"Honor your father and mother" vs Going no-contact with parents

There is a trend being promoted by some psychologists for young adults to cut all contact with parents: don't visit, don't call, don't text, don't respond. This is not general advice for all young adults, but for those whose parents are labeled as toxic, immature, or narcissistic. A few months ago a video from Oprah gave space to one of the psychologists leading the charge for children to go no-contact with their aging parents. A counter-argument in Psychology Today pointed out that what was being welcomed as growth was estrangement, and that it denied the idea of an obligatory parent/child relationship. 

I don't believe that "Honor your father and mother" came up in discussion when I watched the Oprah video. Likewise "Honor your father and mother" was not mentioned in the response in Psychology Today. On the one hand, why would psychologists bring up the Ten Commandments and enter into the realm of spirituality and faith? But here we can see true advantages in religion -- yes, organized religion, complete with shared expectations that are not optional. Religion brings a social contract, an essential element of a functioning society. 

The social fabric is messy, complicated, and built one relationship at a time. It takes work. The social fabric is also necessary even at the psychological level. People who lack a sense of belonging tend to have serious struggles with life happiness. When psychologists normalize breaking off key relationships, it is not always to the benefit of the client that they would help. 

What about those parents who actually are immature, narcissistic, or toxic? There are a number of us whose childhoods were marred by parenting that was worse than indifferent. Labeling the parents as a problem is not always too hasty or too convenient; it can also be too true. I speak as someone with experience dealing with parents who had more than the typical faults. I had a brother who went no-contact with the harsher parent, to the extent possible. The result was not his growth and peace but empowering the unhealed wounds to isolate him still. 

The premise of much popular psychology is that a person's primary duty is to their own personal happiness and well-being. Even if we allow that premise for this conversation, the "cut and run" approach can deprive the adult children of learning how to stand up for themselves, learning to define and redefine relationships to insist on the healthy respect due to an adult. It cuts off opportunities to learn and practice a relationship of equals, and to gain that necessary adult skill of insisting on fairness and respect in mature relationships. 

It can be tricky to rebuild the adult-child relationship when both parties are adults. The habit of power with the parent may show up as disrespect for the adult children when the now-adult children need to claim responsibility over their own lives. But this transition to full adults is not optional, and claiming agency in the relationship is not a developmental milestone we can afford to skip. 

For those of us with challenging parents, going no-contact can deprive us of learning how to find our voice and redefine the relationship, and the related practice of steering a relationship onto a healthier course. The lack of those relationship skills can take a toll on those who go no-contact. 

There may be a time and a place to take a break from a family relationship. But a permanent rupture has its own price tag of leaving the wounds unhealed, the skills unlearned, the power to redefine it unclaimed. 

"Honor your father and mother" may not be easy. And it does not mean tolerating abuse. But there is a place in the conversation for leveling up our own skills so that each side is treated with honor and respect. 

The spiritual foundation of the Ten Commandments

"I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery." (Exodus 20:2)

Depending on which tradition you follow, that is either the prologue to the Ten Commandments or the first commandment itself. For present purposes, either way it is the foundation on which the others rest. What does that say about God's intentions and the law's purpose? 

In our days we hear a lot of prejudice against religious commandments and following them, with sneers about "blind obedience" or "mindless rule-following", usually complete with God's character being defamed as violent or selfish. Here we see that loyalty to God has a completely different origin. He has already established his benevolence, has already worked to free his people, has already shown his compassion toward them. The Lord is not their oppressor but their liberator. As they stand at Sinai, what he has asked them to do before then has led to freedom and blessing. 

The spiritual foundation of keeping God's commandments is his love and compassion for us, the trust that these laws do not bring chains but blessings. He has shown his faithfulness across the generations that separate them from their centuries-gone ancestors who first trusted him, and he will see their descendants through the centuries to come. 

An Objective / Key Result Assessment of the Law - a framework for understanding other the Bible's own comments on the law

For those not familiar with the Objectives and Key Results (OKR) management method, it takes the approach of clearly stating an objective and then measuring progress toward it with key results. The OKR methodology is popular among tech companies. Proponents of OKR often lead its brag-sheet with the fact that Google uses the approach.

I'll start with a general example of how it would be used. If a person wanted to participate in the annual novel-writing challenge in November, a possible OKR write-up for it might look like:

Objective: Complete a novel

• Key Result: Outline a plot with no more than 20 points by November 3
• Key Result: Write a chapter covering one plot point each day for November 4 through November 23
• Key Result: Proof-read and edit 4 chapters a day November 25 through November 29
• Key Result: Format and publish by November 30
  

In some ways, everyone who has ever worked toward a long-term goal may find the OKR method to be nothing but common sense. While I'd accept that as a valid point, I'd also mention: common sense is often sorely lacking, and I'd welcome anything that works to secure a place for common sense in the decision-making process. The OKR method makes it clearer  how to turn common sense into an action plan.

So much for the introduction to OKR. But is the method useful in giving us insight into Biblical law? Consider the common observation that the Ten Commandments fall under the general headings of the two greatest commandments: "love of God" for the first table of the law, and "love of neighbor" for the second table of the law. Here is one way to look at that observation from an OKR framework:

Objective: Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength

• Key Result: You shall have no other gods before me
• Key Result: You shall not make yourself a graven image
• Key Result: You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain
• Key Result: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy 

Objective: Love your neighbor as yourselves

• Key Result: Honor your father and mother
• Key Result: You shall not murder
• Key Result: You shall not commit adultery
• Key Result: You shall not steal
• Key Result: You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor
• Key Result: You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or workers, or property

That OKR framework can shed light on some other comments in the Bible about the law and its place in Christian life. This includes some comments for those of us from the Gentile nations who were never given the Law of Moses, or placed under it.

• That it is possible for people to honor God with their lips, while their heart is far from Him: we can fulfill certain key results -- or even all of them -- while not actually embracing the objective.
• That it is possible for people to keep the letter of the law but still go against the spirit of the law.
• That love is the fulfillment of the law: it is the objective, in this way of viewing it.
• That anyone who claims to keep the law, but chooses to keep only part of it, is not really keeping the law: When we work toward the objectives, we see that all the results are integral to the objective. 

And, saving one for last: 

If anyone says, "I love God," but hates his brother, he is a liar. (1 John 4:20)

Here John the Apostle's comments are something of a challenge to the idea that the two tables of the law are cleanly separate. Is there really one set of laws for love of God, and another for love of neighbor? When Jesus was asked about the greatest commandment, why did he choose to answer with the two greatest commandments -- the first as love of God, the second as love of neighbor -- instead of one commandment as asked? Here again we see reason to consider that they may be inseparable. On that view, Love of Neighbor could be viewed as a sub-point under the heading of Love of God, like so:

Objective: Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength

• Key Result: You shall have no other gods before me
• Key Result: You shall not make yourself a graven image
• Key Result: You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain
• Key Result: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy
• Key Result: Love your neighbor as yourself
• Honor your father and mother (etc)

We may be challenged to see that love of neighbor is part of love of God. Which again fits very well with how Jesus described the Last Day: "Whatever you have done for the least of these brothers of mine, you have done for me."

Teenagers and some thoughts about "Honor your father and mother"

My regular readers will know that I teach a teenage Sunday school class. Today's main consideration was "what the law of God is really for" -- where God so loved the world and we join him in loving the world; where God does not ask us to bow down to him (rather than the idols) but asks us to do right by our neighbors; where we are called to build a good life, build a loving family, build a community that is secure and supportive and stable; where God gives us the pattern that enables us to do that.

But in a class of teens, the call to "honor your parents" deserved a moment's consideration. Younger children can have a very deep trust in their parents, and a deep dependence. As teenagers, that's changing. The class is full of people who are either young adults or within a short time will become young adults. I asked for a show of hands how many of the teenagers could name one thing -- anything -- that they now did better than their parents. As I kept naming the hobbies and interests of my students, and began including things like working electronics, soon every hand in the room was raised. And I mentioned that by now, all of them had seen their parents make mistakes; it's human, and everybody makes mistakes. (I should add, by now I expect everyone has asked their parents a question to which they don't actually know the answer.)

So with the naive trust of a child now ruled out, a teenager is going to look at their parents as more human, closer to equal. (It does help to look at them as equal, and not give into the temptation to dismiss them as worthless simply because they're imperfect. We are all imperfect too.) So these  teenagers still living at home may need some thought about why to trust their parents' judgment. We considered experience: that the teenagers may be young adults, but they're newbies, and newbies make mistakes. We considered that parents have had years and years to see how certain things work out in the real world, and do have a better idea about how some things work out in real life. And if they're trying to teach you something, it's because they want to spare you learning it the hard way.

Teenage Sunday School: David, Bathsheba, and the commandment nobody takes seriously

This lesson worked out well in a classroom containing early teenagers and late pre-teens. They were already familiar with the ten commandments, and with the story of David and Bathsheba.

Opener: The Ten Commandments

The class should be well familiar with the ten commandments by now. At the leader's discretion, either start by seeing how many they can remember without looking, and/or turn to Exodus 20 and read them together briefly. List them on the board for future reference during the lesson. Try to keep this portion of the lesson to 10-15 minutes.

David and Bathsheba

Tell the class that, while reading the next story, they should look for how many of the ten commandments are broken. Read through the story of David and Bathsheba together as a class (2 Samuel 11).

Questions and discussion

1. Which of the ten commandments were broken? Name as many as you can. (Make sure they notice at least coveting the neighbor's wife, adultery, and murder. Let them figure out as much as they can on their own. Before moving on to the next question, point out how the commandments that were broken got more and more serious as the story progressed, and the chain of events kept going from bad to worse.)
2. At the beginning of the story, what was the very first commandment that was broken? 
3. If David had not coveted his neighbor's wife, would the other commandments have been broken?
4. After David and Bathsheba committed adultery, what would it have taken to stop things before taking a life? 
5. Backing up one: before David and Bathsheba committed adultery, what would it have taken to stop the whole horrible chain of events from starting? 
6. So, when was the easiest time to have stopped that whole disaster?

Make sure they either reach the conclusion themselves or help them along as needed: We may not always see "do not covet" as a serious commandment because it seems like a small thing. But "coveting" is where adultery starts, "coveting" is where stealing starts. And in David's case, it didn't stop there. All kinds of evil came from not stopping a thing when it was small enough to stop.

Why Is Greed Called "Idolatry"?

This is written in response to a post by Ryan Thomas Jones -- where I'm a little late to the conversation, but wanted to add some thoughts all the same. In the linked piece, Jones argues that greed can be called "idolatry" only because the target of greed -- money -- involves actual literal images, and those images are the essential part of idolatry. I respectfully disagree. I have split up the response into two points: my objection, and why it matters.

My Objection

Let's start first with the Ten Commandments, the parts about other gods:

You shall have no other gods before me.
You shall not make yourself any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
You shall not bow down to them, or serve them. (Exodus 20:3-5)

If we were to place something before God but make no image of it, it would still be idolatry in a real sense. "Having no other gods before God" is commanded here, just as plainly as not making such an image. Serving a god besides God is plainly called wrong, and I have no doubt this would hold true even without an image. For example, I have no doubt that this command would apply to pagans who served Bacchus or Aphrodite or other gods even if there were no images involved. So serving another god is itself considered wrong, whether or not there are images involved.

Next, Paul on the subject of greed:

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. (Colossians 3:5)

And Christ on the same subject:

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. (Matthew 6:24)

Mr Jones argues that the real reason greed is called idolatry is because money has images on it:

Show me the tribute money. And they brought him a coin. And he said to them, "Whose is this image and superscription?" And they said to him, "Caesar's." (Matthew 22:19-21)

I have to say plainly that I disagree with the reasoning that "greed" is called "idolatry" merely because the coins had images. Greed is not called idolatry only when it applies to something with an image on it. Greed might desire gems that have no image on them, or on gold that has not been minted into coins but is only a bar of precious metal. Paul said nothing to show that greed is only "idolatry" when it applies to things that are marked with an image. If we were to look back to the Ten Commandments for reasons that Paul might call something idolatry, I can see several reasons:

• Having another god before God;
• Having idolatrous images; 
• Serving another god.

When Jesus commented on how "You cannot serve both God and mammon", he did not mention images; he mentioned service, and he mentioned devotion and which master is first in someone's love and devotion.

From there, it seems a safe conclusion -- the intended conclusion -- that greed is idolatry even if it attaches to things like jewelry that have no image on them.

That means "idolatry" is a legitimate concern for other things which take our devotion away from God, where we serve something else before God.

Why It Matters

Mr Jones described some preaching he has heard:

Sometimes they will go on to say, “So we are really all idolators.” It makes for good preaching if you are trying to produce a big altar call with lots of tears. But here’s the thing. It’s not biblical. It’s a pious hoax.

There's an implication that the "idolatry" accusation is being used by the preacher as theatrics, to produce a show -- and that an essential part is the "lots of tears" -- that is, inducing guilt. A commenter to the original post says as much:

The sins that get re-categorized as idolatry are bad enough by themselves, and people are often stuck dealing with them. Adding the idolatry tag is an attempt to ratchet up the guilt ...

I have seen and heard my fair share of bad preaching over the years. I have no doubt that some preachers would use the accusation of "idolatry" to "ratchet up the guilt" as the commenter says, or "produce a big altar call with lots of tears". It is a manipulative thing, and it is right to object to the manipulation. Under the circumstances, another sad thing is that the "altar call" may sometimes be theatrics, not mercy. (My denomination doesn't do altar calls; this cuts down on the theatrics, though without necessarily improving the preaching.) If an altar call makes us rededicate our lives to God, there is a risk that we have rededicated ourselves to works-righteousness.

The reason I bothered writing this post is that I think there's a far better way to react to guilt than by trying to soften the accusation against us. It is better to turn to Christ -- and, sadly, here I'll have to make clear: not in the manipulated "don't you feel even guiltier now" kind of way that Mr Jones was so right to object to. There is a certain kind of preacher who may believe that guilt-tripping repentant sinners is a holy thing and part of his calling; there is something fundamentally sick about that. Should a preacher never try to create guilt? Let's say that if someone has no conscience it is the preacher's job to help revive it, and if someone has no sense of what is good and holy, then it is the preacher's job to build that up. Most people can tell the contrast by themselves, from there. (It is one of the most effective ways of discrediting the church, making a culture where nothing is holy, and then persuading the church to try to fit into that culture. Peoples' consciences will die for lack of hope that there is a better way.)

But for those who are already aware of their sin, it is not the preacher's job to increase their misery in their guilt. It is the preacher's job to show how faithful Christ is in forgiving us, how steady his promises are, how unwavering his faithfulness is. Even when our devotion to Christ may have slipped when we were tempted, it is the preacher's job to remind us that Christ's devotion to us did not slip. It is the preacher's job to explain why we can hope in Christ, and how trustworthy that hope will prove, and how love casts out fear. It is the preacher's job to hold up all of Christ's acts of mercy and forgiveness, and his promise of the Last Day.

That is, I think, the right response to finding out that some things we do can, in fact, be compared to idolatry.

New Testament Commentaries on the Ten Commandments

Do not think that I have come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I have not come to destroy, but to fulfil.(Matthew 5:17)

1. I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. (Exodus 20:2-3)
   

   Concerning eating things offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. Even though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there are many gods, and many lords), but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we are in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we are by him. (I Corinthians 8:4-6)

2. You shall not make for yourselves any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.  You shall not bow down to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. (Exodus 20:4-6)
   

   You say that a man should not commit adultery; but do you commit adultery? You detest idols, but do you commit sacrilege? (Romans 2:22)

   So put to death whatever belongs to the earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and covetousness, which is idolatry. (Colossians 3:5)

3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.  (Exodus 20:7)
   

   Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, "You shall not break your oath, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord."  But I say to you: Do not swear at all: not by heaven, for it is God's throne; not by the earth, for it is his footstool; not by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Do not swear by your own head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But for your words, let "yes" be yes, and "no" be no. Anything beyond these comes from evil. (Matthew 5:33-37)

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. In six days you shall labor and do all your work. But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work -- neither yourself, nor your son, nor your daughter, your manservant or maidservant, nor your cattle, nor the stranger within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: so the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Exodus 20:8-11)
   

   And he said to them, "The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath. So the Son of man is also Lord of the sabbath." (Mark 2:27-28)
   
   And Jesus answering spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?" And they did not answer. And he took the man and healed him, and let him go. (Luke 14:3-4)
   
   And he said to them, "Is there any man among you, if one of his sheep falls into a pit on the sabbath day, will not lay hold of it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? So it is lawful to do good on the sabbath days." (Matthew 12:11-12)
   
   And he came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days. (Luke 4:31)
   
   One man esteems one day as more important. Another esteems every day alike. Let each man be fully assured in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (Romans 14:5-6) (h/t Martin LaBar)

5. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the LORD your God gives you. (Exodus 20:12)
   

   Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. "Honor your father and mother," -- which is the first commandment with promise, that it may be well with you -- "and you may live long on the earth." (Ephesians 6:1)

6. You shall not murder. (Exodus 20:13)
   

   You have heard that it was said by the people long ago, "You shall not murder," and whoever murders shall be in danger of judgment. But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without cause shall be in danger of judgment: and whoever calls his brother a contemptuous name shall be in danger of the council. Bu whoever says, "You fool" shall be in danger of hell fire. So if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:21-24)
   
   Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him. (1 John 3:15)

7. You shall not commit adultery. (Exodus 20:14)
   

   Mat 5:27  You have heard that it was said by the people of old, "You shall not commit adultery." But I say to you, that whoever looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and cast it away from you. For it is better for you that one of your members should perish, than that your whole body should be cast into gehenna. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and cast it away from you. For it is better for you that one of your members should perish, than that your whole body should be cast into gehenna. (Matthew 5:27-30)
   
   It has been said, "Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce." But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries the divorced woman commits adultery. (Matthew 5:31-32)

8. You shall not not steal. (Exodus 20:15)
   

   He who has been stealing must steal no more: but instead, let him work, doing something useful with his own hands so that he may have something to share with the one who is in need. (Ephesians 4:28)

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (Exodus 20:16)
   

   Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual immorality, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things that defile a man. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man. (Matthew 15:19-20)

10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor any thing that is your neighbor's. (Exodus 20:17)
    

    What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Definitely not. No; I would not have known what sin was, except by the law. I would not have known what coveting was, except the law said, "You shall not covet." (Romans 7:7)
    
    Having eyes full of adultery, they cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls. In their hearts they have given covetousness a workout, accursed children. (2 Peter 2:14)

The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery; you shall not murder; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not covet" -- and any other commandments there may be -- are summed up in this saying, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no harm to its neighbor: therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. (Romans 13:9-10)

You have heard that it has been said, you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you, and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what have you done more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do that? Therefore be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)

Bless those who persecute you: bless, and do not curse. (Romans 12:14)

Do not repay anyone evil for evil, providing what is good in the sight of all men. (Romans 12:17)
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:21)

Should Christians keep the Sabbath?

"The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." - Jesus (Mark 2:27)

Most Christians have already heard the basic things the Bible teaches about the Sabbath. The Sabbath was given to Israel as a day of rest. Jesus healed on the Sabbath; some objected that he was a Sabbath-breaker. He explained the good of his actions, showing from their own Jewish tradition how the Sabbath did not stop someone from doing a greater good: they would circumcise a child into the covenant on the eighth day even if it fell on the Sabbath; the priests would serve in the Temple on the Sabbath; someone could rescue an animal that had fallen into a pit on the Sabbath day. He said the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath. After Jesus' ascension the early church leaders met to discuss which of the ancient Jewish laws applied in the church among the Gentiles, and the Sabbath was not mentioned. In the New Testament letters, we are told not to let anyone judge us about the Sabbath day. Paul wrote that some people valued all days equally, and some held one day above another -- that each of us should be fully convinced in his own mind, but that we should not judge each other or cause someone to trip up over these things.

So there we have one of the delicate balances about the Sabbath: we are not made to serve it. But still it was made for us:

"The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." - Jesus (Mark 2:27)

If it was made for us, we are permitted to enjoy its blessings, keeping in mind: the Sabbath is not Lord over us us; Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath.

---

Related notes:

1. Somewhere I read that in ancient times a pagan had criticized the Jews over the Sabbath, saying they were lazy to keep the Sabbath because a Sabbath would leave the work un-done. The Jewish response was: the command says "In six days you shall do all your work" and on the seventh rest -- so that the whole command was kept not only in the one day of rest, but also in the six days of completing all the work so that it was possible to take a day of rest without neglecting important things.
   
   
2. The Sabbath was given as a memory of God resting from his work, and also as it says in memory of Israel's rescue from slavery. So the Sabbath is a lasting memorial of a rescue from slavery. In our age it can be a reminder not to become enslaved willingly. Some types of people become over-committed, and we risk becoming slaves to ourselves, never having a day of rest.
   
   
3. Once in war-time the staff of an aluminum plant worked seven-day weeks. At the end of the war, when they first scaled back to six-day weeks, the plant produced more per week in the six-day weeks than it had in the seven-day weeks. I have this on the word of one of the plant managers, who was my grandfather.
   
   
4. Again, I read somewhere that while people do produce more if they have a day of rest, that we must not imagine that is the true purpose of keeping a Sabbath: as if the true purpose of man were to be productive workers, and the Sabbath was meant to serve our productivity. Instead, the Sabbath is kept as a blessing in itself, not for the sake of something else.
   
   
5. It's likely that the things I've remembered reading, as mentioned in this post, can be found either in the text or footnotes for A.J. Heschel's The Sabbath. I would give that book mixed reviews, but it was well worth the read.
   

Heresy or orthodoxy? A question about the laws in the Torah

Every now and then I post thoughts on things that may be considered heretical by some. As there's hardly a belief that isn't considered heretical by someone or other, I don't find myself too troubled by that, and content myself with trying to figure out whether the idea is actually sound. So the thing I have found myself wondering lately is this: We know that the Old Testament portrays the laws of the Torah as being given some of them directly by the hand of God engraved on stone tablets (10 of them like that) and the rest (does that leave 603?) were not written in stone. So is it orthodoxy or heresy to think that one batch of laws was meant to be more lasting and important than the others?

One the one hand, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength" and "Love your neighbor as yourself" are actually among the other 603 commandments, not among the 10 ... then again, the 10 Commandments are free of things that many people question why they're in the Bible at all, such as dietary laws, clothing codes, and other things that seem fairly cultural. The ones that made the stone tablets do seem to be closer to human universals. Except for the preface, "I am the LORD your God who brought you out of Egypt." So that's the score as I bat the idea around trying to determine what to make of the fact that some were written on stone and others were not.

As always, all comments are welcome.

God's Word as creative power: the 10 commandments

I appreciate the patience of those who waited through various analytical posts. My next few are in a more edifying vein. The next several posts consider different aspects of God's Law. Each post in this series contains a partial picture and therefore an incomplete picture. It still seems best to me to consider these aspects separately. If you read this post and think, "That's only part of the story" -- you're right.

---

In the beginning God's creative power worked through his word, and ten times in the first chapter of Genesis we see "God said" followed by a decree that created reality and blessed the world. In the next book, Exodus, once again we see ten decrees coming from the mouth God. While much has been said about the ten commandments, I want to look first at how they are words of creation and blessing.

Often the ten commandments are heard as good ideas -- and as threats. "Thou shalt" has a certain coerciveness about it. But consider the reality that could be created by the commandments if people lived them. In this sense, the commandments are not so different from God creating a people of his own by saying:

Let there be love of God.
Let there be true knowledge of God.
Let there be freedom from the slavery of false religion.
Let there be respect and honor for the Lord.
Let there be good measures of work, rest and peace.
Let there be peace among brothers and love of life.
Let there be homes blessed with faithful, kind companionship.
Let there be respect and honor for our neighbors.
Let there be honesty, and let there be justice.
Let there be hearts that are glad to see a neighbor's prosperity.

The commandments of God are creative: they call and create a people of his own, binding him to them and them to him. They call us to be co-creators with God of the reality around us, a reality that could, as in the beginning, be called good. The commandments carry the blessing of God in that keeping them makes us channels of God's blessing in the world, blessings such as peace and rest and homes where we are welcome. A people that takes these to heart would be blessed intrinsically by the very fact of having these commandments in their hearts and the actions that would necessarily follow.

I think something like that inspired two of my favorite psalms, Psalm 19 and Psalm 119, both praising the law of God for its beauty, its goodness, and its ability to bless.

Teenage Sunday School Considers Uses of the Law

This is last week's lesson. It introduced them to the idea that the Ten Commandments and the Law in general have a purpose. The week previous, we had reviewed the benefits of the Law and the praise heaped on the Law by Paul and even by Christ. This week, moving on, it may come as a surprise that obedience is not the only purpose of the Law, according to the Bible.

---

Review

• Ask them where in the Bible they can read the Ten Commandments. (Since we haven't gotten to Deuteronomy yet, they're supposed to say Exodus 20 at this point.)
• Ask them to remember the Ten Commandments as best they can and get them on the board. Allowed to open to Exodus 20 and look if memory fails. Have the students take turns with the board, each writing a few of the commandments as their their classmates recall them.
• Have someone draw our split-personality person on the board with the face showing half good and half evil to represent the part of us that is receptive toward God and the part of us that is hostile toward God.

Purpose of the Law: Restraining Sin and Its Damage
Read 1 Timothy 1:8-11.

1. According to this passage, who is the Law for? Lawbreakers and rebels.
   
2. (Indicate drawing of ourselves with our two natures.) If the Law is for the immoral, then which part of us is the Law for, according to this passage? The part that's opposed to God.
   
3. What is the main message of the Law about all these things listed? "Stop it."

Purpose of the Law: Consciousness of Sin
Read Romans 3:19-20. List the purposes of the law that Paul names here.

1. The Law silences us before God.
2. The Law holds us accountable to God.
3. The Law makes us conscious of our sin.

(It takes them some practice to actually focus on what the text says instead of inventing answers out of what they think they ought to be saying. They're still learning how to get answers from the text. It takes some concentrated work of guiding them to stick with the text before they get there.)

Introduce the illustration of the Law as a mirror. Ask them when and how they use a mirror. Examples they offered: when they first get up, when they think there's something stuck in their teeth, maybe after being in a strong wind. The point: the mirror shows them where they need to clean up.

Purpose of The Law: A Tutor that Schools Us in Our Need for Christ
Read Galatians 3:23-25.
Introduces the idea of the Law as a prison ... and time us up. Will pick up there next week.

Teenage Sunday School Starts the Ten Commandments

In the past few weeks we've made it all the way over to Exodus, hitting the highlights such as the Passover along the way. This week the students met the Ten Commandments for the first time since they were outright children. I hope to build in them both an appreciation for the law, a sense of its place in salvation history and in Christian life, and an immunization against legalism. All that will take a few weeks. Here's the first installment.

---

Read Exodus 20:1-17.

• Have the class list the commandments on the board.
  
• Discuss different numbering schemes used for the commandments, the fact that they didn't come numbered so different opinions are ok on the numbering system, and not to be shocked if they see another group number the commandments differently at times.
  
• Made sure everyone knew what adultery and coveting were. Everybody understood that adultery involved mating with someone when you shouldn't, and that coveting meant wanting something that was someone else's.

Questions

1. What would the world be like if people followed this? Much better.
2. Does anyone remember where the Ten Commandments were kept? (Which wasn't a fair question since we hadn't covered it, but I was fairly sure someone would know.) In the Ark of the Covenant. (Short discussion of Raiders of the Lost Ark is inevitable at this point, so I give it a minute or two.)
3. Does anyone remember what the Ark of the Covenant looked like and what it was made of? It was a box covered with gold and it had angels on the top facing each other.
4. When I taught the Ten Commandments to the preschoolers a couple of years ago, I brought in a jewelry box. They swarmed it. What do you know about a jewelry box? It has something cool inside.
5. My jewelry box is wood with some mother-of-pearl inlays ... is it a safe bet that whatever's inside a jewelry box is worth more than the box? Yep.
6. What does it say about the Ten Commandments that the box they made for it was covered in gold? (Mostly raised eyebrows and hey/wow type comments, but they got the point: the Ten Commandments were considered to be worth more than gold.)
7. Is this the first time we've seen laws or commands in the Bible, where God says that we must or must not do something? No, we also saw them in Genesis, "You must not eat of the tree."
8. How did we do with that previous command? Not very well.
9. How do we do with this set of commands? Not very well.

At this point we stopped and reviewed the idea of our being divided within ourselves, with a side drawn towards God and a side still resentful and distrustful towards God. Had a volunteer draw someone on the board with a split face to show a good side and an evil side, representing us as we are. With reference to the picture, a few more questions:

1. What does the good side of us think about the commandments? "Yep, sure, I'll do that."
2. What does the bad side of us think about the commandments? "Forget that!"

Start a section on the board for good reactions to the commandments. Have the class listen for these during the next readings.

Read Matthew 5:17-19
Read Romans 2:17-20

Make list on board of good things said about the commandments in these passages.
Our list included

• keeping the commandments and teaching others to keep them is counted praiseworthy by Christ
• relationship to God
• know God's will
• approve of what is good
• being instructed
• being guided
• being able to instruct and guide others
• having the embodiment of knowledge and truth

Referring back to the two-faced drawing of ourselves, explain how the good things about the commandments interest the better side of us. Then point out that the bad side of us reacts differently. Have the class listen for these during the next reading.
Read Romans 7:7-8 and 7:11.
Start a section on the board for bad reactions to the commandments. Our list included

• Rules are meant to be broken
• So that's what God wants me to do? I'll do the opposite.

And that'll do for this week. Final exam for today's work: in what chapter of the Bible did we read the Ten Commandments? Exodus 20.

Christian Art and the Graven Images Commandment

Canterbury Cathedral, scenes from the Poor Man's Bible Window, circa 13th century, public domain

Every once in awhile I forget that they're out there: those Christians who think that artwork -- especially religious artwork -- is offensive to God because of a commandment in the Sinai covenant given to Israel through Moses. I recently met someone of this view for the first time in a long time. She was earnest, she was sincere, she was passionate, and she thought I was at least leading people astray that I'm supportive of Christian artwork. For the sake of Christ and of fellowship, I didn't want to just dismiss the question, even if it did seem outlandish.

Is Christian artwork permissible in light of the commandments? Does the Sinai covenant apply to Gentiles? And does the Sinai covenant forbid artwork in the first place?

The Question
The Ten Commandments contains a command forbidding images. Why does Christian tradition contain such a long history of images? Are we showing contempt for the commands of God, or ignorance of the commands of God, by having images?

In Answer
Let's start with Exodus and review what it says about images. The translation used here is NIV which is readable but not always the most accurate; if questions of exact wording arise we may want to dig deeper.

---

Against Images
1) Exodus 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them" (etc.).

Comments:
There's a prohibition against images; the context is idol-worship. At this point the question is still open whether that prohibition is absolute or whether it was specific to idol-worship.

---

For Images
2) Exodus 25:18-20: "And make two cherubim out of hammered gold at the ends of the cover. Make one cherub on one end and the second cherub on the other; make the cherubim of one piece with the cover, at the two ends. The cherubim are to have their wings spread upward, overshadowing the cover with them. The cherubim are to face each other, looking toward the cover."

-and-

3) Exodus 25:33-34: "Three cups shaped like almond flowers with buds and blossoms are to be on one branch, three on the next branch, and the same for all six branches extending from the lampstand. And on the lampstand there are to be four cups shaped like almost flowers with buds and blossoms."

-and-

4) Exodus 26:31: "Make a curtain of blue, purple and scarlet yarn and finely twisted linen, with cherubim worked into it by a skilled craftsman."

Comments:
There is a command to make images of things in heaven (cherubim) and earth (almond flowers with buds and blossoms) in context of making a beautiful and holy worship of the true God.

---

Based on these we can see that the prohibition against "images" (all artwork depicting living things) is not absolute even within the Sinai covenant. That still leaves plenty of questions open but it does put Christian religious artwork on a solid basis: it puts the history of religious art within the framework of the Sinai covenant, not outside of it.

For artwork, Exodus allows that there is both a right and wrong use of religious images. It places the right use of religious images squarely within the realm of using our God-given creativity to return glory to the Creator and to build a vision of paradise on earth.