Acts 4:5-12
"I don't feel comfortable talking about God - I just show I'm a Christian by my love." Now, "They'll know we are Christians by our love" is a nice thought; it's a nice song; it's based on a good quotation from John's Gospel. But in John's Gospel it's assumed that the loving people are already identified as possible disciples of Jesus Christ. Their love is the proof that what they say is true; without the words, people will simply identify you as loving, not as Christian.
Our passage today is the continuation of a story where Peter and John heal a lame man. The crowd's first reaction is "Wow, how amazing, look at these guys who healed someone!" If Peter and John had witnessed only by their actions, they would have left the day as heroes. Instead, they decide to open their mouths and speak - they share the good news of Jesus Christ with the gathered crowd. This gets them in trouble with the powers-that-be.
I fear that the mainline church has become much too timid in this area. Fear-mongers, hate-mongers, fire-and-brimstone preachers - they are quite happy to claim the name of Jesus as they carry out their work. But how many churches today are willing to associate Jesus with the good work that they do? In the name of avoiding being offensive, we have too often stopped using the name of Jesus, the chief Cornerstone - and stumbling block. Jesus has always caused offense to some; it can't be avoided if we are to truly follow Christ.
Happily, there are exceptions. Sojourners is a group of both "evangelical" and "mainline" Christians who pursue social justice under Jesus' banner. Here in Mount Pleasant, a chapter of "Love INC" - Love In the Name of Christ - is starting up, providing accountable social services through local churches. It can be done.
St. Francis said "Preach the gospel at all times and, when necessary, use words." He did most of his work in central Italy, in a Christian Empire. Most of the people he met knew the Gospel - and St. Francis used a lot of words. We live in a world where many people know a caricature of the Gospel but few know actual Good News. Preach the gospel at all times, through your work and through your words!
Miscellaneous meanderings:
Is there a difference between people taking offense at Jesus and people taking offense at us? For example: I would not preach as Peter does in verse 12, "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved." I believe this is true in one sense: I think salvation is possible because of Jesus' action. But I don't think that all Muslims are going to hell, or that there is nothing salvific in Buddhism. Jesus Christ can work in many ways and places. You don't need to know the name of a road in order to travel on it.
Ideas like sin, grace, and dependence on God are central to the Gospel, and they are offensive to some. Exclusion is antithetical to the Gospel, but is primarily what folk today will hear from verse 12. When I preach an inclusive Gospel, inviting dialogue with non-Christians, am I authentically translating the New Testament into today's culture? Or am I being wishy-washy?
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Good Shepherds
John 10:11-18
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand, who is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away—and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. The hired hand runs away because a hired hand does not care for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.”
Thank God for George Herbert Walker Bush. And Bill Clinton. And Barack Obama.
OK, so there's a name suspiciously absent there... I found the 8 years under George W. Bush exceedingly painful, because I didn't think he was a good shepherd. He might have been - it's not my desire to start a debate on this topic on this blog - but I didn't perceive him as one. I didn't think he cared about me one whit, and he definitely seemed to be controlled by people who only cared about ideologies and domination. Although I cried with tears of joy and eight years of released tension when Obama won, I think McCain too would have been a good shepherd, he would have laid down his life for his sheep.
Jesus didn't have to die on a cross at the hands of Rome. He could have easily been more popular, he could have easily offended fewer people in power. He could have told the oppressed people to submit to their oppression and wait patiently for death - a message frequently enough told in Scripture and by the church, and very much appreciated by those in charge. Or he could have joined the zealots and fought gloriously for control of Jerusalem.
But he chose to proclaim a message that was bound to end in his death. Of first importance, life is about loving God and neighbor - not necessarily a dangerous message, but it certainly was in Jesus' hands, because Jesus' God insisted on justice and real love for all people. Poverty and sickness are not punishments by God, but are part of this world; wealth is meant to be shared, not acquired; it's hard for the rich to be part of God's kingdom; rules - even the Sabbath! - are meant for humans, not humans for rules; oppression need not be submitted to, but can be fought with subversive love rather than violence. This kind of teaching got people crucified in Jesus' day.
I want good shepherds, leaders who will give up their lives for me. As a post-Nixonian American, I don't really want to follow them, I don't want to be a sheep... they do their job (trying to take care of us) and we do ours. We have the same option with Jesus - we can let Jesus "take care of us" on the cross, and ignore what he says. And if that's all the care we want, perhaps it even "works" - I'm convinced that God forgives sinners, even in the midst of their sin. But gaining the full benefit of a shepherd requires the sheep to follow. And unlike a good president, Jesus can be trusted - not only to try, but to succeed in leading us well. To what extent are we willing to follow his lead? Could it be that Jesus will lead us to greener pastures?
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand, who is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away—and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. The hired hand runs away because a hired hand does not care for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.”
Thank God for George Herbert Walker Bush. And Bill Clinton. And Barack Obama.
OK, so there's a name suspiciously absent there... I found the 8 years under George W. Bush exceedingly painful, because I didn't think he was a good shepherd. He might have been - it's not my desire to start a debate on this topic on this blog - but I didn't perceive him as one. I didn't think he cared about me one whit, and he definitely seemed to be controlled by people who only cared about ideologies and domination. Although I cried with tears of joy and eight years of released tension when Obama won, I think McCain too would have been a good shepherd, he would have laid down his life for his sheep.
Jesus didn't have to die on a cross at the hands of Rome. He could have easily been more popular, he could have easily offended fewer people in power. He could have told the oppressed people to submit to their oppression and wait patiently for death - a message frequently enough told in Scripture and by the church, and very much appreciated by those in charge. Or he could have joined the zealots and fought gloriously for control of Jerusalem.
But he chose to proclaim a message that was bound to end in his death. Of first importance, life is about loving God and neighbor - not necessarily a dangerous message, but it certainly was in Jesus' hands, because Jesus' God insisted on justice and real love for all people. Poverty and sickness are not punishments by God, but are part of this world; wealth is meant to be shared, not acquired; it's hard for the rich to be part of God's kingdom; rules - even the Sabbath! - are meant for humans, not humans for rules; oppression need not be submitted to, but can be fought with subversive love rather than violence. This kind of teaching got people crucified in Jesus' day.
I want good shepherds, leaders who will give up their lives for me. As a post-Nixonian American, I don't really want to follow them, I don't want to be a sheep... they do their job (trying to take care of us) and we do ours. We have the same option with Jesus - we can let Jesus "take care of us" on the cross, and ignore what he says. And if that's all the care we want, perhaps it even "works" - I'm convinced that God forgives sinners, even in the midst of their sin. But gaining the full benefit of a shepherd requires the sheep to follow. And unlike a good president, Jesus can be trusted - not only to try, but to succeed in leading us well. To what extent are we willing to follow his lead? Could it be that Jesus will lead us to greener pastures?
Miscellaneous meanderings
The 4th Sunday of Easter is "Good Shepherd Sunday" each year, with a reading from John 10. The leader as "shepherd" is a common metaphor in the prophets; natural readings for this Sunday would be Jeremiah 23 or Ezekiel 34 (which should be read if you want to understand John 10), but during the Easter season the lectionary has readings from Acts (continuing the "history of Israel" in the history of the church) rather than the Hebrew scriptures.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
In the presence of my enemies
Psalm 23
The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures; he leads me beside still waters;
he restores my soul. He leads me in right paths for his name’s sake.
Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I fear no evil; for you are with me; your rod and your staff— they comfort me.
You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord my whole life long.
I have a love/hate relationship with Psalm 23.
Just once, I want to be at a funeral where we don't read the 23rd Psalm. I've asked my wife to avoid it at my funeral, in case it doesn't happen before then. I suspect that the reason people have it at funerals is because (a) they know everyone has it at funerals, (b) it talks about the "valley of the shadow of death", and (c) it ends with "I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever."
But (c) is almost certainly a bad translation (compare the New Revised Standard Version above). And I'm not fond of "I shall not want," for there are many who have the Lord as their shepherd and are in need. The belief that God's people always have what they need - while true at one level, assuming God can heal anything in the next life - has led some otherwise intelligent and educated Christians to assume that starving to death is not really an issue for good Christians. I especially remember a farmer in her 60s who said "I've lost my faith" one year during a drought, because she didn't see how God could do this to her. I was stunned that anyone - let alone a farmer! - could get into their 60s and think that life would always go well for them.
So I'm not overly fond of some common uses of this Psalm.
On the other hand...
The Lord is my shepherd, and I do believe God is always and everywhere caring for me. And - though I often do fear evil - I believe there is no real need for me to do so, that God will someday prevail.
And God prepares a table for me in the presence of my enemies. Week after week, I approach the table, in the presence of all of God's people. The ones who love me, and the ones who despise me. The ones who give me gifts, and the ones who kick me when I'm down. The ones who understand depression as I do, and those who think it's God's way of taking me down a few notches. And I and my enemies eat together, for it is one table, whether we recognize it or not. We pledge to be at peace with one another, whether we mean it or not. And God forgives us.
The peace of Christ be with you!
The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures; he leads me beside still waters;
he restores my soul. He leads me in right paths for his name’s sake.
Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I fear no evil; for you are with me; your rod and your staff— they comfort me.
You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord my whole life long.
I have a love/hate relationship with Psalm 23.
Just once, I want to be at a funeral where we don't read the 23rd Psalm. I've asked my wife to avoid it at my funeral, in case it doesn't happen before then. I suspect that the reason people have it at funerals is because (a) they know everyone has it at funerals, (b) it talks about the "valley of the shadow of death", and (c) it ends with "I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever."
But (c) is almost certainly a bad translation (compare the New Revised Standard Version above). And I'm not fond of "I shall not want," for there are many who have the Lord as their shepherd and are in need. The belief that God's people always have what they need - while true at one level, assuming God can heal anything in the next life - has led some otherwise intelligent and educated Christians to assume that starving to death is not really an issue for good Christians. I especially remember a farmer in her 60s who said "I've lost my faith" one year during a drought, because she didn't see how God could do this to her. I was stunned that anyone - let alone a farmer! - could get into their 60s and think that life would always go well for them.
So I'm not overly fond of some common uses of this Psalm.
On the other hand...
The Lord is my shepherd, and I do believe God is always and everywhere caring for me. And - though I often do fear evil - I believe there is no real need for me to do so, that God will someday prevail.
And God prepares a table for me in the presence of my enemies. Week after week, I approach the table, in the presence of all of God's people. The ones who love me, and the ones who despise me. The ones who give me gifts, and the ones who kick me when I'm down. The ones who understand depression as I do, and those who think it's God's way of taking me down a few notches. And I and my enemies eat together, for it is one table, whether we recognize it or not. We pledge to be at peace with one another, whether we mean it or not. And God forgives us.
The peace of Christ be with you!
Hello again
Clearly, this hasn't become a habit. And there's no great demand for it right now, as I'm not preaching Sunday mornings these days... but I shall endeavor to make it a habit well before this fall when Sunday preaching returns!
So thanks to those of you who check this out. Hopefully we'll learn something useful this summer.
So thanks to those of you who check this out. Hopefully we'll learn something useful this summer.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Living in unity
Psalm 133
Our culture thrives on conflict. Unity may be good and pleasant, but it doesn't sell...
Yesterday I went to hear Michael Venyah of Soulwinners as he proclaimed a "gospel" of perfection, claiming that true Christians do not sin. He told us in no uncertain terms that Catholics, smokers, and countless other groups were all marching straight to Hell. It was not a very winning speech.
But I found Michael sincere. I had been told that he rants and yells at passersby. I didn't see this at all - he certainly speaks clearly and with volume, but what does one expect from an outdoor unamplified speaker? In contrast, his audience was quite happy to yell at him, tease him, make fun of him, and smoke in his face. He simply continued with his message, answering questions when he could and ignoring the ridicule.
Michael was one of a team, and when he took a break I stepped aside to talk with him. He was friendly and polite. He noted I was a United Methodist clergy, and discussed Wesley with me. We shared our different understandings of Christian perfection, and although it was clear that neither of us were likely to change our minds, Michael seemed honestly interested in what I had to say about Wesley. I said early in the conversation that I sin and so was going to hell by his standards, but did not believe that myself; he was quite willing to converse with me on that basis without trying to convert me further. How good and pleasant it is when kindred live together in unity - even when one of them doesn't recognize the kinship!
I think Michael's understanding of sin and perfection is thoroughly mistaken. His approach to "soul-winning" is not winning many souls, and I fear he is setting himself and his followers up for great disappointment and, quite possibly, great hypocrisy. I also think he loves God and loves people, and is doing his best to save them from damnation. I hope he keeps on talking - and that some people who disagree with him take the time to get to know him instead of simply debating.
Our culture thrives on conflict. Unity may be good and pleasant, but it doesn't sell...
Yesterday I went to hear Michael Venyah of Soulwinners as he proclaimed a "gospel" of perfection, claiming that true Christians do not sin. He told us in no uncertain terms that Catholics, smokers, and countless other groups were all marching straight to Hell. It was not a very winning speech.
But I found Michael sincere. I had been told that he rants and yells at passersby. I didn't see this at all - he certainly speaks clearly and with volume, but what does one expect from an outdoor unamplified speaker? In contrast, his audience was quite happy to yell at him, tease him, make fun of him, and smoke in his face. He simply continued with his message, answering questions when he could and ignoring the ridicule.
Michael was one of a team, and when he took a break I stepped aside to talk with him. He was friendly and polite. He noted I was a United Methodist clergy, and discussed Wesley with me. We shared our different understandings of Christian perfection, and although it was clear that neither of us were likely to change our minds, Michael seemed honestly interested in what I had to say about Wesley. I said early in the conversation that I sin and so was going to hell by his standards, but did not believe that myself; he was quite willing to converse with me on that basis without trying to convert me further. How good and pleasant it is when kindred live together in unity - even when one of them doesn't recognize the kinship!
I think Michael's understanding of sin and perfection is thoroughly mistaken. His approach to "soul-winning" is not winning many souls, and I fear he is setting himself and his followers up for great disappointment and, quite possibly, great hypocrisy. I also think he loves God and loves people, and is doing his best to save them from damnation. I hope he keeps on talking - and that some people who disagree with him take the time to get to know him instead of simply debating.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves
1 John 1:1-2:2
A student came to the office last night and pleaded with me to provide an alternative to the current preacher from "Soulwinners," an itinerant preaching group visiting campus this week. Soulwinners insists that true Christians do not sin - reminds me of the early John Wesley! Allegedly, their soul winning style consists of yelling at students nearby that anyone who is still sinning has not truly repented and will burn in hell. They claim that the majority of the church is a deceiving and damned body that has lost the true Gospel.
I haven't yet heard them preach - but if Scripture is the infallible literal verbally inspired word of God, their interpretation makes sense to me*. There are plenty of Scriptures that insist that we are judged by our works and that those who know God do not sin. When asked "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus effectively says "Keep the commandments - oh, and here's some more." John and Jesus' clarion call is "Repent" - which means "Turn around", not sit around feeling bad about your sins. If this all seems horribly different from the Gospel, try reading Wesley's "The Almost Christian".
But what if the bible contains arguments within itself? Or some writers like to use metaphor and dialectically opposed statements? What if it's actually a good read instead of a philosopher's manual?
Read 1 John (and John, and 2-3 John) looking always and everywhere for metaphor, symbol, and opposite extremes. John doesn't just paint in black and white; he paints in darkness and light, night and day, hate and love, hell and heaven. At times you feel that there's no hope for any of us, that we all clearly live in the dark. And at other times, all of creation is gathered together in God's warm embrace. Avoid the temptation to choose one or the other as "the Truth" - allow God to speak to you as you read.
I'm going to go hear the "Soul winner" today and will update you later in the week!
*If Scripture is the infallible literal verbally inspired word of God, then almost any interpretation makes sense to me. I see arguments all over the place, and as any mathematician will tell you, once you have "one equals zero" you can prove whatever you want.
A student came to the office last night and pleaded with me to provide an alternative to the current preacher from "Soulwinners," an itinerant preaching group visiting campus this week. Soulwinners insists that true Christians do not sin - reminds me of the early John Wesley! Allegedly, their soul winning style consists of yelling at students nearby that anyone who is still sinning has not truly repented and will burn in hell. They claim that the majority of the church is a deceiving and damned body that has lost the true Gospel.
I haven't yet heard them preach - but if Scripture is the infallible literal verbally inspired word of God, their interpretation makes sense to me*. There are plenty of Scriptures that insist that we are judged by our works and that those who know God do not sin. When asked "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus effectively says "Keep the commandments - oh, and here's some more." John and Jesus' clarion call is "Repent" - which means "Turn around", not sit around feeling bad about your sins. If this all seems horribly different from the Gospel, try reading Wesley's "The Almost Christian".
But what if the bible contains arguments within itself? Or some writers like to use metaphor and dialectically opposed statements? What if it's actually a good read instead of a philosopher's manual?
Read 1 John (and John, and 2-3 John) looking always and everywhere for metaphor, symbol, and opposite extremes. John doesn't just paint in black and white; he paints in darkness and light, night and day, hate and love, hell and heaven. At times you feel that there's no hope for any of us, that we all clearly live in the dark. And at other times, all of creation is gathered together in God's warm embrace. Avoid the temptation to choose one or the other as "the Truth" - allow God to speak to you as you read.
I'm going to go hear the "Soul winner" today and will update you later in the week!
*If Scripture is the infallible literal verbally inspired word of God, then almost any interpretation makes sense to me. I see arguments all over the place, and as any mathematician will tell you, once you have "one equals zero" you can prove whatever you want.
Friday, April 10, 2009
They said nothing to anyone...
Mark 16:1-8
16When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. 2And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. 3They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” 4When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed. 6But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” 8So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.
This is (usually) my favorite version of the empty tomb. It has fewer frills than the others - no glorious beings, no earthquakes, just a young man in a white robe (cf Mk 14:51?) telling the women "Christ is risen!" In this version, it's left up to us* - is Christ raised, or has someone stolen the body? Like the women, we are left with the decision: what will we do with this crazy information? I'm pretty sure that my first response would have been the same as theirs, saying nothing to anyone...
Do you believe Jesus was raised from the dead? If so, why? And (assuming you're like most Christians) are you still afraid, or will you someday say something about it to somebody?
Miscellaneous meanderings
*Many scholars believe that the original version of Mark ended with verse 8. The vast majority view verses 9 and following as not the original ending (there are 3 different versions found in the earliest manuscripts, and none of them are very much like the rest of Mark). It's also possible that there was more of the original and it was lost (by the scroll being torn). But ending in verse 8 leaves the book asking the question that it does throughout: what are you going to do with this message?
"...the disciples and Peter..." - not meaning Peter wasn't a disciple, but presumably referring to Peter's denial of Christ and making sure Peter knew he was still invited. God won't turn you away, regardless of what you do to God...
16When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. 2And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. 3They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” 4When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed. 6But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” 8So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.
This is (usually) my favorite version of the empty tomb. It has fewer frills than the others - no glorious beings, no earthquakes, just a young man in a white robe (cf Mk 14:51?) telling the women "Christ is risen!" In this version, it's left up to us* - is Christ raised, or has someone stolen the body? Like the women, we are left with the decision: what will we do with this crazy information? I'm pretty sure that my first response would have been the same as theirs, saying nothing to anyone...
Do you believe Jesus was raised from the dead? If so, why? And (assuming you're like most Christians) are you still afraid, or will you someday say something about it to somebody?
Miscellaneous meanderings
*Many scholars believe that the original version of Mark ended with verse 8. The vast majority view verses 9 and following as not the original ending (there are 3 different versions found in the earliest manuscripts, and none of them are very much like the rest of Mark). It's also possible that there was more of the original and it was lost (by the scroll being torn). But ending in verse 8 leaves the book asking the question that it does throughout: what are you going to do with this message?
"...the disciples and Peter..." - not meaning Peter wasn't a disciple, but presumably referring to Peter's denial of Christ and making sure Peter knew he was still invited. God won't turn you away, regardless of what you do to God...
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Of First Importance
1 Corinthians 15:1-11
15Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, 2through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain. 3For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.
What does Paul say is "of first importance"?
Christ died for our sins...
There are myriad understandings of what this means. I take it to mean that Jesus was like a Jewish sacrifice: the power of his life was released at the crucifixion, and this power is available to us to assure of forgiveness, to enable healing and repentance. What does it mean to you?
...in accordance with the Scriptures...
The early church found Jesus everywhere in the Jewish Scripture, using their method of interpretation. Many in our day continue to do the same - many do not! One of the largest intellectual splits in the U.S. church involves whether one accepts modern advances in literature as applying to the Bible. The methods used in the first century were highly selective and subjective - using them, you can find pretty much whatever you want in Scripture. (One simple example of first century interpretation can be found in Matthew's use of Isaiah 7:14 - see http://fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/Documents/adventa.htm#Advent4 for details.)
I certainly don't see Jesus death (and resurrection) "foretold" in the Scriptures (and yes, I'm quite aware of the myriad prophecies that are claimed to fortell Jesus). I do see Jesus as being both in continuity with and in opposition to the Jewish tradition. He quotes the Scriptures often, but very selectively. He's not afraid to say "Moses said... but I say...", nor is he afraid to say that Moses (not God) laid down a law "because of your hardness of heart". Primarily, I understand the meaning of Jesus' death to be very much in accordance with the Jewish understanding of sacrifice, which is markedly different from that of surrounding religions.
"...and that he was buried..."
The early church is quite insistent that Jesus actually died. He didn't just swoon. (Some folk, in an attempt to make the resurrection scientifically palatable, have claimed that Jesus didn't really die - he just fainted or went into a coma, and came out of it early Sunday morning.) If a crucifixion didn't kill you (and a one-afternoon crucifixion was not typically fatal - thus the breaking of the legs, to hasten asphyxiation and death), being wrapped in a shroud so that you couldn't breathe would presumably do the trick.
...and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,
"Christ is risen!" "Christ is risen indeed!" So shall the Church around the world proclaim this Sunday. I agree with Paul that without this belief Christianity is foolishness. Following most of Jesus' teachings could still make sense, but Christianity as a religion is built upon the belief that the spirit of Jesus Christ is available to us here and now as a living presense.
...and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. [and many others]
Those who learn that I take much of the Bible as story that contains truth but does not describe what literally happened (e.g., I don't think Genesis 1 and 2 describe the Big Bang very well, I don't think there was a literal Garden of Eden; I do think the universe is 13.7 billion years old, and that we evolved from other creatures) often claim "then how can you trust the Bible?" My short answer is "I don't, I trust God." But the longer one is: this passage of Scripture was written by a contemporary (Paul). It's, in part, a secondary source - "I handed on to you ... what I had recieved" - but it is very close (within a 20 years) to the events it describes. It's clear that Paul here is not writing metaphorically. That doesn't make what he says true, of course, but to state that one part of Scripture is metaphorical doesn't make the entire collection of books "false".
Paul definitely has an agenda here - he is preparing for the rest of chapter 15, which claims that life after death is not a false hope but is promised by Christ's resurrection. But the rest of his writings make it clear that Jesus' death and resurrection is, indeed, "of first importance" to him. What in Christianity is "of first importance" to you? Have you ever shared it with your Christian friends? How about your non-Christian friends?
Miscellaneous meanderings:
"Cephas" is "rock" in Aramaic; it is, presumably, the name that Jesus gave to Simon, translated as "Peter" (Greek for "rock") in the Gospels. I doubt anyone knows why Paul uses the Aramaic version - perhaps that is the one Peter normally used, and it is translated in the Gospels for the Greek reading audience; perhaps it is a slight dig? Paul accuses Peter of acting like a Judaizer when it's convenient.
Note that "the twelve" are different from "the apostles". The Gospels tend to treat "the twelve" and "the apostles" as the same group, but give them more than 12 names. Tradition says there were twelve, and overlaps the names, but here it seems likely that there were more than 12 apostles (in addition to Paul).
"One untimely born" is a polite but weak translation. When I was younger I thought Paul was claiming that he wasn't born at the right time to see Jesus in person, but this is flat-out wrong; Paul and Jesus were contemporaries. What the phrase literally means is "an aborted birth." Paul is calling himself a dead infant - stating in a graphic way the idea of verse 9.
15Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, 2through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain. 3For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.
What does Paul say is "of first importance"?
Christ died for our sins...
There are myriad understandings of what this means. I take it to mean that Jesus was like a Jewish sacrifice: the power of his life was released at the crucifixion, and this power is available to us to assure of forgiveness, to enable healing and repentance. What does it mean to you?
...in accordance with the Scriptures...
The early church found Jesus everywhere in the Jewish Scripture, using their method of interpretation. Many in our day continue to do the same - many do not! One of the largest intellectual splits in the U.S. church involves whether one accepts modern advances in literature as applying to the Bible. The methods used in the first century were highly selective and subjective - using them, you can find pretty much whatever you want in Scripture. (One simple example of first century interpretation can be found in Matthew's use of Isaiah 7:14 - see http://fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/Documents/adventa.htm#Advent4 for details.)
I certainly don't see Jesus death (and resurrection) "foretold" in the Scriptures (and yes, I'm quite aware of the myriad prophecies that are claimed to fortell Jesus). I do see Jesus as being both in continuity with and in opposition to the Jewish tradition. He quotes the Scriptures often, but very selectively. He's not afraid to say "Moses said... but I say...", nor is he afraid to say that Moses (not God) laid down a law "because of your hardness of heart". Primarily, I understand the meaning of Jesus' death to be very much in accordance with the Jewish understanding of sacrifice, which is markedly different from that of surrounding religions.
"...and that he was buried..."
The early church is quite insistent that Jesus actually died. He didn't just swoon. (Some folk, in an attempt to make the resurrection scientifically palatable, have claimed that Jesus didn't really die - he just fainted or went into a coma, and came out of it early Sunday morning.) If a crucifixion didn't kill you (and a one-afternoon crucifixion was not typically fatal - thus the breaking of the legs, to hasten asphyxiation and death), being wrapped in a shroud so that you couldn't breathe would presumably do the trick.
...and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,
"Christ is risen!" "Christ is risen indeed!" So shall the Church around the world proclaim this Sunday. I agree with Paul that without this belief Christianity is foolishness. Following most of Jesus' teachings could still make sense, but Christianity as a religion is built upon the belief that the spirit of Jesus Christ is available to us here and now as a living presense.
...and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. [and many others]
Those who learn that I take much of the Bible as story that contains truth but does not describe what literally happened (e.g., I don't think Genesis 1 and 2 describe the Big Bang very well, I don't think there was a literal Garden of Eden; I do think the universe is 13.7 billion years old, and that we evolved from other creatures) often claim "then how can you trust the Bible?" My short answer is "I don't, I trust God." But the longer one is: this passage of Scripture was written by a contemporary (Paul). It's, in part, a secondary source - "I handed on to you ... what I had recieved" - but it is very close (within a 20 years) to the events it describes. It's clear that Paul here is not writing metaphorically. That doesn't make what he says true, of course, but to state that one part of Scripture is metaphorical doesn't make the entire collection of books "false".
Paul definitely has an agenda here - he is preparing for the rest of chapter 15, which claims that life after death is not a false hope but is promised by Christ's resurrection. But the rest of his writings make it clear that Jesus' death and resurrection is, indeed, "of first importance" to him. What in Christianity is "of first importance" to you? Have you ever shared it with your Christian friends? How about your non-Christian friends?
Miscellaneous meanderings:
"Cephas" is "rock" in Aramaic; it is, presumably, the name that Jesus gave to Simon, translated as "Peter" (Greek for "rock") in the Gospels. I doubt anyone knows why Paul uses the Aramaic version - perhaps that is the one Peter normally used, and it is translated in the Gospels for the Greek reading audience; perhaps it is a slight dig? Paul accuses Peter of acting like a Judaizer when it's convenient.
Note that "the twelve" are different from "the apostles". The Gospels tend to treat "the twelve" and "the apostles" as the same group, but give them more than 12 names. Tradition says there were twelve, and overlaps the names, but here it seems likely that there were more than 12 apostles (in addition to Paul).
"One untimely born" is a polite but weak translation. When I was younger I thought Paul was claiming that he wasn't born at the right time to see Jesus in person, but this is flat-out wrong; Paul and Jesus were contemporaries. What the phrase literally means is "an aborted birth." Paul is calling himself a dead infant - stating in a graphic way the idea of verse 9.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
God's Steadfast Love
Psalm 118
1O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good; his steadfast love endures forever!
2Let Israel say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
3Let the house of Aaron say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
4Let those who fear the Lord say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
5Out of my distress I called on the Lord; the Lord answered me and set me in a broad place.
6With the Lord on my side I do not fear. What can mortals do to me?
7The Lord is on my side to help me; I shall look in triumph on those who hate me.
8It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in mortals.
9It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in princes.
10All nations surrounded me; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
11They surrounded me, surrounded me on every side; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
12They surrounded me like bees; they blazed like a fire of thorns; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
13I was pushed hard, so that I was falling, but the Lord helped me.
14The Lord is my strength and my might; he has become my salvation.
15There are glad songs of victory in the tents of the righteous: “The right hand of the Lord does valiantly;
16the right hand of the Lord is exalted; the right hand of the Lord does valiantly.”
17I shall not die, but I shall live, and recount the deeds of the Lord.
18The Lord has punished me severely, but he did not give me over to death.
19Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter through them and give thanks to the Lord.
20This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it.
21I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation.
22The stone that the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.
23This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes.
24This is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.
25Save us, we beseech you, O Lord! O Lord, we beseech you, give us success!
26Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord. We bless you from the house of the Lord.
27The Lord is God, and he has given us light. Bind the festal procession with branches, up to the horns of the altar.
28You are my God, and I will give thanks to you; you are my God, I will extol you.
29O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.
The Psalms in the Lectionary are intended to be used as responses to the lessons. Look for references in this Psalm to Easter ideas: unexpected life in the presence of death; "the cornerstone," a key symbol of Jesus in the early church; forgiveness and righteousness as a gift from God. Psalms 113-118 were read during the Passover celebration, giving this Psalm another strong connection with Holy Week.
On a more personal note - how does this Psalm resonate with you? Do you feel that God always rescues you when you are surrounded? Or do you sometimes feel abandoned? If God does always rescue you - does he always rescue others? If so, how can you help them when they feel abandoned? If not... why you and not others?
These questions are prompted by some local situations I'm aware of:
some who have had a rough life and yet feel very protected by God;
a girl in a coma, and those who pray for her and cannot understand how a loving omnipotent God can leave her there;
my own recent change in belief that God is not omnipotent - and, if God's power is limited, then perhaps my own prayer is a vital part of God's action in the world.
Many people have assumed that, if I believe God's power is limited, then I no longer believe that prayer is effective. On the contrary - if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibeneficient, then intercessory prayer seems to me to be ineffective. God already knows the right thing to do, wants to do the right thing, and is capable of doing the right thing. What difference will my prayer make?
But if God's power is limited, then perhaps some kinds of prayer can produce some kinds of spiritual & physical impact on the world. I don't understand how; but I also don't really understand electromagnetism, and it clearly has an impact. So, should I be devoting more time to intercessory prayer?
Regardless, I claim with the psalmist that God's steadfast love endures forever. I simply see too much love in the universe - in spite of the laws of entropy, which make love difficult and hatred and destruction easy - to believe otherwise.
1O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good; his steadfast love endures forever!
2Let Israel say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
3Let the house of Aaron say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
4Let those who fear the Lord say, “His steadfast love endures forever.”
5Out of my distress I called on the Lord; the Lord answered me and set me in a broad place.
6With the Lord on my side I do not fear. What can mortals do to me?
7The Lord is on my side to help me; I shall look in triumph on those who hate me.
8It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in mortals.
9It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in princes.
10All nations surrounded me; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
11They surrounded me, surrounded me on every side; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
12They surrounded me like bees; they blazed like a fire of thorns; in the name of the Lord I cut them off!
13I was pushed hard, so that I was falling, but the Lord helped me.
14The Lord is my strength and my might; he has become my salvation.
15There are glad songs of victory in the tents of the righteous: “The right hand of the Lord does valiantly;
16the right hand of the Lord is exalted; the right hand of the Lord does valiantly.”
17I shall not die, but I shall live, and recount the deeds of the Lord.
18The Lord has punished me severely, but he did not give me over to death.
19Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter through them and give thanks to the Lord.
20This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it.
21I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation.
22The stone that the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.
23This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes.
24This is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.
25Save us, we beseech you, O Lord! O Lord, we beseech you, give us success!
26Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord. We bless you from the house of the Lord.
27The Lord is God, and he has given us light. Bind the festal procession with branches, up to the horns of the altar.
28You are my God, and I will give thanks to you; you are my God, I will extol you.
29O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.
The Psalms in the Lectionary are intended to be used as responses to the lessons. Look for references in this Psalm to Easter ideas: unexpected life in the presence of death; "the cornerstone," a key symbol of Jesus in the early church; forgiveness and righteousness as a gift from God. Psalms 113-118 were read during the Passover celebration, giving this Psalm another strong connection with Holy Week.
On a more personal note - how does this Psalm resonate with you? Do you feel that God always rescues you when you are surrounded? Or do you sometimes feel abandoned? If God does always rescue you - does he always rescue others? If so, how can you help them when they feel abandoned? If not... why you and not others?
These questions are prompted by some local situations I'm aware of:
some who have had a rough life and yet feel very protected by God;
a girl in a coma, and those who pray for her and cannot understand how a loving omnipotent God can leave her there;
my own recent change in belief that God is not omnipotent - and, if God's power is limited, then perhaps my own prayer is a vital part of God's action in the world.
Many people have assumed that, if I believe God's power is limited, then I no longer believe that prayer is effective. On the contrary - if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibeneficient, then intercessory prayer seems to me to be ineffective. God already knows the right thing to do, wants to do the right thing, and is capable of doing the right thing. What difference will my prayer make?
But if God's power is limited, then perhaps some kinds of prayer can produce some kinds of spiritual & physical impact on the world. I don't understand how; but I also don't really understand electromagnetism, and it clearly has an impact. So, should I be devoting more time to intercessory prayer?
Regardless, I claim with the psalmist that God's steadfast love endures forever. I simply see too much love in the universe - in spite of the laws of entropy, which make love difficult and hatred and destruction easy - to believe otherwise.
Am I acceptable?
Acts 10:34-43
34Then Peter began to speak to them: “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, 35but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. 36You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ—he is Lord of all. 37That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; 40but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, 41not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. 43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”
Peter is speaking to Cornelius, a Gentile, and his household. It took quite a bit for Peter to get over his prejudice and understand that God might be willing to accept non-Jews. I wonder if he ever decided that those who don’t fear God and do what is wrong are acceptable to God – at least as acceptable as anyone else! I hear a message behind his message – that none of us fully fear God and do what is right, that all of us need to be, and can be, forgiven.
Note that Peter (or Luke, putting words in his mouth) doesn’t boldly proclaim that Jesus is God. Jesus is “anointed by God,” “God was with him,” he was “ordained by God.” Unlike Luke & Peter, I believe (and proclaim!) that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh – but I wonder if the Church is too hard on those who hold a lower Christology, who believe that Jesus is special, unique, but not God. As I read the New Testament, John seems to be the only one who regularly and clearly claims Jesus as divine – and even John insists that “the Son is below the Father.”
The Church has argued that the Crucifixion only “works” if Jesus is both human and divine. But think through what you believe about the cross, about forgiveness of sin, about what Jesus actually came here to do. Is it possible for you to embrace some who deny the divinity of Jesus as “Christian”? For readers who don’t think Jesus is divine – are you able to put up with us who hold on to a higher Christology?
34Then Peter began to speak to them: “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, 35but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. 36You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ—he is Lord of all. 37That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; 40but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, 41not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. 43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”
Peter is speaking to Cornelius, a Gentile, and his household. It took quite a bit for Peter to get over his prejudice and understand that God might be willing to accept non-Jews. I wonder if he ever decided that those who don’t fear God and do what is wrong are acceptable to God – at least as acceptable as anyone else! I hear a message behind his message – that none of us fully fear God and do what is right, that all of us need to be, and can be, forgiven.
Note that Peter (or Luke, putting words in his mouth) doesn’t boldly proclaim that Jesus is God. Jesus is “anointed by God,” “God was with him,” he was “ordained by God.” Unlike Luke & Peter, I believe (and proclaim!) that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh – but I wonder if the Church is too hard on those who hold a lower Christology, who believe that Jesus is special, unique, but not God. As I read the New Testament, John seems to be the only one who regularly and clearly claims Jesus as divine – and even John insists that “the Son is below the Father.”
The Church has argued that the Crucifixion only “works” if Jesus is both human and divine. But think through what you believe about the cross, about forgiveness of sin, about what Jesus actually came here to do. Is it possible for you to embrace some who deny the divinity of Jesus as “Christian”? For readers who don’t think Jesus is divine – are you able to put up with us who hold on to a higher Christology?
Monday, April 6, 2009
Advance Lectionary study & Holy Week
In some ways, Holy Week is a strange week for advance lectionary blogging. We journey through the week remembering what caused Jesus’ death – but next Sunday’s lectionary is EASTER, so our daily blogging focuses on the resurrection. It’s rather like being in choir, where much of Lent is spent practicing the glorious Easter music.
The danger is that we will forget Lent and Holy Week altogether. I once attended a church that did their Easter Cantata on Palm Sunday – so as to “free up space” for the busy Easter Sunday service. We never did convince them that Easter was an entire season, and that the second Sunday of Easter might be a better week. That congregation just conveniently ignored the Crucifixion.
But there are advantages too. Lent and Holy Week are not meant to be times when we try to forget the resurrection and “re-live” the horror of the first disciples. All of life, good and bad, is seen through the lens of Easter. One of my goals this Holy Week is to get better at living the truth of the Resurrection at the same time I live the truth of pain, brokenness, and sin. Imagine someone going through surgery without an anesthetic – a common enough event in places without modern medical facilities. A mature patient doesn’t pretend that there is no pain, and they certainly feel the pain. At the same time, they put their trust in the procedure and the surgeon, and find it easier to go through the pain because they know better times are coming.
The danger is that we will forget Lent and Holy Week altogether. I once attended a church that did their Easter Cantata on Palm Sunday – so as to “free up space” for the busy Easter Sunday service. We never did convince them that Easter was an entire season, and that the second Sunday of Easter might be a better week. That congregation just conveniently ignored the Crucifixion.
But there are advantages too. Lent and Holy Week are not meant to be times when we try to forget the resurrection and “re-live” the horror of the first disciples. All of life, good and bad, is seen through the lens of Easter. One of my goals this Holy Week is to get better at living the truth of the Resurrection at the same time I live the truth of pain, brokenness, and sin. Imagine someone going through surgery without an anesthetic – a common enough event in places without modern medical facilities. A mature patient doesn’t pretend that there is no pain, and they certainly feel the pain. At the same time, they put their trust in the procedure and the surgeon, and find it easier to go through the pain because they know better times are coming.
Welcome!
I'm going to start leading a Sunday morning service in the Fall, following the lectionary for readings. And so I'm going to start blogging on the lectionary, working a week in advance.
I don't know yet whether this blog will end up formal or informal - we'll see as we go!
I don't know yet whether this blog will end up formal or informal - we'll see as we go!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)