Sermons | Class Registration | Email Groups |
Calendar | Site Map | 

The Psalms are the Bible’s model prayers. About half of them are written by the famous king David, as well known as a musician and worshipper as he was as a warrior and giant-slayer. There’s a psalm for almost every occasion we’re likely to experience in life. In the Psalms, we find beautiful songs of praise, testimonies to God’s goodness, pleas for help, and questions asked when things don’t work out as they’re supposed to. The Psalms are really meant to be prayed—sung even—rather than just read. I find that I get the most out of them when I adopt them as my own, praying them as my own prayers. I tend to pray them verbatim—doing so aloud and with gusto whenever possible seems to improve the experience immensely—but I know other people who use them as jumping off points into further prayer in their own words. You might even want to try occasionally reading a psalm aloud together with someone else. Take turns reading stanzas aloud. At the end of the psalm—or in the middle of longer psalms—you could jump off-book to pray further about the ways the psalm connects to your own current life circumstances.

If you’re like me, praying two common types of psalms might initially make you a bit uncomfortable:

·         Extravagant claims of righteousness—occasionally, I find myself gulping when, aloud and with gusto, I end up praying something like, ‘I have led a blameless life; I have trusted in the Lord and have not faltered’ (Psalm 26:1). I wonder if the proverbial lightning will strike me down. Despite the fears of divine punishment, a few things have kept me praying these absurd boasts:

o    First of all, I’ve noticed that my praying of these psalms take on a tone of aspiration: it makes me want to be the kind of person who can pray those things without blushing. That seems like a pretty good result to me.

o    Secondly, I get the feeling that the psalmist doesn’t mean that he has never made any mistakes. I think what he’s saying is that he has never abandoned God. That’s still a pretty gutsy thing to say, but it’s not quite a claim to perfection. While the ‘not faltering’ thing still kind of trips me up, I think I can honestly say that ever since I met God I’ve taken my relationship with God seriously.

o    Thirdly, I have a growing suspicion that these extravagant claims to righteousness have less to do with my moral report card, as it were, and more to do with how God sees me. I noticed that sometimes in the same psalm the author will ask for God’s forgiveness and will make one of these audacious claims to utter blamelessness. Once he’s confessed and been forgiven, it’s as if he never even took a mis-step. Perhaps these psalms are saying that, because of God’s goodness, we can be certain that God likes us, sees the best in us, and wants the best for us. If that’s the case—and I’m beginning to believe it is—then we can pray those crazy things with confidence and excitement.

·         Calls for violent retribution—some of the psalms seem like they’re more suited to a Quentin Tarantino movie than to the Bible. While I sometimes still find myself a little squeamish at the sheer bloodthirstiness of some of these ‘crush my enemy’ psalms, I’ve been surprised to find them among the most helpful psalms to pray, for a few reasons:

o    They help me prepare for the difficulties of the day—if I start the day with one of these psalms, it reminds me that not everything is going to go my way. I can prepare myself, and ask for God’s help in facing the difficulties that are sure to come;

o    It’s a faithful and non-violent way to vent—it’s extremely liberating to unabashedly express just how I feel about the people who treat me poorly and unfairly. But in the end, it’s harmless. I’m expressing it to God, not letting it leak out in my interactions with people. I express my anger and my desire for revenge; then I leave it in God’s hands to protect me and to vindicate me when appropriate. Once I’ve expressed my feelings and left action in God’s hands, I can much more easily let it go;

o    I primarily focus the prayers on my true enemies—the New Testament author Paul tells us that our real enemies aren’t other people, but destructive spiritual forces whose entire purpose is to do us harm (Ephesians 6:12). I have no problem praying that these enemies die a gruesome death.

1 and 2 Kings continue where 1 and 2 Samuel left off in the chronology of the Israelite's kings. The story begins with king David's transfer of power to his son Solomon. A great deal of space in 1 Kings is given to Solomon's reign and achievements. After his decline, the nation of Israel was split into two kingdoms, the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, each with a different line of kings who individually had varying degrees of influence and power. As both kingdoms were constantly at war with other nations, both the northern and southern kingdoms eventually fall to enemy forces. Also featured in these books are the prophets (God's spokesmen) Elijah and Elisha and their interactions with the various kings. Elijah was considered one of the most influential prophets in Jewish history.

The author of 1 and 2 Kings is uncertain; it may have been composed by royal historians using court archives or prophets using other written records and oral traditions, or even some combination. The historical perspective of the author is not like that of usual historical writings which normally stress the political, social, and economic climate of the time. While some of those elements are present in 1 and 2 Kings, the primary perspective is theological in nature. The primary question posed is this: who was a "successful king" or an "unsuccessful king" in the eyes of God? The author expresses a good deal of commentary throughout the writing assessing each king's reign from this angle.

As you read 1 and 2 Kings, you may notice patterns about the author's picks and pans for the kings being documented. What do you see as the criteria for successful and unsuccessful reigns? And how do these compare to the ones we might apply to contemporary world leaders?

Acts is the story of what happens to and through Jesus’ followers after his death. It’s the sequel to the gospel of Luke, written—no big surprise—by Luke, a traveling companion and teammate of Paul, the writer of Romans (you can read more about Luke in the introduction to his gospel below). One interesting feature of Acts is that it may well have been originally intended for publication—it contains the acknowledgement of a patron, and it’s written to be just about exactly the length of mass-produced scrolls

It’s a gripping story, full of stirring speeches, dramatic action, plot twists, and amazing miracles. The book of Acts is written to explain how a small group of people in an obscure corner of the Roman Empire ended up starting a movement that spread throughout that entire empire and to Rome itself within a generation. Luke didn’t experience it himself, but he probably wouldn’t be surprised to discover that eventually the good news of Jesus spread throughout the entire world.

The book of Acts attributes this quick spread of Jesus’ message to an entirely new experience in the history of humanity: the widespread pouring out of the Holy Spirit—the very essence of God—on people who hear that message. This arrival of the Holy Spirit gives people a whole new access to the presence and power of a living and active God. As we read Acts, it may be worth it for us to focus on the Holy Spirit. What is it like to be filled with the Holy Spirit? What does the Holy Spirit do? How is life with the Holy Spirit different?

If you’re interested, there is a Daily Guide of Acts available. You can find it at www.bostonvineyard.org/classesprograms/40-days-of-faith. The dates and passage splits don’t match our current schedule, but you may be able to glean some helpful insights on the story and how to apply it to your life.

Introducing James

The book of James was most probably written by James, the brother of Jesus. It's hard to tell who exactly it was written to, but it was likely a letter that was was circulated to early churches about 20 years after the death of Jesus. James is a somewhat peculiar letter compared to the other letters in the New Testament. At first blush, it seems to be a kind of pastiche of practical advice on how to live out a vibrant faith in Jesus. The topics include listening and controlling speech, prejudice, good deeds, wisdom, humility, and patience. This stands in contrast to some other letters which are highly theological and follow a sustained argument. Since the advice is intended to be directly applicable to everyday life, it might be useful to evaluate that advice for yourself and see what happens for you if you put it into practice.

Philippians was written by the apostle Paul to the church in the city of Philippi a prosperous Roman colony in ancient Macedon. Paul states in the letter that he is writing it while imprisoned, most likely in Rome in 61 AD. This letter served as both an update to the church (apostles like Paul would travel often to start new churches), and to encourage the Philippians in their difficulties. In particular he advocates a life that is self-humbling and presses toward their goal.

Paul's letter to the Philippians is notable in that Paul uses the word "joy" in various ways 16 times. Given that Paul was in prison as he wrote this, how do you imagine he's able to speak about so much joy?

1 and 2 Corinthians are two letters (of as many as four) written to the church in the city of Corinth in Greece in about 55 A.D.   They were authored by Paul, an early church founder and author of most of the other letters in the New Testament. At the time, Corinth was the political and commercial center of Greece. It had a typical Greek culture, especially its philosophy and wisdom. The citizens of Corinth were engaged in the worship of Aphrodite, the goddess of love, which brought a great deal of prostitution to the city through the temples dedicated to her.

Paul had founded the church in Corinth, personally knew many people there, and his writing to the congregation was specific to their current situation. In 1 Corinthians, Paul specifically addresses issues including division within the church, sexual immorality, questionable practices (such as eating meat previously offered to idols), and proper use of spiritual gifts. This letter has a mission to build up the followers of Jesus in Corinth while stemming behavior that's gotten out of control.

2 Corinthians has a different structure and tone than the other. The structure seems fragmented and some speculate that it might be parts of two different letters. In it, Paul deals with issues of a more personal nature to him rather than the general issues in 1 Corinthians. Paul uses the first part of the letter to heal any rifts between himself and others in Corinth and to talk some about his current situation. He continues with a call for a collection for the poor. The end of the letter changes pace as Paul defends the authority given to him by God, probably in response to "false teachers" challenging his message.

Some of the material in 1 Corinthians can be challenging to apply today. What do you think about Paul’s advice on marriage? What principles can be learned from his example of eating meat to idols? How would you encourage people to use spiritual gifts in the church?

Mark was one of the early followers of Jesus. He may or may not have known Jesus himself, but he was probably a traveling companion of the apostle Simon Peter. Simon Peter never wrote a history of Jesus himself, but John Mark collected and wrote down Simon Peter’s story. I’m sure that as you read you’ll see that Peter’s perspective comes out strongly, and that it’s a really valuable perspective to have. Mark’s gospel was the first one written, about 30 years after Jesus’ death and resurrection.  It seems that both Matthew and Luke based their gospels on Mark’s. They took the basic plot from Mark, and added inserted additional teaching and stories. Mark’s story itself is very terse and quick-moving. Jesus is seen here as a man of action.

There’s a Daily Bible Guide for Mark on the 40 Days of Faith page of our website. 

Matthew, also known as Levi, was one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. Before becoming a follower of Jesus, Matthew was a collector of taxes for the Romans. It’s hard for us to understand just how unpopular that would have made him: first of all, he was collecting taxes; secondly, it was taxes for an unpopular foreign government; and thirdly, tax collectors at the time were famously corrupt. Perhaps the closest thing we have nowadays is a mobster running a protection racket. So, Matthew goes from being completely outside of ‘decent society,’ to being one of the closest disciples of the new rabbi Jesus, to writing one of Jesus’ biographies.

Matthew uses the earlier and shorter Gospel of Mark as a sort of outline for his story: the plot of the gospel of Matthew follows Mark very closely, and often they even have very similar wording for a story. But Matthew then supplements Mark’s story with significant additions. Matthew includes a far greater amount of Jesus’ teaching, and—interestingly for someone who would have spent much of his life on the outs with his fellow Jews—a particular emphasis on Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies. Matthew, like Mark, places a lot of attention on the theme of the kingdom of God (although Matthew calls it ‘the kingdom of heaven,’ following the Jewish tradition of avoiding saying ‘God’ as much as possible). Whereas Mark demonstrates the kingdom of God through Jesus’ actions, Matthew illustrates the kingdom of heaven through Jesus’ teaching, and particularly his parables. It’s worth paying attention to the way Matthew fills out the picture of the kingdom of heaven over the course of his story.