Krissi

For John to be Elijah he would have had to be reincarnated. Reincarnation has no role in Christian theology and history. Enoch and Elijah were “taken” to heaven and did not return as someone else. Those who were those raised from the dead in both the NT and OT stayed in heaven. I suppose Melchizedek is an exception to the rule of mortality -- I don't understand who he, to be honest ... an angel? All humans who are alive now have a future which includes death. In time, Christians will be eternally reconciled with our Father in heaven. This means that every individual stands alone in history. True, our lives may parallel the lives of biblical characters and we may even have salient points in common with them, but these are merely parallels or similarities. Thus, to answer your question, Elijah may be similar to John the Baptist in substantial ways, but that doesn’t mean that he IS John the Baptist. Elijah is just Elijah.

Elisha knew he was about to be on his own, without his father/master/tutor's support. He had leaned heavily on Elijah in the past, and though he doesn’t seem nervous, he could have been thinking about the future and what could happen to him. Elisha may have sensed he was about to be tested and the enormity of what he had been asked to do made him realize that he may not be up to the challenge. He needed more. More spiritual power to prevail, even though he must have known that the Holy Spirit would surely carry him through. This was his character defining moment. It’s much like when Solomon asked for wisdom, or when Paul, retrospectively, said he had “kept the faith.” Even Jesus had to reject unlimited wealth and power. This, then, was Elisha’s moment, one in which he denied for himself what the world offered by asking for a double portion of the Holy Spirit (spiritual strength).

God told Elijah to anoint Elisha to be his successor. If Elisha wasn’t around, Elijah couldn’t have anointed him. It must be the case, then, that Elijah didn’t expect Elisha to abandon him. They must have been doing some sort of rhetorical dance: three times Elijah asks him to go and Elisha refuses. But why? I’m not sure. Elisha had been a loyal servant/understudy for many years (?), so the two of them had developed a pattern of loyalty. They were never far apart, as far as I know. Furthermore, not only did Elijah know that Elisha would succeed him, but likewise Elisha knew he was to be anointed Elijah’s successor. So both of them knew what would happen. So did the other prophets at the prophetic school. The company of the prophets at Bethel came out to Elisha and asked, “Do you know that the Lord is going to take your master from you today?” “Yes, I know,” Elisha replied, “so hold your peace.” -- I’ve had some truly horrifying experiences in life that made me wonder if God had abandoned me, but honestly, I never really felt I should stop following Him.

Yahweh had given Ahaziah and his family many chances to repent and return to the true worship of God. They didn't worship Yahweh consistently, but veered off toward other gods. The first Commandment is clear: YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME. Ahaziah disobeyed the first commandment by blatantly and openly consulting a false god, thus ignoring Yahweh. This isn't the same as making a personal or business decision before consulting God in prayer, but more like praying to Satan or consulting a horoscope to figure out the future -- clearly sinful.

It could be the case that those Eastern Orthodox Patriarchs spoke God's words prophetically. Time and history will prove them either right or wrong. Though dark outfits, long beards, icons and eye-intensity may seem frightening to those unfamiliar with Orthodoxy, not all prophets or religious leaders look and sound like congenial, Western pastors. As someone who has worked among the powerful for many years and will soon be going into a very difficult situation, I am well aware that most leaders are not godly. Still, I have found fellowship in the most unexpected places and have come to regard some of these powerful men as God's blinking lights shining dimly on far-away hillocks. Christians are always in danger when they rub up against the world. That's the test of faith. We're tested in our families, neighborhoods and politics, but also in business, academe, non-profits, media, and, yes, the church. We are in this world, but not of it, after all. The Holy Spirit, ultimately, "keeps" us. Those called to walk the halls of power are given His protection, just as those called to fields, homesteads or small businesses. Wherever called, we are His missionaries. Christians do much in political places. We channel the direction of the political current in ways that help ordinary people. We work behind the scenes to nudge/promote godly policies. We champion options that no one considers: many pols exist in dissent-free siloes so when we speak honestly with an alternative voice, we give the priceless gift of perspective. We directly witness when God opens those doors. We shield, deflect, put words into their mouths ... etc. So, He has put us in positions of tremendous influence which we exercise anonymously and quietly. Such is our calling. Political leaders also get our expertise. Since we should be graded on the same sliding scale as seculars and non-believers but are, instead, held to a higher standard, we have to be the best at our craft, whatever it is, to overcome the world's bias/bigotry against Christians. This is difficult, to say the least. In addition to expertise, political leaders find in us a person they trust, someone who genuinely cares for them, prays for them, wipes away their tears in moments of weakness and then marches them back to the podium. They are men of clay feet. Nothing more. It is worldly and weak to think of powerful men as a greater threat than the least of us. These men are not to be summarily feared or rejected because they are powerful just as we do not reject the desperate, poor and vulnerable. Power is fungible and moves to where God puts it. He is sovereign. These are the verses taped to the wall. I pray these verses daily: "I stood up and said to the nobles, officials and the rest of the people, 'Do not be afraid of them. Remember the Lord who is great and awesome and fight for your sons and daughters, your wives and your homes.'" Neh 4.14 "There remains yet very much land to be possessed." Josh 13 "I will go before you and will level the mountains, I will break down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron." Isa 35 "The anointing I have received from Him abides in me, so I don't need that anyone teach me because the same anointing teaches me all things and is true. Just as it is teaching me, I will abide in Him." I Jn 2 One more thing. This is God's calling. His mission. Nothing should dissuade any believer from doing what God puts on his or her heart, even the words of a pastor of whom I think highly.

Jehoshaphat was loyal to his fellow believers in Yahweh, even toward a king who was weak and obviously backslidden. Perhaps Jehoshaphat wasn't certain about the prophecy -- only one prophet had declared defeat and death, after all. Prophecy needs discernment and, perhaps, interpretation. It doesn't appear that Jehoshaphat had circumstantial validation of the prophecy, or other sorts of validation. A similar unsureness happens often when we hear what we think is God's voice in our inner ear, or even hear a contemporary prophecy. At this point, we test and make certain about what we hear. Jehoshaphat didn't do this. I disagree with your assessment of him. In my opinion, Jehoshaphat had a strong character. He was loyal. He got rid of the traces of Asherah (though he left some of the high places) -- perhaps he was being politically expedient? His heart was "set on seeking God," ... and he "did what was right in the eyes of the Lord ..." He did what was right in God's eyes. That's remarkable. When it was time to go to war, he did the right thing by going to war. Note that warring wasn't condemned, only Ahab who was condemned for things done before that war commenced. God called many men in the OT to be fighters, commanders and savvy strategists just as He calls men today. Jehoshaphat was one of those called to war by God Himself. The two prophecies (I Kings 22 and 2 Chron 19) seem to conflict: in the first, Jehoshaphat is described as doing right in God's eyes except for not removing the high places; in the second, Jehoshaphat is condemned for helping the wicked and praised for removing traces of idol worship.

Telling truth to power ... God's truth, in this case -- this is so difficult, so personally costly, and yet it must be done. Sometimes, saying nothing is speaking truth, such as during the trial of Jesus.

Pastor Ralph mentioned that it was a universal habit in the Mideast to consult with seers or prophets before battle. I suppose these military men were superstitious, but they may also have wanted the military advantage of knowing what was going to happen so they could come up with a "work-around." As was stated in the last lesson, Yahweh does respond to prayer that's heartfelt, so if defeat was prophesized, a king could pray for Yahweh to alter the course of history, even temporarily. We know that the other gods were impotent and the result of imaginative minds, but the people at that time may have thought, or worried, that if one god opposed a second god, they would need to align themselves with the winning, more powerful god. Ahab wasn't sure about the power of Yahweh. Jehoshaphat, in contrast, was firm in his alliance/faith in Yahweh as Ahab, however, waffled. Jehoshaphat seems like a spiritually discerning guy, one capable of seeing through acting. He wanted Yahweh's prediction, which he believed to be true (and which was true).

Ahab is a type of leader who scares me. He knows ... he really knows God, but still can't bring himself to follow Him. He brings on his own destruction through his weak character in spite of having strong leadership abilities in other areas. God's condemnation of Ahab comes after he stole the vineyard for which he lusted and then indirectly killed it's owner -- Ahab's was a heinous sin. I'm mentally comparing Ahab and David, right now, because both murdered indirectly because of ****. David was forgiven. Ahab was condemned. Why? I think Ahab was sincerely humble after hearing God's condemnation which is why God relented, at least in part, but don't think Ahab had the character or fortitude to truly change his ways as did David. It takes more than repentance -- God wants both repentance and a turning of the heart or a determined changing of character. David had both. Ahab had only the first. Regarding predestination, I, too, am a firm believer that all things are determined in advance, according to His plan and purposes. And, yes, I have a difficult time merging human free will and responsibility with God's foreknowledge and power. This is one of those theological issues that I cannot get my mind around, so let it go. Just give up. If God wants me to understand this, He'll illumine my mind. For now, it's a mystery.

Primitive people, it is said, need idols to help them conceptualize the unconceptualizable – God. Idols are just a prompt. A way of learning. An idol corrects the mind when it goes down errant paths, so it functions as a visible reminder of the way God is. None of this is true, of course. I firmly believe that every person on this earth has a religion; a faith or fear in something. Religions don’t need a god. Secularism, for one, is a godless religion, though it’s not a religion without idols. I know (or know of) people who worship artificial intelligence seeing in it the destruction or hope of humankind. Their idol is technology. I know many Greenies whose strange millennialism is a hope in the restoration of the earth. Their idol is the earth. Politics functions as idol for many as it alluringly combines power and a sense of purpose. Behavioral rituals that accompany strange sexual perversions, an obsession with food, fitness and health, the constant checking of one’s cell phone, women who cling to fading beauty with morning routines that take hours … these rituals are religious, in a way. People without our God manufacture their own gods as compensation, for everyone must have a religion. Idols aren’t something that people “back then” used to make, but something people now – very intelligent people, at times – make without self-awareness. Once I began to look for idols, I found them everywhere. Idols are ubiquitous in our culture. In the Colossians and Ephesians verses, greed is an item on a list that are idolatrous. I read those lists as consequences or proof of idolatry, not equivalences. I see them are evidences of an un-Christian character. A true, mature Christian has few idols. Idols, in the Christian life, are sins that have not yet been put away. We all have them. They’re the things we don’t want to deal with, not those we struggle with.

I do not think any class of people -- leaders, artists, business tycoons, missionaries, etc. -- are held to a higher standard by God. All of us are responsible for being and living like Christ. None are excluded from this standard. The secular world views some people as more powerful or influential than others. We, as Christians, should not follow the world in this regard. In God's eyes, we are all His children. All of us. Thus, two points. 1. We should consciously fight the tendency to put people on pedestals as if they were more important to God and then hold them to a higher standard than we hold ourselves. 2. If we happen to be people of fame or influence, we need to continue living up the high standard of faith that God has placed on us, considering ourselves no better or worse than others.

The phrase Pastor Ralph used is "a pattern of wickedness." This seems accurate because sin does tend to cluster in certain areas. Those clusters are like patterns of weakness and sin. One of MANY ideas in Christian faith I do not understand is that of agency. I don't know when I am responsible for generating from within me my own sinful ideas and deeds and when that sin was generated by Satan, as with Job. I don't understand what is my role and responsibility, that of the Holy Spirit and Satan. Sorry! Clearly, in this passage, the "pattern" of sin is in Ahab (even though he had an accomplice in his wife): "YOU sold yourself ... YOU caused Israel to sin ... YOU behaved in a vile manner ..." These are accusations. Ahab both is being accused and held accountable. Ahab didn't merely "allow" his wife to break these commandments, but rather he willingly and eagerly took the property. She's responsible for her own sins. Elijah did NOT accuse Ahab of murder, false witness and coveting. Those were Jezebel's sins. His sins didn't include hers -- his sins included worshiped idols, causing the nation to sin and selling himself to evil.

I have been reading, recently, about the peace of God that transcends one’s understanding. A person with His peace is able to let go and trust God to work in any circumstance or situation. I find this difficult, to say the least. By nature, I’m not a peaceful person but more like Ahab, eager for more, then angry that the situation didn’t resolve itself the way I wanted. Honestly, I have laid on my bed and sulked in the past. I’ve even refused to eat! So, at the level of a damaged character, I understand Ahab. He is what I was. He’s not depressed – he’s a lousy person! Jezebel is worse. She’s truly diabolical. Of course Jezebel is responsible for what she did; Ahab is not. Guilt does not transfer because we are married to, or work for, someone who is evil. In the text, Ahab does not appear to know what Jezebel did and certainly didn’t prod her to do it. Yes, the elders are responsible for their own lying as well as murder. They have answered to God for both. -- The question I have is WHY? Why did God let this happen to a good man like Naboth, a man who obeyed God and did His will, and then was murdered for it? I'm like Naboth -- surrounded by people who do not share my faith. Narratives like this take my breath away. My faith falters. I fear that God will cause horrible things happen to me precisely because I obeyed Him. God is sovereign. He could have prevented Naboth's death. He could have protected him. He did not. Naboth could have sold his field for a tidy sum and vacationed for the rest of his life on a Mediterranean beach, but instead, obeyed God and was murdered. Why? Why doesn't God protect the good? Why does He choose some of us to be martyred in great agony? Why did almost all the apostles die gruesome deaths?

This story reminds me of David and Bathsheba: Here Ahab coveted/lusted-for what was not his to have ... as did David. Ahab could have tendered his offer, been rebuffed, and then walked away -- David could have peeked and then looked away, but both succumbed to the temptation of taking what was not theirs. This was a backhanded form of stealing. It wasn't that the object of their coveting was so desirable to Ahab. Surely, there were many plots of land that were as good, if not better, than Naboth's vineyard. I'm sure, too, that Ahab had enough land around his residence to create his own vineyard or courtyard garden. So, he wasn't tempted by the thing-in-itself, but by the idea that there was something out there he couldn't possess, that there were things in the world that were potentially not to be conquered, bought or taken. Ahab knew the role of land in Israel, that land was passed down generationally, and yet, he asked to buy it. Ahab's proposal was wrong. Sinful. Against the Jewish law and custom. It was wrong to ask Naboth to do something that was contrary to his belief system, particularly since the Israelite way of looking at the world was one Ahab shared, or should have shared. Ahab knew it would have been wrong to buy the land inherited by another family. He did it anyway. Naboth is the noble character in this story. He persisted in keeping the law as he understood it to be, not selling the land at even an exorbitant price, but passing it down through his family-lineage. (As an aside, isn't it interesting the Elijah, in an earlier chapter, asked the widow for her last meal? Like Ahab, Elijah asked for the outrageous ...) -- I'm back ... So, I was just reading about Jeremiah and how Jeremiah's cousin (?) came to him, right before Jerusalem was to fall to the Babylonians, to sell his family's field. Jeremiah bought it -- the field symbolized how the Israelites would return and reclaim their own land. It wasn't a bad deal, then, but a prophetic one. The point is that Hanameel, the man selling the land, was so convinced that Israel was to be destroyed that he disobeyed the tradition/law and sold the land in advance, making a tidy profit. Very few Israelites returned. (I rather doubt Hanameel was among them, but do not know.)

I'm not sure this is a direct answer to your question, but what strikes me about these passages in Kings and Judges is their public nature. This is not God whispering into the mind of Elijah, but God making himself clear to nations. God's revelation didn't begin like this, however. In the beginning of the Elijah/Ahab story, God whispers solely to Elijah and Elijah "did what the Lord told him." Then, God's communication broadened when he healed the women's son from the dead and the widow said, "... now I know you're a man of God." Note she didn't seem to have further illumination about God's nature or power, but rather trusted Elijah's claim to be a prophet. Later, when Elijah presented himself to Ahab in Kings 18, Ahab didn't seem to gain a greater understanding of God. But when the scope of God's revelation widened to include all the Israelites who were on the hill watching the miraculous fire consume the sacrifice, "... they fell prostrate and cried, “The Lord—he is God! The Lord—he is God!” The people suddenly understood more about God. Lastly, in the passages today about the 20th chapter of Kings, God is speaking through a prophet to Ahab but the scope of His communication is the entire army. The faith of not just Ahab is being tested, but that of the nation. When they see the miraculous victory, they know something about God's character, or at least his unique claim to being the only God. Presumably, the army understood God's greatness after their victory. -- I pray God speaks to nation's today just as He did in the time of Ahab. I pray He brings Western nations to an understanding of His might and power so that their citizens cling to Him in faith. Bringing nations to repentance and faith is "the impossible situation" of these chapters in Kings. By whittling the army down to three hundred men, no one could claim that the impossible situation was overcome by human ingenuity. People had to admit that God really did enter into human history in strength and power, that He is who He say He is ... the great "I am."

The king may have been corrupted and weakened in his faith, but he was still a believer in Yahweh, and impressively, at a moment of great peril, trusted Yahweh with his life and future. He’s like most political leaders – full of himself in times of ease and on his knees in times of peril. He’s also like most political leaders in that he tends to have bad judgment regarding who can be trusted: obviously his wife was a tragic choice, but also the military leaders that God pushed to the side in favor of an entirely new group. Ahab had chosen unbelieving and incompetent advisors. In many instances in scripture, Christians interact with secular people in positions of great power. Christian history is dotted with believers in positions of authority or influence. I believe, firmly, that society is leavened by faith-filled Christians who struggle within hostile environments both to evangelize, perhaps subtly, and to be as salt and light. This is a God-given mission. His calling on their lives. There are probably hundreds of thousands of Christians throughout the world who are working for governments and officials who overtly hate God. I believe the corruption and evil in my own government is mitigated, in part, by the presence of Christian believers quietly and without fanfare pushing policies and ideas toward righteousness. In our Elijah story, Obadiah hid prophets in caves. He worked for a corrupt and evil king. God placed him there. May those of us called to be Obadiahs bravely "hide the prophets," or whatever God calls us to do, without fear and flinching ... compromise and corruption. -- “Then you will know that I am Yahweh.” V13 Obviously, Ahab needed a reminder of who God is, if not a reawakening. In all of our criticism of Ahab, mostly deserved, It's well to remember that he still turned to Yahweh at critical junctures. He passed those tests by re-turning to the true God. He didn’t waver or ask for advice, but with a clear mind, did as God commanded. I don’t know if this is about the Israelites or about Ahab. The passage is about Ahab.

Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you. This proverb quoted by Pastor Ralph, deals with two groups of people -- mockers and the wise -- and their respective responses to being rebuked. Who are the mockers? They're secular people, particularly those who are strident and pushy about their lack of faith. When a Christian points out a fault to a mocker, the mocker doesn't respond in humility but will lash out at the Christian in hate. John the Baptist had the courage to rebuke Herod because of his sexual proclivities -- he lost his head. Herod's response was hate. The carnal mind is enmity against God. Rom 8 Those who are wise, presumably Christians, can accept criticism and love the Christian brother or sister who offered the criticism constructively. Of course, being this Christian is difficult and a goal to which we strive. In my case, criticism that's well thought out and seems true is far easier to accept even if hurtful: I know I have a long way to go in the process of sanctification.

Elijah obviously heard a voice, not his mind or conscience -- a voice(!); an audible voice. That voice was clear and understandable to him. Elijah knew he was talking to God Himself – there was no ambiguity in Elijah’s mind that he was talking to God even though, presumably, he couldn’t see God as he spoke with Him. He conversed with God just like he would with another person, except God was invisible. This is how all communication works between humans: we hear … we respond. Without hearing an audible voice, we have to guess at what the other person is saying. In essence, we’re reduced to sign language. In a restaurant many years ago, at the table next to me, I watched several deaf people signing quickly and passionately. They were obviously recounting something that had happened – sharing a story. Their facial expressions were over-sized and dramatic as they “signed.” Their communicating without sound involved the entire body. Since I make noise, my communication can be subtle, which it is. I have a soft voice. I also have very restrained bodily movements. I can whisper and not move my body yet still communicate. But if I were deaf, my entire body would be involved in communicating. Perhaps, when God speaks, He is dramatic because we can’t hear Him otherwise because we’re spiritually deaf or hard-of-hearing. Whispers don’t communicate to the deaf. Thus, drama is needed – earthquakes, fire, windstorms, etc. If we could hear His whisper … if we could hear his audible voice, drama would be unnecessary. We could, like Elijah, have an ordinary conversation with God. Why does God do this? He knows we’re hard-of-hearing. If He wanted to communicate with us, He could do so easily. Perhaps communication isn’t the point. Maybe there’s more going on here than God trying to tell us something. Like so much these days, I simply don’t understand this. If God wants to communicate with me, why doesn’t He acknowledge my limitation and speak audibly or in ways I easily understand? I’m stuck with two possibilities, both of which I don’t like. First, He isn’t communicating with me. The reason I don’t hear his voice is that He’s not speaking (even though I want Him to speak to me.) He’s silent. Second, whispering may be beneficial in some way. This would mean that God’s goal isn’t communicating, but something else entirely.

Jason, directly above, wrote more deeply and thoughtfully than I am able. I can only add a few words ... I find it incredibly painful to believe -- and truly to live out -- the idea that by death comes life, that as I die to myself, my character enlarges/changes/improves. The abundant and useful life only comes after I have been shredded and devastated. Only then does God pick up the pieces to reassemble me ... only then can I be used by Him. Self-pity is an emotion that emerges during this shredding period. Self-pity looks back to old values and ideals, to the dreams that no longer exist, to all that was "given up" and then begs to be released from suffering. It's a backward, sin-ward emotion. But only suffering, at least in my life, has made a godly future possible. I suppose entitlement also looks back to what was. It sees the best of the past and expects/wants it to continue. It sees the changes within and thinks they're good enough. Only an entitled attitude would dare ask God to reverse the course of His plan.

Elijah is not at fault. He's a tired, emaciated, exhausted, emotionally fried prophet who couldn't take it anymore. He needed sleep, food and encouragement. His problem wasn't a lack of faith. Frankly, in a way, I think Elijah is rationally adding up his life work as a prophet and coming to the conclusion that it had not come to much. The King/Jezebel were still determined to shun Yahweh for other gods and the ordinary Israelites who enjoyed the fire-spectacle quickly settled back into their ungodly routine of life and worship. The status quo had been restored in short order. So, Elijah's victory was pyrrhic. The personal cost to Elijah, as Elijah perceived it, was greater than the success he was able to understand and see. He saw himself as a failure -- perhaps I should say that he saw his life's work as having failed. "I've had enough, Lord ..." My heart bleeds for him.

Pastor Ralph asked a question that suggests a higher standard than simply avoiding sin. He didn't ask why it would be important to put away sinful behaviours and thoughts, but rather why it's important to put aside "things that facilitate and tempt us." This is a much broader category. I've been reading about the lives of well-known Christians and have noticed that many believers that God greatly used went through a period of isolation, solitude and "apartness" from the things and people of his/her past. This could be the "clear break" to which Pastor Ralph refers. Perhaps we're not only asked to break from sinful things, but to break from familiar (unsinful) things that could pull and tug us away from the new direction God is leading us. -- Regarding the slaughter of the Baal prophets, I'm not concerned with the morality of slaughter in the OT, NT and prophetic literature including Revelation, but rather with our unwillingness to confront evil today. Ceding truth to "multiculturalism" was never recommended in the Bible. Obviously, the God of the OT is the same God as in the NT -- has He changed? Is His anger at contemporary Baal prophets in leadership any less now than it was then? In my wee opinion, we are too deferential to current political sensibilities. Furthermore, it is wrong to think that Jesus' pacifism is the "new" standard of behaviour while jettisoning the "old standard" which was the righteous slaughter of the Baal priests who led an entire nation astray. Perhaps God would be as angry today as He was in the time of Elijah about leaders, both political and religious, who destroyed communities and individuals and led people into apostacy. Is it possible that His solution -- the extermination of evil leaders -- could be His command in the future? Perhaps His command to murder the evil prophets should not be thought of as "extreme." It grieves my soul to imagine God changing His standard of righteousness as well as His way of dealing with unrighteousness because of prevailing cultural norms and our current deference to "multi-culturalism" which is nothing more than coerced religious syncretism. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.” Romans 1.8

Any believer who sees the moral decline in once-Christian societies or is active politically will strongly desire revival. Repentance and revival are generally simultaneous. Then, restoration. So, it makes sense that Elijah intuited that "turning hearts back" or repentance, would either be simultaneous or precede his calling which was to trigger a revival among apostate Israelites. Like Elijah, John the Baptist told people to turn from their sins and be baptized. This was in preparation for the coming of the Messiah, which he also preached. Matthew, the gospel, explicitly equates John the Baptist and Elijah going as far as to hint that John was the reappearance of Elijah. Turning hearts back (or for the first time) to the Lord, is not only an important ministry, it is THE ministry to which we are called. Evangelism is the good news. The Great Commission is ours to fulfill. Witnessing and evangelizing are not optional behaviours, but the central focus of our Christian life. I think of revival as a large scale evangelization which occurs when the spirit moves in mightier ways than normal among populations that have either backslidden or have never known Him.

The rebuilding of the altar reminds me of other destroyed and rebuilt buildings and places, the symbolism of which is huge to people. Right now, Notre Dame is almost rebuilt after being burned in suspicious circumstances. The people are mostly secular. Perhaps the restoration of the cathedral will rekindle the flames in their heritage Christian faith. It must have been a poignant moment when Elijah took twelve stones to rebuild, slowly, the altar with the help of other men. It represented, like Notre Dame, the rebuilding of faith, the restoration of what was and should be. I thought a lot about rebuilding in my worship practice and am unsure of how to answer this question.

I run up against syncretistic attitudes every single day as I'm surrounded by unbelievers in daily life, readings and activities. It is very helpful to be reminded that SPIRITUAL NEUTRALITY IS IMPOSSIBLE. Yes. Yes. Yes. This is so true. The supposed neutrality I often encounter, which is a form of syncretism, is agnosticism. Agnostics like to think they've found a midway position between atheism and belief. It's easy to be an agnostic, I tell my agnostic friends, family and acquaintances, because it shuts down the mind -- at least atheism takes intellectual heft to defend. But since most people aren't up to arguing for unbelief, they hide in the weeds of agnosticism. Atheism invites debate: Agnosticism ends conversation. Most agnostics claim they don't like contentious conversations that "go nowhere" but would rather be "polite" and "just get along." And so, the agnostic evades talking about the true God. I often write about the religion of Secularism because it exposes the non-neutrality of which Pastor Ralph describes. Secularists squirm when I use this phrase. They say that the fact that they don't believe in God is proof they're not religious. But as Christians, we know that neutrality isn't possible, that it's Baal or God, as in Eiljah's case ... there's no fence-sitting. I never accuse Secularists of being Satanists, but merely point out that the idea of being a-religious is logically untenable, that everyone has a religion or religious-like way of looking at the world and theirs is the religion of Secularism whether they want to admit it or not. I also capitalize Secular so Secularism is seen as equivalent to other religions such as Hinduism which is also capitalized.

These passages speak to my heart. The long wait ... God's silence for several years ... provision without contentment ... and then, finally, it ends. May it be so, Lord. Obadiah is a complex man, seemingly brave and faithful but still distrusting and fearful. Perhaps he's like all of us. I admire his behind-the-scenes undermining of Jezebel's desire to supplant Yahweh with Baal. Hiding 100 "enemies of the state" required ingenuity and conniving. And risk. He would have died if his plot was discovered. Among other things, I think this pericope teaches us to foster good even when the government is evil, and part of this fostering may mean actively undermining powerful leaders and their policies. I pray to do this. Soon. May I be brave, Lord. My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.'