“Then Moses said to the entire Israelite community, “This is what the Lord has commanded: Take up an offering among you for the Lord. Let everyone whose heart is willing bring this as the Lord’s offering. . .Then the entire Israelite community left Moses’s presence. Everyone whose heart was moved and whose spirit prompted him came and brought an offering to the Lord for the work on the tent of meeting, for all its services, and for the holy garments. . .So the Israelites brought a freewill offering to the Lord, all the men and women whose hearts prompted them to bring something for all the work that the Lord, through Moses, had commanded to be done.” (CSB – Read the chapter)
How is God’s work accomplished? The answer is in all kinds of ways, but there are two basic categories into which all of these different ways can be sorted. The first category is when God does His own work by Himself. Creation would be an example of this kind of work. No one helped Him with that. It was all God from start to finish. Salvation also falls into this category. The second category is when God does His work through us. This is a much larger category because it’s how God usually works. We see this kind of work happening as Moses finally calls the people to begin the actual construction of the tabernacle. Let’s explore what’s going on here.
Before we jump into the text, I wanted to include a quick housekeeping note. We are entering into the final stretch of the Exodus narrative. This last part is going to have lots and lots of repetition of what we talked through in detail earlier in the journey. From about the halfway point of chapter 36 through nearly the end of chapter 39, we read about how the Israelites built all the various parts and pieces of the tabernacle under the leadership of the two main artisans God raised up for this purpose. The text is an almost word-for-word repetition of the instructions God gave to Moses. As a result, we aren’t going to cover every word like we have been doing. Instead, we’ll treat the whole thing in summary fashion with a set of links back to where we talk about the parts and pieces over the summer. I’ll also include links to the whole text so you can read it for yourselves. All of that being said, let’s get to the text for today.
If you’ll notice, we skipped a big block of text here. While you can click through the link up there to read it for yourself (something I always encourage you to do), what we missed was the list of materials God invited the people to give so they could build the tabernacle. Then God lists out all the various parts and pieces of the tabernacle that the people were to build from the tent and its covering to the holy garments for the priests. In short, they were to build all the things God had commanded them to build. Or, more simply, they were to do what He had told them to do.
Thinking about that, why didn’t God just do all of this for the people? He could have just plopped the tabernacle down in the middle of the camp for them. At the very least, He could have dropped all the resources in the people’s laps so they didn’t have to give from their own stuff to make the project possible. Why call the people to do what He could have just done for them?
The reason is fairly simple: God isn’t interested in automatons who mindlessly do what He says. If He had wanted that, He wouldn’t have created us with the ability to make meaningful and consequential (i.e., free) choices. He doesn’t want robots, He wants sons and daughters who are invested freely and fully in a loving relationship with Him. Because of this, God rarely does His work without inviting us to be involved in it. And while there are occasionally choices that are so important for us to make that He spells out the terrible consequences of making the wrong one as clearly and graphically as He can, for the most part, He simply extends an invitation and leaves it up to us to decide what we are going to do with it.
We see that here in this very text with the three-fold repetition of the idea that the people were invited to give freely and willingly. “Let everyone whose heart is willing bring this as the Lord’s offering.” “Everyone whose heart was moved and whose spirit prompted him came and brought an offering to the Lord.” “So the Israelites brought a freewill offering to the Lord, all the men and women whose hearts prompted them to bring something.” No one was forced to participate in this. Now, perhaps there was cultural or peer pressure if “everyone” was doing it, but that’s different than divine goading. The people freely decided to join in the work God was doing among them. And, as we’ll see later on in the text, they went above and beyond in their excitement to be a part of His work.
God rarely does His work without involving us in it. He does this because, again, He’s more interested in a relationship than a project. When we get to be active participants in what He is doing in His world, we experience the joy that does not come by other means. God invites us to do something that is bigger than we think we can manage on our own, and then helps us to do even more than we thought was possible.
Spend much time talking with churches in various places, and you’ll soon discover one story after another of how the people felt like God was calling them into one project or another, they contributed what they could – which wasn’t enough to actually get whatever it was done – covered the whole thing with prayer, and then in ways they didn’t expect and couldn’t fully explain beyond God’s provision using means that only He could have accessed, they wound up with all they needed and more to do whatever it was. Indeed, the combination of God’s power and our willingness to be faithful and obedient stewards of what He has given us is awfully powerful.
I just heard the story the other night of a church who was invited to pray for an unreached people group that at the time (the late 1980s) was part of the Soviet bloc. This nation was entirely behind the Iron Curtain and they were not going to be able to send anyone to do any kind of a Gospel-advancing work among that people. They were stuck “merely” praying for them. So, the church committed to doing that. And wouldn’t you know it, two years later, the Soviet Empire collapsed, the Iron Curtain came down, and they were able to start sending missionaries.
They didn’t just send preachers, though. They sent medical personnel to offer free medical services that were once unobtainable for most people because of the incompetence of Soviet communist governance. When these doctors and nurses were asked why they would come and do this, they explained that Jesus had told them to love their neighbors as themselves, and that He made clear that everyone in the world is a neighbor, so here they were. The church sent successful businessmen and businesswomen to teach the people there how to start and run their own businesses as communism had never encouraged such a thing. And, when asked, they explained that Jesus loved them and gave His life up for them, and as a result, they could give of their time to go help a people trying to learn how to live with freedom for the first time in more than a generation how to do that wisely and well.
God was doing a work among this people, but He did it through the faithful labors of this particular church. Now there is a still small, but growing church movement in this nation that is confessionally mostly Muslim, but is functionally agnostic. God’s work, our involvement.
In this same kind of way, God still calls and invites us to be active participants in the expansion of His kingdom today. These invitations come in all sorts of different ways. It may be a nagging sense that you need to go have a conversation with someone you haven’t talked to in a while. It could be learning that a friend has fallen on hard times and is struggling financially. Maybe a neighbor has recently had a baby, and a meal she doesn’t have to cook would be an enormous gift. Perhaps your church is going through a building project and you have the chance to be a part of the action financially. Your state could have been recently hit by a devastating hurricane, and the relief efforts will be ongoing for some time. I just learned yesterday that you are statistically more likely to meet an evangelical Christian in India than you are in New England. I’m not yet sure what to do with that, but the fact hasn’t left my mind.
God does all of His best work through the faithfulness of His people. When you step up to respond with faithfulness to the call He has put on your heart and mind, you will be a part of that best work. And when you do, you will most certainly be glad that you did.
The Nexus 
I wonder why every single individual I have ever interacted with or read who deconverted, including a fair number of former professional pastors and ministers from various Christian sects, consider this type of stuff complete and utter drivel?
Also, not one I am aware of has asserted their lives were not far better since rejecting faith based nonsense, and although reality can sometimes be tough without the insular support from their old church they would rather face life head on and deal with fact and truth than the lies and crippling guilt oriented garbage promoted by religion.
Makes you think, does it not?
LikeLike
Not particularly. If they still considered “this type of stuff” worthwhile, they probably wouldn’t have walked away from their faith.
That being said, if they were in a church community that kept them saddled with “crippling guilt oriented garbage,” that was probably a church I would want to leave too. Lots of “former believers” weren’t really followers of Jesus at all. They were bought into false versions of Christianity that were stifling legalistic and ridiculously literalistic in their approach to the Scriptures.
Those churches become a caricature of the actual Christian faith and deserve to be rejected. Unfortunately, their deconverts reject the real thing without realizing that they’re really rejecting a fake and haven’t ever experienced the real thing. There is often and unfortunately a great difference between what a religion actually teaches and how its professed followers practice it. In rejecting what ought to be rejected, too many folks throw the baby out with the bathwater.
LikeLike
The reason they walked away was Because it wasn’t worthwhile. Which is why they regard it as drivel. I thought that point was obvious?
The Not really Christian at All trope is such an arrogant and highly offensive term.Nit to me of course, but certainly to those who walked. Many of them having dedicated a fair portion of their life to your god Yahweh, including missionary work.
To label these people not really Christians is simply disgusting.
Almost every sect of Christianity at some level considers all the others a false version of Christianity, and at the extremes of this consider such people, fellow Christians, are doomed to eternity in Hell!
You for example are a Trinitarian, a completely church constructed doctrine yet I have read a number of Trinitarians assert non Trinitarians such as the Christadelphians are not really Christian.
You for example, reject scientific evidence for any number of refuted bible tales, which is an example of hypocrisy, and you even believe in demons, which is not only risible in the extreme in this day and age, but potentially dangerous from a diagnostic point of view.
In truth the evidence reveals that it is all bathwater.
Furthermore, your continual refusal to honestly engage on crucial aspects of your faith based beliefs – consider how many topics you simply do not properly address – are, in part, a perfect example why so many people wake up to reality and walk away.
LikeLike
I’m not sure there’s a way to put this non-offensively, but I don’t mean it that was. You don’t believe any of it in the first place, so, honestly, your thoughts on these particular questions are entirely irrelevant to me. Once you have a dog in the fight, then you can comment meaningfully on in-house debates.
LikeLike
You see what I mean by not addressing the issues?
No dog in the fight?
Oh, really?
🤣🤣🤣
Christianity and religion in general affects a wide range of issues and to simply brush my comment off because I am an atheist is yet another example of the arrogance you display when trying to defend your rather revolting religion, especially as I am one of those you consider are doomed to spend eternity being tortured in Hell.
While I would simply laugh in your face at such stupidity, that you indoctrinate this tripe into kids is tantamount to child abuse, Jonathan. For this alone you should be deeply ashamed.
There are numerous examples of those who deconverted who still have trouble dealing with this specific dogma.
And this display of yours adds yet another dimension to the argument for rejecting your faith based worldview.
Maybe if you showed even the merest humility and integrity over these matters your stock might rise a few points.
As it is, (not that you care one iota, I’m sure) your constant displays of hubris and hypocrisy illustrate more eloquently than I ever could why so many show Christianity the middle finger and embrace fact, truth, honesty and reality.
Something the vast majority of the Christian religion is yet to acknowledge.
LikeLike
There’s that accusation of child abuse again. You hadn’t made it for a while. I was starting to wonder what was wrong. Just when we start to get into what could potentially be a constructive and worthwhile series of conversations, you go and do something like that to remind me that, no, yours is not criticism I need to take seriously. I’d be tempted to be offended by it if it weren’t so laughably absurd.
Oh well, we’ll keep going back and forth, I suppose, because you’ve taken such an active interest in my blog. I really do appreciate that much, though, by the way, as frustrating as it occasionally is. Your constant engagement has likely been a factor in triggering what WordPress’s algorithm is such that by the end of the year, the traffic I have seen this year will be four times what it was last year. I tip my hat in gratitude to you, Sir.
LikeLike
As several of those whom have deconverted who I chat with here in blogland have actively condemned it as child abuse, one lady still receives therapy, and some have gone on to express how deeply they regret inflicting it on their own children, two fathers I could point you to, I am very interested to know on what basis you consider indoctrinating young children with this ridiculous notion of Hell is not child abuse?
And bear in mind the accusation of not addressing issues.
LikeLike
To once again use the illustration I used quite some time ago, your whole perspective of Christianity is rooted in the 1-star reviews of a tiny minority of customers. It would be like if I found one person who had a negative experience with your shop in spite of 99 others having a tremendous experience, and deciding on the basis of that one negative review that your business must really be awful. You have a fully caricatured view of what genuine, Gospel-rooted Christianity is like, and can’t imagine that it’s not like that. And, from the evidence of our conversations, you won’t be persuaded that your view might not be fully reflective of the reality of the thing. Given all of that, why try very hard to substantively engage with you on any issues?
LikeLike
See, once again you equivocate and simply refuse to engage the subject.
Let me point out it was YOU that picked up on the single issue of child abuse.
When I called you on it you now ignore my request to show why indoctrinating children with the notion of Hell should not be regarded as child abuse.
And I presume as a Baptist your kids are fully on board with Hell, yes?
So, let’s try again, why should indoctrinating children with the notion of spending an eternity being tortured in Hell not be regarded as child abuse? Especially in light of the fact there is no evidence for this.
The floor is yours.
Away you go.
LikeLike
Your whole premise here is absurd, and I’m just not going to engage you on it.
LikeLike
What about my premise is absurd, for goodness’ sake?
Baptists are fully on board with the notion of Hell and preach that all non-believers will be punished by being sent there for eternity, no reprieve.
So, how can indoctrinating small children with the belief, either tacitly or overtly, that they will be sent to Hell once they die if they do not accept Jesus of Nazareth as their savior NOT be regarded as child abuse?
Surely you have been asked and obliged to address this question before, even from your own kids?
Please don’t balk now. You plainly disagree. Address the issue and correct what you obviously consider to be a caricature and /misunderstanding.
Over to you, Jonathan.
LikeLike
Nope. You reject the starting point. Nothing else from that point forward will make sense to you. And the evidence bears this out rather thunderously. All past attempts to walk through nuanced theological issues have been uniformly wastes of time. I’m not going to give any more of it to this round.
LikeLike
This isn’t the issue. Everyone I have raised the topic of Hell with who has deconverted have considered this is a form of child abuse.
Therefore, whether I agree with this position is not the point. I have a surly no belief in Hell yet you Re firmly convinced that, as things stand this is where I am destined to spend eternity. You fully accept it just as I fully accept evolution and there are any number of apologists who will argue evolution is false just as William Lane Craig defends to the hilt the doctrine of Divine Command Theory.
So I am asking you to lay out the reasons to demonstrate why indoctrinating children who fail to accept the premise that Jesus is their savior will result in them being sent to Hell for eternity and why this should not be considered a form of child abuse?
LikeLike
Once again: your perspective on these matters is doubly skewed. It’s skewed by your foundational unbelief. That renders your ability to engage productively on the entire question impossible. I’ve explained that multiple times before. It is also skewed by the fact that your view has been so profoundly shaped by deconversion stories which are pretty unfailingly awful. And indeed, to leave behind an entire worldview framework doesn’t happen because everything is okay. Until you are willing to acknowledge your obvious and inherent bias on these kinds of questions, productive conversation really isn’t going to be possible.
That being said, it’s not a form of child abuse because it’s true and teaching children things that are true is not an inherently abusive act. True things can, of course, be taught in abusive ways, but that is the fault of the one doing the teaching so badly and not of the things that are being taught. The problem then is not with the information, but the presentation.
LikeLike
Your first error is assuming this is solely based on MY “skewed perspective” quite forgetting that this perspectives is shared by those who deconverted that I have raised the issues with.
And ftr, they were all on board with the first premise. This seems such a basic thing to have to remind you of I wonder of you actually pay attention to what I write before the mental shutters slam shut.
I never left behind anything as I was never in in the first place.
I look at it purely from a neural or atheist position base on lack of evidence and the effect / damage it does. And this perspective is backed up by those who were subjected to this vile doctrine.
Even if you could demonstrate the doctrine is true it is still heinous.
As you cannot it then becomes doubly so, especially as it is not teaching but most definitely indoctrination.
As a father you truly should be ashamed.. Besides, you know this is a church doctrine and the character Jesus of Nazareth never talked or believed in eternal torment, referring to Gehenna.
To teach otherwise is simply lying… And child abuse
LikeLike
I read very carefully, and I meant what I said. Your perspective is like if you went to the line for the infirmary at the local water park, found it filled with people who had been hurt because they didn’t ride the latest slide correctly, and came away with the conclusion that the water slide is the problem even though 98% of the people who rode it didn’t have any issues at all because they followed the instructions correctly. Until you acknowledge this, our continuing to have this conversation is pointless.
Now, allow me a bit of clarity. I’m not saying it was the fault of the folks who have deconverted that they had Christianity wrong in the first place. That almost assuredly wasn’t their fault at all. But it still happened, and their perspective was skewed by it. What they rejected was very likely a false version of the thing that deserved to be rejected.
I didn’t say the doctrine was easy, I simply said that it was true.
I’m still waiting for that shame to settle in. I’ll let you know if it ever arrives. And I do always find it humorous when you tell me what it is I believe and know about Jesus. In the meantime, and to repeat myself from earlier in the day, you have once again demonstrated why taking your arguments seriously is a fool’s errand at best.
LikeLike
Those that deconvert do so because the claims made of Christianity are simply not true. This is why they deconvert. I would have thought this so obvious there was no need to mention it.
One only has to consider a scholar of Ehrman’s standing.
Aside from the fact the character Jesus of Nazareth never taught eternal damnation in Hell there is no evidence of its existence. If anything Jesus taught annhialation. This is, why he mentioned Gehenna.
Surely you are aware the doctrine is a church construct or do you truly not understand the religion you are part of?
Why are you waiting for the shame to settle in? You are indoctrinated so it won’t “settle in.”
I said you Should ( ought to) feel ashamed, not that you would.
That might only happen should you awaken from your delusion and deconvert.
LikeLike
Once again, I find it genuinely hilarious when you tell me what I should think or understand about various matters of Christian doctrine.
The stories of why people walk away from the Christian faith are always more complicated than that. Your bias is showing again.
And that was sarcasm on my part. I thought that was clear.
LikeLike
The reasons people walk away may be underpinned by certain misgivings that caused a lack or loss of trust, but ultimately it is because they have exercised a little critical thinking and realized that the claims they were indoctrinated to accept as gospel (pun intended) are simply not true.
The doctrine of Hell is a good example.
I am not telling you what to think about your doctrine and religion I am simply pointing out the errors in your understanding of it or your blatent wilfull ignorance. Hell being one such example.
Such sentiments are echoed by all those who deconvert, from Pastors to pew warmers.
Go read their testimonies. I have no need to lie about such things. The internet is awash with this stuff and it would be the effort of little more than an hour or so to compile a list that would keep you busy for a considerable length of time.
And you have yet to present any sort of arguement or defense to even suggest that the indoctrination of children with the notion of eternal torment in Hell is anything but child abuse.
Surely as a Pastor you have such a defense down pat?
LikeLike
In 1980 the US Olympic Ice Hockey team played against the Soviet Union team. The US team was made up of amateur players, mostly collegiate hockey players. The Russian team was composed of mostly professional players, some from the NHL. In the last exhibition game between the 2 squads the Russians beat team USA 10-3. The Russians had won 5 of the last 6 gold medals and were heavily favored. You could say there was no way possible the American could stay within 4 goals of the Russian team. Yet they beat them 4-3.
I’ve read that you could not post a wager on that game as the Russians were such heavy favorites no one would be foolish enough to wager on the Americans. It was that much of a slam dunk. My guess is your thoughts about religion are the same. There is no way there is a God. But what if there is? Just curious if there is any time in your life where you were 100% invested in anything, that there was no chance of yourself being wrong, only to find out you were, indeed, stuck with egg on your face. Except in this case it’s not egg on your face but your eternal soul.
Which brings me back to a question I asked you months ago about Pascal’s wager. And you never responded.
What say you about Pascal’s wager?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ah, Mister Meadors.
Wondered when you would turn up. I suppose you have been busy celebrating Trump’s victory?
To your comment….
“There is no way there is a God. But what if there is? Just curious if there is any time in your life where you were 100% invested in anything, that there was no chance of yourself being wrong, only to find out you were, indeed, stuck with egg on your face. Except in this case it’s not egg on your face but your eternal soul.”
I have never said: “There is no way there is a God.”
I always say, no evidence has ever been presented to demonstrate the veracity of the claim gods exist.
And II usually add. If you feel you have evidence then go ahead abd present it. Well, do you?
I am not quite sure I understand the second part of this question.
I am a staunch Liverpool supporter and have been left with egg on my face a number of times when convinced they would win.
Not that often, thank the gods, but it has happened.
Does this count as an example?
Apologies about Pascal’s wager. I genuinely don’t remember.
Ask your question again and I shall endeavor to answer it.
LikeLike
@Thomas.
Sorry, I misread the end of your comment regarding Pascal’s wager.
“What say you about Pascal’s wager?”
Generally I have nothing to say about it, but I sense this is not the reply you are looking for?
You the theist makes the claim your god, Yahweh exists.
I simply fall back on my default response. Present the evidence.
LikeLike