Blithe Spirit (Lent V)

I 

Blithe Spirit – Lent V

 

Romans 8:6-11

Life in the Spirit 

 

8:6 To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace.

 

8:7 For this reason the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law-- indeed, it cannot,

 

8:8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

 

8:9 But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

 

8:10 But if Christ is in you, then the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

 

8:11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you.

 

 

I hate to begin a message with a controversy, but here we are. What do we understand about the “Word of God”? Theologically, the Gospel of John says that JESUS is the Word of God, made flesh, and who “tented” among us human beings. Throughout the Bible, the “scriptures” referred to would have been the Torah and the writings of the Jewish faith, as nothing in what we know as the “New Testament” existed. One theological/biblical vein would be that we believers should learn what we could of biblical history and the journey of God’s people Israel through the pages of the Jewish texts (our “Old Testament”) and should take very seriously the testament that tells us of the life, ministry, and teachings of Jesus Christ. Those who assembled and accepted the “canon” of the “New Testament” included a number of epistles (letters) of Paul and other early church leaders, as well as the witness of the Gospel writers and the “historical” book known as Acts. They also included a book of apocalyptic writings ascribed to John which we know as Revelation.

 

Another school of thought, and one that is pretty militant about it, is the “evangelical” school, that believes that the “Word of God” is the Bible as written, or at least as it was written down in the “original manuscripts,” none of which we have access to. By accepting “the Bible” as the “Word of God,” which was in some way “inspired” or “God-breathed,” this school believes in taking what it says literally. This concept has even become a kind of “litmus test” as to whether someone is a “true Christian” or now—“Do you believe the Bible is LITERALLY true?” If one is to answer “no” or qualifies their answer in some way, they are often judged to be a “nominal” Christian, or not a Christian at all. So, who is right?

 

As usual, the TRUTH is probably in the middle. It is hard to argue against the Christology that posits Jesus as the “Word made flesh,” and therefore God’s “final answer” to humanity. From my perspective, I DO believe in the “authority” of the written scriptures of the two testaments in our Bible, however, I believe that, while they are “God-breathed”—written by men and possibly women inspired by the Spirit of God—they are not dictum from God, Godself. These words are “filtered” through the human experience and told by people who either lived what they wrote, or were first-century witnesses of some sort, at least as far as the New Testament is concerned. I do not believe—and neither did the early church, or the church, going forward, as Christian history unfolded—that the Bible is the product of a kind of “automatic writing” wherein God “dictated” what God wanted to be written on the page, with little influence of the human writer. “Inspired” or “God-breathed” doesn’t mean DICTATED. It leaves much room for the actual writer’s testimony of what they saw or experienced, and may indeed include both the influence of the cultural history of the time in which they were writing, AND their own interpretation of what they believed. So why do I bring all of this up as we begin to examine this passage from Paul’s letter to the church at Rome?

 

Well, partly because Paul is a scholar AND an interpreter of scripture—a Pharisee—within his original Jewish tradition. It stands to reason that he would bring this “scholar’s eye” into his leadership and teaching in the life of the early church. Paul would not have taught the Torah as something to be blindly “obeyed,” but instead, God’s guidance for a people God wished to protect and to whom God wished to offer wisdom for how to incorporate their faith in life. Certainly, Paul was not expecting he was crafting “Christian Torah” as he wrote letters of comfort, guidance, and even chastisement, to branches of the early church. He seems free to state his opinions in his writings, even occasionally stating overtly, “I say, not the Lord…”, meaning he didn’t profess to be “speaking God’s word” directly. The problem with the evangelical view is that taking the Bible literally means ignoring both the magic of the wisdom and interpretation of the early church leaders like Paul, AND some of the history of their experience and context, which when included in “the Word,” may distort what we take FROM it. In short, there are things the early church was grappling with in their context that no longer should matter to us today, as our context and state of knowledge is totally different from the first century. Indeed, throughout the ages, Jewish scholars have interpreted, re-interpreted, and then re-RE-interpreted Torah for the people of Israel, as history and life changed, evolved, and as people became more knowledgeable. It is this ability to “re-interpret” that helps the Bible be a “living” book, not a summary of some sort of “golden tablets” God just delivered through writers in some kind of spirited trance. 

 

Today’s passage from Romans 8 is a perfect example of why we need to take a critical and contextual look at what we label “scripture.” Romans 8:6-11 is clearly and heavily influenced by Gnostic thought. The Gnostics were a philosophical “movement” in the early days of Christianity who believed that the “spirit” and the “flesh” of humanity could be and should be separate things. In a condensed and frankly overly-simplified understanding of Gnosticism, the Gnostics promoted building up and encouraging one’s spiritual life, while acknowledging the “lusts” and primitive hungers of “the flesh.” In short, the Gnostics believed one could be “pure in spirit” while indulging the “desires of the flesh,” and that this could be pursued simultaneously! In fact, it is my understanding that some Gnostic sects actually “celebrated” both by incorporating human sexual rituals in their “temple worship.” Gnostic ideas of this “separation” of spirit and flesh crept into the early church, and this passage in Romans shows that some form of it even “leaked” into our scriptures! Thankfully, we don’t see the truly prurient version of Gnosticism in the Bible, but the idea that “spirit” and “flesh” need to be kept separate, with one being the “desirable” one to be lifted up, while the other “denied” is clearly what we see in Romans 8:6-11. In caveman language, spirit GOOD, flesh BAD. But is this really true?

 

The Romans author starts off this pericope by the polemical statement that the “flesh” is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is “life and peace.” That’s blatantly Gnostic, friends. Did Paul get swept up in this? Or are we reading some words penned by an amanuensis recording his own “thoughts” of what he thinks Paul believes? Frankly, it’s hard to believe a Jewish Pharisee like Paul the Apostle would get swept up into Gnosticism, especially given in several other places in his epistles he speaks against it. If it is true that “those in the flesh” cannot please God, then we are all doomed, for I confess to being a creature in the flesh, and like it or not, so are you! Now, I have to ask you: do you think God would have created us as “fleshly” creatures if only the “mind of the Spirit” could please God? Would God have made such a deal out of sending the Son into the world—BORN into the world as a “fleshly” creature—to “tent” among human beings if the ultimate desire of God was that we would somehow be “transformed” totally into “Spirit-minded” beings? Why would God have created us as fleshly, sexual beings with senses like touch and taste, if God wanted only spiritual obedience? None of this makes sense, unless we respectfully “filter” the Gnosticism out of Romans 8:6-11. 

 

Indeed, the “incarnation”—God in Christ as the perfect fusion of flesh AND spirit—is the very fulcrum of the Christian faith. The most condemned heresies of the faith occur when you discount either the “fully human” or the “fully divine” attributes of Jesus Christ. Isn’t this, to a lesser degree, just what the author of this passage is doing but saying that the only way we can “please” God is to fully eschew our fleshly reality and desire to think only of “life in the Spirit” as the ultimate form of Christian worship? Thankfully, the passage doesn’t end after the Gnostic prologue of verses 6-8! Let’s go on…

 

 In verse 9, the author turns to Jesus, suggesting that if Christ “lives in us,” then Christ brings the Spirit into OUR spirit, taking up residence there, and connecting us—flesh AND spirit—to the divine. Later, the author writes that Christ “gives life to our mortal bodies” as well. Now we’re getting somewhere! Just as the Christian church has long affirmed both the total humanity and total divinity of Jesus Christ, so we, too, are both flesh AND spirit beings, with God’s own Spirit inhabiting, or “tenting” along with us. Taken this way, this passage that begins with a Gnostic underpinning, moves us to understand that we CAN’T separate flesh and spirit, as this is precisely how God “designed” us, affirming the “formula” by sending God’s own Son among us as the fullest incarnation of it. Jesus pleased God because he fully utilized the miracle of his human existence—including his flesh—while focusing his spirit on God’s Spirit, thus “awakening” the “third” part of the human experience. Remember how God is “three-in-one, one-in-three,” or what we label the Holy Trinity? So God made us beings of body, mind, and spirit. We best please and glorify God when we use ALL THREE in harmony to do and live the will of God for us, and this harmony is possible because of the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, AND because God sent the “Spirit of Jesus” into the world to guide and empower both Christians and the Christian church. You think maybe this is what the Romans author is thinking here? I do. 

 

So, to review:

 

*The Romans author is NOT being seduced by the Gnostics, ultimately, but MAY be using their lingo to get their attention, similar to how the author of the Gospel of John uses the language of Greek philosophical thought in that amazing prolegomena in chapter one (i.e. the “logos”) to lure them in.

 

*The text is NOT telling us to ignore, eschew, or even “hate” our bodies, but to use them to please God, not just to satisfy our own desires and/or to break God’s law. There is a fine point here. God gave us these bodies, made us as sensual creatures capable of enjoying loving relationships, tasting of the fruit of the creation, and gave us the other senses to fully experience the magnificent world around us. 

 

*We should do this! However, without a healthy relationship with God and the guidance of the Spirit of God within, we will be in a constant battle against “the flesh,” as its temptations and excesses threaten to lead us astray from the aim of pleasing God, even as we enjoy life.

 

*”Life in the Spirit” is an act of Grace freely given by God in Christ Jesus. It is not meant to be a drudgery, nor is it meant to be abused by “going Gnostic” and trying to separate spirit from flesh and using this as a selfish shortcut to self-fulfillment.

 

*Righteousness is just “right living,” something made possible by both an ongoing act of the human will, coupled with the indwelling Holy Spirit. This right living is meant by God to be a joyful thing, and not a “war” between the worlds of flesh and spirit. 

 

*Never forget the most human thing Jesus did—he wept for Lazarus, when he heard of his death. Weeping—or any of the other uniquely “human” things such as ecstasy, fear, love and grief—are God’s emotional gifts to us “in the flesh.” They are not to be ignored, but celebrated, and never exploited to selfish ends. 

 

My wife the dietitian uses as her slogan in her field: “Eat less, move more, everything in moderation.” Based on today’s text, here’s one for us Christians: “Listen for the Spirit, live rightly, bless God and yourself!” And don’t forget to love your neighbor! Amen.

 

Unlikely

 

The Unlikely

1 Samuel 16:1-13

David is chosen and anointed 

 

16:1 The LORD said to Samuel, "How long will you grieve over Saul? I have rejected him from being king over Israel. Fill your horn with oil and set out; I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have provided for myself a king among his sons."

 

16:2 Samuel said, "How can I go? If Saul hears of it, he will kill me." And the LORD said, "Take a heifer with you and say, 'I have come to sacrifice to the LORD.'

 

16:3 Invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what you shall do, and you shall anoint for me the one whom I name to you."

 

16:4 Samuel did what the LORD commanded and came to Bethlehem. The elders of the city came to meet him trembling and said, "Do you come peaceably?"

 

16:5 He said, "Peaceably. I have come to sacrifice to the LORD; sanctify yourselves and come with me to the sacrifice." And he sanctified Jesse and his sons and invited them to the sacrifice.

16:6When they came, he looked on Eliab and thought, "Surely his anointed is now before the LORD."

 

16:7 But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him, for the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart."

 

16:8 Then Jesse called Abinadab and made him pass before Samuel. He said, "Neither has the LORD chosen this one."

 

16:9 Then Jesse made Shammah pass by. And he said, "Neither has the LORD chosen this one."

 

16:10 Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel, and Samuel said to Jesse, "The LORD has not chosen any of these."

 

16:11 Samuel said to Jesse, "Are all your sons here?" And he said, "There remains yet the youngest, but he is keeping the sheep." And Samuel said to Jesse, "Send and bring him, for we will not sit down until he comes here."

 

16:12 He sent and brought him in. Now he was ruddy and had beautiful eyes and was handsome. The LORD said, "Rise and anoint him, for this is the one."

 

16:13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and the spirit of the LORD came mightily upon David from that day forward. Samuel then set out and went to Ramah.

 

 

Everybody loves an underdog. Or the candidate for about anything who is the least likely to win and excel at her/his job. I read the other day that years ago, David Letterman, the retired comedian and long-ago graduate of Ball State College (now University) in Muncie, Indiana, sponsors a scholarship for “C” students, for that is what he was. There is something gratifying about that, even for me, and yet I was never a “C” student! See what I mean? We have a “thing” for the “least likely” to win and excel. The thrill is not the same, though, when the least likely wins and is a total DUD at what they do, and we have certainly seen examples of THAT in history. Why do we get so jazzed by the “Least Likelys” coming out on top?

 

Possibly it is because most of us live with higher aspirations than we have ever been able to live up to. Couple that with the middle-class angst of believing that there are those out there who “bought” their positions, or they are the result of some hidden privilege, and you have fertilizer for the field of enjoying when someone “defeats the system” to get ahead. “Least likely” folk, or teams, or talents of any kind get us going. Remember a few years ago when a frumpy, chunky woman with poorly styled hair and a dress to match shuffled out on the stage of “Britain’s God Talent”? Her name was Susan Boyle, and the panel that included that arrogant boob Simon Cowell, immediately began eyerolling, based on her appearance and timid demeanor. Then, Boyle began to sing “I Dreamed a Dream” from “Les Misérables,” and the place came unglued, as her crystal-clear, perfect-pitched voice exploded across the airwaves. Not only was she an overnight sensation, but the video of that event went so viral that she walked into instant fame and a highly successful career. Another “Least Likely” made good. Everybody loved it. 

 

This is exactly what is going on in this weekend’s lectionary text I have chosen. God calls on Samuel to finger the next king of Israel, succeeding Saul, who was pretty much the first Trump—bloated with power and privilege, not too good at doing “king stuff,” and frankly, not very stable. God tells Samuel that the next king will be one of Jesse’s sons, so Samuel has each of them paraded before him, that he may discern which one would win at “Israel’s Got Talent.” He did have one caveat given him by God, though: don’t just look on the outward appearance, as it may mask the “heart” that God is looking for in a king for God’s people. Starting with Abinadab, they come before Samuel, one by one, and each is rejected by him, saying, “The Lord has not chosen any of these.” Jesse is holding out his last son, possibly because he is so young, but maybe also because he just couldn’t imagine the “ruddy” dreamer behind door number two couldn’t POSSIBLY be God’s choice to lead the people of Israel. Samuel has to ask, “Is this all there is?” Jesse’s reluctance is explained by his report that David is busy tending to his sheep—a sheepish excuse if I’ve ever heard one. Samuel is not dissuaded: “Send for him and bring him in,” he orders. Of course, he gets the nod from God. 

 

There is something satisfying about this, and I suggest it is this “Least Likely” syndrome. Whether its King David, Susan Boyle, or the 1969 Mets, we get a vibe when the UNLIKELY surprises us and wins, and goes on to be great because of it. There are very few exceptions to this “rule” of which kinds of people we like to see excel. One might point to John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the shining son of wealthy elites, who went on to be a beloved (and unfortunately assassinated) President of the United States, but would JFK have been elected President if it wasn’t for the heroic story of his PT 109 experience in World War II? My personal favorite of a “to the manor born” success story was the late PA Senator John Heinz, heir of the ketchup fortune. Almost every time he addressed the U.S. Senate, he would preface his remarks with the admission that he was “born with a platinum spoon in my mouth,” just to make sure that the public and his colleagues knew that he was coming from the ranks of the privileged, and that his views should be “screened,” accordingly. It was his way of using self-humiliation to urge others to appropriately receive and temper his remarks. I admired him for that. Why DO the “good” die young, anyway?

 

Still, we like the underdogs best. Jimmy Carter began his quest for the presidency as one, for sure. Hardly anybody outside of Georgia had ever heard of him. When he told his mother, Lillian Carter, that he was going to run for President, she asked, “Of what?” Talk about being dissed. Of course, he went on to win the office, and I’m guessing that many of us voted for him just BECAUSE he wasn’t a Kennedy or a Rockefeller. Now, here comes my “big jump” for this sermon: I would like to suggest that, knowing this proclivity for humanity to “root for the underdog” or the “Least Likely,” God sent Jesus as one of these! Think about it.

 

Jesus was “born in a barn,” to use our uncomplimentary rhetoric. The authorities of his day were out for his hide, because the Magi said their reading of the stars said he would be “a king.” The prophet Isaiah said he would be “despised and rejected by humanity.” He grew up as the son of a manual laborer—a carpenter’s son. As one who came to identify with all humans, he chose his disciples from among the marginalized and “common” folk of his day. Early on in his ministry, he began to be tested by both the devil and various religious leaders of his time. Numerous times, after he preached and talked about what the prophets have said about himself—the Messiah—he had to disappear because of the threat of retribution. Even the people who mobbed him seeking healing, were out for themselves, for when he was later arrested and handed over to the authorities, many of the same people called for Barabas, a known criminal, to be released, instead of Jesus. Never did he claim the authority or power that was his to punish or oppose his detractors. The closest he came to “anger” happened when he chased the merchants out of the Temple, merchants who had taken the space set aside for non-Jews (Gentiles) to hear Torah. Other than that, he took the role of an underdog, a “Least Likely” sent to save humanity from their sins and update them on God’s desire that all should live in peace in an unfolding “Kingdom” of God. After a sham of a trial, he was beaten and sentenced to the capital punishment mode of the day—a public crucifixion between two other “losers.” 

 

Moses was guilty of killing an Egyptian guard, yet God called him to lead God’s people to freedom. Jacob was a scoundrel, a “Least Likely” to be anything but a successful flim-flam man, yet God used him to institute the twelve tribes of Israel through the lineage of his sons. David turned out to be a heinously flawed King, having committed adultery and had a man sent to be killed in battle so he could “inherit” his wife. Jesus had no one to come to his defense when hauled before the authorities; even Pontius Pilate washed his hands—literally—of any accountability, as he saw Jesus as such a sad case that he wasn’t worth the pushback. Even death did not shrink in the face of the Son of God…at least initially. 

 

The fulcrum of humanity’s reconciliation to our Creator is the resurrection of Jesus. As I have written in other sermons (echoing some of the profound theologians and Bible scholars long before me), this even was so much more than a man being “revived.” In the resurrection, Jesus defeated the pain of death and ushered in a promise of life beyond death. Something that was the “Least Likely” for us—overcoming the pain of death—became the “Least Likely” thing to threaten us now, or for eternity, thanks to the Savior who understood what it meant to be a “Least Likely.” Thanks be to God.

 

And before taking his seat at his Heavenly Father’s right hand, Jesus set the church in motion by turning the reins over to a team of “Least Likelys”—the twelve, later the women, the former pagans, the Gentiles, and then a Pharisee of the same ilk that persecuted and accused Jesus in the first place! Guess who’s in charge of it now? US! Talk about a band of “Least Likelys!” 

 

All this to say that our redemption is the product of God’s ultimate identification with the “Least Likelys” of our planet. And God’s church continues to be here after over 2,000 years of being run by the most unlikely leaders one could imagine. Why? Because the Holy Spirit understands how to mobilize and “gift” the unlikely to carry it forth. As the Bible testifies, God has always done that. And remember, when God calls you to do something on behalf of the Kingdom of God, your objection based on being a “Least Likely” won’t wash. I’ll close with one of my favorite “Celtic” prayers from the Iona Community:

 

"O Christ, the Master Carpenter,
who at the last through wood and nails,
purchased our whole salvation,
wield well your tools in the workshop of the world,
so that we, who come rough-hewn to your bench,
may here be fashioned to a truer beauty by your hand.”

 

Amen.

Five Easy Peaces

Five Easy Peaces

 

Romans 5:1-11

Reconciled to God by Christ's death 

 

5:1 Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

 

5:2 through whom we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand, and we boast in our hope of sharing the glory of God.

 

5:3 And not only that, but we also boast in our afflictions, knowing that affliction produces endurance,

 

5:4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope,

 

5:5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.

 

5:6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

 

5:7 Indeed, rarely will anyone die for a righteous person--though perhaps for a good person someone might actually dare to die.

 

5:8 But God proves his love for us in that while we still were sinners Christ died for us.

 

5:9 Much more surely, therefore, since we have now been justified by his blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath of God.

 

5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more surely, having been reconciled, will we be saved by his life.

 

5:11 But more than that, we even boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

 

In earlier sermons, I shared that, as a young adult suddenly “jarred” by a personal encounter with what I understood as God, I sought out not only good adult counsel from my home pastor, but reading material as well. While this experience caused me to start reading the New Testament (a “Good News for Modern Man” version from the American Bible Society, which I had been given in my church youth group as a younger teen), I also turned to a source that had become important to me early in life—books. The first one I came to that I thought might be helpful was Billy Graham’s “Peace with God.” For a young adult just starting to take his rejuvenated faith seriously, this simple volume by the famous evangelist was most helpful. In that book, Graham wrote in easy-to-understand terms about what John 3:16 truly meant for me. He made it personal, which at age 18 is exactly what I needed. I remind the reader of my story, as aren’t we all looking for peace? And especially, peace with God? The apostle knew this, so he addresses it to the early Christians at Rome in this weekend’s text.

 

If you’ve listened to my sermons along the way, or have been reading these “retirement sermons” on my blog, you know I like to have fun with titles, not just to be clever, but to get the reader to wonder where I’m going with that particular message. I called this weekend’s message “Five Easy Peaces” as a play on the title of a 1970 movie starring Jack Nickelson, “Five Easy Pieces.” As a movie buff, I tend to do this a lot. If you find it misleading, forgive me! In this case, though, the Apostle Paul gave us the “five easy peaces” to peace with God.

 

In the text, Paul tells us at the outset that we DO have peace with God through our justification by faith in Jesus Christ. He’s doing some good journalism by writing a powerful “summary lead” to kick off the text. The reader’s interest is piqued to find “the rest of the story,” as the late Paul Harvey might have labeled it.

 

Next, Paul reveals another layer by stating that through Jesus, God has given us ACCESS to GRACE. I’m calling these the first two “easy peaces” available to us all through the Christ Event. Think of how powerful “access” to God is! Throughout human history, we have done all kinds of desperate—even awful—things to “gain access” to what we perceived to be the “higher power.” Wars have been fought over it. People have lost their lives in the aim to acquire it. Some really BAD theology has been crafted in an attempt to control “access” to God, and a few people have lost their heads over it, literally. It is a foundational belief of the Christian faith that in Christ, God has offered full access to God, along with the peace it provides. To not be cut off from a relationship with God, no matter what might “get in the way,” is a wonderful gift, and ACCESS is our first “peace” in Paul’s litany.

 

This access opens a pipeline to peace number two: GRACE. Grace is the ultimate gift, and the fulcrum of peace with God. God’s grace washes away whatever we perceive as cutting us off from God. The Bible calls it “sin,” but I fear we have too often branded stupid, human failings with that label, while excusing much more serious behaviors and attitudes with lesser ones. By this kind of “scapegoating” the real things we do that harm or ruin relationships, we diminish the grace God offers to give us a fresh start, hopefully to “get it right” the next time. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the “scholar of discipleship,” called that “cheap grace.” But God’s grace was never meant to be CHEAP, just gifted to us, and received and used graciously, not exploited by those not willing to take responsibility for their wrongs. GRACE is the second of our “five easy peaces.”

 

For the next three, we have to get down and dirty, so to speak. Nothing of value comes easily, does it? We DO have to remember that Paul is writing at a time when the fledgling Christian church was under much persecution, both from the Roman government and the religious leaders who either felt threatened by its land-office growth, or who believed it to be heretical. With this in mind, early Christ followers had to endure both secrecy—even while trying to fulfill the Great Commission—and suffering. In this Romans 5 text, Paul puts a positive “spin” on this suffering, or what the translation above calls “afflictions.” 

 

The author tells us that suffering—afflictions—can develop certain positive, on-going, and empowering traits in those who respond “graciously” to negative circumstances. The first “peace” that comes from suffering is ENDURANCE. It’s important to note that all three of these remaining “peaces” go right to the heart of our human experience, and “endurance” certainly makes this fact clear. As part of the temporal creation, we humans can be limited by stamina, age, and illness. When we experience any kind of suffering or affliction, we have a choice to make: will we allow it to dominate and overcome us, leading to resignation or “giving up,” as some say; or will we use the experience like coaches or practitioners of physical fitness use weights? When one lifts weights or more extreme forms of “resistance” training, our muscles are temporary “injured” by the effort, and as they heal, they grow stronger. Likewise, runners or fitness walkers strengthen their lungs and legs, producing stamina—ENDURANCE. So it is with suffering or afflictions that we do NOT program or plan for. When it comes our way, and we focus on getting through it, bathing it in prayer, trusting God to help us, and reaching out to our supportive community, we steel ourselves for the future AND learn lessons on how to approach it when it happens again. 

 

Peace number four that we may gain through affliction is CHARACTER. One dictionary defines “character” as: “the way someone thinks, feels, and behaves.” Another defines it as: “the mental, moral, and emotional qualities that define an individual or group, encompassing their habits, temperament, and reputation.” As Christ followers, we are called to be “persons of character,” and the standard we have been given is the life of Jesus Christ, himself. In emulating Jesus, and following his exemplary teachings, we demonstrate character that is both OURS and GOD’S. Isn’t there great peace in feeling that we are being true to ourselves, our faith, and witnessing to God’s love by our actions and attitudes? Doing so is what we call CHARACTER. My experience is that developing character by just “doing the right thing” is hard, but the progress is often accelerated when we are tested. Again, we can respond positively to challenges, which does help us develop character, or we can “kick against the goads,” thus solidifying who we are and what we are, resisting change that brings growth—throwing out the anchor, so to speak. God’s authentic call is always FORWARD, not backward, and rarely ever to just stand in place. This affliction-produced “character” is best summed up in the timeless expression, “One can either light a candle or curse the darkness.”

 

The final of the five “peaces” is HOPE. I love that Paul (in many translations) tells us that HOPE does not DISAPPOINT. That makes a lot more sense to me than what the translation cited above says: “does not put us to shame.” In times of suffering, HOPE gets us through. When we are tending to a friend, family member, or sibling in Christ who is suffering, we may offer HOPE as both a balm and a reminder of God’s promise that “all things work together for good for those who love God and who are called according to God’s purpose.” HOPE points us forward, beyond the affliction. If we eschew hope, it is WAY too easy to give up, or at least not “go to school” on what we are experiencing. By taking this negative tack, we run the risk of losing out on the final three “peaces” God offers. Don’t do it, Beloved. When the river rises, float your boat, or build a bridge. 

 

So, there you have it, FIVE EASY PEACES: Access, grace, endurance, character, and hope. The “joke” in the title is that none of these things are really “easy.” Jesus sacrificed everything to offer us unlimited access to God AND the grace that finds, redeems, and empowers us. Endurance, character, and hope arise from the afflictions that we may face, going forward, when we respond faithfully to their tugs and lumps by trusting God and keeping our “minds, hearts, and doors” open. 

 

God’s ultimate goal is the total reconciliation of all of creation, including US, and the restoration of the peaceful, beloved community God first envisioned when it all came off the assembly line. God’s gift of “free will” got us into the selfish mess humanity was in.  Using this same free will to respond to God’s grace, receiving access to God, and responding positively to suffering and affliction will bring us the peace we all seek. To quote a favorite movie character—Sean Connery’s “Jim Malone” in “The Untouchables”—“Here endeth the lesson.” Amen.

 

Inherit the Wind

Inherit the Wind

 

John 3:1-17

The mission of Christ: saving the world 

 

3:1 Now there was a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a leader of the Jews.

 

3:2 He came to Jesus by night and said to him, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with that person."

 

3:3 Jesus answered him, "Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above."

 

3:4 Nicodemus said to him, "How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother's womb and be born?"

 

3:5 Jesus answered, "Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.

 

3:6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.

 

3:7 Do not be astonished that I said to you, 'You must be born from above.'

 

3:8 The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

 

3:9 Nicodemus said to him, "How can these things be?"

 

3:10 Jesus answered him, "Are you the teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand these things?

 

3:11 "Very truly, I tell you, we speak of what we know and testify to what we have seen, yet you do not receive our testimony.

 

3:12 If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?

 

3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.

 

3:14 And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,

 

3:15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

 

3:16 "For God so loved the world that God gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

 

3:17 Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world but in order that the world might be saved through him.”

 

 

I stole the title of this message from the 1960 film by the same name, starring Spencer Tracy and a truly all star cast. “Inherit the Wind” is based on the real-life “Scopes Monkey Trial,” over a Tennessee school teacher who taught Darwin’s theory of evolution, which ran afoul of the biblical “creation story” popular in the Bible belt. The sermon title has nothing to do with the Scopes Monkey Trial, other than the idea that new discoveries often conflict with long-accepted beliefs.

 

Every pastor loves to preach on this text, mostly because it contains the most “famous street address” from the pages of scripture: John 3:16. You simply can’t preach this text without winding up eventually at verse 16, but something else caught my attention this time around the John 3 “horn.” The text tells us that the exchange recorded is between Jesus and Nicodemus, a Pharisee. The whole “born again” (or “from above”) thing comes from this passage, something that got Jimmy Carter into all kinds of controversy during his presidential campaign because he claimed to be a “born again Christian.” Playboy Magazine and other more legitimate journalism of the day weren’t familiar with the term, and because Carter paired it with his confession that he “lusted after women,” it went “viral,” as we would say today. His dilemma was quite a LONG distance from what our own President today has confessed in the “Access Hollywood” video. 

 

No, what caught my attention this time through the John 3 passage was what Jesus reportedly said in verse 8 about the wind that “blows where it chooses.” Since “wind” or “breath” is the Bible’s metaphor for the Holy Spirit, this gives an interesting random quality to the course and work of the Spirit of God. If we take Jesus at his word, here—and isn’t this the whole point of the controversies ranging from “biblical authority” to the scholars of the “Jesus Seminar”—he is telling us that at least one of the “persons” of the Holy Trinity is not bound by too many constraints. There are whole branches of the Christian tradition that believe in things like “election” and “predestination,” both of which tend to “lock God in” to certain outcomes in God’s dealing with humanity, based solely on the idea that God’s eternal existence and life “outside” of time means that God already “knows” how everything is going to turn out in the end, and therefore has preordained it to be. If that sounds confusing to you, join the club. On the other hand, other traditions within Christianity advance the idea of “free will,” wherein humanity was granted the ability to choose by God, and this includes our own spiritual destiny. I’m sure God is amused by all of the kerfuffle over this question, which may be the reason Jesus tried to set the record straight with “For God so loved the world that God sent the Son so that whosoever believes in him may not perish, but have eternal life.” Remember the old “KISS” thing? Keep It Simple, Stupid? Here you go. 

 

During a brief “social media” break while writing this message, I ran across a posting from an “anonymous participant” on a page called “United Methodist Church Members.” The author castigates the “idea” of “gay Christians,” suggesting that, according to scripture, there is no such thing. This kind of judgmental spirit comes from circling the wagon around a few “clobber” verses and then using them to “cancel” other people who LOVE God and who are LOVED BY God, as clearly stated in this passage by Jesus Christ. The “whosoever” in John 3:16 is the key. How sad that some feel they must elevate their own spiritual status by queuing over others. To quote the late Rodney King, “Why can’t we just all get along?” Playing God and judging others is beyond my paygrade. It’s really beyond all of our paygrades, friends. 

 

Back to the meandering Spirit. Indeed, God’s Holy Wind DOES wander the earth, looking to touch the lives of the people whom God loves. And those of us who have signed on to faith in the Son of God are gifted with the Holy Wind, meaning we are empowered and led by the Spirit. Hearing from this text that that same Spirit isn’t necessarily “working a program” beyond loving and embracing the people of God, “as the wind blows,” means that God may well call us to do things both beyond our comfort zone and even beyond our skill set. This is why we learn later that the Spirit also imparts “gifts” to God’s people, as needed, and “as the Spirit wills.” Why are we so quick to “pigeonhole” people into roles when God reserves the right to call them beyond their acquired abilities? Our pastor mentioned recently how we in church leadership should not expect that every school teacher wants to teach Sunday school, nor does every accountant feel called to be on the finance committee. They may come to us caught up in the Holy Wind, feeling a call to serve God on a different plane than what they do for a living. Serendipity is a “thing” of the Spirit, as I read this text, and for why? Only God ultimately knows, but one guess is that when opening our lives to God’s leading, being challenged beyond our comfort zone might “feel” like something God would legitimately do (i.e. Moses, King David, Esther, Ruth, and virtually any of the twelve called by Jesus). Following the proverbial “other road” as God leads also opens us to more passion about our calling. Passion is good!

 

I live with a nonconformist. If you know Dara, and how proper she always seems, you might find that interesting, even unexpected. However, throughout her childhood, she regularly chose to swim upstream from her peers. She chose her own fashions based on what SHE liked and felt comfortable in, balked at popular trends in music or activities, and kept her cache of friends to a minimum, so as not to be influenced by “the crowd.” Thanks to this “against the current” style, she has demonstrated an acute ability to discern the leading of the Holy Spirit. Maybe verse 8 is the reason? Believe me, “the wind blows where it chooses,” summarizes my loving wife! My label for her has often been “The Statue of Liberty.”

 

As you read this, if you are one of those folks who prefer to have a planned, neat agenda, the Good News is that God loves you, too. However, don’t always resist the divine “randomness” of the Spirit who may call you to at least temporarily leave your comfort zone to go “on mission.” For those of you who, like myself, thrive in the world of randomness (at least of thought), work at being able to more clearly discern whether your “inspirations” are your own or of the Spirit. There’s nothing wrong with doing good works because you like to engage in them, but just don’t miss the “Kairos” movements of the Spirit, who will take you to where and when they are most needed. One final caution: never sit still and wait for the Spirit to move you, for the Spirit moves too fast for that. Besides, each of us has already been given spiritual gifts for service, as the Bible tells us, and we should be about using these gifts, even when we are experiencing a lull in the “wind.” It is my conviction that the Holy Spirit finds it easier to lead someone who is already moving than an “object at rest.” To quote an African American preacher friend of years ago: “This is THAT which the Spirit has promised, and if this ISN’T that, I’m gonna’ do THIS until THAT comes along!”

 

So, this is the “Wind” we inherit as followers of the Christ. It will do us well to remember that “the wind blows where it chooses,” and if the wind of the Holy Spirit blows in our direction, we will be blessed—and mightily used of God—if we perk up and catch the breeze. Our “inheritance” in this regard goes well beyond just simple ministry tasks. God IS on the move in the world, desiring us to be heralds of the Good News of “great tidings for all people.” This is not the time for telling people they DON’T QUALIFY for redemption because of some characteristic of their personhood. In Christ, we are called to embrace, not partition, love, not judge, and welcome, not screen those whom the Holy Wind blows our way, or we to them. Remember the story from Acts about Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch wherein the Spirit LITERALLY “blew him” to the eunuch so the latter could find God’s redeeming love. I could happen to you, if you open yourself to inheriting the wind. Amen.

 

MacGuffin

 

The MacGuffin 

Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7

Eating of the tree of knowledge 

 

2:15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it.

 

2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden,

 

2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."

 

3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

 

3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden,

 

3:3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die.'"

 

3:4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die,

 

3:5f or God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

 

3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate.

 

3:7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves.

 

 

The famous filmmaker, Alfred Hitchcock, used what he called a “MacGuffin” in his films. A MacGuffin is a “device” or an element in the film used to move the plot along, was not really the story being told, nor even essential to it. Trouble is, often, viewers would miss the real message of the movie, getting caught up instead by the MacGuffin! Examples of MacGuffins in films include: the “spy” focus in “The 39 Steps”; the briefcase in “Pulp Fiction”; the ark in “Raiders of the Lost Ark”; and the $40,000 in “Psycho.” Another example I can think of is the falcon figurine in “The Maltese Falcon.” None of these items is really what the story is about. You could substitute almost anything for the MacGuffin in each of these films, and still have the central stories of adventure, mystery, intrigue, and most importantly, the relational interaction between the main characters. All good filmmakers understand the principle of the MacGuffin.

 

Too bad we religious people don’t get it, though, when it comes to the Bible and its wealth of stories! Ignore the plot device of the MacGuffin, and one misses the “why” of the story in the first place. Today’s passage is from Genesis, and what we have come to call the “Creation story.” Specifically, this part of that story has been labeled by theologians down through the century as “The Fall,” when Adam and Eve SINNED, thus introducing sin into the human equation, and cutting off humanity from deity. BOY, did we miss the boat here, and any decent filmmaker could tell us this! We went for the MacGuffin and missed the depth and meaning of the story.

 

Let me put on my best filmmaker “hat” and reapproach this passage: it’s not about SIN, at all. SIN is the MacGuffin that moves along the narrative. The actual story is about choice, trust, redemption, and love. I must confess that in my earliest days of preaching, I, too, got caught up in the MacGuffin. While I never taught this Adam/Eve/Serpent/God story as literally true, I was guilty of telling my first congregations that it was a metaphorical story designed to tell how “sin” first entered into the human experience, and that this “original sin” was what has plagued humanity, down through the ages. Thankfully, I at least told my folk that God loved them and provided a means of redemption in Jesus Christ, but that even this is too shallow for the powerful and inciteful message of Genesis 2.

 

Before we get beyond the MacGuffin of sin, let’s talk about “original sin” for a moment. Most of us grew up in some religious tradition that spoke of it, and even tried to teach the concept in Sunday School. The Roman Catholics really struggled with it, because they had two major streams of thinking about just what the “original sin” was. For the branch of the Catholic Church that flowed from Thomas Aquinas, the original sin of Adam and Eve was simply that they were “disobedient,” eating of the tree that God told them to leave alone. However, the branch of Catholic theology that stemmed from St. Augustus was much more specific: Adam and Eve had sexual relations before God had “prepared” them for it, and the Genesis 2 story is a metaphor for this version of “original sin.” Believe me, the whole thing is more complicated than that, but for now, my “Cliff Notes” version must suffice. My point, though, is that “sin” is not the real point of the story in Genesis. Some may believe my assertion here is heretical, but I don’t think so.

 

If we believe that God “hates sin,” then why would God creates humans with the ability to choose how to behave. What God “hates” about sin is how it seriously damages relationships and may harm human community. The commandments that God passed along to Moses are all about how God wants us to avoid sin because of this. As I mentioned in a recent sermon, all ten commandments are about the harm the listed infractions can do to relationships—with God, and with others. I would assert that the first commandments about how we should respect our Creator have less to do with how God “feels” about it than they do with how God desired to preserve Israel’s focus on their Lord (i.e. worship, service, and fellowship) that became their most common bond, helping them build and sustain a beloved community. The rest of the commandments “prohibit” behaviors that break relationships between neighbors, friends, and families, and by extension, harm the community at large. By believing the “offense” is against God, we are scapegoating not only where the real harm is occurring, but making God out to be the “mad dad” (as in the old threat, “Wait until your FATHER gets home!”). 

 

We learn from the history of God and humanity in the Hebrew Bible that God loves humanity. In the New Testament, the Christ Event is front-and-center as the continued “working proof” that God loves us all. It’s also in the New Testament that we read that God IS love. What more do we need to “get it” that God’s “best life now” is that God’s people would truly find a path toward being a Beloved Community, would live in harmony with one another, would desist from hurting one another, and might also find a path back to their loving Creator. God loved us so much that God DID give us the freedom to choose how we will live, how we will behave, and what we will do to find the fulfilment and joy in life. Or not. Yes, we even have the freedom to make bad choices, to blame “life” for our dissatisfaction, and even to take it out on whatever we understand “God” to be.

 

By believing in “original sin” as some specific thing that our progenitors did, thus “introducing” sin into the human existential continuum, we fall for two “MacGuffins” that were really just there to move the true “plot” along: Adam and Eve “did it”; and “The devil made us do it.” Had “original sin” been the real issue bothering God, don’t you think Jesus would have made that the central point of his message? Instead, he loved the unlovable, taught us to love our neighbor, to love God with all our heart, strength, soul, and mind, demonstrated that men AND women are equal partners in life, and showed humanity that forgiveness and healing are the highest of virtues. He went to the cross, rather than pull some kind of divine power play to save himself, and offered that he was fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy to “take away the sins of the world.” The church has focused SO MUCH on “the blood,” the cross as the “propitiation for our sins,” and on our redemption as being a “one and done” thing that I fear we’ve fallen for the “MacGuffin” again. The true plot of the Jesus story is that God came among us to again show us the height and breadth of Divine love, and to yet again PLEAD with us to “be our sibling’s keeper.”

 

Even as Jesus taught us, forgiveness is the easy part. Living into it is the challenge. We participate in our own redemption by LIVING the Gospel that Jesus taught. Not “earning” God’s favor, mind you, as this has been granted to us by Jesus, himself, but by BECOMING the people that WE want to be and that GOD wants us to me. By following through in making the Beloved Community a possibility, through mending our rifts with each other, and by looking out for “the least of these,” we bring joy to the halls of heaven, for this is what God was after, all along.

 

Make no mistake about it, sin was not “introduced” to the world by Adam and Eve. Their story was just the MacGuffin to move the plot along, getting us to focus on our OWN culpability in humanity’s inability to sustain God’s dream of a Beloved Community. The freedom that God gave us as humans can be used for “bad” (sin) or “good” (agape love). We are the ones who make the choice, in both the micro AND the Macro of this decision. Blaming it on Adam and Eve, or even “the serpent” sends us down the path of deception and blame, two things that will RUIN any attempt at building a sustainable human community, or what the Bible calls “The Kingdom of God.” 

 

If it sounds like I’m suggesting that much of theology and church history has swallowed the MacGuffin whole and missed the REAL truth of the God-human struggle, I confess that I am. The longer I study the Bible, the more I see that God IS love, and WE are the offspring of that love. The true “melody” of human redemption, and that which will fully restore our relationship with our Father/Mother God, is best summed up in the fifth commandment: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God has given you.” Amen.

All of Us

All of Us

 

2 Peter 1:16-21

Shining with the glory of God 

 

1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty.

 

1:17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased."

 

1:18 We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain.

 

1:19 So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

 

1:20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,

 

1:21 because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

 

I have always ascribed to the scholars’ idea that the Petrine epistles are remembered/transcribed sermons, possibly by Peter, although I seem to recall that most “Bible guys” give the letters too late a date for that to be true. They certainly could be messages by one of Peter’s younger charges, though. I can “hear” Peter’s voice in these letters, at least the enthusiasm and temperament of the “Peter” we read of in the Gospels. Like so much of the Bible, though, it really doesn’t matter a great deal. This is the canon we have, and the Bible with which we must wrestle, interpret, and preach, so there you have it. And the Petrine letters are chockful of stuff worth wrestling with, all kind of jammed in there together—much like most of our sermons, wouldn’t you say?

 

Therefore, let’s start with the last two verses of this passage, since they have to do with the very idea of scriptural interpretation. As an immature, Christian youth, I remember thinking these verses were telling us that, ultimately, it would be the Holy Spirit that would have to help us understand what scripture means, since the Holy Spirit was the “inspirer” of them, in the first place. Remembering how my various literature teachers used to go into long excurses about what William Shakespeare really “meant” with his flowery prose, I used to think, “Wouldn’t it be cool if we could actually ASK Bill Shakespeare what he meant? Wouldn’t that end the sometimes wide-a-field speculation? 

 

One of my favorite scenes in Woody Allen’s Oscar-winning film, “Annie Hall” happens when he is standing in line with Diane Keaton, waiting to get into a movie. A man behind him is “pontificating” to his date about the “depth of meaning” in this film and all kinds of other artful media expressions from film to television. Allen eventually “has enough” of what he believes is just pseudointellectual babble, and when the man moves on to express his opinions regarding media scholar Marshall McLuhan’s work, Allen openly expresses his displeasure. The man reacts by stating that he “teaches a course” at Columbia on modern media, which he believes elevates him to the level of expert, especially on the work of McLuhan. Allen responds, “Oh YEAH, well…” and he reaches off camera and tows in the REAL Marshall McLuhan, who denigrates the man’s lack of knowledge of his work, putting him in his place. Allen then breaks character again, looks directly into the camera, and speaks: “Don’t you wish REAL LIFE were like this?” Kind of my idea about trusting that if the Holy Spirit is the true inspiration behind what we read in the Bible, then the Holy Spirit should be “patient zero” in our efforts to interpret it.

 

Not so easy, is it? Don’t we ALL have our own ideas about how the Spirit “speaks” to us? Some of us talk of the “still, small voice,” while others rise in public worship and spew long speeches in “tongues,” awaiting an interpretation, in the full believe that we have just regurgitated an actual, in-real-time message DIRECTLY from the Holy Spirit. How in the world can either of these “voices” be trusted to give us the unarguable “interpretation” of something from the Bible? See the problem with expecting the Holy Spirit to be Marshall McLuhan, waiting just off camera to be consulted? 

 

AND, even IF we could tap the Holy Ghost as a resource, we still have to deal with the “living” nature of scripture. I have come to believe this means that the Bible CAN be interpreted “freshly” for each time and era, and that it can mean different things to different people, consulting it for different reasons. Is this what the Petrine voice (which I’ll now refer to simply as “Peter” to keep the narrative easier to follow) is trying to tell us in these verses? Is Peter saying that, since the Holy Spirit “inspired” these words, desiring them to have universal, not time-locked, meaning, we are FREE to interpret their meaning for what we are facing, at any given time, both as individual Christians, and as the church? I believe the author is amplifying this assertion by stating in verse 20, that there IS no “one person’s interpretation” that can be said to be exhaustively “right.” The texts of scripture are for ALL people, for ALL time, and may have a VARIETY of interpretations, as led by the Spirit in kairos time, and as called upon by the zeitgeist. In other words, even if we are somewhat successful at deducing what a given text meant when it was first written, it is true that its meaning in the current era may be different, or at least apply differently, because history, circumstances, and WE have changed. What ALL of us should affirm together is that the scriptures HAVE MEANING for us, and are “inspired by God and are useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in right living.” I’ve heard that somewhere. What we ALL can affirm is the value of the Holy Bible for our individual and corporate “wrestling matches” over its meaning. No ONE can say “Here’s exactly what this means for all of us.” It just doesn’t work that way. Never has. If you don’t believe that, just pick up a good text on church history. We can see things so very differently, depending on our perspective, our need, and our OWN history, can’t we. Another case in point…

 

Recently, the nation has been doing its “dividing” thing over a Super Bowl halftime show by the Puerto Rican musical star, “Bad Bunny” (real name: Benito Antonio Martinez Ocasio.) Some people felt his show was obscene, while others of us thought It was artistic and amazing. Some felt it was divisive and “political,” while most of us saw it as celebrating American inclusivity, unity, and love. Some pontificated that “only Americans should be performing at the Super Bowl,” while others pointed out that, as a native-born Puerto Rican, Mr. Bunny IS an American. Discounting the actual factual correction stated in the last postulate, it should be clear that different audiences can see the same show and come away with entirely different meanings and opinions about it. We should be able to agree on the facts, even if that is the only thing, but the context we are in currently even puts these in dispute, so let’s move on.

 

One more assertion I need to make, concerning what Peter tells us in these last two verses: “scriptural authority” does not mean that there is one single “interpretation” of scripture that is absolutely, unarguably correct. It just means that we agree that the Bible is the “one book” Christians have as our common source of faith, guidance, and life. We are clearly free to take different meanings away from it, as the Holy Spirit inspires. The closest parallel I can think of from secular history is the Constitution of the United States of America. It is AUTHORITATIVE because it was made so by the founders, and as properly amended through our history. Would anyone argue, though, that any part of it has one, clear INTERPRETATION? History has proved this wrong, as well, as Supreme Courts have shifted gears on its meaning multiple time. Its interpretation and meaning, whilst varied, do not reduce its authority. The preamble begins with the main thing: “We the people.” We’re in this together. Ultimately, our “divisions” shouldn’t matter. Later, regarding God’s heartfelt desire in giving us Jesus and the Word of God, Peter will tell us that God wishes that “none should perish.” WE are in this together, and this is the main thing that we should keep the main thing. If it isn’t about ALL of us, then none of us is safe.

 

While there is a lot of good stuff in this passage, I want to close with one phrase that keeps haunting me in this time of disaffiliations, division, and downright nasty badgering between factions, of which I confess I’ve been quite caught up in, frankly. Peter uses the phrase in verse 19 of “a lamp shining in a dark place.” He refers here to “prophecy,” but given the wider context of the passage, I believe he is speaking of the Word of God, namely Jesus Christ, himself. And as “ambassadors for Christ,” we are being challenged to keep this lamp shining. It is clear that the “dark places” do not go away just by the clock ticks of history. We are in one right now, both in the church AND in American society. One message that can be universally accepted if we preach it right is this “ALL of us” message. And yes, this is a follow up on my “All for One, One for All” message of a couple of weeks ago. Can we at least agree that there is ONE God, one faith, one baptism, one Lord of us all in the Christian church? (And “one nation under God,” if you want to stretch this to patriotism?) Is this not the “main thing”? I would argue that both the Word of God and the U.S. Constitution are here to draw believers (and patriots) into single communities, where mutual respect and the “common good” are perfected and practiced. Whenever one person or one faction believes it has the “ultimate truth,” this kind of unity is not only threatened, but probably impossible. We’re very close to this right now.

I encourage us to bring out those lamps, for only light can drive out darkness, and only love can drive out hate. I’ve heard that somewhere, too. Jesus told us “a house divided against itself will not stand.” And for we patriots, Benjamin Franklin said, “We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.” Both were right, and should be passionately heeded by those of us with the lamps. Amen.