[23] "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. [24] You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!
[25] "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. [26] You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean.
[27] "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people's bones and all uncleanness. [28] So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. Matthew 23:23-28 (ESV)
The second two woes here, are further explanations of the first woe, of how in following the law, they failed to follow the law. They concentrated on the easier things, and neglected the weightier things. It isn’t that they should not have tithed cumin and dill, though Jesus is poking fun at them a bit for how seriously they take the rules on tithing, but that they did that as a pretense of upholding the law, while on the other hand ignoring God’s word all together. It is the baptist who quits smoking as a pretense for following God’s word, yet denies his child baptism, has an affair, and then engages the gospel mill with unforgiving judgmentalism, all the while criticizing others for taking God’s word seriously, and baptizing their children.
I always feel a bit uneasy though, in pointing out another’s hypocrisy. I’m not immune to it myself. However, it needs to be pointed out when it is seen. It is in fact the only loving thing to do. You can’t just turn a blind eye to it, and not say anything about someone twisting God’s word and leading others astray.
The gospel is freeing though. It frees you from compulsion to appear righteous, because it makes you righteous. It declares you righteous, even while acknowledging your sinfulness. So it introduces a paradox. It allows you to acknowledge your own sinfulness, while taking comfort in the righteousness of Christ that is yours, and proclaiming it to others. It allows you to stop taking yourself seriously, and begin taking others seriously. And in my experience, people find that quite refreshing. You know, you actually have more opportunity to share the gospel when your willing to drink a beer with the down hearted? People open up a little more, when you let them in? When you can laugh at yourself, people are willing to listen. When you speak their language, course as it might be, they develop an affinity for you, and begin to understand.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Blind Guides
[16] "Woe to you, blind guides, who say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.' [17] You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? [18] And you say, 'If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.' [19] You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? [20] So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. [21] And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. [22] And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it. Matthew 23:16-22 (ESV)
Blind guides, the world is quite full of them. Today people treat it as quite a light thing, I’m often amazed at what people don’t think matters. God’s word is not clear on this is considered an argument, despite the fact that God’s word is very clear, but merely challenges popular opinion. Sometimes I debate with fundamentalists who keep talking about innerrancy and inspiration, and I get the impression they have never read the Bible, and could care less what it actually says. They are often stunned when I pull out verses that speak of Baptism as saving. They tell me, they believe the Bible, and then talk about things that are not in it at all, like an age of accountability, or dedicating children rather than baptizing them. They talk of how unchristian it is to smoke or drink, when the Bible says either nothing, or quite the opposite. They rail on about cussing, and are oblivious to the course language that the scriptures themselves employ. They argue against philosophies of men, and are so naïve concerning philosophy as to not realize that they have been suckered into the philosophies of men hook, line and sinker. Most of what passes for Christian ethics today, is really not much more than Stoicism, and tell you the truth Epicureanism. Rather than an embrace of life in joy and sorrow, of which scripture talks, Christianity is sold as all but an abstinence from joy in life at all!
The problem has not changed. Man makes law, where God has made none. And where that may be forgivable where traffic is concerned, it is not where the word of God is concerned. If scripture doesn’t say anything against it, you have an obligation to keep you mouth shut, aside from perhaps friendly or fatherly advice. But the root of this problem is in reality a failure to see that scripture is not about do’s and don’ts, but about Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection and the forgiveness of sins that that accomplishes for us. Because if you concentrate on the law, you become a lawyer, and the lawyer’s job is to find loopholes and technicalities, and make them up where their aren’t any. And it is all the more ludicrous because it isn’t needed, we have Christ and forgiveness.
Blind guides, the world is quite full of them. Today people treat it as quite a light thing, I’m often amazed at what people don’t think matters. God’s word is not clear on this is considered an argument, despite the fact that God’s word is very clear, but merely challenges popular opinion. Sometimes I debate with fundamentalists who keep talking about innerrancy and inspiration, and I get the impression they have never read the Bible, and could care less what it actually says. They are often stunned when I pull out verses that speak of Baptism as saving. They tell me, they believe the Bible, and then talk about things that are not in it at all, like an age of accountability, or dedicating children rather than baptizing them. They talk of how unchristian it is to smoke or drink, when the Bible says either nothing, or quite the opposite. They rail on about cussing, and are oblivious to the course language that the scriptures themselves employ. They argue against philosophies of men, and are so naïve concerning philosophy as to not realize that they have been suckered into the philosophies of men hook, line and sinker. Most of what passes for Christian ethics today, is really not much more than Stoicism, and tell you the truth Epicureanism. Rather than an embrace of life in joy and sorrow, of which scripture talks, Christianity is sold as all but an abstinence from joy in life at all!
The problem has not changed. Man makes law, where God has made none. And where that may be forgivable where traffic is concerned, it is not where the word of God is concerned. If scripture doesn’t say anything against it, you have an obligation to keep you mouth shut, aside from perhaps friendly or fatherly advice. But the root of this problem is in reality a failure to see that scripture is not about do’s and don’ts, but about Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection and the forgiveness of sins that that accomplishes for us. Because if you concentrate on the law, you become a lawyer, and the lawyer’s job is to find loopholes and technicalities, and make them up where their aren’t any. And it is all the more ludicrous because it isn’t needed, we have Christ and forgiveness.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Evangelization Vs. Prsosyletization
[13] "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.
[14] [15] Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves. Matthew 23:13-15 (ESV)
“For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte.” It’s odd to me, Judaism had to be different in those days. I don’t hear of converts to Judaism these days. I don’t see any proselytizing for Judaism happening either. I talked to a Jew the other day, we joked a bit about the 3 foot by 3 foot kosher section at Albertsons as an indicator of the size of the Jewish community in Tooele. It is his understanding that you aren’t a Jew unless your Mother is a Jew. I’m always curious as to when that change happened and why, as in the OT, the Jewish faith is very patriarchal.
Proselytism is controversial today. Christians call it evangelization. Funny though, it rarely is evangelization they engage in, but proselytism. Evangelism would give you the impression that it has something to do with the evangel, the gospel. But most “evangelization” efforts I’ve been exposed to were nothing but law oriented. Evangelization, would be what J.K. Rowling did with her Harry Potter Books, and Movies. I admit, I only watched the movies. But wow, I did not see that coming. She actually has done for our generation what C.S. Lewis did with Narnia. Worked the whole idea of the gospel, the resurrection and victory over death into a fictional narrative, what Tolkien called the eucatastrophy. I didn’t see it coming, but then I’m a literary dolt. Really, I only wish I could understand all the nooks and crannies of literary theory and dissect the meaning from a Shakespearean play. I read Hemingway novels, and find them enjoyable. I remember sitting with a professor of English who had his PHD in Hemingway for an hour and a half and being marveled at the connections I’d missed. “Old Man and the Sea” I was made aware is also a resurrection story, a Christ story, a telling of the eucatastrophy.
But that is evangelism, telling the story, and bringing out it’s importance for ones own life, applying it to the life of the individual. The gospel is about communicating the forgiveness of sins won by Jesus Christ with his death and resurrection. Prosyletizing is getting in a moral pissing match with your neighbor, over whose ethic is better. When you go about arguing whether or not polygamy is a good idea or not, you are not evangelizing. When you spend a half an hour telling another person why they shouldn’t engage in extramarital sex, or abstain from drinking, quit smoking, and how Christ can help you with that you are at best prosyletizing, and even making another twice a child of hell as you. Not that there isn’t a place for communicating Christian morals, but first make sure they are morals Christ, who made wine for drunk Jews as his first miracle, would be communicating. And then realize that the morals are not what makes Christianity Christianity. Christians adopt these morals for one reason, and one reason only, to thereby communicate the love of Christ to their neighbor, Christ, who forgives sins. But the reason for the morals is what makes Christianity Christianity. The Christian life is a forgiven life. It is being forgiven that you enter into the kingdom, it is forgiving others, especially those looking for forgiveness that you allow others to enter it.
[14] [15] Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves. Matthew 23:13-15 (ESV)
“For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte.” It’s odd to me, Judaism had to be different in those days. I don’t hear of converts to Judaism these days. I don’t see any proselytizing for Judaism happening either. I talked to a Jew the other day, we joked a bit about the 3 foot by 3 foot kosher section at Albertsons as an indicator of the size of the Jewish community in Tooele. It is his understanding that you aren’t a Jew unless your Mother is a Jew. I’m always curious as to when that change happened and why, as in the OT, the Jewish faith is very patriarchal.
Proselytism is controversial today. Christians call it evangelization. Funny though, it rarely is evangelization they engage in, but proselytism. Evangelism would give you the impression that it has something to do with the evangel, the gospel. But most “evangelization” efforts I’ve been exposed to were nothing but law oriented. Evangelization, would be what J.K. Rowling did with her Harry Potter Books, and Movies. I admit, I only watched the movies. But wow, I did not see that coming. She actually has done for our generation what C.S. Lewis did with Narnia. Worked the whole idea of the gospel, the resurrection and victory over death into a fictional narrative, what Tolkien called the eucatastrophy. I didn’t see it coming, but then I’m a literary dolt. Really, I only wish I could understand all the nooks and crannies of literary theory and dissect the meaning from a Shakespearean play. I read Hemingway novels, and find them enjoyable. I remember sitting with a professor of English who had his PHD in Hemingway for an hour and a half and being marveled at the connections I’d missed. “Old Man and the Sea” I was made aware is also a resurrection story, a Christ story, a telling of the eucatastrophy.
But that is evangelism, telling the story, and bringing out it’s importance for ones own life, applying it to the life of the individual. The gospel is about communicating the forgiveness of sins won by Jesus Christ with his death and resurrection. Prosyletizing is getting in a moral pissing match with your neighbor, over whose ethic is better. When you go about arguing whether or not polygamy is a good idea or not, you are not evangelizing. When you spend a half an hour telling another person why they shouldn’t engage in extramarital sex, or abstain from drinking, quit smoking, and how Christ can help you with that you are at best prosyletizing, and even making another twice a child of hell as you. Not that there isn’t a place for communicating Christian morals, but first make sure they are morals Christ, who made wine for drunk Jews as his first miracle, would be communicating. And then realize that the morals are not what makes Christianity Christianity. Christians adopt these morals for one reason, and one reason only, to thereby communicate the love of Christ to their neighbor, Christ, who forgives sins. But the reason for the morals is what makes Christianity Christianity. The Christian life is a forgiven life. It is being forgiven that you enter into the kingdom, it is forgiving others, especially those looking for forgiveness that you allow others to enter it.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Do as they teach, but not as they do
Matthew 23:1-12 (ESV)
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, [2] "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, [3] so practice and observe whatever they tell you— but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice. [4] They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. [5] They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, [6] and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues [7] and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. [8] But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. [9] And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. [10] Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. [11] The greatest among you shall be your servant. [12] Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
There is a lot to chew on in this passage. Practice and observe what they tell you-but do not what they do. Parents use that line… Were all sinners, and often it is just easier to teach rather than do. Jesus doesn’t have anything against the law the Pharisees teach, but the teachers teach more with their actions, and those are not good. So knock yourself out. Practice and observe, but the burden of the law is hard to bear, at that time it is best to let Christ take it.
Too often this is the problem in the church today. People read passages like the one above as if it was all Christ had to say. They then think the problem was that the Pharisees weren’t practicing what they preached. They then practice what they preach…. No they don’t, but they make great pretense of it. And they lay heavy burden’s on the souls of others, and never do anything to lift them. That is the problem of the Pharisees. They aren’t willing to move the burdens with their fingers. Christ moved the burden, he carried it for us, He took it to the grave and buried it so that it would not need to be carried anymore. He forgave our sins.
I do caution, that people read the second part of this passage a bit to simply at times, all these things about Rabbi, Instructor, or Father. If pastor was in common usage at this time, he would have thrown that term in too. Of course no one objects that we call our dad’s father. But when the guy has a black shirt with a white tab on its collar somehow it is forbidden. Paul tells the Corinthians that he is their spiritual Father, I do not think Paul was thereby sinning. Jesus was called Rabbi many times. But this is all about the arrogance that can often go along with such titles, he is cautioning them against this, we are all brothers. But arrogance takes many forms, and attaches itself to many a proper title. Yes, Proper titles. It is proper to be known by the title, it is a show of respect to address someone by their title, as much as it is at times, humbling to accept the title. But all of this comes under the don’t lord it over others. It can be just as arrogant to refuse to be known by the title, and not just a bit naïve.
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, [2] "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, [3] so practice and observe whatever they tell you— but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice. [4] They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. [5] They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, [6] and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues [7] and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. [8] But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. [9] And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. [10] Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. [11] The greatest among you shall be your servant. [12] Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
There is a lot to chew on in this passage. Practice and observe what they tell you-but do not what they do. Parents use that line… Were all sinners, and often it is just easier to teach rather than do. Jesus doesn’t have anything against the law the Pharisees teach, but the teachers teach more with their actions, and those are not good. So knock yourself out. Practice and observe, but the burden of the law is hard to bear, at that time it is best to let Christ take it.
Too often this is the problem in the church today. People read passages like the one above as if it was all Christ had to say. They then think the problem was that the Pharisees weren’t practicing what they preached. They then practice what they preach…. No they don’t, but they make great pretense of it. And they lay heavy burden’s on the souls of others, and never do anything to lift them. That is the problem of the Pharisees. They aren’t willing to move the burdens with their fingers. Christ moved the burden, he carried it for us, He took it to the grave and buried it so that it would not need to be carried anymore. He forgave our sins.
I do caution, that people read the second part of this passage a bit to simply at times, all these things about Rabbi, Instructor, or Father. If pastor was in common usage at this time, he would have thrown that term in too. Of course no one objects that we call our dad’s father. But when the guy has a black shirt with a white tab on its collar somehow it is forbidden. Paul tells the Corinthians that he is their spiritual Father, I do not think Paul was thereby sinning. Jesus was called Rabbi many times. But this is all about the arrogance that can often go along with such titles, he is cautioning them against this, we are all brothers. But arrogance takes many forms, and attaches itself to many a proper title. Yes, Proper titles. It is proper to be known by the title, it is a show of respect to address someone by their title, as much as it is at times, humbling to accept the title. But all of this comes under the don’t lord it over others. It can be just as arrogant to refuse to be known by the title, and not just a bit naïve.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Fifth Sunday After Trinity
7/20/11
1 Corinthians 1:18- 25
Bror Erickson
[18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. [19] For it is written,
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart."
[20] Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? [21] For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. [22] For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, [23] but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, [24] but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. [25] For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Cor. 1:18-25 (ESV)
For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Christ the power of God.
We preach Christ Crucified. that is, we preach the gospel, Christ Crucified. It’s a funny thing, but it seems Christ Crucified is a despised message today, even in the church. I mean I find it particularly troubling that there is little room left for it in those institutions that call themselves church. If you need this illustrated for you, think about this, when was the last time you saw a crucifix in the church? I’ve never minded a bare cross. I normally don’t mind them at all. I grew up seeing both crucifixes and crosses in the many churches I called home. Though in retrospect I think there were more crosses than crucifixes. If you are confused, a crucifix is a cross with a body hanging on it, the body of Christ. It’s a specially poignant reminder of the gospel, because “we preach Christ Crucified.”
But today you can get anything you like crucified. I do wonder what the evangelical world has against doves, as they seem intent on crucifying all of them they can find. To be fair I‘ve seen it in a Lutheran Church or two, also. I always wonder what an archeologist would make of that a thousand years from now. And I’m not sure Precious Moments should be in the cross and crucifix business at all. But the minute you put a body on the cross illustrating just what it is that Jesus did there for the sins of the world, then you have people coming out of the wood works to tell you how offended they are by it.
I mean, it dumbfounds me that the one crucifix we have here, a gift to this congregation from Paul Roberts, can be at times such a source of consternation. It’s so small, I marvel that people even notice it, but they do. And they let me know about it! My reaction is to want to get a bigger one, and put it one the cross above the altar. One of the biggest criticisms and tell alls about Mormon‘s is their aversion to crosses. An aversion to a crucifix is really the same thing. It is an aversion to the gospel, to Christ crucified. Yes it is great to be reminded that Christ rose from the dead, and the empty cross is as good a symbol of that as anything. But it is rather peculiar that Paul equates Christ crucified with the power to save, rather than “He is Risen.” Of course both those have to happen for their to be gospel. But Paul does well to remind us that Christ crucified is not going to be popular with anyone.
Christ Crucified. There is a lot in those two words. It was a stumbling block to the Jews, who sought signs. One is reminded how often Jesus refused to do signs for the Pharisees. He did signs a plenty for the faithful, but not for those who demanded them as if Jesus was to be their personal magic show. Christ Crucified was indeed a stumbling block to them. It was the opposite of what they expected. It is the opposite of what many people want in a Christ, in a messiah.
They expected the Messiah, the Christ to come and save them from the world, not succumb to it. And that is what Christ crucified looks like, succumbing to the world. So often we, want something different, something other worldly, an experience or miracle, something extraordinary that gets us out of here. Some political remedy. This is the way of the Jews who sought signs, rather than Christ crucified.
There is something almost mundane about Christ Crucified. It says life isn’t going to be different for us. From an objective standpoint, its going to look the same. It makes our hope look foolish to the world. It means that we will suffer the same disappointments, the same set backs, the same struggles as everyone else in the world, maybe even more. I mean it isn’t as if Christ on the Cross holds out the promise of a rose garden. And I’ve been there a time or two wishing it did, praying for a break as the bills pile up, a marriage runs up on the rocks, attendance dwindles at church, and or, I just plain let someone down because I have my head stuck, and someone else leaves the congregation for reasons unexplained, while others visit only once, and your out of town when a close friend dies, but the breaks don’t seem to come, or when they do you don’t realize them. Have you been there, wishing it was different, as if believing in Jesus Christ would just eliminate all your problems, slashing your bills, giving you an unexpected promotion.
Christ Crucified makes one wonder, when your life is no different then anyone else’s, why do you think your after life should be? Foolishness to the Greek. But then Christ’s life was really no different in this world. After all, He was Crucified, he died a horrible death, and yet he was still Christ, and he still rose from the dead. And he promises to us a share in his life. Christ Crucified, It wouldn’t make any sense to preach it if he hadn’t risen from the dead. But he did rise from the dead, and that means that he did something on the cross. He did what he said he was going to do on the cross. He interprets the event. Someone, one of those Greek types seeking wisdom, told me just the other day, a God-man dying on the cross for my transgressions doesn’t make sense unless you are brought up to believe that. Nice try, I suppose, he was trying to dodge the existential ramifications of Christ‘s death and resurrection. But when that man rises from the dead, then that man gets to interpret the event and what happened there, he knows better than anyone. He says He died to forgive you your sins, and to drive that point home, he tells you to “eat his body, given for you,” and to Drink the cup of the New Testament, “in my blood, which is for you for the forgiveness of sins.” Because it was on the cross that the son of God was sacrificed, and it was on the cross that your death took place, and it was on the cross that your sins were forgiven, and it was there that the son of man was lifted up that whoever believes in him may have eternal life, just as he has.
7/20/11
1 Corinthians 1:18- 25
Bror Erickson
[18] For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. [19] For it is written,
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart."
[20] Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? [21] For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. [22] For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, [23] but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, [24] but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. [25] For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Cor. 1:18-25 (ESV)
For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Christ the power of God.
We preach Christ Crucified. that is, we preach the gospel, Christ Crucified. It’s a funny thing, but it seems Christ Crucified is a despised message today, even in the church. I mean I find it particularly troubling that there is little room left for it in those institutions that call themselves church. If you need this illustrated for you, think about this, when was the last time you saw a crucifix in the church? I’ve never minded a bare cross. I normally don’t mind them at all. I grew up seeing both crucifixes and crosses in the many churches I called home. Though in retrospect I think there were more crosses than crucifixes. If you are confused, a crucifix is a cross with a body hanging on it, the body of Christ. It’s a specially poignant reminder of the gospel, because “we preach Christ Crucified.”
But today you can get anything you like crucified. I do wonder what the evangelical world has against doves, as they seem intent on crucifying all of them they can find. To be fair I‘ve seen it in a Lutheran Church or two, also. I always wonder what an archeologist would make of that a thousand years from now. And I’m not sure Precious Moments should be in the cross and crucifix business at all. But the minute you put a body on the cross illustrating just what it is that Jesus did there for the sins of the world, then you have people coming out of the wood works to tell you how offended they are by it.
I mean, it dumbfounds me that the one crucifix we have here, a gift to this congregation from Paul Roberts, can be at times such a source of consternation. It’s so small, I marvel that people even notice it, but they do. And they let me know about it! My reaction is to want to get a bigger one, and put it one the cross above the altar. One of the biggest criticisms and tell alls about Mormon‘s is their aversion to crosses. An aversion to a crucifix is really the same thing. It is an aversion to the gospel, to Christ crucified. Yes it is great to be reminded that Christ rose from the dead, and the empty cross is as good a symbol of that as anything. But it is rather peculiar that Paul equates Christ crucified with the power to save, rather than “He is Risen.” Of course both those have to happen for their to be gospel. But Paul does well to remind us that Christ crucified is not going to be popular with anyone.
Christ Crucified. There is a lot in those two words. It was a stumbling block to the Jews, who sought signs. One is reminded how often Jesus refused to do signs for the Pharisees. He did signs a plenty for the faithful, but not for those who demanded them as if Jesus was to be their personal magic show. Christ Crucified was indeed a stumbling block to them. It was the opposite of what they expected. It is the opposite of what many people want in a Christ, in a messiah.
They expected the Messiah, the Christ to come and save them from the world, not succumb to it. And that is what Christ crucified looks like, succumbing to the world. So often we, want something different, something other worldly, an experience or miracle, something extraordinary that gets us out of here. Some political remedy. This is the way of the Jews who sought signs, rather than Christ crucified.
There is something almost mundane about Christ Crucified. It says life isn’t going to be different for us. From an objective standpoint, its going to look the same. It makes our hope look foolish to the world. It means that we will suffer the same disappointments, the same set backs, the same struggles as everyone else in the world, maybe even more. I mean it isn’t as if Christ on the Cross holds out the promise of a rose garden. And I’ve been there a time or two wishing it did, praying for a break as the bills pile up, a marriage runs up on the rocks, attendance dwindles at church, and or, I just plain let someone down because I have my head stuck, and someone else leaves the congregation for reasons unexplained, while others visit only once, and your out of town when a close friend dies, but the breaks don’t seem to come, or when they do you don’t realize them. Have you been there, wishing it was different, as if believing in Jesus Christ would just eliminate all your problems, slashing your bills, giving you an unexpected promotion.
Christ Crucified makes one wonder, when your life is no different then anyone else’s, why do you think your after life should be? Foolishness to the Greek. But then Christ’s life was really no different in this world. After all, He was Crucified, he died a horrible death, and yet he was still Christ, and he still rose from the dead. And he promises to us a share in his life. Christ Crucified, It wouldn’t make any sense to preach it if he hadn’t risen from the dead. But he did rise from the dead, and that means that he did something on the cross. He did what he said he was going to do on the cross. He interprets the event. Someone, one of those Greek types seeking wisdom, told me just the other day, a God-man dying on the cross for my transgressions doesn’t make sense unless you are brought up to believe that. Nice try, I suppose, he was trying to dodge the existential ramifications of Christ‘s death and resurrection. But when that man rises from the dead, then that man gets to interpret the event and what happened there, he knows better than anyone. He says He died to forgive you your sins, and to drive that point home, he tells you to “eat his body, given for you,” and to Drink the cup of the New Testament, “in my blood, which is for you for the forgiveness of sins.” Because it was on the cross that the son of God was sacrificed, and it was on the cross that your death took place, and it was on the cross that your sins were forgiven, and it was there that the son of man was lifted up that whoever believes in him may have eternal life, just as he has.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Jesus, God and Man
[41] Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, [42] saying, "What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?" They said to him, "The son of David." [43] He said to them, "How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying,
[44] " 'The Lord said to my Lord,
Sit at my right hand,
until I put your enemies under your feet'?
[45] If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?" [46] And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions. Matthew 22:41-46 (ESV)
Jesus is rather quite conscious of who he is. People like to be ignorant of Jesus Christ. Well that is my theory. They latch on to many different clichés, conspiracy theories, and naïve regurgitations of 19th century liberal theologies, of which none hold in light of what the gospels say. Here we see Jesus, riddling the Pharisees as only he can. Here he claims divinity, even as he is a man. The son of God, the Son of David. “The Lord says to My Lord.” The Bible is replete with God talking to God. It is also replete with Jesus making claims to divinity.
Jesus knows he is the Christ. He has blessed Peter for calling himself as such. So when he makes the claim that the Christ is Lord, is God, then he is making the claim to be God. Jesus is God. His divinity necessarily precedes his humanity. This is a point that was lost on Arianism, and it’s modern counterpart, Mormonism. If you aren’t God, you aren’t God and never will be. It is inherent in the idea of God that he is eternal, without beginning and without end. Even the Pagan philosopher Aristotle, was able to determine this much as he articulated the cosmological argument for God. If you have a beginning, you are not God. It is not so much the end that matters. Immortality is possible even if you are created, that is in fact the point of Christianity, putting death to death. But immortality, though essential to divinity, is not the same as divinity. It is the idea of beginning. God has no beginning, he is eternal. If Jesus is God, as he claimed, and as he proved with his resurrection, than his divinity is also necessarily without beginning. There is no time when Jesus becomes God. You can’t become God. Becoming is unbecoming of God. What God became was man.
[44] " 'The Lord said to my Lord,
Sit at my right hand,
until I put your enemies under your feet'?
[45] If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?" [46] And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions. Matthew 22:41-46 (ESV)
Jesus is rather quite conscious of who he is. People like to be ignorant of Jesus Christ. Well that is my theory. They latch on to many different clichés, conspiracy theories, and naïve regurgitations of 19th century liberal theologies, of which none hold in light of what the gospels say. Here we see Jesus, riddling the Pharisees as only he can. Here he claims divinity, even as he is a man. The son of God, the Son of David. “The Lord says to My Lord.” The Bible is replete with God talking to God. It is also replete with Jesus making claims to divinity.
Jesus knows he is the Christ. He has blessed Peter for calling himself as such. So when he makes the claim that the Christ is Lord, is God, then he is making the claim to be God. Jesus is God. His divinity necessarily precedes his humanity. This is a point that was lost on Arianism, and it’s modern counterpart, Mormonism. If you aren’t God, you aren’t God and never will be. It is inherent in the idea of God that he is eternal, without beginning and without end. Even the Pagan philosopher Aristotle, was able to determine this much as he articulated the cosmological argument for God. If you have a beginning, you are not God. It is not so much the end that matters. Immortality is possible even if you are created, that is in fact the point of Christianity, putting death to death. But immortality, though essential to divinity, is not the same as divinity. It is the idea of beginning. God has no beginning, he is eternal. If Jesus is God, as he claimed, and as he proved with his resurrection, than his divinity is also necessarily without beginning. There is no time when Jesus becomes God. You can’t become God. Becoming is unbecoming of God. What God became was man.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Loving Yourself
[34] But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. [35] And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. [36] "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" [37] And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. [38] This is the great and first commandment. [39] And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. [40] On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets." Matthew 22:34-40 (ESV)
The Pharisees did not like the Sadducees. It seems that when Jesus silences them, the Pharisees begin to reassess Jesus, wondering if he might be one of them. Of course, they ask a law question. Pharisees can’t get passed the law, mostly because they never get around to actually understand it. It’s a softball pitch. Jesus doesn’t hesitate to answer it.
Love. Love God with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your mind. And the second like it. Love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus is just quoting Old Testament.
It’s funny, because people often think Jesus is here loosening up on the law, of which Jesus says not a jot or tittle will pass away before heaven and earth pass away.
In truth, it is love that is behind all the law. This is what the pharisees most often don’t get, even today. The law cannot be upheld without love. And when you love, you follow the law. This is why you need the gospel. Only the gospel can change a heart and give it love.
This is also the futility of the worldly sense of repentance where the verses that say repent and believe are concerned. The Pharisaical tendency here is to treat them as two different things, and after treat them as something that is only possible after a few years of life after some sort of age of accountability. There are so many problems with that. Where as the biblical concept of repentance recognizes the need based on original sin manifest in a dead heart only remedied by faith in the gospel, this worldly sense would actually require a person to commit particular sins to be repented of! In essence it requires guilt of particular sins, before salvation is possible. So in order to know the love of God and his grace, you first have to be guilty of adultery, theft, murder, drunkenness, or at the very least, childish insubordination.
But then you aren’t taking the law seriously if you conceive of repentance in this manner, because first of all the law requires love of God. All our sin is a result of our failure to love God. It is in effect a result from a lack of faith, as faith is a combination of fear, love and trust in God. When we love God above all things, then we love his name and do not blaspheme it, we love his word and attend to it diligently, we love his worship and being together with his saints. When we love God, we love his people, his creation, we love those whom he has redeemed.
We love our neighbor as ourselves. This starts with loving ourselves. All too often, I do believe, our lack of love for others is in proportion to our lack of love for ourselves. This can be a difficult one. Perhaps it isn’t that we don’t love ourselves. Paul says no one has ever hated his own flesh. But it is that we are often at a loss as to how to love ourselves, and so we engage in behaviors that often end up diminishing the love we have for ourselves. Today this is most often the case when it comes to sex. Outside of the committed relationship of marriage, this just exposes one to all sorts of danger. It is an act of love, and yet outside of marriage it is fraught with hazards which make it a very unloving thing to do for one’s self or others, even when they are willing participants. And to often it just contributes to a self loathing. For the men there is a debasing of themselves as they give in to the “animalistic urges” as I believe the old anglican rite of marriage used to describe it. There is a place for those, marriage. However, failure to control them, failure to confine them to the marital bed where one takes responsibility for the outcome in love for his partner, undermines his own view of himself as something more than animal. For women, you can only subject yourself to being used by so many men, before you are left feeling empty. Giving yourself to another, who ultimately rejects you and moves on is humiliating, I’d imagine. Of course none of this is really thought through at the time of indiscretion. Too often our young people aren’t even given the tools with which to think this sort of thing through.
But love for others starts with love for yourself. The list could go on to include numerous other self-destructive behaviors, drunkenness, drug abuse. Something strikes me as odd about an ad campaign against teen drinking that has people engaging in numerous extreme sports saying “lives on the edge, doesn’t drink.” I have nothing against extreme sports. But advertising this as a healthier way to carry out your death wish, strikes me as disingenuous. One most of those sports, unless done irresponsibly, are quite safe. But if you are trying to save lives, encouraging teens to live on the “edge” seems a bit counter productive, unless you mean the edge of the sidewalk. Just saying. Other than that, yeah, I think it is much better to encourage a kid to rock climb, mountain bike, kayak and what nor else rather than drink. Though I do think that whole campaign is a bit overblown, I suppose I just spent too much time in Europe. I think we make it more of a problem than it has to be, compounding and exacerbating the negative effects with our puritanical laws against it. The point is we could do a bit more to teach our kids to love themselves.
But if you have no love for yourself, you will not be able to love others. But from whence does love for self come? That is the conundrum. You can’t just tell one to love themselves. Perhaps a person can “fake it till you make it.” But love is fickle in this world of sin. I myself have gone through periods of self loathing, and depression accompanied by various self-destructive habits, including death wish mountain biking escapades chasing an adrenaline high.
But then it is equally true, that the more we learn to love others, the more we learn to love ourselves. But the true source for love in this life, is God who is Love, and who showed that love for us in His Son Jesus Christ. That perhaps is the beauty of the cross and resurrection that cracks the conundrum. Here we see a man, who has loved us, and loved his Father, enough that he sacrificed himself for us, dying in our place. But we see divine love for us in that the Father, so loved us, so cared for us as his children that he was willing to sacrifice his only begotten Son on our behalf, that he might forgive our sins, and adopt us as our own. And this is then the gospel, the source of our love. We love because he first loved us. And it is this love that is the mark of true repentance, which then is synonymous with faith. To believe is to repent.
The Pharisees did not like the Sadducees. It seems that when Jesus silences them, the Pharisees begin to reassess Jesus, wondering if he might be one of them. Of course, they ask a law question. Pharisees can’t get passed the law, mostly because they never get around to actually understand it. It’s a softball pitch. Jesus doesn’t hesitate to answer it.
Love. Love God with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your mind. And the second like it. Love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus is just quoting Old Testament.
It’s funny, because people often think Jesus is here loosening up on the law, of which Jesus says not a jot or tittle will pass away before heaven and earth pass away.
In truth, it is love that is behind all the law. This is what the pharisees most often don’t get, even today. The law cannot be upheld without love. And when you love, you follow the law. This is why you need the gospel. Only the gospel can change a heart and give it love.
This is also the futility of the worldly sense of repentance where the verses that say repent and believe are concerned. The Pharisaical tendency here is to treat them as two different things, and after treat them as something that is only possible after a few years of life after some sort of age of accountability. There are so many problems with that. Where as the biblical concept of repentance recognizes the need based on original sin manifest in a dead heart only remedied by faith in the gospel, this worldly sense would actually require a person to commit particular sins to be repented of! In essence it requires guilt of particular sins, before salvation is possible. So in order to know the love of God and his grace, you first have to be guilty of adultery, theft, murder, drunkenness, or at the very least, childish insubordination.
But then you aren’t taking the law seriously if you conceive of repentance in this manner, because first of all the law requires love of God. All our sin is a result of our failure to love God. It is in effect a result from a lack of faith, as faith is a combination of fear, love and trust in God. When we love God above all things, then we love his name and do not blaspheme it, we love his word and attend to it diligently, we love his worship and being together with his saints. When we love God, we love his people, his creation, we love those whom he has redeemed.
We love our neighbor as ourselves. This starts with loving ourselves. All too often, I do believe, our lack of love for others is in proportion to our lack of love for ourselves. This can be a difficult one. Perhaps it isn’t that we don’t love ourselves. Paul says no one has ever hated his own flesh. But it is that we are often at a loss as to how to love ourselves, and so we engage in behaviors that often end up diminishing the love we have for ourselves. Today this is most often the case when it comes to sex. Outside of the committed relationship of marriage, this just exposes one to all sorts of danger. It is an act of love, and yet outside of marriage it is fraught with hazards which make it a very unloving thing to do for one’s self or others, even when they are willing participants. And to often it just contributes to a self loathing. For the men there is a debasing of themselves as they give in to the “animalistic urges” as I believe the old anglican rite of marriage used to describe it. There is a place for those, marriage. However, failure to control them, failure to confine them to the marital bed where one takes responsibility for the outcome in love for his partner, undermines his own view of himself as something more than animal. For women, you can only subject yourself to being used by so many men, before you are left feeling empty. Giving yourself to another, who ultimately rejects you and moves on is humiliating, I’d imagine. Of course none of this is really thought through at the time of indiscretion. Too often our young people aren’t even given the tools with which to think this sort of thing through.
But love for others starts with love for yourself. The list could go on to include numerous other self-destructive behaviors, drunkenness, drug abuse. Something strikes me as odd about an ad campaign against teen drinking that has people engaging in numerous extreme sports saying “lives on the edge, doesn’t drink.” I have nothing against extreme sports. But advertising this as a healthier way to carry out your death wish, strikes me as disingenuous. One most of those sports, unless done irresponsibly, are quite safe. But if you are trying to save lives, encouraging teens to live on the “edge” seems a bit counter productive, unless you mean the edge of the sidewalk. Just saying. Other than that, yeah, I think it is much better to encourage a kid to rock climb, mountain bike, kayak and what nor else rather than drink. Though I do think that whole campaign is a bit overblown, I suppose I just spent too much time in Europe. I think we make it more of a problem than it has to be, compounding and exacerbating the negative effects with our puritanical laws against it. The point is we could do a bit more to teach our kids to love themselves.
But if you have no love for yourself, you will not be able to love others. But from whence does love for self come? That is the conundrum. You can’t just tell one to love themselves. Perhaps a person can “fake it till you make it.” But love is fickle in this world of sin. I myself have gone through periods of self loathing, and depression accompanied by various self-destructive habits, including death wish mountain biking escapades chasing an adrenaline high.
But then it is equally true, that the more we learn to love others, the more we learn to love ourselves. But the true source for love in this life, is God who is Love, and who showed that love for us in His Son Jesus Christ. That perhaps is the beauty of the cross and resurrection that cracks the conundrum. Here we see a man, who has loved us, and loved his Father, enough that he sacrificed himself for us, dying in our place. But we see divine love for us in that the Father, so loved us, so cared for us as his children that he was willing to sacrifice his only begotten Son on our behalf, that he might forgive our sins, and adopt us as our own. And this is then the gospel, the source of our love. We love because he first loved us. And it is this love that is the mark of true repentance, which then is synonymous with faith. To believe is to repent.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
The Resurrection of the Flesh
[23] The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, [24] saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother.' [25] Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother. [26] So too the second and third, down to the seventh. [27] After them all, the woman died. [28] In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her."
[29] But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. [30] For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. [31] And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: [32] 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living." [33] And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching. Matthew 22:23-33 (ESV)
He is not God of the dead but of the living. There is today much confusion regarding the resurrection. Perhaps, somewhat because of this passage that says we will be like the angels in heaven. Or perhaps because of the inherent Platonism in western society. Perhaps because we’ve translated the Nicene Creed to say the resurrection of the body, rather than the technically more accurate flesh. Being like angels does not mean we will be angels, or bodyless beings. It means we aren’t married or given into marriage. But being resurrected isn’t about going to heaven in spirit, or our souls leaving our bodies behind.
All one has to do to understand what eternal life and the resurrection is all about is look to Jesus Christ and his resurrection, the first fruits. He was raised in the flesh, that’s the controversy, he did not appear as a ghost, but his body left the tomb. Thomas inserted his hand in the flesh.
But he is the God of the living, not of the dead. Jesus says this in order to prove to the Sadducees that there is a resurrection. The Sadducees are silenced. But this has far reaching implications. It means that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are not dead. That they are living depends on the fact that there is a resurrection. If there was no resurrection then one could not say that they are living.
But there is some question as to in what sense Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are living, and what that means for us, or our loved ones who have passed on. One wonders if they are considered living in anticipation of the resurrection that is strictly a future event, or if even right now, do to the eternal nature of heaven they already enjoy their glorified bodies in heaven. I get a headache trying to think of how all that works out. One can think on these things for a long time. It is part of the beauty of Christianity I think, that in essence it is so simple a child can believe and have salvation, and yet a genius can put his brain to work on it for a life time and never plumb the depths of it.
[29] But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. [30] For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. [31] And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: [32] 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living." [33] And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching. Matthew 22:23-33 (ESV)
He is not God of the dead but of the living. There is today much confusion regarding the resurrection. Perhaps, somewhat because of this passage that says we will be like the angels in heaven. Or perhaps because of the inherent Platonism in western society. Perhaps because we’ve translated the Nicene Creed to say the resurrection of the body, rather than the technically more accurate flesh. Being like angels does not mean we will be angels, or bodyless beings. It means we aren’t married or given into marriage. But being resurrected isn’t about going to heaven in spirit, or our souls leaving our bodies behind.
All one has to do to understand what eternal life and the resurrection is all about is look to Jesus Christ and his resurrection, the first fruits. He was raised in the flesh, that’s the controversy, he did not appear as a ghost, but his body left the tomb. Thomas inserted his hand in the flesh.
But he is the God of the living, not of the dead. Jesus says this in order to prove to the Sadducees that there is a resurrection. The Sadducees are silenced. But this has far reaching implications. It means that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are not dead. That they are living depends on the fact that there is a resurrection. If there was no resurrection then one could not say that they are living.
But there is some question as to in what sense Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are living, and what that means for us, or our loved ones who have passed on. One wonders if they are considered living in anticipation of the resurrection that is strictly a future event, or if even right now, do to the eternal nature of heaven they already enjoy their glorified bodies in heaven. I get a headache trying to think of how all that works out. One can think on these things for a long time. It is part of the beauty of Christianity I think, that in essence it is so simple a child can believe and have salvation, and yet a genius can put his brain to work on it for a life time and never plumb the depths of it.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Give to Caesar what is Caesar's
[15] Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his talk. [16] And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances. [17] Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" [18] But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, "Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? [19] Show me the coin for the tax." And they brought him a denarius. [20] And Jesus said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?" [21] They said, "Caesar's." Then he said to them, "Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." [22] When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away. Matthew 22:15-22 (ESV)
Render on to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. Jesus shows himself to be cunning. He avoids getting trapped. He won’t say either that it is lawful or unlawful, but he re-frames the question, and answers in such a way that it makes logical sense to everyone.
But in answering the way he did, he introduced a concept that was foreign to Judaism, but reconciled a harsh fact they had to live with. In Judaism there was no concept of a separation between church and state. At least there was no thought that church and state should be separate. This is part of the reason the life of Israel was so heavily dependent on the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of the kings.
Only after the exile, when Israel never is given total freedom do you start to see the worship life of the Jews take on a life separate from that of the governing authorities. It was a reality that began even during the exile which can be seen in the life of Daniel and others. These were the first to show that you could respect pagan authorities, and yet still worship God faithfully. But this was more or less a compromise for the faithful. Judaism longed to see a weeding of church and state again, with a faithful king. This is what they saw in the manner of the messiah. They wanted a return to the days of David and Solomon.
But the word’s Jesus utters here provide a basis for the doctrine of a separation of Church and state, the correct balance of it becomes the new Shangri-La for Christians. It also gave the church the ability to survive for the first 300 some years where it was persecuted by the state it prayed for, (and now we have Christians hesitating to pray for the president because he is of a different party.)
Render on to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God that things that are God’s. Let the two of them govern each other according to their own standards, the church lives by the gospel. All we have is forgiveness
Render on to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. Jesus shows himself to be cunning. He avoids getting trapped. He won’t say either that it is lawful or unlawful, but he re-frames the question, and answers in such a way that it makes logical sense to everyone.
But in answering the way he did, he introduced a concept that was foreign to Judaism, but reconciled a harsh fact they had to live with. In Judaism there was no concept of a separation between church and state. At least there was no thought that church and state should be separate. This is part of the reason the life of Israel was so heavily dependent on the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of the kings.
Only after the exile, when Israel never is given total freedom do you start to see the worship life of the Jews take on a life separate from that of the governing authorities. It was a reality that began even during the exile which can be seen in the life of Daniel and others. These were the first to show that you could respect pagan authorities, and yet still worship God faithfully. But this was more or less a compromise for the faithful. Judaism longed to see a weeding of church and state again, with a faithful king. This is what they saw in the manner of the messiah. They wanted a return to the days of David and Solomon.
But the word’s Jesus utters here provide a basis for the doctrine of a separation of Church and state, the correct balance of it becomes the new Shangri-La for Christians. It also gave the church the ability to survive for the first 300 some years where it was persecuted by the state it prayed for, (and now we have Christians hesitating to pray for the president because he is of a different party.)
Render on to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God that things that are God’s. Let the two of them govern each other according to their own standards, the church lives by the gospel. All we have is forgiveness
Monday, July 18, 2011
Fifth Sunday of Trinity
Fourth Sunday After Trinity
July 17, 2011
Luke 6:36-42
Bror Erickson
[36] Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. [37] "Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; [38] give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you."
[39] He also told them a parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? [40] A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. [41] Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? [42] How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. Luke 6:36-42 (ESV)
Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful… He also told them a parable; Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?”
The whole text here is not much more than law. Except for this reminder that your Father is merciful, you have law, and the kind of law I struggle with more than anything. I think it is the kind of law we all struggle with, I think it is inborn with us to think we are better than others, or above others. It is a law against self-righteousness. It is a law that says to be merciful, because we all need mercy.
Judge not, and you will not be judged, condemn not, and you will not be condemned, forgive, and you will be forgiven. Do for others what your Father has done for you. Your Father has withheld judgment, your Father has pardoned you, your Father has forgiven you with the blood of Jesus Christ.
Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall in the pit? Jesus warns us that we are all blind. We are all blind when it comes to the law. It’s a strange thing. It is not like we can’t help each other out, it is that we need to realize we have planks in our eyes. We all have planks in our eyes, including our brother or sister objecting to us for trying to take the “speck” out of his eye, when we have a log in our own.
Sin, it is such a tricky thing. The depths of it in our own lives is never completely plumbed. We search ourselves week after week in a moment of silence, confessing incognito, as it were, to our sins. What do we confess? Adultery? Lust? Theft? Murder? Disrespecting our parents? Drunkenness? Do we confess the sins of Judgmentalism as we come off the heels of the Casey Anthony trial? The trial the media can’t seem to get enough of? Do we harbor anger at the jury? Do we judge those who judge her? Sin people, we have it. It infects us to the core! We think we are incapable. That’s what gets me. I hear people utter it under their breath. I hear it spoken behind the judgment. I could never do that, I’m a good person. We want to believe that so bad. But it is the fear that is true. It is the fear behind that that drives us to judge. It is the fear behind that that compels us to show no mercy. It is the fear that that sin lives inside all of us. The truth is, you are a sinner, and you are capable of that whatever it is. You are capable of doing even that which most sickens you to death. You are capable of that that insights even the most righteous of your anger and cries for justice. That’s why you cry for justice.
And that isn’t to say there isn’t a place for justice in this world. There most certainly is. It’s probably more to say, be careful what you ask for. There will come a time when you aren’t asking for justice but mercy. In fact, when we are honest with ourselves, and plumb the depths of our sin, then we are the last one’s who should be calling for justice, and the first one’s who should be calling for mercy. But to plumb the depths of our sin like that, is only possible with the help of Jesus, with his word, because he is the only one not blind, the only one not infected with sin, the one who has not even a speck in his eye, but sees our sin for what it is, and he alone is able to show it to us, to train us fully, so that being fully trained we, his disciples, would be like him, our teacher. And our teacher, the only one truly righteous, did not come to judge or condemn, because the world was already condemned, he came to forgive and show the mercy of his Father, our Father, by dying for our sins on the cross, and rising again from the dead to give us life, and give it to us with abundance. To give us life. He gave us life. He gives us life. He forgives our sins, and shows us mercy. So it is, that when we in the name of Christ forgive and show mercy to others, when we love them with the love with which he has loved us, well then, we give them the life he has given us.
Now the peace of God that surpasses all understanding keep your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.
July 17, 2011
Luke 6:36-42
Bror Erickson
[36] Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. [37] "Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; [38] give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you."
[39] He also told them a parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? [40] A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. [41] Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? [42] How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. Luke 6:36-42 (ESV)
Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful… He also told them a parable; Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?”
The whole text here is not much more than law. Except for this reminder that your Father is merciful, you have law, and the kind of law I struggle with more than anything. I think it is the kind of law we all struggle with, I think it is inborn with us to think we are better than others, or above others. It is a law against self-righteousness. It is a law that says to be merciful, because we all need mercy.
Judge not, and you will not be judged, condemn not, and you will not be condemned, forgive, and you will be forgiven. Do for others what your Father has done for you. Your Father has withheld judgment, your Father has pardoned you, your Father has forgiven you with the blood of Jesus Christ.
Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall in the pit? Jesus warns us that we are all blind. We are all blind when it comes to the law. It’s a strange thing. It is not like we can’t help each other out, it is that we need to realize we have planks in our eyes. We all have planks in our eyes, including our brother or sister objecting to us for trying to take the “speck” out of his eye, when we have a log in our own.
Sin, it is such a tricky thing. The depths of it in our own lives is never completely plumbed. We search ourselves week after week in a moment of silence, confessing incognito, as it were, to our sins. What do we confess? Adultery? Lust? Theft? Murder? Disrespecting our parents? Drunkenness? Do we confess the sins of Judgmentalism as we come off the heels of the Casey Anthony trial? The trial the media can’t seem to get enough of? Do we harbor anger at the jury? Do we judge those who judge her? Sin people, we have it. It infects us to the core! We think we are incapable. That’s what gets me. I hear people utter it under their breath. I hear it spoken behind the judgment. I could never do that, I’m a good person. We want to believe that so bad. But it is the fear that is true. It is the fear behind that that drives us to judge. It is the fear behind that that compels us to show no mercy. It is the fear that that sin lives inside all of us. The truth is, you are a sinner, and you are capable of that whatever it is. You are capable of doing even that which most sickens you to death. You are capable of that that insights even the most righteous of your anger and cries for justice. That’s why you cry for justice.
And that isn’t to say there isn’t a place for justice in this world. There most certainly is. It’s probably more to say, be careful what you ask for. There will come a time when you aren’t asking for justice but mercy. In fact, when we are honest with ourselves, and plumb the depths of our sin, then we are the last one’s who should be calling for justice, and the first one’s who should be calling for mercy. But to plumb the depths of our sin like that, is only possible with the help of Jesus, with his word, because he is the only one not blind, the only one not infected with sin, the one who has not even a speck in his eye, but sees our sin for what it is, and he alone is able to show it to us, to train us fully, so that being fully trained we, his disciples, would be like him, our teacher. And our teacher, the only one truly righteous, did not come to judge or condemn, because the world was already condemned, he came to forgive and show the mercy of his Father, our Father, by dying for our sins on the cross, and rising again from the dead to give us life, and give it to us with abundance. To give us life. He gave us life. He gives us life. He forgives our sins, and shows us mercy. So it is, that when we in the name of Christ forgive and show mercy to others, when we love them with the love with which he has loved us, well then, we give them the life he has given us.
Now the peace of God that surpasses all understanding keep your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
A great Legacy
This book is a Festschrift in honor of Dr. Rod Rosenbladt who is known for his many years of tireless service in breaking students of their pietism and teaching them the glories of Lutheran Orthodoxy at Christ College, now known as Concordia University Irvine. The man is also known for legendary one liners that have the cast of Whitehorse Inn licking wounds for weeks as he exposes the weakness not only of American Arminianism, but also the Reformed position. There is only one Lutheran on that show, because two would over power them.
But it's a Festschrift you say, we like the man but why should we buy another Festschrift? I admit I have a few of these on my shelves, and most of them are disappointing except for an essay or two. This one breaks the mold, there may have been one or two essays I did not find interesting. Of course the other members of the Whitehorse Inn and, even R.C. Sproul contribute riveting essays, most are the essays of students who have studied under Dr. Rosenbladt's tutelage. It shows an impressive legacy he leaves behind as he plans to retire from teaching.
For those interested in apologetics, this book may well be indispensable. But the essays cover the gamit of theological interest today, from historical theology, to pastoral uses of apologetics, Luther's treatment of Islam, etc. there is much here showing that Dr. Rosenbladt has succeeded in handing down the faith once and for all delivered to the saints, to yet another generation of scholars.
But it's a Festschrift you say, we like the man but why should we buy another Festschrift? I admit I have a few of these on my shelves, and most of them are disappointing except for an essay or two. This one breaks the mold, there may have been one or two essays I did not find interesting. Of course the other members of the Whitehorse Inn and, even R.C. Sproul contribute riveting essays, most are the essays of students who have studied under Dr. Rosenbladt's tutelage. It shows an impressive legacy he leaves behind as he plans to retire from teaching.
For those interested in apologetics, this book may well be indispensable. But the essays cover the gamit of theological interest today, from historical theology, to pastoral uses of apologetics, Luther's treatment of Islam, etc. there is much here showing that Dr. Rosenbladt has succeeded in handing down the faith once and for all delivered to the saints, to yet another generation of scholars.
Friday, July 15, 2011
The Wedding Garment
[22:1] And again Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying, [2] "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son, [3] and sent his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding feast, but they would not come. [4] Again he sent other servants, saying, 'Tell those who are invited, See, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding feast.' [5] But they paid no attention and went off, one to his farm, another to his business, [6] while the rest seized his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them. [7] The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. [8] Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. [9] Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.' [10] And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests.
[11] "But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. [12] And he said to him, 'Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?' And he was speechless. [13] Then the king said to the attendants, 'Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' [14] For many are called, but few are chosen." Matthew 22:1-14 (ESV)
I suppose the temptation is to make this about proper attire for going to church. I’ll try to avoid that. But what is this wedding garment, the lack of which gets the man thrown into the outer darkness, which is just another term for hell by the way.
This is one that isn’t exactly the easiest to make heads or tails of. At least I haven’t found it all that easy. The only way it seems to make sense to me, is if he is here talking about the “outward association” of the kingdom of God, the church we call it, meaning the gathering on earth of God’s saints, where they gather around the wedding feast of the Lord’s Supper, which should be at every gathering of Christ’s saints. I do not get this ambivalence towards the supper that is so often found in congregation after congregation. And when Ihear an Altar guild complain that it is too much work, I’m tempted to tell them to stay home all together. IF you can’t find joy in preparing for the Lord’s Supper that other’s might benefit from the forgiveness of sins, and find it to be a chore to set out some wafers and wine, then perhaps this parable is talking about you. As with all these thing. That might be harsh, but what are you doing on the altar guild? If you find it a chore, don’t do it. Make room for someone else. Maybe it is time you just sat and enjoyed the service, there comes a time for that too. I do realize you can’t make one enjoy something by telling them to enjoy it.
But this is what the parable is getting at. The wedding feast. This isn’t the heavenly throne room, to which only those with faith, the garment to be clothed with, will go. This is church. And the warning here is almost moot. It seems to be, going to church isn’t enough, you need faith too.
What is odd, is so many people seem to have the idea everyone else in this story has. “I have faith, why do I need to go to church.” Pastors hear that sort way to often. It is never said that bluntly, but it is what is meant. The pastor is left asking, what kind of faith is this, that doesn’t want to be at the wedding feast? What kind of faith doesn’t want to be with Christ and his gifts on Sunday morning? I’ve never seen this work out well for the families involved. Mom’s moaning after the fact about their kids shacking up or joining cults, Well I can sympathize, but excuse me if I don’t find fault with previous pastors or myself. God has given God fearing parents responsibility for raising God fearing children. And yes he tends to hold father’s responsible for this, even if it seems that more often than not it’s the moms that work hardest at it.
But true enough, being a member of the institution is nothing if you do not have the wedding garment that is faith.
Or perhaps the other side of it is repentance, the hall mark of faith. One can’t have the one without the other. And perhaps that is the thing that needs to be pointed out more today than anything. As it seems today, people talk about faith and yet seem to have none. Faith seems to be synonymous with doubt in some circles. It’s the faith of Pharisees, worse than that of demons who at least recognize God is one. It is a haughty faith they speak of that depends on their own doing, and sees no place for the sacraments. Lord have mercy.
[11] "But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. [12] And he said to him, 'Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?' And he was speechless. [13] Then the king said to the attendants, 'Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' [14] For many are called, but few are chosen." Matthew 22:1-14 (ESV)
I suppose the temptation is to make this about proper attire for going to church. I’ll try to avoid that. But what is this wedding garment, the lack of which gets the man thrown into the outer darkness, which is just another term for hell by the way.
This is one that isn’t exactly the easiest to make heads or tails of. At least I haven’t found it all that easy. The only way it seems to make sense to me, is if he is here talking about the “outward association” of the kingdom of God, the church we call it, meaning the gathering on earth of God’s saints, where they gather around the wedding feast of the Lord’s Supper, which should be at every gathering of Christ’s saints. I do not get this ambivalence towards the supper that is so often found in congregation after congregation. And when Ihear an Altar guild complain that it is too much work, I’m tempted to tell them to stay home all together. IF you can’t find joy in preparing for the Lord’s Supper that other’s might benefit from the forgiveness of sins, and find it to be a chore to set out some wafers and wine, then perhaps this parable is talking about you. As with all these thing. That might be harsh, but what are you doing on the altar guild? If you find it a chore, don’t do it. Make room for someone else. Maybe it is time you just sat and enjoyed the service, there comes a time for that too. I do realize you can’t make one enjoy something by telling them to enjoy it.
But this is what the parable is getting at. The wedding feast. This isn’t the heavenly throne room, to which only those with faith, the garment to be clothed with, will go. This is church. And the warning here is almost moot. It seems to be, going to church isn’t enough, you need faith too.
What is odd, is so many people seem to have the idea everyone else in this story has. “I have faith, why do I need to go to church.” Pastors hear that sort way to often. It is never said that bluntly, but it is what is meant. The pastor is left asking, what kind of faith is this, that doesn’t want to be at the wedding feast? What kind of faith doesn’t want to be with Christ and his gifts on Sunday morning? I’ve never seen this work out well for the families involved. Mom’s moaning after the fact about their kids shacking up or joining cults, Well I can sympathize, but excuse me if I don’t find fault with previous pastors or myself. God has given God fearing parents responsibility for raising God fearing children. And yes he tends to hold father’s responsible for this, even if it seems that more often than not it’s the moms that work hardest at it.
But true enough, being a member of the institution is nothing if you do not have the wedding garment that is faith.
Or perhaps the other side of it is repentance, the hall mark of faith. One can’t have the one without the other. And perhaps that is the thing that needs to be pointed out more today than anything. As it seems today, people talk about faith and yet seem to have none. Faith seems to be synonymous with doubt in some circles. It’s the faith of Pharisees, worse than that of demons who at least recognize God is one. It is a haughty faith they speak of that depends on their own doing, and sees no place for the sacraments. Lord have mercy.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Perilous Writing
Wilbur Smith is known for his action pact adventure novels, most of which take place in Africa. I’ve been a fan for a long time. He doesn’t break genre in this book, "Those in Peril". It lives up to his ability to pack a page with adventure, and is very entertaining on many levels.
Set in contemporary Arabia and North Africa, Somalia, with side trips to Texas, Paris, Colorado, and Capetown, the story unfolds as a rich girl is kidnapped, raped, and held for ransom only to be rescued by her oil baroness mother’s security team, who later find they need to return and finish the job in order to insure their own security. With the help of a Natural Gas ship turned Trojan horse they infiltrate and do away with the Somali Pirate problem. It makes for a good fantasy. Lots of guns, bombs, blood and fighting.
What is troubling and perhaps even perilous about this book, is that it feeds the politically correct monster or perhaps “the beast.” Cross, the main protagonist, ex-military officer from south Africa turned security provider, all but breaks character on page 194 to deliver the same none thinking, historically in accurate but politically correct speech concerning Islam as being essentially a religion of peace. His theory goes that Islam is no different than Christianity, Judaism, or Buddhism, all of which supposedly have had their own violent histories. For proof he trots out the same tired ponies of the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Really he only betrays his own ignorance concerning world religions, and history. Not to mention he merely insults Islam by not taking its own founding documents and culture seriously. For I nice anecdote to this sort of sloppy non-scholarship one should read Rodney Stark’s, “The Case for the Crusades,” coupled with a reading of the Koran. Reading the Koran might itself be more of a detriment to this view than anything.
Christendom has, to be sure, experienced explosions of violence. Yet one might recall that the conversion of the Roman Empire came about amidst Christians turning the other cheek as they were persecuted for believing in a God that so love the world that he gave his only son to die for the sins of the world, and taught his followers to so love the world themselves. Love sometimes does require one to go to war to defend weak and innocent; something that Wilbur Smith’s book does a great job of illustrating amidst the glaring weakness of political correctness, and thus war is not antithetical to Christianity. But this is a far cry from the origins and teachings of Islam as found in the Koran and experienced in history. Mecca, the home of Islam itself did not even experience a peaceful conversion but was first conquered by Mohammed’s men and forced to convert by the sword! This was repeated in ever widening circles for the history of the religion, though it has more or less stagnated in the west after the taking of Constantinople. Especially after having been repelled from the gates of Vienna twice, and turned back by the last crusading order from the Isle of Malta. Of course, the glaring contradiction concerning the history of Islam, and Crosse’s take on religion is also brought out in the same book when a plucky retired American Navy Admiral reads a letter from his great Grandfather who fought the Barbary Pirates, and explains that “their book” demands them to make war on all infidels. (pg. 291)
I’m afraid it is time for the west to wake up and come to terms with just who “the beast” really is as our crusading forefathers once did, rather than to keep making the mistake Cross and his team did the first time, and leaving the job only half done. It is much more serious than even Fox News would like you to think.
Set in contemporary Arabia and North Africa, Somalia, with side trips to Texas, Paris, Colorado, and Capetown, the story unfolds as a rich girl is kidnapped, raped, and held for ransom only to be rescued by her oil baroness mother’s security team, who later find they need to return and finish the job in order to insure their own security. With the help of a Natural Gas ship turned Trojan horse they infiltrate and do away with the Somali Pirate problem. It makes for a good fantasy. Lots of guns, bombs, blood and fighting.
What is troubling and perhaps even perilous about this book, is that it feeds the politically correct monster or perhaps “the beast.” Cross, the main protagonist, ex-military officer from south Africa turned security provider, all but breaks character on page 194 to deliver the same none thinking, historically in accurate but politically correct speech concerning Islam as being essentially a religion of peace. His theory goes that Islam is no different than Christianity, Judaism, or Buddhism, all of which supposedly have had their own violent histories. For proof he trots out the same tired ponies of the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Really he only betrays his own ignorance concerning world religions, and history. Not to mention he merely insults Islam by not taking its own founding documents and culture seriously. For I nice anecdote to this sort of sloppy non-scholarship one should read Rodney Stark’s, “The Case for the Crusades,” coupled with a reading of the Koran. Reading the Koran might itself be more of a detriment to this view than anything.
Christendom has, to be sure, experienced explosions of violence. Yet one might recall that the conversion of the Roman Empire came about amidst Christians turning the other cheek as they were persecuted for believing in a God that so love the world that he gave his only son to die for the sins of the world, and taught his followers to so love the world themselves. Love sometimes does require one to go to war to defend weak and innocent; something that Wilbur Smith’s book does a great job of illustrating amidst the glaring weakness of political correctness, and thus war is not antithetical to Christianity. But this is a far cry from the origins and teachings of Islam as found in the Koran and experienced in history. Mecca, the home of Islam itself did not even experience a peaceful conversion but was first conquered by Mohammed’s men and forced to convert by the sword! This was repeated in ever widening circles for the history of the religion, though it has more or less stagnated in the west after the taking of Constantinople. Especially after having been repelled from the gates of Vienna twice, and turned back by the last crusading order from the Isle of Malta. Of course, the glaring contradiction concerning the history of Islam, and Crosse’s take on religion is also brought out in the same book when a plucky retired American Navy Admiral reads a letter from his great Grandfather who fought the Barbary Pirates, and explains that “their book” demands them to make war on all infidels. (pg. 291)
I’m afraid it is time for the west to wake up and come to terms with just who “the beast” really is as our crusading forefathers once did, rather than to keep making the mistake Cross and his team did the first time, and leaving the job only half done. It is much more serious than even Fox News would like you to think.
The Cornerstone
[42] Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures:
" 'The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;
this was the Lord's doing,
and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
[43] Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. [44] And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."
[45] When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. [46] And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet. Matthew 21:42-46 (ESV)
The chief priests and the Pharisees understand intrinsically what Jesus was saying. What is interesting, is even knowing this they go ahead to do exactly what the parables say they will do. They start to plot to kill the son. The stone the builders rejected, becomes the cornerstone. Jesus is our cornerstone, the basis of our faith, the all in all, because the Pharisees succeeded in killing him, but they couldn’t keep him down, he rose from the dead to be our life.
" 'The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;
this was the Lord's doing,
and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
[43] Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. [44] And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."
[45] When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. [46] And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet. Matthew 21:42-46 (ESV)
The chief priests and the Pharisees understand intrinsically what Jesus was saying. What is interesting, is even knowing this they go ahead to do exactly what the parables say they will do. They start to plot to kill the son. The stone the builders rejected, becomes the cornerstone. Jesus is our cornerstone, the basis of our faith, the all in all, because the Pharisees succeeded in killing him, but they couldn’t keep him down, he rose from the dead to be our life.
the Cornetstone
[42] Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures:
" 'The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;
this was the Lord's doing,
and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
[43] Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. [44] And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."
[45] When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. [46] And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet. Matthew 21:42-46 (ESV)
The chief priests and the Pharisees understand intrinsically what Jesus was saying. What is interesting, is even knowing this they go ahead to do exactly what the parables say they will do. They start to plot to kill the son. The stone the builders rejected, becomes the cornerstone. Jesus is our cornerstone, the basis of our faith, the all in all, because the Pharisees succeeded in killing him, but they couldn’t keep him down, he rose from the dead to be our life.
" 'The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;
this was the Lord's doing,
and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
[43] Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. [44] And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."
[45] When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. [46] And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet. Matthew 21:42-46 (ESV)
The chief priests and the Pharisees understand intrinsically what Jesus was saying. What is interesting, is even knowing this they go ahead to do exactly what the parables say they will do. They start to plot to kill the son. The stone the builders rejected, becomes the cornerstone. Jesus is our cornerstone, the basis of our faith, the all in all, because the Pharisees succeeded in killing him, but they couldn’t keep him down, he rose from the dead to be our life.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Giving the Kingdom to those who Bear Fruit
[33] "Hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and went into another country. [34] When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit. [35] And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another. [36] Again he sent other servants, more than the first. And they did the same to them. [37] Finally he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' [38] But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, 'This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.' [39] And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. [40] When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?" [41] They said to him, "He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons." Matthew 21:33-41 (ESV)
This is a parable concerning Israel. Israel being the vineyard, the priests and Pharisees being the tenants to whom it is rented. It doesn’t end well. People today like to complain about the New Testament being anti-Semitic. I don’t know exactly how this charge is leveled in reality. On the other hand, many Christians have gone overboard in the opposite direction, sacrificing the gospel so as not to offend Jews today. Others go so far as to work modern Israel into an eschatological matrix that sees Jews as being saved without any belief in Christ. This parable speaks against that as those in the crowd who heard the parable understood.
In so far as Judaism can be distinguished from Christianity, it must be said that the New Testament is anti-Judaism. Modern Judaism is an outgrowth of the pharisaic sect of the New Testament era. Other strands of Judaism that were around at that time have died out. The Pharisaic sect has of course splintered itself over the years, and in many ways is unrecognizable in any of its forms to the first century sect. But Judaism only survives as a religion so long as it rejects Christ as the messiah. The New Testament does not concern itself with Jewishness as a nationality or ethnicity. That is the thing about Christ, in him there is no Jew or Greek… The Gospel is for all alike, the Jew, Greek, American, Indian, black white, yellow green, red and blue. Would that our churches reflected that more often.
The parable at hand illustrates the problem though. The kingdom will be rested from the Pharisees. After the resurrection, and especially with the destruction of the temple, it is. But there is a greater warning for the church today here. We can never be secure in our salvation, or think that our church is immune to the threats exposed in this parable of those who will not give the owner his due in the form of fruit. Mostly what this means is we cannot afford to persecute the prophets, those who speak true the word of God. Today this is happens in so many forms within the institutions we call church. Liberal protestantism, in the mask of genteel politeness, has ripped the concept of integrity from the church, has ripped from the people even the ability to take God’s word seriously. The minute one has his sensibilities offended they leave any investigation of doctrine on the floor.
But the institutions tend to approve the liberals and shun the conservatives, and in today’s world, yesterday’s liberals have become today’s conservatives. Sloppy scholarship is no longer tolerated or approved of, today it is merely assumed at the outset even among conservatives. N.T, Wright is considered a conservative, because he argues for the resurrection, but the rest of his scholarship undermines the implications of that resurrection as he obscures justification while appealing to extra biblical texts to try “get behind the text and divine what Paul really meant, as opposed to what he really said!” Witherington follows suit. I’m running into the same thing reading Wolfheart Pannenberg right now, who has incredibly interesting insights to the text, but muddles his scholarship with appeals to Q, and merely assuming a dichotomy where the resurrection accounts are in play, somehow assuming there is a contradiction between an empty tomb and accounts of resurrection appearances, that really dumbfound me as the one seems dependent on the other in a manner where neither is possible without the other! It’s mind boggling how someone that smart can be that stupid at the same time.
In any case, the vineyard withers under such scholarship. But where the gospel is there will also be evangelization bearing fruit for the tenant. Where the church remains faithful to the gospel there will be growth. Probably not the same “dynamic” growth in numbers and so on that one sees in faddish Christianity. But that typically isn’t growth at all. If there is no gospel, there is no “church growth.” Where there is the gospel, there is always growth perceivable or not. On the other hand, where people are leaving a church like Norwegian sewer rats from a sinking ship, one might also question if the gospel is really being preached. Today there seems to be a tendency within “confessional” Lutheran circles to blame declining numbers on the gospel. I’m not always sure it is the gospel’s fault. Sure the gospel offends. Other things offend too. Just because one is offended, does not mean it was the gospel that offended them. The pastor cannot afford to not examine himself, and keep a close watch on his teaching, as Paul admonishes Timothy. We have no more assurance than the teachers of Old Israel; we too need Christ, never forgetting we too live by the gospel.
This is a parable concerning Israel. Israel being the vineyard, the priests and Pharisees being the tenants to whom it is rented. It doesn’t end well. People today like to complain about the New Testament being anti-Semitic. I don’t know exactly how this charge is leveled in reality. On the other hand, many Christians have gone overboard in the opposite direction, sacrificing the gospel so as not to offend Jews today. Others go so far as to work modern Israel into an eschatological matrix that sees Jews as being saved without any belief in Christ. This parable speaks against that as those in the crowd who heard the parable understood.
In so far as Judaism can be distinguished from Christianity, it must be said that the New Testament is anti-Judaism. Modern Judaism is an outgrowth of the pharisaic sect of the New Testament era. Other strands of Judaism that were around at that time have died out. The Pharisaic sect has of course splintered itself over the years, and in many ways is unrecognizable in any of its forms to the first century sect. But Judaism only survives as a religion so long as it rejects Christ as the messiah. The New Testament does not concern itself with Jewishness as a nationality or ethnicity. That is the thing about Christ, in him there is no Jew or Greek… The Gospel is for all alike, the Jew, Greek, American, Indian, black white, yellow green, red and blue. Would that our churches reflected that more often.
The parable at hand illustrates the problem though. The kingdom will be rested from the Pharisees. After the resurrection, and especially with the destruction of the temple, it is. But there is a greater warning for the church today here. We can never be secure in our salvation, or think that our church is immune to the threats exposed in this parable of those who will not give the owner his due in the form of fruit. Mostly what this means is we cannot afford to persecute the prophets, those who speak true the word of God. Today this is happens in so many forms within the institutions we call church. Liberal protestantism, in the mask of genteel politeness, has ripped the concept of integrity from the church, has ripped from the people even the ability to take God’s word seriously. The minute one has his sensibilities offended they leave any investigation of doctrine on the floor.
But the institutions tend to approve the liberals and shun the conservatives, and in today’s world, yesterday’s liberals have become today’s conservatives. Sloppy scholarship is no longer tolerated or approved of, today it is merely assumed at the outset even among conservatives. N.T, Wright is considered a conservative, because he argues for the resurrection, but the rest of his scholarship undermines the implications of that resurrection as he obscures justification while appealing to extra biblical texts to try “get behind the text and divine what Paul really meant, as opposed to what he really said!” Witherington follows suit. I’m running into the same thing reading Wolfheart Pannenberg right now, who has incredibly interesting insights to the text, but muddles his scholarship with appeals to Q, and merely assuming a dichotomy where the resurrection accounts are in play, somehow assuming there is a contradiction between an empty tomb and accounts of resurrection appearances, that really dumbfound me as the one seems dependent on the other in a manner where neither is possible without the other! It’s mind boggling how someone that smart can be that stupid at the same time.
In any case, the vineyard withers under such scholarship. But where the gospel is there will also be evangelization bearing fruit for the tenant. Where the church remains faithful to the gospel there will be growth. Probably not the same “dynamic” growth in numbers and so on that one sees in faddish Christianity. But that typically isn’t growth at all. If there is no gospel, there is no “church growth.” Where there is the gospel, there is always growth perceivable or not. On the other hand, where people are leaving a church like Norwegian sewer rats from a sinking ship, one might also question if the gospel is really being preached. Today there seems to be a tendency within “confessional” Lutheran circles to blame declining numbers on the gospel. I’m not always sure it is the gospel’s fault. Sure the gospel offends. Other things offend too. Just because one is offended, does not mean it was the gospel that offended them. The pastor cannot afford to not examine himself, and keep a close watch on his teaching, as Paul admonishes Timothy. We have no more assurance than the teachers of Old Israel; we too need Christ, never forgetting we too live by the gospel.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
An Exercise in Blindness
[28] "What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, 'Son, go and work in the vineyard today.' [29] And he answered, 'I will not,' but afterward he changed his mind and went. [30] And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, 'I go, sir,' but did not go. [31] Which of the two did the will of his father?" They said, "The first." Jesus said to them, "Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you. [32] For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him. Matthew 21:28-32 (ESV)
Jesus starts laying it thick on them. He actually condemns them. They thought they had it made They were supposedly the righteous ones. But it was the tax collectors and prostitutes that repented and went the way of righteousness that John preached. They were willing to be forgiven. The Pharisees spent too much time trying to make sure they had nothing to be repentant of, its an exercise in blindness, to see how much you can avoid seeing.
Jesus starts laying it thick on them. He actually condemns them. They thought they had it made They were supposedly the righteous ones. But it was the tax collectors and prostitutes that repented and went the way of righteousness that John preached. They were willing to be forgiven. The Pharisees spent too much time trying to make sure they had nothing to be repentant of, its an exercise in blindness, to see how much you can avoid seeing.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Third Sunday after Trinity
[15:1] Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. [2] And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, "This man receives sinners and eats with them."
[3] So he told them this parable: [4] "What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? [5] And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. [6] And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.' [7] Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.
[8] "Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and seek diligently until she finds it? [9] And when she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost.' [10] Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents." Luke 15:1-10 (ESV)
“Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost. Just so, I tell you there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance” “Over one sinner who repents.”
The 99 bring no joy because they do not repent. The 99 bring no joy because they stay in their sins. But there is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents. It is the joy of a father receiving a son back. It is great joy indeed. The question though is what is repentance? What is it’s relationship to faith? When Martin Luther Penned his 95 thesis the first one claimed that the whole life of the Christian should be one of repentance. He rebelled against indulgences because they short circuited repentance, and all but encouraged sin. Of course, it is often thought that Lutheranism encourages the same with it’s emphasis on Grace alone and faith alone. But this is not true, because where there is no repentance there is no faith, not in the way that Lutheran’s understand faith which is to fear, love, and trust in God above all things. It’s funny about the 95 thesis, that one reading this document that started the reformation, doesn’t notice a whole lot Lutheran about it. Luther wrote those almost as one stabbing in the dark at something that was wrong. There isn’t a lot about forgiveness, there is nothing about faith alone. Behind the document are numerous Roman Catholic assumptions. Yet, he is right when he claims that the whole of Christian life should be marked by repentance.
It is sort of curious to me, today when I hear certain representatives of so called Christian traditions, that refuse to baptize babies, claiming one needs to repent before they can be saved. Denying the Grace of God given in baptism to those whom Christ adored so much as to make models concerning the reception of God’s kingdom is not Christian, and it betrays a false sense of repentance, but a sense of repentance that I think we are often guilty of harboring, even a Pharisaical sense of repentance. It is an idea that gives rise to classifications of sin, self-righteousness, and despair.
Repentance is the call to faith, the call to faith is a call to repentance. It was the call of John the Baptist who was preparing the way, and it was the call of Jesus Christ who is the way. But it is often confused. Repentance is thought of as something we do, and possibly even as something we can do without the help of God. But true repentance, just like faith is an impossibility apart from the work of the Holy Spirit.
There is an earthly sense of repentance, and this is where I think the confusion comes in. Repentance here means a couple different things, that are not necessarily foreign to Christian repentance, but are inadequate for the definition. In the world repentance is a sorrowful feeling over a grievous, and a promise to stop, or atleast and attempt to try and stop. And this is what so many Christian theologies seem to think of repentance. It is perhaps the reason the Amish let their kids go wild for a couple years, so they have something to repent of. The true problem with this concept of repentance is a failure to think of sin in anything but human terms. To think of it only in regards to those things we consider sinful or particularly bad, perhaps mostly because of their ill effects on society, and the disruptions they cause to a peaceful existence, and the hurt it causes in one’s own life and those with whom we share life. And though that is a meaningful distinction, or classification to make, it fails to plumb the depths of what sin is and what we most need to repent of. Drunkenness, adultery, fornication, theft, murder, the despising of parents and other authorities, should have not place in the Christian life, and where there is guilt concerning these things there needs also be repentance even in the earthly sense if faith and repentance in the Christian sense are to live.
But repentance is so much more, and means so much more than adopting the middleclass mores of society at large. And it is this repentance that brings joy to the heart of our Father in heaven and causes his angels to rejoice. It is the repentance that is coming to faith. God does not classify sin in the same way we do, so he does not regard repentance in the same way we do. At the heart of sin, is the great sin of unbelief. All sin is a result of our failure to fear, love and trust in God above all things. This is why even our good works, when done outside of faith can be considered sins, it is why even our good works need to be forgiven if they are to be regarded as good in the sight of God. This is what the Pharisees failed to understand, the reason why the 99 think they need no repentance. They do not see their unbelief as being sin. It is also why we don’t commune people of other faiths or denominations in reality. No one needs Jesus to give up drunkenness, though he might help. It doesn’t take rocket science to figure out that fornication and adultery are bad for society and for an individual, same with a host of other sins. You can repent of those and still not know true repentance.
True repentance is a gift from God that comes with faith in Jesus Christ who forgives our sin, who forgives us of adultery, fornication, drunkenness, theft, but most of all forgives us of our unbelief, and thus brings us to repentance, and restores our love for God, and for mankind whom he has redeemed, teaching us not to regard others as sinners as if we were not, but people to be loved with the love of God who died on the cross to take away the sin of the world, the greatest sin of all, unbelief.
[3] So he told them this parable: [4] "What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? [5] And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. [6] And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.' [7] Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.
[8] "Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and seek diligently until she finds it? [9] And when she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost.' [10] Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents." Luke 15:1-10 (ESV)
“Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost. Just so, I tell you there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance” “Over one sinner who repents.”
The 99 bring no joy because they do not repent. The 99 bring no joy because they stay in their sins. But there is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents. It is the joy of a father receiving a son back. It is great joy indeed. The question though is what is repentance? What is it’s relationship to faith? When Martin Luther Penned his 95 thesis the first one claimed that the whole life of the Christian should be one of repentance. He rebelled against indulgences because they short circuited repentance, and all but encouraged sin. Of course, it is often thought that Lutheranism encourages the same with it’s emphasis on Grace alone and faith alone. But this is not true, because where there is no repentance there is no faith, not in the way that Lutheran’s understand faith which is to fear, love, and trust in God above all things. It’s funny about the 95 thesis, that one reading this document that started the reformation, doesn’t notice a whole lot Lutheran about it. Luther wrote those almost as one stabbing in the dark at something that was wrong. There isn’t a lot about forgiveness, there is nothing about faith alone. Behind the document are numerous Roman Catholic assumptions. Yet, he is right when he claims that the whole of Christian life should be marked by repentance.
It is sort of curious to me, today when I hear certain representatives of so called Christian traditions, that refuse to baptize babies, claiming one needs to repent before they can be saved. Denying the Grace of God given in baptism to those whom Christ adored so much as to make models concerning the reception of God’s kingdom is not Christian, and it betrays a false sense of repentance, but a sense of repentance that I think we are often guilty of harboring, even a Pharisaical sense of repentance. It is an idea that gives rise to classifications of sin, self-righteousness, and despair.
Repentance is the call to faith, the call to faith is a call to repentance. It was the call of John the Baptist who was preparing the way, and it was the call of Jesus Christ who is the way. But it is often confused. Repentance is thought of as something we do, and possibly even as something we can do without the help of God. But true repentance, just like faith is an impossibility apart from the work of the Holy Spirit.
There is an earthly sense of repentance, and this is where I think the confusion comes in. Repentance here means a couple different things, that are not necessarily foreign to Christian repentance, but are inadequate for the definition. In the world repentance is a sorrowful feeling over a grievous, and a promise to stop, or atleast and attempt to try and stop. And this is what so many Christian theologies seem to think of repentance. It is perhaps the reason the Amish let their kids go wild for a couple years, so they have something to repent of. The true problem with this concept of repentance is a failure to think of sin in anything but human terms. To think of it only in regards to those things we consider sinful or particularly bad, perhaps mostly because of their ill effects on society, and the disruptions they cause to a peaceful existence, and the hurt it causes in one’s own life and those with whom we share life. And though that is a meaningful distinction, or classification to make, it fails to plumb the depths of what sin is and what we most need to repent of. Drunkenness, adultery, fornication, theft, murder, the despising of parents and other authorities, should have not place in the Christian life, and where there is guilt concerning these things there needs also be repentance even in the earthly sense if faith and repentance in the Christian sense are to live.
But repentance is so much more, and means so much more than adopting the middleclass mores of society at large. And it is this repentance that brings joy to the heart of our Father in heaven and causes his angels to rejoice. It is the repentance that is coming to faith. God does not classify sin in the same way we do, so he does not regard repentance in the same way we do. At the heart of sin, is the great sin of unbelief. All sin is a result of our failure to fear, love and trust in God above all things. This is why even our good works, when done outside of faith can be considered sins, it is why even our good works need to be forgiven if they are to be regarded as good in the sight of God. This is what the Pharisees failed to understand, the reason why the 99 think they need no repentance. They do not see their unbelief as being sin. It is also why we don’t commune people of other faiths or denominations in reality. No one needs Jesus to give up drunkenness, though he might help. It doesn’t take rocket science to figure out that fornication and adultery are bad for society and for an individual, same with a host of other sins. You can repent of those and still not know true repentance.
True repentance is a gift from God that comes with faith in Jesus Christ who forgives our sin, who forgives us of adultery, fornication, drunkenness, theft, but most of all forgives us of our unbelief, and thus brings us to repentance, and restores our love for God, and for mankind whom he has redeemed, teaching us not to regard others as sinners as if we were not, but people to be loved with the love of God who died on the cross to take away the sin of the world, the greatest sin of all, unbelief.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Snarky Jesus
[23] And when he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" [24] Jesus answered them, "I also will ask you one question, and if you tell me the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. [25] The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?" And they discussed it among themselves, saying, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will say to us, 'Why then did you not believe him?' [26] But if we say, 'From man,' we are afraid of the crowd, for they all hold that John was a prophet." [27] So they answered Jesus, "We do not know." And he said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things. Matthew 21:23-27 (ESV)
By what authority? It is a preposterous question. Nicodemus understood that no one could do these works if they were not from God. The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus. Jesus answers back with pure snark. They want to trap him, and he asks a question that will trap them. Jesus shows little patience. Of course he also knows the Pharisees will finally get what they are asking for, but it will be on his time, not theirs. He sets the terms. In the meantime he’ll just egg them on. The authority by which he does these things is obvious to those who care to know. Go ahead, like Baby Jesus if you want to. My favorite Jesus is snarky Jesus
By what authority? It is a preposterous question. Nicodemus understood that no one could do these works if they were not from God. The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus. Jesus answers back with pure snark. They want to trap him, and he asks a question that will trap them. Jesus shows little patience. Of course he also knows the Pharisees will finally get what they are asking for, but it will be on his time, not theirs. He sets the terms. In the meantime he’ll just egg them on. The authority by which he does these things is obvious to those who care to know. Go ahead, like Baby Jesus if you want to. My favorite Jesus is snarky Jesus
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Who gives a Flying Fig?
[18] In the morning, as he was returning to the city, he became hungry. [19] And seeing a fig tree by the wayside, he went to it and found nothing on it but only leaves. And he said to it, "May no fruit ever come from you again!" And the fig tree withered at once.
[20] When the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, "How did the fig tree wither at once?" [21] And Jesus answered them, "Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea,' it will happen. [22] And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith." Matthew 21:18-22 (ESV)
I’ll just be honest, these words scare the hell out of me at times. I’m left thinking then why hasn’t Utah converted to Lutheranism yet? Exactly why is it I don’t have…. In the end though, I am also often amazed at the prayers that are answered.
It’s a big if clause though. There are a few things that need to be taken into account. First, Jesus spoke this to the disciples. This very well wasn’t spoken as something that would be true of all Christians, who are given different and varied gifts. 2. The Disciples at the time they asked about this, were not able to do it themselves, and yet one would be hard pressed to say they didn’t have faith. So it really shouldn’t bother one that he can’t make a fig tree wither up. I mean who really gives a flying fig.
And even if you could make a fig tree wither, I’d much rather have the ability to change water into wine, it doesn’t mean you have faith. I’m reminded of Matthew 25 here, it was the goats who claimed to have done great things in the name of Jesus, something that comes to mind as I pass the Pentecostal church claiming an healing ministry in town. The sheep really were not at all aware of what they had done. Just things to consider.
[20] When the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, "How did the fig tree wither at once?" [21] And Jesus answered them, "Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea,' it will happen. [22] And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith." Matthew 21:18-22 (ESV)
I’ll just be honest, these words scare the hell out of me at times. I’m left thinking then why hasn’t Utah converted to Lutheranism yet? Exactly why is it I don’t have…. In the end though, I am also often amazed at the prayers that are answered.
It’s a big if clause though. There are a few things that need to be taken into account. First, Jesus spoke this to the disciples. This very well wasn’t spoken as something that would be true of all Christians, who are given different and varied gifts. 2. The Disciples at the time they asked about this, were not able to do it themselves, and yet one would be hard pressed to say they didn’t have faith. So it really shouldn’t bother one that he can’t make a fig tree wither up. I mean who really gives a flying fig.
And even if you could make a fig tree wither, I’d much rather have the ability to change water into wine, it doesn’t mean you have faith. I’m reminded of Matthew 25 here, it was the goats who claimed to have done great things in the name of Jesus, something that comes to mind as I pass the Pentecostal church claiming an healing ministry in town. The sheep really were not at all aware of what they had done. Just things to consider.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Infants can and do Believe
[14] And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them. [15] But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying out in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" they were indignant, [16] and they said to him, "Do you hear what these are saying?" And Jesus said to them, "Yes; have you never read,
" 'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies
you have prepared praise'?"
[17] And leaving them, he went out of the city to Bethany and lodged there. Matthew 21:14-17 (ESV)
I don’t know how one reads this passage and isn’t convinced of the ability for infants to believe and confess that Jesus is the Christ. Of course it is fitting that those who are indignant of indignant baptism are the ones who most strikingly resemble the Pharisees. Faith and confession are always from God. In my opinion the fact that these children and infants confessed Jesus is far less a miracle than that I as a jaded adult believe. All faith is a miraculous intervention of God. If you don’t believe that, then you haven’t contemplated faith much, or you simply just don’t really believe now do you?
This is what strikes me of baptists most, they think they have faith, but what they confuse for faith, is barely the surface of what faith is. I’m not saying they don’t have faith, though I do often wonder what faith it is that denies the grace of God to those Jesus had such compassion for. What I am saying is, that what they call faith, and what they describe as faith, is hardly the sum total of faith.
(I purposely spell baptist with a small b, so as not to leave out Calvary Chapelites, Pentecostals, Campbellites, other “non denominationals” and other assorted followers of antichristian theologies. And to avoid confusing them with John the Baptist.)
" 'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies
you have prepared praise'?"
[17] And leaving them, he went out of the city to Bethany and lodged there. Matthew 21:14-17 (ESV)
I don’t know how one reads this passage and isn’t convinced of the ability for infants to believe and confess that Jesus is the Christ. Of course it is fitting that those who are indignant of indignant baptism are the ones who most strikingly resemble the Pharisees. Faith and confession are always from God. In my opinion the fact that these children and infants confessed Jesus is far less a miracle than that I as a jaded adult believe. All faith is a miraculous intervention of God. If you don’t believe that, then you haven’t contemplated faith much, or you simply just don’t really believe now do you?
This is what strikes me of baptists most, they think they have faith, but what they confuse for faith, is barely the surface of what faith is. I’m not saying they don’t have faith, though I do often wonder what faith it is that denies the grace of God to those Jesus had such compassion for. What I am saying is, that what they call faith, and what they describe as faith, is hardly the sum total of faith.
(I purposely spell baptist with a small b, so as not to leave out Calvary Chapelites, Pentecostals, Campbellites, other “non denominationals” and other assorted followers of antichristian theologies. And to avoid confusing them with John the Baptist.)
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
A time for Everything
[12] And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. [13] He said to them, "It is written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer,' but you make it a den of robbers." Matthew 21:12-13 (ESV)
Just in case they weren’t ready to take him I guess. Jesus comes in and causes a commotion. Throws tables over, runs people out with whips. Drives them out.
Today it is considered bad form to get into a polemical argument with a a false teacher, taking advantage of the poor faithful sheep, or those who would just like to be faithful sheep. I don’t know, I guess the moral of this story is, there is a place and a time for polite, and there is a time and a place to defend the house of God, the Body of Christ that is his temple.
Just in case they weren’t ready to take him I guess. Jesus comes in and causes a commotion. Throws tables over, runs people out with whips. Drives them out.
Today it is considered bad form to get into a polemical argument with a a false teacher, taking advantage of the poor faithful sheep, or those who would just like to be faithful sheep. I don’t know, I guess the moral of this story is, there is a place and a time for polite, and there is a time and a place to defend the house of God, the Body of Christ that is his temple.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Third Sunday of Trinity
Third Sunday of Trinity
7/3/11
Ephesians 2:13-22
Bror Erickson
[13] But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. [14] For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
[15] by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, [16] and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. [17] And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. [18] For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. [19] So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [20] built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, [21] in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. [22] In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit. Ephes. 2:13-22 (ESV)
But no in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances…. Has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances.
A dividing wall of hostility. Paul in this chapter is emphasizing how in Christ there is neither Jew nor gentile. He talks about this division being one of hostility. Jews did not always get along with their gentile neighbors, or maybe it was the gentiles did not always get along with their Jewish immigrant neighbors. Typically this has been true of any culture different than the prevailing one that lives among another culture. There is often too much confusion, and what is considered polite in one culture is considered rude in another. Hostilities develop.
But there is a greater wall of hostility not just between cultures but between God and man, who is by nature a child of wrath born dead in his trespasses. And it is in breaking down this wall of hostility, that the other wall of hostility is broken down. Yes hostility. While in our sin, God is hostile to us. Ephesians 2 describes us as Children of his wrath!
But Jesus broke down this in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility, because it was in his flesh that God died to make atonement for our sins with his blood of peace.
But it does not end there! Paul goes on to explain what this means, what it has done, what his death and resurrection have done to break down this dividing wall of hostility. By dying for our sins, he has abolished the law of commandments and ordinances! Abolished the law of commandments and ordinances. This is the law that demands our death for breaking the commandments and ordinances. Jesus abolished it. No longer will the law reign but the Love of Christ in the forgiveness of sins, because Christ has abolished the law of commandments and ordinances. Not just ordinances, but also of commandments. And he didn’t replace the law, he didn’t replace the commandments and ordinances, but abolished them, or at least abolished the law governing them.
Commandments and ordinances, The natural division here is commandments having to do with the Ten Commandments, laws that more or less govern the actions of all men Jew or Greek. This is the natural law we have in our hearts, written down in stone. Things we know intrinsically to be wrong. The ordinances, are the dietary and ceremonial laws of the Jews that governed their religious devotion and temple worship. There is no reason eating pork is wrong in and of itself, apart from the ordinances God gave Israel to set them apart from the rest of the world. Now that Jesus has come and broken down this dividing wall built on law, there is no need for it.
Abolished not replaced. But man does man want to hold on to law! I cringe as I hear baptists and others talking about the sacraments as ordinances. The other day I heard a man say that “Grace doesn‘t release me from obedience, it empowers me for obedience.” I think to myself, Yuck. I get full body shivers when I hear drivel like that, gospel being turned to law. The sacraments being the basis of a New Testament Judaism, just as legalistic as the one Jesus railed against in his sermons and teachings. Empowers us for obedience? I mean I have to ask a guy like that how it is working out for him, how obedient has he been? But a guy who says stuff like that is blinder than a bat to his own sin. Grace forgives. It is the dream of the old adam that it would empower us to obey. Give us the strength or what ever to obey. But that is someone who has not quite figured out the extent of their sin.
Now, it does come close to the truth, in that being loved we are given the ability to love. But that love is always going to be imperfect this side of Glory, insofar as it is our love, perfect insofar as it is forgiven of Christ. Yeah, that is the hard reality of being by nature a child of wrath, even our good works, even our love, have to be forgiven to be good in the eyes of God. And who really gives a flying fig what Man thinks. Empowers us for obedience. This is nothing but throwing you back under the bus of the law. Nothing but another way of leading a person to despair! Because quite frankly if you are honest with yourself, you don’t obey, even as a Christian. On your best day, you still fall short. And if you think that grace is about empowering you for obedience, you are going to be despairing of grace when you figure out you haven’t been all that obedient. People like this don’t get it. They tend to water down the law. They tend not to take Christ’s sermon on the mount seriously. They do away with the idea that one sins in thought word and deed, and think that if they merely lust after the woman they have not committed adultery. The problem is when you take that route, you end up one morning waking up next to your neighbor’s wife. And then your world comes crashing down around you. You despair of grace. Then instead of repenting, and being forgiven, you shack up with her and continue consigning yourself to the reality of hell, and living it up while you still have a chance. But it doesn’t have to be that way. I do recommend the avoidance of waking up in an adulterous bed. But I dare say we have all come to realizations one way or another that the lives we have been living are less than God pleasing, and this not just a theoretical thing of realizing the scriptures teach us we are sinners, or a wrote recitation of the confession of sins that marks the beginning of the divine service. We are sinners, and that is a hard reality that bites us to our core. Perhaps it isn’t everyday that it bothers us as it should, but there are times when we wake up and realize that we have made a mess of our own lives, and perhaps even the lives of friends and family with our sin. That we have made it perhaps a bit tougher on ourselves or others. That is the law. We come to realize that we have not been obedient. Grace hasn’t empowered us for that. The gospel is not about an easier set of rules and regulations to follow.
No, when Christ preaches peace to you, when Christ preaches the Gospel to you. It is not a pep rally. It is not a you can do it speech that he gives. No, he tells you I have done it for you. He tells you he tore down this dividing wall of hostility in his flesh that was crucified for your sins, so that his blood would buy you peace. There he preaches your sins are forgiven, and though the world may rage now against you, you are at peace with God. In the world you will have tribulation, and that on account of sin, but take heart for Jesus has overcome the world, he has covered your sin with his blood. You, yes you, are forgiven.
Now the peace of God that surpasses all understanding keep your hearts and mind in Christ Jesus our Lord, Amen.
7/3/11
Ephesians 2:13-22
Bror Erickson
[13] But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. [14] For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
[15] by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, [16] and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. [17] And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. [18] For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. [19] So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [20] built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, [21] in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. [22] In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit. Ephes. 2:13-22 (ESV)
But no in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances…. Has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances.
A dividing wall of hostility. Paul in this chapter is emphasizing how in Christ there is neither Jew nor gentile. He talks about this division being one of hostility. Jews did not always get along with their gentile neighbors, or maybe it was the gentiles did not always get along with their Jewish immigrant neighbors. Typically this has been true of any culture different than the prevailing one that lives among another culture. There is often too much confusion, and what is considered polite in one culture is considered rude in another. Hostilities develop.
But there is a greater wall of hostility not just between cultures but between God and man, who is by nature a child of wrath born dead in his trespasses. And it is in breaking down this wall of hostility, that the other wall of hostility is broken down. Yes hostility. While in our sin, God is hostile to us. Ephesians 2 describes us as Children of his wrath!
But Jesus broke down this in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility, because it was in his flesh that God died to make atonement for our sins with his blood of peace.
But it does not end there! Paul goes on to explain what this means, what it has done, what his death and resurrection have done to break down this dividing wall of hostility. By dying for our sins, he has abolished the law of commandments and ordinances! Abolished the law of commandments and ordinances. This is the law that demands our death for breaking the commandments and ordinances. Jesus abolished it. No longer will the law reign but the Love of Christ in the forgiveness of sins, because Christ has abolished the law of commandments and ordinances. Not just ordinances, but also of commandments. And he didn’t replace the law, he didn’t replace the commandments and ordinances, but abolished them, or at least abolished the law governing them.
Commandments and ordinances, The natural division here is commandments having to do with the Ten Commandments, laws that more or less govern the actions of all men Jew or Greek. This is the natural law we have in our hearts, written down in stone. Things we know intrinsically to be wrong. The ordinances, are the dietary and ceremonial laws of the Jews that governed their religious devotion and temple worship. There is no reason eating pork is wrong in and of itself, apart from the ordinances God gave Israel to set them apart from the rest of the world. Now that Jesus has come and broken down this dividing wall built on law, there is no need for it.
Abolished not replaced. But man does man want to hold on to law! I cringe as I hear baptists and others talking about the sacraments as ordinances. The other day I heard a man say that “Grace doesn‘t release me from obedience, it empowers me for obedience.” I think to myself, Yuck. I get full body shivers when I hear drivel like that, gospel being turned to law. The sacraments being the basis of a New Testament Judaism, just as legalistic as the one Jesus railed against in his sermons and teachings. Empowers us for obedience? I mean I have to ask a guy like that how it is working out for him, how obedient has he been? But a guy who says stuff like that is blinder than a bat to his own sin. Grace forgives. It is the dream of the old adam that it would empower us to obey. Give us the strength or what ever to obey. But that is someone who has not quite figured out the extent of their sin.
Now, it does come close to the truth, in that being loved we are given the ability to love. But that love is always going to be imperfect this side of Glory, insofar as it is our love, perfect insofar as it is forgiven of Christ. Yeah, that is the hard reality of being by nature a child of wrath, even our good works, even our love, have to be forgiven to be good in the eyes of God. And who really gives a flying fig what Man thinks. Empowers us for obedience. This is nothing but throwing you back under the bus of the law. Nothing but another way of leading a person to despair! Because quite frankly if you are honest with yourself, you don’t obey, even as a Christian. On your best day, you still fall short. And if you think that grace is about empowering you for obedience, you are going to be despairing of grace when you figure out you haven’t been all that obedient. People like this don’t get it. They tend to water down the law. They tend not to take Christ’s sermon on the mount seriously. They do away with the idea that one sins in thought word and deed, and think that if they merely lust after the woman they have not committed adultery. The problem is when you take that route, you end up one morning waking up next to your neighbor’s wife. And then your world comes crashing down around you. You despair of grace. Then instead of repenting, and being forgiven, you shack up with her and continue consigning yourself to the reality of hell, and living it up while you still have a chance. But it doesn’t have to be that way. I do recommend the avoidance of waking up in an adulterous bed. But I dare say we have all come to realizations one way or another that the lives we have been living are less than God pleasing, and this not just a theoretical thing of realizing the scriptures teach us we are sinners, or a wrote recitation of the confession of sins that marks the beginning of the divine service. We are sinners, and that is a hard reality that bites us to our core. Perhaps it isn’t everyday that it bothers us as it should, but there are times when we wake up and realize that we have made a mess of our own lives, and perhaps even the lives of friends and family with our sin. That we have made it perhaps a bit tougher on ourselves or others. That is the law. We come to realize that we have not been obedient. Grace hasn’t empowered us for that. The gospel is not about an easier set of rules and regulations to follow.
No, when Christ preaches peace to you, when Christ preaches the Gospel to you. It is not a pep rally. It is not a you can do it speech that he gives. No, he tells you I have done it for you. He tells you he tore down this dividing wall of hostility in his flesh that was crucified for your sins, so that his blood would buy you peace. There he preaches your sins are forgiven, and though the world may rage now against you, you are at peace with God. In the world you will have tribulation, and that on account of sin, but take heart for Jesus has overcome the world, he has covered your sin with his blood. You, yes you, are forgiven.
Now the peace of God that surpasses all understanding keep your hearts and mind in Christ Jesus our Lord, Amen.
Friday, July 1, 2011
The Prophet
[6] The disciples went and did as Jesus had directed them. [7] They brought the donkey and the colt and put on them their cloaks, and he sat on them. [8] Most of the crowd spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. [9] And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, "Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!" [10] And when he entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred up, saying, "Who is this?" [11] And the crowds said, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." Matthew 21:6-11 (ESV)
“This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee.” There were at leas a great deal of Jesus’ compatriots who recognized that he was a prophet. Of course there is nothing new here, even Nicodemus recognized that early in Christ’s ministry.
What’s odd is that even today, people will recognize Jesus as being a prophet but care less as to what that actually means. It means he spoke truth, he spoke the word of God. It means that you cannot discount what he says of himself. If he is a prophet, then what he says about himself is true.
This is where Muslims get Jesus completely wrong, but also a good many people today, who perhaps aren’t muslims, but think they can lump, Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha together and call them all prophets, which has come to mean in common parlance, something to the effect of, charismatic religious figure we can admire but ignore. If Jesus is a prophet, then these others are not. And if these others are prophets, then Jesus is not. They did not teach the same thing. Only one of them is good. And that one is Jesus. He is the only one who rose from the dead, so I’m guessing he is the one to put your money on.
Of course that is another thing all together. I think faith has to be something a little more than Pascal’s Wager, after all it is completely antithetical to 1 Cor. 15. If Jesus be not raised from the dead, we who laid down our money on him, are most to be pitied. If there is a God we made him out to be a liar. If there isn’t, well if Nietzche is right… See I don’t know. Some want to believe God is dead, they think it gives them freedom somehow, to run off and do stupid things, take advantage of others and so on. Of course most atheists do end up adopting some sort of ethic. And I have met very few people atheist or otherwise, who don’t deal with guilt on some level. So that seems to be a dead end. To top it off, those engaging in the hedonistic lifestyle seem to be enjoying life as much as the tee totaling baptists, which is to say, they don’t seem to be enjoying life. Neither of these two groups
That’s telling on both accounts. Christ came that we would have life, and that abundantly. (John 10:10) So that’s where the problem is. True Christian theology, as men like G.K. Chesterton have shown, should have the effect of showering one’s life with joy and purpose, even in the midst of the pain and suffering of this world. It gives us a sure and certain hope, that this is not the end of life. It brings to life value in knowing that Jesus Christ has loved us to the point of redeeming our lives with his very own blood. So the Christian is left with the wonderful predicament that Paul illustrates, to live is Christ, to dies is gain. Sure we leave this world to be with Christ, and it is better for us. As long as we live here, we live for others, as Christs to them. Our life is a living sacrifice that way, we live for others, as Christ lived for us to bring them with us to live with Christ. And this doesn’t require that we join a monastery, in fact a monetary is the exact opposite of this. The self proclaimed “good works” of running off to Calcutta to work in a soup kitchen is not this. In fact, we live for those whom Christ has put in our live, mostly our family, we carry this out by living in our vocations, doing honest work. Perhaps, we are missionaries, but flipping hamburgers is truly as God pleasing a work, the only question to be asked is, is it personally satisfying for you. But my son really appreciates a good hamburger, and since we find Christ in our neighbors, the least of these as Christ says (Matthew 25), then making a good hamburger appreciated by others is indeed a service to Christ. However this means those working at McDonalds will be suffering in the third level of hell….
There are some vocations that are not Godly, any way you cut them. It is a service to Christ when you are the best father you can be, the best son, daughter, mother, employer, employee, politician, judge farmer, janitor, Hvac repairman, soldier (yes killing people can be a very God pleasing thing to do), the list could go on. And then the trials, and tribulations you endure in work gain perspective, because it is here you are serving Christ, who suffered and died for you, then these things can bring a great joy, and they become less burdensome as you realize they are in God’s hands.
And that is why it is such a great thing that Jesus, this prophet from Nazareth of Galilee, is who he says he is, the one who truly does come in the name of the Lord, the great I AM, God become man for us men and our salvation.
“This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee.” There were at leas a great deal of Jesus’ compatriots who recognized that he was a prophet. Of course there is nothing new here, even Nicodemus recognized that early in Christ’s ministry.
What’s odd is that even today, people will recognize Jesus as being a prophet but care less as to what that actually means. It means he spoke truth, he spoke the word of God. It means that you cannot discount what he says of himself. If he is a prophet, then what he says about himself is true.
This is where Muslims get Jesus completely wrong, but also a good many people today, who perhaps aren’t muslims, but think they can lump, Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha together and call them all prophets, which has come to mean in common parlance, something to the effect of, charismatic religious figure we can admire but ignore. If Jesus is a prophet, then these others are not. And if these others are prophets, then Jesus is not. They did not teach the same thing. Only one of them is good. And that one is Jesus. He is the only one who rose from the dead, so I’m guessing he is the one to put your money on.
Of course that is another thing all together. I think faith has to be something a little more than Pascal’s Wager, after all it is completely antithetical to 1 Cor. 15. If Jesus be not raised from the dead, we who laid down our money on him, are most to be pitied. If there is a God we made him out to be a liar. If there isn’t, well if Nietzche is right… See I don’t know. Some want to believe God is dead, they think it gives them freedom somehow, to run off and do stupid things, take advantage of others and so on. Of course most atheists do end up adopting some sort of ethic. And I have met very few people atheist or otherwise, who don’t deal with guilt on some level. So that seems to be a dead end. To top it off, those engaging in the hedonistic lifestyle seem to be enjoying life as much as the tee totaling baptists, which is to say, they don’t seem to be enjoying life. Neither of these two groups
That’s telling on both accounts. Christ came that we would have life, and that abundantly. (John 10:10) So that’s where the problem is. True Christian theology, as men like G.K. Chesterton have shown, should have the effect of showering one’s life with joy and purpose, even in the midst of the pain and suffering of this world. It gives us a sure and certain hope, that this is not the end of life. It brings to life value in knowing that Jesus Christ has loved us to the point of redeeming our lives with his very own blood. So the Christian is left with the wonderful predicament that Paul illustrates, to live is Christ, to dies is gain. Sure we leave this world to be with Christ, and it is better for us. As long as we live here, we live for others, as Christs to them. Our life is a living sacrifice that way, we live for others, as Christ lived for us to bring them with us to live with Christ. And this doesn’t require that we join a monastery, in fact a monetary is the exact opposite of this. The self proclaimed “good works” of running off to Calcutta to work in a soup kitchen is not this. In fact, we live for those whom Christ has put in our live, mostly our family, we carry this out by living in our vocations, doing honest work. Perhaps, we are missionaries, but flipping hamburgers is truly as God pleasing a work, the only question to be asked is, is it personally satisfying for you. But my son really appreciates a good hamburger, and since we find Christ in our neighbors, the least of these as Christ says (Matthew 25), then making a good hamburger appreciated by others is indeed a service to Christ. However this means those working at McDonalds will be suffering in the third level of hell….
There are some vocations that are not Godly, any way you cut them. It is a service to Christ when you are the best father you can be, the best son, daughter, mother, employer, employee, politician, judge farmer, janitor, Hvac repairman, soldier (yes killing people can be a very God pleasing thing to do), the list could go on. And then the trials, and tribulations you endure in work gain perspective, because it is here you are serving Christ, who suffered and died for you, then these things can bring a great joy, and they become less burdensome as you realize they are in God’s hands.
And that is why it is such a great thing that Jesus, this prophet from Nazareth of Galilee, is who he says he is, the one who truly does come in the name of the Lord, the great I AM, God become man for us men and our salvation.