request fair or an ancient example of extortion–“protection money?”
• David admits his intent to take revenge was wrong and praises Abigail for preventing him taking things into his own hands.
• Lessons for those who are wronged?
• Is it OK to seek legal recourse when you are being or have been oppressed?

Peter’s admonition to return blessing for evil.

• Does God really hear the prayers of good people and ignore the prayers of the bad?
• What do you learn about David and about God from David’s kindness toward King Saul?
• What are the lessons here? (eg ~ A soft answer turns away anger, Respect generates respect)
• Let God take care of people changes.
• Does this mean human intervention, by law enforcement or political action or social action is inappropriate?
• cf Jacob benefitting at Laban’s expense.

Forgiveness

• Must we forgive those who repent and ask for forgiveness? eg an abusing adult, an assailant who leaves lasting physical or emotional damage?
• Do we forgive only those who repent and ask for forgiveness? eg Jesus forgave those who killed him and we don’t read that they apologized.
• Forgiveness depends on us not the perpetrator.
• In what ways do those who forgive benefit? (Benefits to the one forgiven are more obviously true).
• A question from the lesson quarterly: What should be recommended when forgiveness does not cause any change in abusive behaviour?

Confess to one another. (James 5:16)

• What does James mean here?
• What hesitancies do you have about confession to others?
• Are there not appropriate boundaries, things that ought not to be shared?
• What of the Arab proverb, “Confession is good for the soul, but bad for the reputation?”

Build up one another.

• What prompts us to criticize and put others down?
• How might we address the cause of this behavior rather than just control or stifle the demeaning comments?

(from Good Word Online):

Memory Text: Matthew 11:28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.”

What are your favorite Elijah stories?

• What attracts you to these stories?
• Do Elijah’s experiences encourage or discourage you?

Would God be more inclined to perform miracles for believers or unbelievers?

• cf C. S. Lewis—unbelievers need miracles. Lack of miracles shows higher level of faith.
• Would we be more justified to pray for miracles for unbelievers than believers?

Lessons from Elijah’s life

• Time of trouble and Elijah.
• EGW says we’ll “not lack or suffer hunger. . .” EW 56.
• In spite of promises and miracles, we humans are susceptible to stress. (Cf Elijah)
• What is our best preparation for our Time of Trouble?
• Sleep, exercise, healthy diet (lesson) = good stress treatment.

Jesus’ coping mechanisms.

• Prayer
• Nature
• Friends in Bethany
• Helping others. How does helping others alleviate stress?

(from Good Word Online):

Memory text: I Peter 5:7 Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.

Is fear an inherent part of human life? (cf lesson comments about infants being afraid, page 35).

Saying, “don’t be afraid” (e.g. John 14:1-2) is lots easier than not being afraid.

How can one translate the admonition into practice?

• How do counseling techniques and divine aid relate to one another? (Cf. Lesson description of counseling approaches including breathing techniques, thinking about safe things, etc.)
• How does the success of human efforts to control anxiety affect God’s promises?
• Trust in God is an extension of how we’ve learned to trust a parent.
• Does trust in human beings always precede trust in God?
• What of those whose parents have been untrustworthy—those who have been neglected or abused by their parent?
• How does one who has been betrayed by human beings regain trust in God?
• How does one who feels neglected by God gain confidence in God?

What do you learn from the lilies and the sparrows?

• Do believers and unbelievers see these stories differently?
• How would you help a skeptic who believes in an uncaring God or no God at all, come to confidence in God?

Phil 4:11-13 [11] I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. [12] I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. [13] I can do all this through him who gives me strength.

• Are believers just Pollyanna’s, ignoring all the bad?
• How does this relate to earlier admonition in this chapter? (verses 6, 7: [6] Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. [7] And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.)

(from Good Word Online):

Memory text: John 16:20 Very truly I tell you, you will weep and mourn while the world rejoices. You will grieve, but your grief will turn to joy.

Amnon, Tamar and Absalom

• What would you say is the primary lesson to be learned in this story? (e.g. incest, lust, revenge, guilt, emotions controlling behavior, etc.)
• Is attraction negative and evil?
• If not, what makes it so?
• How can attraction be used positively?
• Biblical examples (e.g. Song of Solomon).
• What advice do you have for victims of abuse?

Note the contrasting effects of negative and positive emotions in Galatians 5:22 and the SS lesson list.

• What might you add to these lists?
• Do you see connections between the fruit of the Spirit and human feelings?
• Do you see any significance to the sequence of items in that list?

Jesus’ compassion often motivated Jesus’ actions (e.g. feeding the crowds, healing lepers, touching children).

• How have we acted on feelings of compassion?
• Is it important to act out a response to our feelings?
• What of feelings experienced but not acted on?
• Might apparently good acts be motivated by something other than compassion? (e.g. mission trips for the adventure vs the service)
• Better not to act kindly at all?
• Do feelings ever follow actions? (E.g. Jesus as sorrowful and suffering after looking over Jerusalem just preceding His triumphal entry, and the description in Isaiah 53).

God’s plan for painful emotions.

• Does John 16 offer hope or discouragement? (“In this world you will have trouble. . .”)
• Why give up all the fun things in life now for an uncertain future hope?
• Is this comfort for the comfortable or only a message for the suffering?
• What does one say to those already comfortable?

Come and enjoy the Spring Bank Holiday weekend of fellowship, spiritual food, activities and exercise in the beautiful surroundings of Lendrick Muir.

Find out more…

Telephone Scottish Mission Office

01764 653257

Below are links to resources from the 9th November 2010 lecture by John Walton.

MP3 files

• The lecture, ‘Can a scientist believe in miracles?‘ (18MB, 71min)

Audio recordings (in MP3 format), presentations and handouts (in PDF format) from Cedric Vine’s weekend study conference, ‘Cedric Vine – Angles on Mark’,  held at Crieff Adventist Church on 15-17 October 2010.

If you find them interesting please let us know!

1. “An Alternative Gospel ~ Mark and Imperial propaganda”, Friday night.
   • MP3 file (21MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
2. “A Battle of Equals?  Jesus and agonistic Palestinian society”, Saturday morning.
   • MP3 file (14MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
3. “A Wilderness Route ~ Jesus and the return of Yahweh”, Saturday morning.
   • MP3 file (13MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
   • Handout in PDF format
4. “On Cycles and Roads ~  Plot and arrangement in Mark”, Saturday evening.
   • MP3 file (17MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
5. “That Clever Ending ~  Mark as an early understanding of the death of Jesus”, Saturday evening.
   • MP3 file (17MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
6. “A Right Pair ~  Reading Mark with the help of Ezekiel”, Sunday morning.
   • MP3 file (14MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
7. “The Future (and Further Developments). Mark 13 and the flow of NT apocalyptic revelation”, Sunday morning.
   • MP3 file (25MB)
   • Presentation in PDF format
   • Handout in PDF format

from Good Word Online):

Leading Question: If your spouse does something really foolish, what is your obligation to protect him or her?

Key Passage:

• 1 Samuel 25

Thoughts:

1. Protecting your spouse. From a modern perspective, we might wonder how a beautiful and sensible woman like Abigail ended up in marriage with a foolish and stubborn man like Nabal. But what is more crucial for our lesson this time is the question of obligation to a spouse who does something very foolish. Did Abigail do the right thing in going around Nabal? Did she break her marriage vow in doing so? Or was her choice to protect him from the results of his foolish choices a much greater good? What parallels can we draw in today’s world?

2. Three characters. On the basis of what we can learn from 1 Samuel 25, give a brief, thumbnail sketch of the major characters in this week’s lesson: Nabal, Abigail, and David. In each character, what do you find admirable? What do you find blameworthy?

3. Abigail’s gentle rebuke of David. When Abigail met David under the highly-charged backdrop of David’s intention to seek revenge, how would we judge Abigail’s comment to him in 25:31 (NRSV): “My lord shall have no cause of grief, or pangs of conscience, for having shed blood without cause or for having saved himself.” How would you evaluate the ethical standards implied in such a statement? From a diplomatic perspective, was Abigail being bold or gentle? Or was she skillfully blending boldness with gentleness?

4. David’s honesty. In 1 and 2 Samuel David’s life is full of detours. But the author gives him good marks for honesty and fairness. His passion often gets him into trouble, but here he boldly admits that Abigail saved him from evil. Is such an admission laudable in a leader? Should that be a model for leaders today? In an authoritarian culture, admission of error puts a leader’s reputation at risk. Is that true here? Does this story put David in a positive or negative light?

For comparison: When David pursued the Amalekite marauders to recover the people and spoils they had taken (1 Samual 30), 200 of his men were too exhausted to continue. The 400 when who went with David didn’t want to share the spoils with those who stayed behind. David decreed: “For the share of the one who goes down into the battle shall be the same as the share of the one who stays by the baggage; they shall share and share alike” (30:24). Is that right? Is that fair?

5. David’s polygamy. According to 1 Samuel 25:43, Abigail and Ahinoam both became David’s wives. Later, David reclaimed Michal, his first wife, tearing her away from a devoted husband (2 Samual 3:15-16). Yet Scripture utters no critique of his polygamy. Why?

(from Good Word Online):

Leading Question: Does the Lord always choose the best man to be his leader?

Key Passages:

• 1 Samuel 14, Jonathan takes risks for Israel, the people rescue him from Saul
• 1 Samuel 18-20 Jonathan in covenant with David, protects him from Saul
• 1 Samuel 31, Saul and his sons die in battle
• 2 Samuel 1, David mourns the death of Saul his enemy and Jonathan his friend

Thoughts:

1. A good question to open discussion: If you could vote for one of the following as king/president, which one would you choose: Saul, David, or Jonathan?

2. Covenant loyalty: One of the most moving narratives of human friendship in Scripture. The story of Jonathan and David’s commitment to each other, as told in 1 Samuel 20 illustrates on the human level, one of the most important theological words in the Old Testament: chesed. Probably best translated as “covenant loyalty,” chesed is the word that describes God’s commitment to Israel. What are the characteristics of the commitment of these two men to each other that reveals the nature of God’s love for his children and can guide us in our relationships with each other?

3. The battle in 1 Samuel 14. Four points worth noting:

• The importance of oath. Several Old Testament narratives illustrate the significance of an oath. The bond between Jonathan and David was marked by an oath (1 Sam 20:13-17). The story of Rizpah in 2 Samuel 21 (see lesson for November 27) provides two additional examples of crucial oaths: Joshua’s oath to preserve the Gibeonites (Joshua 9), an oath which Saul broke; and David’s oath to Jonathan which resulted in his sparing Mephibosheth when the “payment” of seven lives was demanded by the Gibeonites for the oath which Saul broke (1 Sam 21:7-9).
• Avoiding the consequences of a bad oath. Oaths also figure prominently in the horrendous story of the dismembered concubine (Judges 19-21). There the Israelites had sworn to kill anyone who did not come out to battle against Benjamin (Judges 21:5) and also that no one should give their daughter in marriage to Benjamin (Judges 21:1). The first oath led to the slaughter of the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead. But 400 virgins were saved from Jabesh to satisfy the requirements of the second oath, providing wives for Benjamin so that Israel would not break its oath. But when the 400 virgins did not suffice, Israel came up with a plan to supply wives for the men of Benjamin without breaking their oath: the wifeless men would snatch a maiden during the dances at the annual festival at Shiloh. They would explain to the families who thus “lost” a virgin daughter that at least a wife had been provided without “guilt” have been incurred (Judges 21:22).

Just as Israel found a way around a problem oath in Judges 21, so Israel found a way around a problem oath in the story of 1 Samuel 14. Saul had sworn that no one was to eat anything until God had given them victory (14:24). Jonathan had not heard the oath and tasted some honey (14:27-28). The broken oath, even though done ignorantly, meant that the Lord would not respond to Saul’s request for counsel (14:37). Saul seemed to sense that his rash oath had been broken and affirmed that the guilty one would die, “even if it is my son Jonathan” (14:39). When the lots were cast, Jonathan had been identified as the culprit (14:43). But when Saul announced that he must die, the people intervened. In the words of Scripture: “So the people ransomed Jonathan, and he did not die” (14:45). In terms of divine justice, Saul was credited with keeping his oath; but the action of the people saved Jonathan. Like the circumvention of the oath through the dancing maidens of Judges 21, so the people’s rescue of Jonathan represents another notable avoidance of the consequences of a bad oath. Question: How does this approach to an oath differ from the way that we would approach an oath or a promise today?

Speaking to Israel’s oath to preserve the Gibeonites, in spite of their deception, Ellen White comments as follows:

And though the oath had been secured by deception, it was not to be disregarded. The obligation to which one’s word is pledged–if it do not bind him to perform a wrong act – should be held sacred. No consideration of gain, of revenge, or of self-interest can in any way affect the inviolability of an oath or pledge. “Lying lips are abomination to the Lord.” Proverbs 12:22. He that “shall ascend into the hill of the Lord,” and “stand in His holy place,” is “he that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.” Psalms 24:3; 15:4. — Patriarchs and Prophets, 506

• Rare instance of Urim and Thummim. In the NRSV, 1 Samuel 14:41-42 describes the actual usage of Urim and Thummim, apparently two stones placed on the breastplate of the high priest that are used when a yes/no answer is required. What is remarkable about this instance is that the Hebrew Bible (Masoretic text) is missing the part that explicitly mentions Urim and Thummim. The missing part has been added from the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint = LXX). The footnote in the NRSV is not at all illuminating. The NIV includes the missing part in a footnote, but not in the main text; NASB and NKJV ignore the addition completely. CEV, in keeping with its practice of not using unique biblical langauge does not use the words Urim and Thummim. Ralph Klein, in 1 Samuel (Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 10), p 131, includes not only the missing part about Urim and Thummim, but another section of text that is also found only in the Greek Old Testament. Here is Klein’s translation of the section (1 Samuel 14:38-42) that includes the full text as found in the Greek Bible: The missing parts is bolded in the text the follows:

38 So Saul said, “Bring here all the officers of the troops so that we may know and see how this sin happened today. 39 As Yahweh lives, who delivers Israel, even if this sin involves my son Jonathan, he shall surely die!” Not one of the troops replied to him. 40 Then he said to all Israel, “You will be on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will be on the other side.” The troops again said to Saul, “Do what is good in your eyes.” 41 Saul said, “O Yahweh God of Israel, why have you not answered your servant today? If this iniquity is in me or in Jonathan my son, O Yahweh God of Israel give Urim. But if this iniquity is in your people Israel, give Thummin.” The result was that Jonathan and Saul were taken while the troops went free. 42 Saul went on, “Make the lot fall between me and between Jonathan my son. The one Yahweh takes shall die.” Although the troops said it shouldn’t be this way, Saul forced them and they cast between him and Jonathan his son. The result was that Jonathan was taken.

In both cases, Klein notes that the omission in the Masoretic text is the result of a classical scribal error, called “homoioteleuton,” an omission because the scribe’s eye skipped from one word to the same word later in the text, leaving out everything in between. In verse 41 the scribe’s eye skipped everything between “Israel” and “Israel”; in verse 42 his eye skipped everything between “Jonathan my son” and “Jonathan his son.” Dealing with such omissions in the biblical text can be very troubling for some. In class, when the study guide author [Thompson] was dealing with the three major New Testament passages where part of the “received” text can go missing in modern translations [the doxology of the Lord’s prayer, Mat 6:13; the story of the woman taken in adultery, John 7:53-8:11; the trinity proof-text, 1 John 5:7], a young woman wrote this rather wrenching response:

I guess I really don’t understand. If we teach our children the doxology part, wouldn’t we want it in our Bible, too? The story of the adulteress – if it is not in the old manuscripts then how do we know that it is true? I guess that maybe I am one of those people that you talk about that have a hard time with the fact that you are raising up questions about the word of God. It is really starting to upset me the way you are making the Bible seem like it all might not be true. See, when I was a kid a lot of people turned out to be not true. They let me down and now I don’t trust them. Well, you are making the Bible feel like I can’t trust it. How do I know what really happened and what did not happen? I have always been able to feel security in the Bible. When I was scared or frightened as a kid I would sleep with it. I always felt safe then. But your class is bringing up questions that I don’t like and can’t deal with. Please help gain back the trust I am losing. Thanks.

• Providence. In the battle that took the life of Saul, a nearly-flawless Jonathan also lost his life. What does Jonathan’s experience tell us about how Providence works in “protecting” God’s people?

(from Good Word Online):

Leading Question: Does it work to bargain with the Lord when we want something very badly?

Key Passage:

• 1 Samuel 1-2, Baby Samuel brings joy to childless Hannah

Questions:

1. Bargaining with the Lord. Hannah made a bargain with the Lord, promising to dedicate a male child as a nazirite if the Lord would bless her with a son. When is it legitimate to strike such bargains with the Lord? Are they recommended or simply allowed? Or would we go further and actually prohibit them? What can we learn from Hannah’s bargain and from another famous bargainer, Gideon?

2. The Lord’s direct involvement in opening and closing the womb. Do we find such divine involvement harder to believe in our day? Knowing what we know about reproductive processes, what does it mean for us today when a barren woman prays for a child? What does such a prayer “accomplish”?

3. Evils of polygamy: Scripture gives us no explicit command against polygamy. Indeed some of the great heroes of faith had more than one wife. Abraham, Jacob, and David are perhaps the clearest examples. Here, Hannah’s “rival used to provoke her” (1 Sam 1:5). How could one use this story, along with the stories of Abraham and Jacob to mount a case against polygamy?

4. Vengeful hymn of thanksgiving. Hannah’s hymn (1 Sam 2:1-10) includes some strong statements against her “enemies,” of whom Peninah would be the most obvious. How should we relate to the those psalms that reveal sentiments in prayer that we probably would not want to emulate in our better moments? Two chapters in C. S. Lewis, Reflections on the Psalms, address the problem of hateful language in the psalms: Chapter III, “The Cursings” and Chapter VII, “Connivance.” See also Chapter 8, “What kind of prayers would you publish if you were God?” in Alden Thompson, Who’s Afraid of the Old Testament God?

It should be noted that the problem of the so-called “imprecatory Psalms” can be approached from quite a different perspective, namely, that of the sovereignty God. In that sense, the Psalms are not approached from the standpoint of devotional literature, but from the standpoint of God’s right to rule in the universe, and to rule righteously. See, for example, Richard Davidson, “Revelation/Inspiration in the Old Testament: A Critique of Alden Thompson’s ‘Incarnational’ Model,” in Frank Holbrook and Leo van Dolson, eds, Issues in Revelation and Inspiration (Berrien Springs: Adventist Theological Society, 1992), 105-135, esp. 130-131.

5. Raising children. Samuel’s children did not turn out well; Eli’s children did not turn out well. What do we make of all that?

(from Good Word Online):

Leading Question: How does one stand for the Lord when everyone else falls away?

Key Passages:

• Numbers 13-14, From twelve spies down to two, Caleb and Joshua
• Joshua 14, Caleb asks for the toughest part of Canaan
• Judges 1:12-15, Caleb gives his daughter to the bravest warrior

Questions:

1. Going against the flow. When Caleb and Joshua returned with the rest of the spies, they tried but failed to break the popular tide against moving ahead. How much should we attempt to counteract popular feeling? In the Church? In culture?

2. Fickle people. When God said go, the people said they wouldn’t. When God said to stay, the people said they would go anyway. Typically we don’t have specific and audible voices telling us whether to go or stay, at least not from God or from credentialed prophetic voices. But are we in danger of being equally fickle when we “know” we should go or not go?

3. Give me the hill country. Even when Caleb was old, he was still asking for the hard challenges. What is the inspirational value of someone who tackles the tough stuff? Can we help to inspire others when we take on a hard challenge?

4. I’ll give my daughter to the bravest man! Caleb’s management style is several steps removed from the way most modern westerners would respond to similar challenge. Where in the world would it be appropriate today to give your daughter as a reward to the bravest man?

Note: A biblical perspective on incest. From a modern perspective, incest is wrong, even criminal, for two reasons: 1) Coercive sexual relations that take advantage of familial ties; 2) The potential for genetic complications. The Bible itself doesn’t mention either of these “modern” reasons, but simply lists certain prohibited relationships. In this week’s lesson, Caleb gave his daughter Achsah to Othniel his younger brother as a sister. In other words, Othniel married his niece. That particular relationship is not prohibited in the catalogs of Leviticus 18 and Lev 20, but some of the prohibited relationships listed there were indeed exemplified among the forebears of those who came out of Egypt. The two most notable examples would be Abraham marrying his sister, his father’s daughter (Gen 20:12; but cf. Lev 18:9) and Amram marrying his father’s sister (Exo 6:20; but cf. Lev 18:12). Even more striking is the tension between the laws that prohibit a man from having relations with his brother’s sister (Lev 18:16), but mandate such a relationship if the brother dies childless. The provisions of that “Levirate marriage law” [law of the husband’s brother] are spelled out in Deut 25:5-10.

(from Good Word Online):

Leading Question: “Do stories make truth more believable?”

Key Passages:

1. Genesis 39:6-12, Joseph and Potipher’s wife
2. 1 Samuel 24:1-6, David allows Saul to escape from the cave
3. Job 1-2, God and Satan in dialogue over righteous Job
4. Joshua 3:9-17, Joshua leads Israel across the Jordan River
5. 1 Samuel 8:7-20, Israel tries to persuade Samuel to give them a king
6. 1 Kings 12:1-16, Rehoboam resists the people’s request for lower taxes

The first lesson in this new series is a general one that looks at the relationship between story and history. Stories are highly effective teaching methods. And the flow of the story is often more important than the facts the author uses to make his point. Indeed, authors are even willing to shape the facts to better serve the story. The best way to see that happen is to compare the parallel accounts in Scripture, Samuel-Kings with Chronicles in the Old Testament, and Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John with each other in the New Testament.

None of the “background” characters that are the focus of our attention this quarter is featured in parallel accounts, so we cannot compare how two different biblical writers tell their stories. But whether one is dealing with one narrative or multiple narratives, it is clear that the story line is the one that carries the day.

The effectiveness of story is suggested by this striking statement from C. S. Lewis, penned after he had completed one of the books in his space trilogy, Out of the Silent Planet: “Any amount of theology can be smuggled into people’s minds under cover of romance without their knowing it” – Letter, 9 August 1939, cited in Walter Hooper, C. S. Lewis Companion and Guide (HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), 20.

Questions:

In each of the narratives that follow, the story setting illuminates the author’s purpose and sheds light on a particular aspect of life.

1. Joseph and Potipher’s wife. How does one preserve one’s honor and integrity in the face of sexual temptation? What is the inspiration value of this story for moderns who may also face temptations of a sexual nature?

2. David and Saul. How far should one go to preserve the honor of the Lord’s anointed leader? When does one rise up against an evil leader? Was Dietrich Bonhoeffer right, for example, in joining a conspiracy to murder Hitler? For a recent account of Bonhoeffer’s mental anguish, see Eric Metaxas, Bohonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy (Thomas Nelson, 2010).

3. God and Satan. To what extent does the “heavenly court” scene at the beginning of the book of Job illuminate the cosmic conflict and the point of the book? The conflict between God and Satan is never revealed to Job or to his contemporaries. How would that have affected their understanding of the circumstances surrounding Job’s losses? When evil strikes in our day, how do we know whether it comes from God, Satan, or is simply the result of natural causes? For an explanation as to why Satan is rarely mentioned in the Old Testament, see Alden Thompson, “Whatever happened to Satan in the Old Testament?” in Who’s Afraid of the Old Testament God? Pacesetters, 2003), 33-53.

4. Crossing Jordan. How does one make miracles believable? When can one safely expect a miracle as Joshua did? Is there a danger of presumption if we attempt to follow his example?

5. Persuading a prophet. The people wanted a king and tried their best to persuade Samuel. God was actually more ready to grant their request than Samuel. How do we negotiate our will and the Lord’s will? When there is a live “authority” figure? When there is no one before us except God in heaven?

6. Rehoboam. According to Scripture, the people had a legitimate complaint when they came to the new king Rehoboam. But he chose to defend his authority instead of responding positively to the people’s request. When is it appropriate for us to challenge earthly authorities? Note Ellen White’s observation about the far-reaching implications of failing to reason from cause to effect:

Had Rehoboam and his inexperienced counselors understood the divine will concerning Israel, they would have listened to the request of the people for decided reforms in the administration of the government. But in the hour of opportunity that came to them during the meeting in Shechem, they failed to reason from cause to effect, and thus forever weakened their influence over a large number of the people. – Prophets and Kings, 90