Luke 24:44-53
24:44 Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you--that everything written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled."
24:45 Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures, 24:46 and he said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day, 24:47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
24:48 You are witnesses of these things. 24:49 And see, I am sending upon you what my Father promised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high." 24:50 Then he led them out as far as Bethany, and, lifting up his hands, he blessed them. 24:51 While he was blessing them, he withdrew from them and was carried up into heaven. 24:52 And they worshiped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy; 24:53 and they were continually in the temple blessing God.
I've spent this week thinking over the theme of all of this week's readings about the Ascension. I had nothing. I even typed up a post about how I had nothing and wrestling with those moments went t he Bible just doesn't speak to me. When I'm not moved by the words I read, and how that's always a trying moment for my faith, because I've always been raised to believe the Bible should speak to us, and while it usually does, when it doesn't, the silence is deafening.
That post was sarcastic, a little bitter, a little sad, and also contained some cliche' cynical commentary about Jesus leaving us having to have faith, because having Him still on the Earth providing absolute proof would just be too easy.
That's when it hit me. The Ascension is about faith. Not in the cynical way I was thinking, though. Not in the, "God's going to remove the proof so you have to have faith in Him" way, although there is a hint of that. No, the Ascension is about faith of a different kind. It's about Jesus having faith in us. The Ascension is the moment when Daddy Jesus, having ran with us on our bike halfway up the driveway, releases us to let us try to find our own balance. He's guided us, told us how to do things, and now we have to keep going. Just like the dad with the bike, Jesus hasn't gone far, and we can still feel the balance He imparted on us. He still yells encouragement, and will help us get up if we fall. Still, the opportunity for us to ride free is still there. He's giving us the chance to stand on our own.
So, this Ascension Week, remember, Jesus Ascended because He had faith in us to handle matters down here. I hope we can live up to His trust in us. I'm pretty sure we can, because I believe in Him, and if He believes in me, then I guess it's about time I started believing in me as well.
Friday, May 30, 2014
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
The Spirit of Jesus's Commands
I've been procrastinating on this one. John 14:15 is one of those verses that sometimes makes me cringe. I know we're not supposed to admit that any Bible verses make us cringe or aren't our favorites, however, I'm trying to be honest and confront these verses as they come, and that means owning my biases. In John 14:15, Jesus says something, that, in many ways, seem simple. He says that if we love Him, we are to keep his commands. Why would that cause me such problem? To answer that, I need to give some background on myself and my beliefs regarding Jesus in general.
I was raised in the Southern Baptist church, raised to believe in the Bible, and in a mostly literal interpretive framework. I went to a Catholic high school for academic reasons, before majoring in philosophy and religion at Cumberland College (now University of the Cumberlands) in southeastern Kentucky, which is a SBC affiliated school. Throughout my adolescence, I went throughout a process of liberalization when it came to my theology. One of the places that started was noticing how, time and time again, Jesus emphasized an attitude of love over a rigid adherence to rules. I've tried to apply the general ethic Jesus embodied to the problems of today, rather than searching verse by verse for clues as to how one Biblical writer or another might have believed on an issue.
During college I began to advance this idea in classroom discussions, papers, and other places. The idea that Jesus calls us to an ethics, and not a set of rules. While it was rare to get outright hostility towards the notion, there was always a hint of caution in the response. It usually involved people indicating that there would never be any disagreement between the perfect rules of God and an ethic of love, and John 14:15 was the verse cited. You see, this verse, I was told, tells us that loving God means keeping His commandments, and therefore, an ethic of love is really the same thing as an ethic of following the rules. That was an idea that never sat well with me. I mean, hadn't they read the Gospels. Didn't they see Jesus time and time again flout the rules in favor of healing, or caring for people's needs, in the name of love. Each time, they had an explanation, about how the REAL rule said to do/not do X, and Jesus did Y, which was similar to X, but not exactly X, so the lesson isn't really about the relationship between people and rules, but about the precise definition of the rules.
I got frustrated. I felt like people were missing the forest for the trees. Did they really think Jesus's ministry was about refining the rules? cthey see that every word He said was about love, and not directed at commands, but about an inward attitude? He summed up the entire Law in two commands about love. Did people really think He did that, just so He could then bizarrely redefine love as following the law?
So, that's my baggage when I look at this week's passage, John 14: 15-21:
“If you love me, keep my commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be[c] in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”
As I was trying to look at this passage with fresh eyes, and tried to free myself of the baggage I mentioned, I found myself asking a question, one that I had always assumed had an obvious answer: "What ARE Jesus's commands." The presumed answer to that question throughout my childhood was simple, the commands of Jesus are the commands of all of the Bible, because the whole Bible is His Word, right?
What if we don't make that assumption, though? After all, Jesus was speaking to His disciples while He was still on Earth. Most of them were illiterate and barely knew the Old Testament, and the New Testament hadn't been written yet. So, maybe He was just talking about the things He told them were commands.
Based on that, I tried to do a quick survey of the commands of Jesus. There are many lists online that list anywhere from fifty commands to hundreds. Some seem to think that every time Jesus opened His mouth it was a command. I tried to look up when he used the word "command" (brief English search, not thorough, and no Greek scholarship, here), and I came up with only a couple of results. There was His description of the two great commandments, to Love God and Love Neighbor. There was also one chapter earlier, the only time He clearly enunciated a new command, telling them to love one another as He had loved them. Okay. So, maybe the commands of Jesus aren't as big a list of rules as I thought. Perhaps Jesus's "command" was the ethic of love I believed in all along.
Then Jesus does something interesting: He begins His famous promise about sending the Spirit. This is the set of verses that has launched Trinitarian doctrine more than any other. I've heard them preached on, discussed, expounded, read, and recited hundreds if not thousands of time, yet I rarely hear them in conjunction with the verse on commands. Usually the verse on commands is one sermon, and the verses on the Spirit are another.
However, Jesus talks about the Spirit and then COMES BACK to the command talk. The two are clearly connected.
Here's the puzzling thing, though. You don't need a Spirit to follow a list of rules. I'm a lawyer, I know this from experience. There's no real spirit in the law. The Spirit, a "Spirit of Truth," particularly, is needed where there's doubt, and ambiguity. There's no ambiguity and a huge list of commands and rules. There IS, however, ambiguity in an ethic of love. There's ambiguity in figuring out HOW to love someone. There's a whole lot of ambiguity there. So, perhaps Jesus is telling us that in order to understand how to follow His commands, which aren't a big list of rules, but rather a few principles, we need a Spirit. Perhaps, then, the verse about following His commands isn't Jesus redefining Love into obedience at all, but the opposite. Love may be obedience, but obedience is love, and the only way to figure that out is with a living Spirit.
I spent so long bothered by that verse, feeling like Jesus had let the legalism slip back in at the last moment. I should have known better. I should have known I could trust Him. That's why I'm starting to love this project. It's two weeks old, and I've already been forced to tackle a verse that has plagued me for years, and it will do so no more. His command is love. Now that's Good News.
I was raised in the Southern Baptist church, raised to believe in the Bible, and in a mostly literal interpretive framework. I went to a Catholic high school for academic reasons, before majoring in philosophy and religion at Cumberland College (now University of the Cumberlands) in southeastern Kentucky, which is a SBC affiliated school. Throughout my adolescence, I went throughout a process of liberalization when it came to my theology. One of the places that started was noticing how, time and time again, Jesus emphasized an attitude of love over a rigid adherence to rules. I've tried to apply the general ethic Jesus embodied to the problems of today, rather than searching verse by verse for clues as to how one Biblical writer or another might have believed on an issue.
During college I began to advance this idea in classroom discussions, papers, and other places. The idea that Jesus calls us to an ethics, and not a set of rules. While it was rare to get outright hostility towards the notion, there was always a hint of caution in the response. It usually involved people indicating that there would never be any disagreement between the perfect rules of God and an ethic of love, and John 14:15 was the verse cited. You see, this verse, I was told, tells us that loving God means keeping His commandments, and therefore, an ethic of love is really the same thing as an ethic of following the rules. That was an idea that never sat well with me. I mean, hadn't they read the Gospels. Didn't they see Jesus time and time again flout the rules in favor of healing, or caring for people's needs, in the name of love. Each time, they had an explanation, about how the REAL rule said to do/not do X, and Jesus did Y, which was similar to X, but not exactly X, so the lesson isn't really about the relationship between people and rules, but about the precise definition of the rules.
I got frustrated. I felt like people were missing the forest for the trees. Did they really think Jesus's ministry was about refining the rules? cthey see that every word He said was about love, and not directed at commands, but about an inward attitude? He summed up the entire Law in two commands about love. Did people really think He did that, just so He could then bizarrely redefine love as following the law?
So, that's my baggage when I look at this week's passage, John 14: 15-21:
“If you love me, keep my commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be[c] in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”
As I was trying to look at this passage with fresh eyes, and tried to free myself of the baggage I mentioned, I found myself asking a question, one that I had always assumed had an obvious answer: "What ARE Jesus's commands." The presumed answer to that question throughout my childhood was simple, the commands of Jesus are the commands of all of the Bible, because the whole Bible is His Word, right?
What if we don't make that assumption, though? After all, Jesus was speaking to His disciples while He was still on Earth. Most of them were illiterate and barely knew the Old Testament, and the New Testament hadn't been written yet. So, maybe He was just talking about the things He told them were commands.
Based on that, I tried to do a quick survey of the commands of Jesus. There are many lists online that list anywhere from fifty commands to hundreds. Some seem to think that every time Jesus opened His mouth it was a command. I tried to look up when he used the word "command" (brief English search, not thorough, and no Greek scholarship, here), and I came up with only a couple of results. There was His description of the two great commandments, to Love God and Love Neighbor. There was also one chapter earlier, the only time He clearly enunciated a new command, telling them to love one another as He had loved them. Okay. So, maybe the commands of Jesus aren't as big a list of rules as I thought. Perhaps Jesus's "command" was the ethic of love I believed in all along.
Then Jesus does something interesting: He begins His famous promise about sending the Spirit. This is the set of verses that has launched Trinitarian doctrine more than any other. I've heard them preached on, discussed, expounded, read, and recited hundreds if not thousands of time, yet I rarely hear them in conjunction with the verse on commands. Usually the verse on commands is one sermon, and the verses on the Spirit are another.
However, Jesus talks about the Spirit and then COMES BACK to the command talk. The two are clearly connected.
Here's the puzzling thing, though. You don't need a Spirit to follow a list of rules. I'm a lawyer, I know this from experience. There's no real spirit in the law. The Spirit, a "Spirit of Truth," particularly, is needed where there's doubt, and ambiguity. There's no ambiguity and a huge list of commands and rules. There IS, however, ambiguity in an ethic of love. There's ambiguity in figuring out HOW to love someone. There's a whole lot of ambiguity there. So, perhaps Jesus is telling us that in order to understand how to follow His commands, which aren't a big list of rules, but rather a few principles, we need a Spirit. Perhaps, then, the verse about following His commands isn't Jesus redefining Love into obedience at all, but the opposite. Love may be obedience, but obedience is love, and the only way to figure that out is with a living Spirit.
I spent so long bothered by that verse, feeling like Jesus had let the legalism slip back in at the last moment. I should have known better. I should have known I could trust Him. That's why I'm starting to love this project. It's two weeks old, and I've already been forced to tackle a verse that has plagued me for years, and it will do so no more. His command is love. Now that's Good News.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
A New Project and the Nature of Forgiveness
So, I've been not writing much, and that's not good for me, but I rarely find myself inspired enough to sit down and write. In order to do better, I've been looking for a formula, something that would give me some structure, and I think I've found it. First, look here. Blogging once a week about a specific set of preset texts. Perfect. Structure, a schedule, all the things I need to force some effort out of myself. So, I'm joining the project, in a very "Hey, I'm going to do this, too" kind of way, not in any official capacity. With that said, let's launch into this week.
Acts 7
Acts 7
55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
57 At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him,58 dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their coats at the feet of a young man named Saul.
59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep.
What struck me immediately about this passage, and something I'd forgotten, was Stephen's last words, asking forgiveness for his killers, which immediately reminded me of Jesus's words on the cross, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do." What is striking about these is the unconditional nature of the forgiveness shown by Stephen and Jesus. The people they are forgiving are literally in the middle of killing them. There's no repentance, no apology necessary first. They don't feel the need to rebuke them for their sin. They forgive. Immediately, and without precondition.
Unfortunately, at times the church gets away from the model of forgiveness shown by Stephen and Jesus. We demand that repentance precede forgiveness, even though neither Jesus nor Stephen demanded that as they died. I recently read a post online, in reaction to what the poster thought was an acceptance of sin, which said that Jesus's model was to rebuke sin, and then forgive, but on the cross, He literally indicates that He desires forgiveness for those who DON'T know what they do, and feels no need to rebuke prior to forgiving. Jesus and Stephen forgive, and request forgiveness wholly and unconditionally. May we have the strength to follow in that path.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)