Discovering God 5 – God as Personal

God as Personal

My sister in law (now former sister-in-law) was livid. How could Cindy and I allow our children to read story books in which animals talked. We were all in Colorado for vacation with my parents and our children were reading some of their favorite stories (which had talking animals). My sister-in-law said that since animals could not talk it was inappropriate for us to allow our children to even, for a moment, think that animals had such human characteristics. It was anthropomorphizing at its worst.

Now for those of you who are unaware of the term, anthropomorphizing means giving human traits (speech, emotions etc.) to non-human parts of creation. The most obvious example would be Disney films in which tea-pots can talk and trash compacting robots can fall in love. However much we may enjoy such stories we know the difference between make-believe (talking fish) and reality (stuffed trout for dinner). We know that non-human creatures and inanimate objects, while having many endearing characteristics are not in the end human.

I raise the issue of anthropomorphizing because it is at the heart of our discussion of God as personal. As I wrote in a previous article, when the church moved from a Judaic to a Greek view of God, the universe and everything, it became an unwritten rule that Christians were to avoid any attempt at anthropomorphizing God. We were not, in other words to attribute to God any characteristics which might remotely be associated with human beings. God was not to be seen as jealous, angry, loving, or even, in fact, caring. God was the unmoved mover. God was the first cause. To attribute any sort of human attribute to God was to return to some ancient past in which people were superstitious and used inappropriate language about God. We were to react to such usage with the vehemence my former sister-in-law used when confronted with our children's books about talking animals.

This concern with anthropomorphizing God continues to this day. I still hear people in and out of the church castigating others for speaking of God in terms that might also be used to speak of human beings. The problem with such antipathy toward using human language to refer to God is that it ignores virtually the entire Biblical tradition…which regularly uses such language to describe God. Granted, while the use of human characteristics might be metaphor it is intended to remind us that God is not merely a force (ala Star Wars), a spirit that inhabits everything (ala pantheism), an ideal thought (ala much Greek thought) but instead a personal being who is interested in all of creation including all humans.

When we say that God is personal then, we are indeed saying that God while being other than us (creator not creature) is also in and of God's self a "Thou". Martin Buber in his wonderful book I and Thou (Simon and Shuster, 1996) writes about the relational character of God. That when encounter God we are encountering a "Thou" and not an "it". That when we encounter God, or God encounters us, we are engaging in a relationship in which we experience "another". This sense of encountering the personal is what I believe the Biblical writers were trying to get at when they used anthropomorphic terms to describe God. The encounters of human beings with the one, true living God, were encounters of very personal nature in which God was experienced as loving, caring, judging, calling, jealous and concerned (to name a few human traits). This sense of encountering the personal becomes even more real in the person of Jesus of Nazareth whose birth we will celebrate this week. I encourage you then, as you prepare to celebrate Christmas, to see it as a moment when the "Thou" we call God, becomes the enfleshed human being we call Jesus, who desires to encounter us in a very personal and loving way.

Next week: God as loving

Discovering God 4 – God as Interactive

God as Interactive

So which God do we want? I realize that may seem like a very strange question, as if we were at the god cafeteria and could select which ever flavor of God we wanted. But in essence, as we have discussed in earlier articles, this is what we do. We read the scriptures, test our own experience, listen to a variety of traditions and then we make our choice. This exploration and choosing has essentially led to three very distinct images of God in terms of how God relates to the world.

The first is what I will refer to as the Deist God. This is the God who made everything, established a set of immutable laws, set the world in motion and then sat back and watched what took place. Some people have referred to this as the watch-maker God who created a self-sufficient world and simply let it run.

The second is what I will refer to as the hyper-Calvinist God. This is a God who acts upon the world. This God is all powerful, remote and immutable. This God causes all things but is unaffected by what takes place in the world. Everything (and I mean everything) is planned before the beginning of time. History is merely a God-authored script being played out.

Finally there is the God I will call the calling God. This is a God who interacts with all of creation. This is the God who "walks in the cool of the morning" in the Garden of Eden. This is the God who speaks to Abraham and Sarah. This is the God who calls Moses, the judges, the Prophets and Paul. This is the God who becomes flesh in Jesus of Nazareth and is tempted like all of us.

So which God do we want? While I can't answer for ay of you I will choose God number three (so to speak). I will choose the calling God. I will choose this God because, as you will read in a moment, I believe this is the God whom scripture describes, whom Jesus incarnates and who interacts with us today.

This is the God of scripture. God interacts with God's creation. From the very opening lines of scripture in Genesis (God being active in creation) to the closing verses in Revelation (God being in the midst of God's people) God is involved with creation. God is neither remote nor merely acting upon. God is calling, speaking, arguing and acting with and for humanity. God has relationships with human beings in such a way as to impact the choices and decisions that they and we make. This is a God who cares enough to be involved with a world that has the freedom to make choices.

This is the God who is incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth. It is remarkable to me that people can see God as either remote or merely acting upon the world, when God loved the world enough to be enfleshed and live in the midst of the trials and tribulations of a human life. This is an incarnate God who took the time to tell stories and parables, heal the sick and give sight to the blind, and then give his life to defeat the powers and principalities of this world. Jesus was not an avatar of God, moving through life unmoved by the pain of the creation. Jesus was one who prayed, wept and loved.

This is a God who is with us today. The book of Acts, the history of the church and much of our experience tells us that God not only cares, but that God listens and acts in the time and space which we occupy. We have encountered a God who cares deeply for us, causing (as even Calvin would argue) our hearts to burn within us. This is a God, who trough the Holy Spirit, guides our lives when we are willing to listen. We experience ourselves not as puppets, but as human beings in relationship with a living God.

So which God do you want? The choice is yours but I hope you will consider God number three.

Next week: God as personal

Shaping Our Faith: Discovering God 3 – God as Creative

God the Creator

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." With those words the entire Biblical epic opens up before us. Unfortunately most of us have become so accustomed to this opening line that we give it little attention, even though it is an extraordinarily remarkable statement.

It is a remarkable statement first because it implies that what exits does not exist as an accident of physics and chemistry. In other words the creation of the universe (including the "Big Bang" for which there is great evidence and for the moment is still the most plausible explanation for the origin and character of the universe) was not simply a random act of a spectacular nature. It was instead, somehow, an intentional act which offered the possibilities and potentials for life. Many of the "new atheists" have argued that if one were to replay the Big Bang any number of times the odds are against life emerging at all. Other evolutionary theists take exception to that view and argue that if one could replicate the Big Bang that things would turn out very much like they are today. The nature of our understanding and experience of God would have us agree with the latter group…God was intentional in the shaping of the origins and structure of the universe.

It is a remarkable statement second because it reminds us that God acts in creative ways. God it would appear is never quite satisfied with the status quo. The intentionality of the act of creation says that there is something about God that is always looking to new possibilities. We might assume that God could have been satisfied to simply be God in the vastness of nothingness (Sorry but I don't have the grammar to describe an "environment" in which there is no time, space or matter), yet for whatever reason, about 13 billion years ago God set out to be creative. God decided to create the universe in which we live. Now we need to be clear that unlike the Genesis account in which everything was neatly created exactly as humanity currently encounters it (in a mere seven days to boot), God's creative energies were not exhausted in one moment. They have been at work ever since the first energy was released by the Big Bang billions of years ago and are continuing even today as the universe continues to change.

It is a remarkable statement third because it implies God's playfulness. I realize that playfulness if not often a notion that comes to mind when we think of God. Our traditions (that of Calvin who argued that God had planned what would happen in every moment in time before time began…and that of Newton for whom every action there had an equal and opposite reaction…meaning little or no randomness) have given little room for God to be playful. Yet how else can we describe a God who was willing to allow species to come and go (experts estimate that 99% of all species that have lived on earth are now extinct yet there may still be 30 million species left on earth), species to transform (there are nearly 300,000 kinds of beetles) and species to become self-aware enough for relationship with God (you and me)? These facts, among many others, seem to imply that God's creativity is open to the playful and the novel.

    So what is the bottom line for us? First I hope the bottom line is that this view of God as creator allows us to see God as one who is continuing to create ever new possibilities for the universe and for us even as we read this. Second I hope it gives us permission to be creative and playful in what we do for God since we are those created in God's own image.

Next week: God as interactive

Shaping Our Faith: Discovering God 2

Where did the "omnis" go…or for that matter where did they come from?

God is omnipotent (all powerful). God is omniscient (all knowing). God is omnipresent (all present). God is omnibenevolent (all loving).

These are the attributes of God that most of learned in Sunday school and church. They were drilled into our heads in order to insure that we were aware that God was not like us but was completely different. God was other. In his Creeds of the Church (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1973) John Leith (one of my former professors) quotes the 1646 Westminster Confession. "There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will, for his own glory." This God is certainly "other" but is this really the God we encounter in the scriptures.

I ask that question because the God we encounter in the scriptures hardly looks like the God of the Westminster Confession. The God we find in scripture barters with Abraham (Genesis 18:16-33), argues with Moses (Exodus 4), gets really angry (Exodus 32:7-10), changes "his" mind (Exodus 32:14), forgives (II Samuel 12:13-14), calls prophets (Isaiah 6:1-13), loves the world (John 3:16) and comes enfleshed in the person of Jesus of Nazareth (John 1). The God of the scriptures appears to be a very different kind of God; a God who is willing to get down in the muck and mire of creation, to listen to and be impacted by human prayers and even to suffer and die for creation itself.

    This being the case, how then did we move from a God who was intimately involved in human relationships to a God who is seen as completely other and who moves human beings like pieces on a chess board according to "his own immutable counsel"? The simple answer…the Greeks. The more complex answer…that as Christianity moved from a Hebraic centered world into a Greek centered world, the God views of the church changed. The very "earthy" God of the Jews had to give way to a very "transcendent" God because an earthy God was a scandal to the Greeks. Greek gods were "timeless, immutable, impassible, incapable of being affected…in all, (and) not merely in some respects." (Williamson, Way of Blessing, Way of Life, St. Louis: Chalice Press, 104)

This view of God was an outcome of Plato's philosophical views which argued (and this is a very simplistic rendering of his philosophy) that the physical world was an imperfect copy of the perfect transcendent world (in a sense the spiritual is perfect, the physical is imperfect). Thus for the Greeks it was necessary to remove God from the daily grind of human existence and elevate God into the philosophical stratosphere. Only by so doing would God be worth worshipping. This Greek view of God then became the norm for the church early on and continues to dominate our thinking even today.

    Unfortunately this reworking of God gutted any thought or discussion of God as relational. God became distant and remote, unable to feel or experience anything. Thus even Jesus' death on the cross became a mere transaction on God's behalf rather than an experience of God's own suffering for humanity. One of my goals then as I said last week is to return us to understanding God as the one who is creative, interactive, personal, loving, purposeful, judging, and forgiving; in other words the God of the scriptures. By so doing I believe we will not only return to our Biblical roots but we will enrich our own relationship with God.

    Next week: God as creative.

Shaping Our Faith: Discovering God 1

Who is this God and how do we know what we think we know about God?

In their 1971 album "Aqualung" the group Jethro Tull (I know that this is probably the first time in a while anyone has talked about Jethro Tull in church) focused the second side of the record entirely to an examination of how the church and society talk about God. In the song "My God" the lyrics read, "People -- what have you done -- locked Him in His golden cage. Made Him bend to your religion --Him resurrected from the grave. He is the god of nothing -- if that's all that you can see." In more recent times Alanis Morissette in her song "What if God were One of Us" sung "What if god was one of us? Just a slob like one of us just a stranger on the bus, trying to make his way home."

Last week we looked at monotheism as one of the defining characteristics of our faith. As the lyrics noted above show us however simply believing in one God as opposed to many gods still leaves a very wide open playing field in terms of who is this one God? Is this one God the one who wants to welcome everyone into heaven? Is this one God the one who gives us permission to kill our enemies? Is this one God a distant and remote power who has little interaction with humanity? Is this one God a tyrant who punishes those who do not perfectly obey? I ask these questions because they each describe how God has been interpreted by the church across time. So who is this God and how do we know what we know about God?

For those of us in the Reformed Tradition (meaning Presbyterians and Reformed churches) the answer to how we know about this God we worship is scripture. Though tradition, culture and experience always play a part in how we understand God, our central focus is to be on mining the Bible for clues to knowing and understanding God. While that might appear to make the task of discovering God easier, in some ways it makes it more difficult. It makes it more difficult because the scriptures, spanning more than a thousand years, written by dozens of different individuals, in dozens of different cultural environments, composed of multiple kinds of literature does not give us a single definitive vision of God. Thus it has been easy for the church and individuals to create God in their own image. We can pick and choose the images we like while discarding those we do not appreciate. As Ian Anderson put it, we lock God in his golden cage (a cage of our own making).

So who is this God? As I said a few weeks ago I am going to argue that the Biblical story while offering a variety of perspectives on God gives us, in the end, a cohesive image from which to work. That cohesive image is of a God who wants to bless humanity and creation. From the opening words of Genesis (God makes a good creation), to the prophets (God desires to restore that creation), to the life and work of Jesus (proclaiming the new Kingdom in which relationships with God and neighbor are restored) to the final words of Revelation (where there is a new heaven and earth in which pain and death have been destroyed) we are shown a picture of a God who desires humans to live in right relationship with God, with one another and with the creation that God has made.

This vision of a God who desires to bless humanity (and has come personally to bless us…more about that later) helps us see that God is: interactive, personal, loving, purposeful, judging, forgiving and creative. Realizing that this language is not the traditional language we have used to speak of God (omnipresent, etc.) I will spend some time next week discussing why I believe the language I will use is closer to the Biblical vision than the traditional descriptions many of us were taught.

Next week: where did the Omnis go?

Shaping Our Faith: One God

Monotheism: The Heart of Judeo-Christian-Islamic faith

God. This is a word we often use without thinking. We talk about God. We pray to God. We refer to God's will. We use "God" in curses (I suppose not the best example). The word God is so much a part of our language that we seldom stop to consider what a profound theological statement we are making when we use the term.

Monotheism, the belief that there is one God (and not many gods) is a remarkable concept. For much of the history of God's people (see there I go using God) monotheism was not even on the theological horizon. For at least a thousand years God's people were henotheists (those who worship one god but accept the presence of other gods). We see this in the Exodus 20:3, "You shall have no other gods before me." In other words while the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob may have believed that other gods existed they were to worship one God alone; the God who had called Abraham and through Moses had liberated the people from the power of Pharaoh.

This belief in the presence of other gods was to be expected in the ancient world. Except for very rare instances nations and peoples had a plethora of gods in which one god would be dominant but not exclusive. Speculation exists that the present understanding of monotheism developed during the Babylonian captivity (597-538 BC). We see this development expressed in Isaiah 44:06, "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god" and it's further developed in Isaiah 44:09-20, a satire on the making and worship of idols. This new concept not only clearly set Judaism off from all other religions but it became the backbone of the Hebraic faith.

Christianity, as an offshoot of Judaism, continued the tradition of monotheism. This absolute adherence to monotheism proved to be a difficulty however as the church tried to discern the nature and work of Jesus of Nazareth (we will deal with this struggle of who Jesus was and is in future articles). In other words, how could Jesus be both a human being and God, especially if God is one and cannot be divided? As the church spread throughout the Roman Empire it would have been very easy for Christians to return to a polytheistic stance in order to deal with this quandary. They refused to do so however and were clear that while Jesus is mysteriously God with us, God is still one.

Ultimately then this adherence to monotheism shaped and shapes our faith in several critical ways. First monotheism allows us to focus our devotion and worship on the one, true living God. If, as we believe, there is but one God then this one God is deserving of our worship and devotion for all of the blessings of life we have received. Second, monotheism reminds us that our primary allegiance is to be offered to God and to God alone. Scripture tells us that we are to love God with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength, thus giving God "first dibs" on our lives. This orientation allows us to be guided by God as we seek to bless others. Finally monotheism allows us to orient our lives to God who is the very source of life and blessing itself. Since God is the creator and giver of life, then by aligning ourselves with God we encounter the one who is able to help us become fully human; meaning becoming capable of living in right relationship with Gods-self, neighbor and creation so that we can both be blessed and can bless others. Monotheism thus forms the very foundation of our faith, allowing us to not only talk about God, but to discover who this God is.

Next week: Who is this God?

Shaping Our Faith: A Foundational Idea

We are busy people. It doesn't seem to matter which stage of life we are in (young and single, coupled up, re-singled, parenting, empty nest, retired, older married or single) there always appears to be more to do than we have time do. In the midst of this busyness we seldom take the time to ask deep theological questions…such as "What ought to be the foundational idea upon which I build my concept of God and the creation?" Between working, taking care of the children or grandchildren, volunteering in the community and the church, going out with friends, traveling or a host of other activities those kind of God questions simply don't seem all that important. They are better left to professional theological types who have the time to ponder such things.

The problem with such an answer is that, as I said last week, whether we want to believe it or not, each of us does theology every day. We make conscious and unconscious decisions about how to treat people, whether or not to fudge our taxes, how much truth we will tell, what we will give to the church or charity, for whom we will vote, or how we will rear and discipline our children among a host of daily decisions. On a more irregular basis we may have to come to grips with the pain and suffering of the world (why is Haiti hurting so much? Why did my best friend get cancer?) and ultimately our own deaths. How we make those daily decisions and the answers we come to about the hurt of the world and death itself are going to be based in some way (again even unconsciously) on how we understand God and God's relationship with us and with the world.

It would seem to me then (and hopefully to most of you) that it makes sense to spend some time trying to organize what we believe (our personal theological perspective) in order that the choices we make and the answers we derive have some congruence and are not simply emotional responses to the moment. In addition such a coordination of belief and action allows us to be more fully integrated and confident human beings. It also allows us, when faced with difficult decisions and personal tragedies, to have the theological and personal resources to deal with them. We are not left adrift wondering what we ought to do and believe.

Given all of this what ought the foundation of our theological world view be (assuming you are on board with all of this)? Again, as I said last week, there are many foundations upon which Christians and the church have organized their world views. What I want to offer to you this morning is one that has stuck with me ever since reading Way of Blessing, Way of Life; A Christian Theology, by Clark Williamson (Chalice Press, 1999). Williamson is a retired professor of Christian Thought at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis. In Way of Blessing, Way of Life, Williamson argues that the Biblical story (which we spent the last year reviewing) is a single story in which God works to bring blessing to creation. In other words from the beginning of humanities relationship with God, God wanted people to live fully human lives; lives lived in loving relationship with God, neighbor and creation.

This way of blessing and life is ultimately and decisively demonstrated in and made possible through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. In Jesus we see the possibilities of grace, love, forgiveness and reconciliation which enable blessed life. We see the possibilities for blessed communities in the life of the early church as they followed the Jesus' way. Revelation itself (though a tough book to get through) finishes the Biblical story with a vision of what blessed life looks like. So as we move forward with our theological trek the foundation upon which I will be building a theological world view will be that of a God's way of blessing and God's way of life. I hope you will join me on this journey. Next Week: Monotheism: The Heart of Judeo-Christian faith.

Shaping Our Faith: How do we begin?

So how do we begin? How do we figure out, in an organized way, what we as Jesus followers ought to believe and do? How do we know if we are on the right track or have totally missed the direction in which Jesus would have us go (such as when the church endorsed slavery and the oppression of women)? While some people may not think the questions are important, in the end they are because how we answer them will dictate the shape and form of both our church and our lives…two things that matter a great deal to God.

The first way in which people often begin to answer these questions is to simply read the Bible and assume the answers will become clear. In other words we read the scriptures while attempting to draw certain beliefs and moral imperatives out of the words before us (similar to what we do on Sunday mornings in worship). Though all good Christian theology begins with the Bible the trouble is that the Bible is not organized as a systematic theological treatise about God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit and their relationship with humanity and creation. As I have said before, the Bible is a composition of history, theological reflection, poetry and prophecy; all of which are rooted in ancient cultures whose world views (scientific, philosophical, and relational) are very different from our own.

That Biblical reality thus requires any individual Christian or theologian wishing to have a coherent faith and life to choose at least one foundational idea or concept upon which to organize how they read the Bible and upon which they build their set of beliefs (theology) about who God is, how God acts and how we are to live in response. For example we could base our beliefs about God and ourselves upon the foundation that "God is love." Everything we believe and do would then be shaped by that core belief (we would feel loved and want to share that love with others). Or we could base our beliefs about God and ourselves upon the foundation that "God is a God of wrath"; how we lived out our lives of faith would be very different if this were our foundational Biblical principle (we would live fearful lives and want others to be afraid as well).

Our historic foundational principle as Presbyterians has been that God has all power and does not share it. In theological speak we call this the Sovereignty of God. This was the guiding principle for John Calvin (1509-1564) as he tried to work out a theology for the Protestant churches that were breaking away from the church in Rome. Calvin (and those who have followed him over the centuries) believed that God controlled everything, including our own actions and our eternal destinies. Nothing happened (in any sphere of creation) that was not ordained "from all eternity" by God. While this may seem a bit controlling to us 21^st Century believers, it was of great comfort to people living it the 1500s. Rather than worrying if they were good enough to be saved (an issue in Catholicism of the time) they had assurance that they were indeed members of Gods saved elect and heaven was their destination.

    Over the years this fairly rigid view of God and God's sovereignty has continued to evolve. As science, philosophy and psychology helped us better understand the human condition, and as we were better able to read scripture in its original contexts, believers have offered a wide variety of organizing principles upon which to base their understandings of God and self. Next week I will offer the organizing principle upon which I will be building the theological perspective that will guide our discussions about who we are and how we ought to live as Jesus followers. Next week: The Life of Blessing

So what happened at General Assembly

So what is General Assembly, why ought I to care and what happened at its last meeting?

First General Assembly is the every-other year gathering of elders and ministers, elected by our regional bodies called presbyteries, who look at issues facing our denomination. This gathering studies, debates and recommends directions in which the denomination ought to go. It also makes recommendations as to changes in our constitution (called the Book of Order) that guides our corporate life. Any changes to our constitution must be voted on by the regional bodies before they come into effect.

We should care about what happens at General Assembly because changes the Assembly might make could impact (even if in a minimal way) the life and work of First Presbyterian Church. While most of what we do here at 1669 W. Maple is directed by our elders and you the congregation members, recommendations and changes in our constitution can affect the overall governance and life of our congregation.

So what happened at this last meeting (I list only the five most important)?

1. The Assembly debated the definition of marriage. Currently our constitution specifics that marriage is between a man and woman. In the face of several states allowing same-sex marriage the Assembly struggled with our current definition. The outcome of the debate was the reaffirmation of our existing definition.
   
2. The Assembly debated the language surrounding the qualifications for ordination. Currently our constitution requires that those coming for ordination live celibate lives if single and that sexual relationships are only appropriate for married (one man, one woman) clergy. The Assembly voted to remove this language and allow congregations and presbyteries full authority to decide who ought to be ordained (this will go to the regional bodies for a vote).
   
3. The Assembly debated the overall structure of our constitution. Our constitution was at one time small enough to fit into a shirt pocket. Over the years it has grown into an ever larger document outlining procedures to cover virtually every aspect of the life of a church or regional body. The Assembly approved a reduction in the size of the constitution which focuses on fundamentals of governance and not the details. Churches and regional bodies will be able to work out all of the details for themselves (this will go to the regional bodies for a vote).
   
4. The Assembly debated the nature of our relationship with Israel and the Palestinians and their ongoing conflict. Historically our denomination has insisted upon the right of Israel to be safe within its borders, the right of the Palestinian people to their own nation and the desire for Jerusalem to be open to people of all faiths. This position was once again affirmed by the Assembly along with a call for Israel to move the separation wall back to its borders and off of Palestinian land.
   
5. The Assembly discussed the current boundaries of our regional governing bodies and elected a commission (which can act with the authority of the Assembly) to reorganize those boundaries when and if requested by those regional bodies.
   

If you have more questions about the Assembly you can ask me or our own Rosy Latimore who was a delegate to the Assembly. John

Visions From Our Story: The Church as Worshipping Community

So what makes the church different from any other organization that does good things and trains children to be helpful, caring individuals? I ask this question because much of what the church does is also done by other organizations. We focus on caring for the environment. Greenpeace, The Nature Conservancy, Earth First and hundreds of other organizations do the same. We focus on making our children better, more caring people. Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts, and most of our schools do the same. We focus on helping those in need. Lighthouse, the Red Cross, Orchards Children and Family services along with thousands of other organizations do the same. So what makes us different?

The answer can be found in two words, worship and witness. This week we will look at worship and next week at witness. (Actually we will spend several weeks looking at what it means to be church…but these two factors, worship and witness, define us in our most essential essence).

Wikipedia defines Christian worship as, "the central act of Christian identity, the purpose of which is to ascribe honor or worth to God." While this definition is helpful it does not quite get at the fullness of what Christian worship is about. Warren Wiersbe (with some personal additions from me in italics)
offers a better definition. He writes, "Worship is the believer's response of all that he/she is--mind, emotions, will, possessions and body--to all that God is and says and does (in Jesus Christ)." In other words worship is a life orientation as much as it is something we do for an hour on Sunday mornings.

The people of God have always struggled with this definition of worship (though it is at the heart of the entire Biblical story) because it demands so much. It has always been easier to choose one of two alternatives.

The first alternative is to see worship as a particular set of practices (singing hymns, saying prayers, offering gifts, listening to sermons, etc.) rather than a way of life. In other words as long as we go through the religious motions we have met all of God's requirements. We have liked seeing worship in this way because it allows us to be in charge of our lives rather than turning control of our lives over to God. The outcome of this choice however is that we often fail to love others as God in Christ has called upon us to do, thus the Promise of a transformed world is lost.

    The second alternative has been to assume that if we live good lives then our worship is complete. In other words as long as we are nice and polite to people around us then we have fulfilled everything that God desires and we don't actually need to be "in church" and engage in a particular set of liturgical practices. We have liked this choice because we don't actually have to take the time to give praise and glory to God…we don't have to give God any of our time and attention. The outcome of this choice however is that we lose our connection with the living God and thus the Promise of transformed lives is lost.

    We are different from other organizations because in worship we offer our minds, emotions, wills, possessions and bodies to the living God through a particular set of practices and then go forth showing the sacrificial love of God in Christ to the world in all that we say and do. Worship sets us apart in both action and orientation. So as we seek our vision for our life together we need to hold worship as central to our life and to our identity as the people of the Promise.

Visions From Our Story: the Church II

Last week we looked at a wide variety of images that have been used to describe the church; the body of Christ, The Way, the Church, a hospital for sinners or a community of the Promise. Each of these images carries with it a particular view of what the church should be and how it ought to operate. While these images are helpful to our vision quest to be the church of the Promise there is one more place we need to go if we want to see how these images might actually be lived out…to the book of The Acts of the Apostles. Acts is the story of the transition of the followers of Christ from rag tag disciples into a Promise proclaiming community that changed the world.

The story in Acts begins with Pentecost when the church was empowered by the Holy Spirit to tell the story of God's saving love as the fulfillment of the Promise. This transforming moment had two important consequences. The first is that it sent people of the Promise out across the Roman Empire telling the story of Jesus and the transforming love of God. The second is that it created a very different kind of community. We read about this community in the second chapter of Acts.

 

"Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles. All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. "

 

What we see in this passage is that this was not only a community in which lives were being changed by the power of God but a community in which people lived as if they were one large family. They shared all that they had with one another so that no one person would be in need. This was one of the great demonstrations that the Kingdom of God (the fulfillment of the Promise) was breaking into the world, since the Kingdom of God was the place and time when the needs of all would be met. This was a community living the Promise to the fullest.

    Unfortunately as we read the letters of the Apostle Paul we begin to realize that while some churches such as the one at Philippi lived out this sharing life in its fullest, there were others such as the one at Corinth where sharing was not at the heart of their life. In fact at Corinth wealthy believers would eat and drink to excess in the presence of hungry believers and feel no compunction to share.

    The challenge for us as the 21^st Century church is to figure out how this call to sharing ought to be lived out in our midst. There are simple ways: our giving to the church that it might be shared with the wider church and its mission activities, our giving to the deacons fund which meets immediate needs of families (food, shelter, clothing), preparing meals for those in our community who find themselves in need of short term assistance, sharing our time and talents to teach Sunday school or serve in another way to make a difference in and through this church.

    Underlying each of those ways however is the firm belief that we are more than a volunteer organization but a true family bound together by the love and grace of God in Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. For if we believe these things then sharing will become part of who we are not merely an occasional act of compassion "others."

Visions From Our Story: the Church

So what is the church? Is it the people who gather each week at 1669 W. Maple Drive? Is it the church building that exists at that location? Is the church all believers in Jesus Christ around the world? Is it just some of the followers of Jesus who believe certain things? Is it a human institution (rules, regulations, budgets, etc.)? Is it a holy institution (a locus of the presence of God in Christ)? Is it a hotel for saints or a hospital for sinners?

Over the centuries these and other descriptions have been used to define the thing that we call church. If we are to cast a vision for our church it might be worth taking some time to think about the church.

The place we need to begin is with the realization that the followers of Jesus were not always called either Christians or the Church. In the beginning those who followed Jesus were called The Way. In some ways (no pun intended) I think this would have been the most appropriate name for the Christ centered community. The Way reminded Christ's followers that they were on a journey to discover and live out the love and grace of God they learned from Jesus. It was a reminder that faith was about adventure and growth. It was a reminder that we never arrive but are always becoming those persons God wants us to be.

Relatively quickly the name The Way lost out to two other designations: Christians (to describe individual followers) and the Church (to describe collective followers). The word church in Greek is ecclesia. It was a term that referred to a group of people who are called out of a larger community to meet for a specific purpose. It was often used to describe a meeting of citizens who came together to make decisions. In a sense then the followers of Jesus took an existing term, redefined it and made it their own. While the church thus had a name (the church of God at Ephesus, meaning the people at Ephesus called out by God for the purpose of following Jesus) it still had to figure out what it was.

We are indebted to the Apostle (meaning a person sent for a specific purpose…and in the Christian sense, one sent to found churches) Paul for his work at defining the idea of church. Paul used a number of images to describe the church but the primary one was that of the Body of Christ. The image is a powerful one because it reminds us of two key things.

First it reminds us that the church is not simply a human institution (though it often operates like one). The church instead is a living, breathing entity drawing its life from its head, Jesus Christ. This realization ought to help us avoid the temptation to become so immersed in the "business" of running the church that we forget that our purpose is to exist as the arms, hands and heart of Christ in the world.

Second it the term reminds us that just as a body has many parts so does the church. The Apostle Paul spends a great deal of time talking about being a member of the church…by which he does not mean a member of an organization, but a physical member such as a hand or a foot. The idea is that each of us is given certain natural and spiritual abilities which we are to use to make the Body of Christ function properly. Thus membership becomes not about privilege but about service.

Our vision then ought to take into consideration the unique nature of the church; that we are called by God to live out the way of Jesus in the world. This is a task to which no other organization in the world is called nor empowered to do. This is our task, and one which I hope we as people of the Promise are proud to undertake.

Visions From Our Story: the Promise is Shared

So who ought to be invited? Anyone who has every gotten married, had a birthday party or graduated from high school or college knows the dilemma. Who are we going to invite? Do we just invite immediate family? Do we invite our extended family? Do we invite close friends, business associates or the entire world? The answers are always different depending on the event, seating availability and the cost involved. So unless we are simply going to invite the entire world, a choice has to be made as to who is welcome.

This question of who is invited was one of the first issues face by the early church. It was an issue because Jesus and all of his followers were Jewish. It was an issue because the messiah was someone expected by the Jews and not by anyone else. It was an issue because Judaism was a faith that had protected its identity by being separate from the society around it. It was an issue because Jews understood Gentiles to be ritually unclean and unworthy to receive the grace of God. Therefore following Pentecost the answer to "who is invited" was very simple. Jews alone were invited.

The issue of who is invited however soon became more complicated. It became more complicated because the disciples remembered that Jesus had told them to go into all of the world, proclaiming the Good News, making disciples of all nations (meaning Gentiles as well as Jews) and then teaching them all that Jesus had commanded. The issue because more complicated when Peter was given a vision by God essentially declaring that Gentiles were no longer ritually unclean and should hear the Good news about salvation in Jesus. It became even more complicated when the Saul of Tarsus (whom we know as Paul the Apostle) was converted and believed his mission was to Jews and Gentiles alike.

This transition from a message for Jews only to a message for the world was never smooth. There were great debates in the first 50 years of the life of the Christian community over the inclusion of Gentiles into the People of the Promise. How was it to be done? Did men have to be circumcised (the mark of entry for men into the Jewish community)? Did men and women have to follow all of the Jewish dietary laws? Did people essentially have to become Jewish in every way in order to be part of the Promised people?

The final answer arrived at by the Apostles, elders and other church leaders was that Gentiles did not have to become Jewish in order to be part of God's people of the Promise. As the Apostle Paul taught, we gain entry into the People of Promise by faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Granted, the leaders of the community desired that members still obey some of the Jewish rules, but the leaders were willing to open the doors of the church to the wider world and allow Paul to preach to anyone who would listen.

In terms of our visioning process I believe this is a powerful reminder that there are still those around us who feel as if the Good News is not for them. They see themselves as outsiders looking in at the church. If we are to be the church that reaches out to the entire world then we need to continually examine how we reach out to those who are marginalized in our society, that they too might discover their place as People of the Promise.

Visions From Our Story: the Disciples Empowered

    So what now? While it may appear to be a simple question the history of empires and the world often turn on how it is answered. This past week I watched a bit of Ken Burns' documentary on the Civil War. The episode I saw was on the battle at Gettysburg. The battle finally turned on what is called Picket's Charge. The Southern commander, Robert E. Lee, ordered one of his subordinates, Picket to send his entire brigade into the heart of the Union lines. The Union soldiers were hidden behind fences and trees while Picket's soldiers would have to cross more than 300 yards of open fields before they reached the enemy. The results were as horrendous as many of the southern commanders feared…the destruction of Picket's forces, the loss of the battle and essentially the loss of the war. As the battle ended both sides had to ask themselves…what now? The south answered with an organized, yet life-saving withdrawal to Virginia. The northern troops answered by staying where they were, refusing to capitalize on their advantage, a mistake which led to almost two more years of warfare.

    So what now? That was the same question which faced the followers of Jesus after the resurrection. Though they were not as scared as they had been following Jesus' death and burial, they were not willing yet to follow-up on the advantage that the resurrection offered. The advantage that the resurrection offered was that the powers of Rome, and I suppose hell itself, were not mighty enough to destroy Jesus and the Promise he proclaimed. Though crucified he was now alive and was calling his followers to action. Yet he had told them that they would have to wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit before they could launch their world transforming mission. This must have seemed an odd thing to ask because while the Spirit was not an unknown entity to first century Jews, it was not at the heart of their faith. First century Judaism was focused on the Torah (the Law of Moses) and the Temple (the place where God was thought to reside). Yet wait they did.

    On Pentecost (a long standing Jewish holy day) the Holy Spirit arrived. Like an overwhelming flood of power it flowed over and into the disciples. The Holy Spirit transformed the disciples from a bunch of fishermen, tax collectors and ruffians to a faith focused "army" whose mission was to transform God's people into a spirit empowered Promise proclaiming community of faith. The question of "so what now" was answered with a resounding call to a new way of living based on the life and work of Jesus. Immediately upon the arrival of the Spirit the disciples (including women) emerged from their hiding place and engaged the world in a way that altered history forever. Peter took the lead and by proclaiming the good news about Jesus led more than 3,000 people in a single day to become part of this new Christ centered community.

    So what now for us? I believe that as we search for our vision we need to remember that it has to be Spirit inspired and Spirit led. As with any organization it is easy for the church to fall into the trap of visioning for ourselves as if we are merely another human institution. In other words we organize, market and vision for the church as we are a business. What we have to remember however is that we are a spiritual enterprise. This means that not only are we to act differently than much of the world, we are to draw our strength and power not from profits or customer service, but from the Spirit itself. We are to be a supernaturally inspired and directed community. Any vision worth having then needs to be founded upon prayer, passion and the presence of God's Spirit.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Lives

It happens every year. Spring training arrives and baseball fans are filled with hopes and dreams of glory. This will be the year for their team. This will be the year that the impossible happens and their team plays David to the leagues' Goliaths. Unfortunately following spring training there is the regular season where reality sets in. And the reality is that only two teams will go to the World Series and only one will win. The fans of the other teams will end their seasons in great disappointment and frustration. They will go back to their off season lives hoping that one day a miracle will occur and the world will be set right with their side winning.

In a sense that is the way the people of Israel looked at the messiah business. There had been dozens of wannabe messiahs who had come and gone. They had raised armies. They had raised hopes. They had encouraged the people. They had faced the Romans. They had died. But like good baseball fans the people if Israel did not give up. They believed that one day their David would arise again and lead their team, their nation, to victory.

This was their hope in Jesus. While Jesus did not appear to the usual messianic suspect people rallied around him. His teachings focused on a radical obedience to the living God. His healings showed the presence and power of God. His ability to out fox his opponents showed promise. People flocked to him and wanted to make him their king. But as the story often goes, so went Jesus. He was betrayed, arrested, tried, convicted and crucified. Hope faded. People look to next season and the next messiah.

What would be different this time though, was that there would be extra innings. According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, as soon as the Sabbath was over (Jesus having been buried immediately before the Sabbath) some women went to Jesus' tomb to complete the rituals required for an appropriate burial. When they arrived at the tomb, the stone covering the entrance (the tomb was a small cave dug in the side of a hill) was rolled away, the body was not there and a messenger or messengers (the stories vary at this point) from God informed them that Jesus was not dead but alive.

This story seems too fanciful to believe. Yet the women or woman (again the stories vary) encounter the living Christ and are overcome by both fear and joy. The women raced back to tell the rest of Jesus' followers that he was alive. The followers didn't believe them, not simply because the bearers of this news are women, but because God would not resurrect individuals before the end of time. God would not raise Jesus without raising all the other righteous while at the same time establishing God's kingdom on earth. Needless to say the followers of Jesus were a bit surprised and afraid when Jesus appeared in their midst as well. The realization of the resurrection forced them to rethink their understanding of God's Promise and how that Promise was being fulfilled in Jesus. The powers of this world, sin and death, had been defeated and God's reign had begun in a new and powerful way. This event would change the world forever.

This portion of the story is critical for any vision we offer. The story of Jesus resurrection reminds us that the powers of this world that cripple creation (humans and the natural world) are no match for the love and grace of God in Jesus Christ as lived in the church. Our visions then need not be restricted in their scope and in their hope. We need not be afraid to offer up audacious visions of what God would have us to do…not because we are great, because there is nothing God cannot do.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Appears to be Finished

The coming of the Promise in Jesus' work (the blind were given sight, the lame walked, the hungry were fed and the poor had good news preached to them…in other words God's kingdom was breaking into the world) was celebrated. Everywhere that Jesus went he gathered crowds. The people were hungry for someone who taught with power and authority. They wanted to believe that there was someone who cared enough about them to bring the love, grace and power of God into their lives. In a highly stratified society (stratified by wealth, citizenship and occupation) few religious teachers (rabbis) would pay attention to women, the poor and the outcast. Jesus while not focusing exclusively on those groups made sure that they were included in the heart of his ministry. And so people celebrated.

This way of Jesus, while being celebrated by much of the populous, was not appreciated by the existing religious or secular power structures. It was not appreciated because it undermined the teachings of the religious traditionalists. It undermined their teachings because people began to believe in Jesus' theology of inclusion (all are welcome in God's kingdom) over against the traditionalists theology of exclusion (only the best Jews were welcome in the Kingdom). Jesus' Promise proclamation undermined the secular powers because Jesus taught a radical allegiance to the Kingdom of God over against all other allegiances (whether to Jerusalem or Rome).

It was these challenges to authority that ultimately led to Jesus' death and crucifixion. Neither the religious nor political authorities could allow Jesus to live. His teachings of a radical allegiance to the God of Israel and to God's Kingdom (over against religious traditions, Jewish nationalism or Roman rule) meant that he was a threat to everyone. The easiest way in which to be rid of Jesus was claim that he was a political revolutionary. While there was little evidence to back this claim it was sufficient for the Romans to act. The Romans ultimately viewed Jesus as one more revolutionary, wanna-be king who needed to be executed as a warning to others who would try and bring about some sort of Kingdom which rivaled Rome's.

Jesus' crucifixion as a failed revolutionary stunned his followers. If Jesus was indeed the one true bringer of the Promise then he ought to have brought the authorities in Jerusalem and Rome to their knees. Even though he had predicted his death on numerous occasions the disciples were still caught by surprise. His death scattered them and most of his followers made the decision to melt back into society and resume their former lives. The Promise seemed dead.

As we seek our own vision what we can take from this portion of the story is that we are called to a radical allegiance to God's Kingdom. This means that our relationship with Jesus Christ is to inform the choices we make in every area of our lives, from home, to school, to work, to our checkbooks and to how we engage the world around us. While we can pledge allegiance to country, company and kin, those allegiances are always secondary to our allegiance to Christ. The love and grace of Jesus Christ is to ultimately guide all that we are and all that we do both as individuals and as communities of faith.

Visions From Our Story: Jesus the Messiah

So why didn't everyone flock to Jesus and declare him to be the chosen one of God? This is a question that has disturbed people from the time of Jesus until now. When we read the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) we read stories of amazing healings, transformational encounters and miracles of feeding and forgiveness. From our lenses (that of 21^st century Christians) we can see what we believe to be the obvious. Jesus was the messiah, the Son of God and God incarnate. We shake our heads and wonder about those who were near him, that they could be so obtuse and not see what we see.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that we have the advantage of two thousand years of Christian interpretation and the Gospels themselves to show us the way to our particular set of beliefs. What we need to remember is that in the time of Second Temple Judaism (this is how the time of Jesus is referred to…the time of the second Temple in Jerusalem…the first one being destroyed by the Babylonians and then a new one built after the people returned from exile) there was no consensus as to who the messiah would be or how he would accomplish his task. And the idea that a human being could somehow be God incarnate was a heresy to be avoided at all costs.

While there was no clear consensus as to the "who" or "how" of the messiah there was consensus as to the "what" of the messiah. The "what" was the messiah would drive the Roman's from the land and restore Israel to its status as an independent nation where God's rule and reign and law would be observed. They would establish a political Kingdom of God. Israel would become a theocracy (in some ways like modern day Iran) where only God's people were allowed. Ultimately Jerusalem would become the center of all worship throughout the world as people realized that the God of Israel was the one, true God.

Looking at the life of Jesus through this lens then what we see is that Jesus was not fulfilling these expectations. Jesus was offering a very different version of the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God in Jesus' teachings was the fulfillment of God's rule and reign and not Israel's. What I mean by that is that Jesus had come to lead the transformation of the entire world into the world that God had originally intended for God's creation. This is a world in which people live in loving relationships with God, one another and with the world around them. This is a world in which people strive for peace and justice; caring and compassion.

This mission in which Jesus was engaged then pitted him against many people, both Jews and Gentiles. It pitted him against those who desired a political overthrow of the Romans. It pitted him against those who used the Law of God (the Law that is the Torah...the first five books of the Bible) as a way to exclude people from the community of faith and from God's Kingdom. It pitted Jesus against those who believed the Temple (and its rituals) in Jerusalem was the be all and end all of faith. It pitted Jesus against the Romans who believed that all people needed to give allegiance to them above and beyond any other allegiance. What Jesus was doing then was redefining (or actually clarifying) the role of the messiah as the one who was bringing the Kingdom of God for all people.

In terms of our vision then we would be wise to see Jesus in this role…as kingdom bringer and not merely saver of souls. By so doing we honor his work and find our own calling and mission in the world. For if we follow the kingdom bringer then perhaps we are kingdom co-workers with him.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Made Flesh

The Promise was now held captive by those who believed it was a promise just for them. The Promise that God would use Israel to restore all of creation (the fulfillment of God's promise that Israel would be a blessing to the entire world) did not seem possible since Israel believed that the blessing was simply the restoration of their political independence. In other words the Promise was all about Israel and not the world. We can't blame Israel for losing sight of its larger purpose. In the midst of war, exile and poverty it is easy to lose the big picture and focus instead on immediate needs and desires. God however had not lost sight of the larger picture.

God's promises are eternal. God does not get sidetracked but constantly moves forward with God's plans to restore creation and remake the world. Thus, as our communion liturgy puts it, "when the time was right God sent his only son Jesus into the world." God was going to complete God's plan even when the people who were supposed to be helping to complete it were part of the problem.

The sending of Jesus into the world was not "plan B" for God. Some people have intimated that God had hoped that the restoration of the world would ultimately be accomplished by Israel's obedience to the Law (Plan A) and only when they were unable to accomplish the task did God decide to send Jesus. This view does not coincide with scripture. From the beginning of the Biblical story Israel was to be the incubator of the fulfillment of the Promise, not its completer. The final fulfillment was always to be an act of God. Humanity, because of its self-centeredness, would never be capable on its own of breaking the power of sin in the world. Only God could accomplish this and God would do so through Jesus.

The Bible looks at Jesus through many lenses. The scriptures describe him as a prophet, teacher, rabbi, messiah (Christ), Son of God, Son of Man and The Word. (Next week we will look at how Jesus defined himself and his mission). The Apostle Paul shines his own light on Jesus and Jesus' work here on earth referring to Jesus as "our peace" (Ephesians 2:14), one who was "in the form of God" (Philippians 2:6), "the first born of all creation" (Colossians 1:15), and "Lord" on multiple occasions. Each of these descriptions adds something to our understanding of the person and work of Jesus.

Ultimately our tradition (the Orthodox Christian tradition accepted by the vast majority of Christians over the past 1,500 years) affirmed above all other views of Jesus that in the person of Jesus we see the fullness of both God and humanity at work. This view was not always taken for granted but was arrived at through Bible study, prayer and debate. One of the reasons the church arrived at this conclusion, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to God, was the very fact that scripture makes it clear that human beings (as noted above) cannot fulfill the Promise themselves. And since Jesus' actions initiated the fulfillment of the Promise to save and restore the world then God must have been at work in Jesus in a way God is not and cannot be at work in and through other human beings.

Where this leaves us in terms of our own vision is that this Jesus whom we worship and follow shows us the very heart of God. By making Jesus Christ the center of our lives we are making God the center of our lives and our corporate vision. Thus the Promise can live through us.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Held Captive

We began this series of weekly updates with a vision of a marvelous creation (Genesis 1 and 2) in which God was living in right relationship with all of God's creation (humans, animals and creation itself); and all of creation (humans, animals and creation itself) were living in right relationship with God and with one another. This good creation was disrupted by humanity's self-centeredness and refusal to listen to the will of a creating and loving God.

The story continued with a vision of God's efforts to restore the marvelous balance and relationships which were the intent of God's creative work. We watched God work with Abram (through which God promised to bring about the restoration of the good creation), with King David (from whose lineage God promised a new king would come) and ultimately with King Cyrus of Persia who restored Israel (after her exile) in order that the promise might be fulfilled.

What we might wish for at this moment in the story (the last 500 years before the birth of Jesus) was that the nation of Israel would realize its calling and set its mind and will to the task of working with God to restore the creation. Unfortunately this is not what happened. The trauma of loss (of its freedom and sense of invulnerability) made the people of Israel grow inward rather than reach outward. The leadership of the nation believed the only way to maintain its identity as a distinct people of God was to erect higher and higher walls in order to be separate from the peoples around them.

We see this in the two books of Ezra and Nehemiah. These twin books (they are in fact one story in two parts) tell of the amazing and heroic return of the God's people to the land. We can read of the bravery of ordinary men and women who stood against immense pressure to give up the quest to restore Israel. The dark side of this return however was that the leadership did everything it could to insulate the Jewish people from the people who loved around them. This even took the form of having Jewish men who had married foreign women during the exile divorce their wives and commit to never again marry outside the faith.

It was during this time as well that the party known as Pharisees had its beginnings (though it would only take final shape in the time of Jesus). The Pharisees were those who believed that one way to insure the separateness of the Jewish people was by keeping the laws of God in minute detail. They were not legalists as such, but they were determined to maintain the integrity of the Jewish people at all cost. This desire for separateness meant that the promise of God to restore creation was held captive because of the fear of outsiders. In fact even the vision of this restoration was lost and replaced with a vision of restoring Israel only…a fact with which Jesus would have to contend.

The challenge before us a renewed people of God in Christ, is to never hold the promise hostage. Our calling is to usher the promise into the world in order that the world might be slowly, but surely redeemed. Granted none of us can complete this task of restoration, only God can do that. None-the-less we are baptized into the body of Christ in order that we might be co-workers in Christ to restore what humanity rent apart. So any vision to which we ought to conform our lives should be one that sets the promise free, rather than one that holds it tightly for as if it is our possession and not God's promise for the world.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Comes Home

The story of the people of God is a long and complicated one. Within this complicated story one of the great themes that emerges over and over again is that of exile and return. This is in fact the overarching framework of the entire Bible. Thinking back to the beginning of our story we remember that creation was the perfect home for Adam and Eve. Their unwillingness to listen to God had them "exiled" from paradise, thus causing all of creation to groan and long for the perfection of the original creation. The Promise given to Abraham, that through his family the world would be blessed, is the promise that God would work to bring all of creation (humanity and the physical creation) back to the condition in which God originally created it.

This theme of exile and return once again comes into focus when the people of Israel traveled down into Egypt and became captives. Through Moses the people were freed and after a forty year journey traveled home to the land "flowing with milk and honey." They came home to the land promised to Abraham.

The next exile episode is the one we read about last week in which the Judah was destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 B.C. E. (one of the great Middle Eastern empires) and the Jewish leadership was sent into exile in Babylon, which is modern day Iraq. The people of God struggled with this exile as much or more than with any of those that had preceded it. They struggled because they had believed that because they possessed the Temple (what they thought was the very throne of God) that God would not allow them to be destroyed. Fortunately the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel let the people know 1) that the nation fell because of its self-centered vanity and not because the gods of Babylon were greater than the God of Israel and 2) the fall was not the end. God would indeed, one day bring God's people back home.

This return began in 538 B.C.E. when the Persians under Cyrus obliterated the Babylonian Empire and instituted a new way of dealing with subject peoples. The Persians allowed each nation to worship and live as they pleased as long as they paid their taxes. In fact Cyrus not only allowed the Jews to return home but sent money to help them rebuild Jerusalem and its Temple. For this reason the scriptures refer to Cyrus as "messiah", the only time that such a term is used for a non-Jew. The story of this return and rebuilding can be found in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.

The story of exile and return is a reminder to us that the way of following God is not always a straight and easy path. The church, as with Israel, lives in a real world with real issues and real pressures to take paths that do not always conform to the way of Jesus (see our Revelation 2:12-17 as an example). The challenge before us as we seek our particular vision is to trust that even when we do get off track God in Christ is always ready to redirect us (to bring us home from exile). This means that we do not have to wait for the perfect vision for our church family. We can, as Martin Luther put it, "sin boldly", meaning we can do our best to serve God trusting that in God's grace even when we are not perfect God will still use us. The challenge is to find a vision, get going and trust the Spirit will use us to do great things. So as we progress in our vision casting process, realize this process will be ongoing as we travel together in the way of Jesus.

Visions From Our Story: the Promise in Peril

Things were looking up for Judah. While their northern neighbor Israel had been annihilated by the Assyrians, Judah had escaped. Through a miraculous intervention of God (or a highly unlikely set of fortuitous events…given one's take on history) Jerusalem, Judah's capitol, was never captured and its leaders never put to death by the Assyrians.

Unfortunately as we have witnessed so often with God's people, the blessings of one generation were not appreciated by the next. The kings that followed this escape were mostly a pretty sad lot. Some were quite evil (Manasseh who erected altars to other gods and returned to child sacrifice) while others simply were inept. There was one bright spot, Josiah. Josiah reinstituted the Torah, removed foreign gods and tried his best to return the nation to a more God-centered way of life. Unfortunately he was killed while trying to defend his nation from the Babylonians (the Empire that annihilated the Assyrians).

The kings who followed Josiah seemed to have learned nothing from his efforts or the fate of Israel. The prophets had declared that Israel was destroyed because they had failed to be a nation of justice, compassion and inclusion and were instead a people of oppression and greed. One would think that Judah would, at all costs, attempt to live otherwise. Regrettably Judah believed itself to be invulnerable because God would never forsake them and could therefore live as it pleased.

Judah believed they were invulnerable for two reasons. The first reason was that the Assyrians never conquered Jerusalem. The people of Judah saw their miraculous escape as God's promise that God would always protect them. The second reason was that Jerusalem housed the Temple, the very throne of God. Surely Judah believed, God would never allow God's own house to fall. Thus Judah believed they could do as they pleased and God would look the other way.

The Prophet Jeremiah proclaimed that this was not so. He declared, "Do not trust in these words: the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord" (Jeremiah 7:4)…Behold you trust in deceptive words to no avail. Will you steal, murder…and burn incense to Baal..and then come and stand before me in this house (the temple) and say…we are delivered! – only to go on doing these things which are abominations?" (Jeremiah 7:8-11) In other words Jeremiah was telling Judah that if it did not get its act together it would suffer the same fate as did Israel…which is exactly what happened. The Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and the temple and carried the leaders of the nation into exile. The Promise (of God's worldwide restorative work) was now in peril for the people of God were scattered across the face of the earth.

For you and I this story ought to remind us that our vision needs to be one that guides us in establishing a community that reflects God's desires for justice, compassion and inclusion. If we are to be the bearers of God's promise then our church ought to reflect these virtues that were at the heart of both the Torah and the teachings of Jesus. By creating such a community we allow the promise of God's restoring work to be experienced by all those with whom we have contact. By becoming such a community we allow the promise to live in us. Though we will never be perfect, we can with God's help, lead a very different life than Judah and Israel.

Visions From Our Story: The Promise Saved

One became two and then two become one. God's people had created, under the leadership of King David, one nation; one nation capable of carrying God's promise for the world. Unfortunately as we discovered, that one nation lasted only a matter of two generations. David's son, Solomon and his grandson, Rehoboam, broke the nation in two through oppression, abusive taxation and a refusal to listen to the needs of the people.

The two nations (Israel in the north and Judah in the south) engaged in an elaborate dance for several hundred years. Sometimes they would wage war against one another. At other times they would work together for a common cause. Ultimately Israel chose to go down a road that not only led them away from God (worshipping the gods of their neighbors and engaging in economic oppression and child sacrifice) but led them to an arrogance that ignored geo-political reality. Their demise was a brutal demonstration of the power of the Assyrian Empire and the foolishness of Israel's leadership. They would no longer be a factor in bringing the promise of God to fruition.

In the face of this defeat and destruction Judah (the remaining bearer of the promise) was blessed to have a king who did all he could to be faithful to God. Hezekiah was one of the bright spots in the life of God's people. His reign began a few years after the fall of Israel. The scriptures say that "he did what was right in the sight of God." He pushed out the gods of neighboring peoples, destroyed the bronze serpent that Moses had created in the wilderness (it had become an object of worship), defeated Israel's enemies, obeyed the Laws of God and then refused to pay tribute to Assyria (who by this time was elsewhere occupied). For a moment things were looking up.

Unfortunately for Hezekiah and Judah, the Assyrians returned. Hezekiah attempted to buy off the Assyrian King Sennacherib with silver and gold, but that would not suffice. The Assyrians were out to destroy Jerusalem. Hezekiah did not know what to do and so he sought the wisdom and advice of the great prophet Isaiah. Isaiah sought the wisdom and advice of God. The word that came to Isaiah was that Hezekiah should not fear. The Assyrians would never take Jerusalem.

It is at this point that the scriptures and history are in agreement with the outcome of the events, but not the cause behind the outcome. With the Assyrians encamped around Jerusalem, ready to destroy it, a miracle occured. Literally one morning the residents of Jerusalem awoke and the Assyrians had vanished, leaving behind much of their equipment and food. While the scriptures attribute this to God's hand (an angel who slew 143,000 of the Assyrians), there is speculation that either a plague broke out amongst the army, or the king of Assyria heard rumors of a rebellion at home and returned to protect what was his (he was assassinated by his sons shortly after arriving home). Regardless of the reason Jerusalem and the people of God were saved. The Promise would live for another day.

Where I believe this story helps us with our vision is to remind us that even in the most difficult of times, God is willing and able to assist us in fulfilling our vision. We can see this in the life of our church. Over the last twenty years, even with the rotating door of pastors and interim pastors and the economic meltdown in the area, First Presbyterian has made a difference in the world. By being faithful to the call of God to love neighbor and work for the reconciliation of the world you changed lives and communities. This story reminds us that even as Jerusalem could count on God so can we.

Visions From Our Story: the Promise Diminished

Scripture offers us a wide variety of images of God. God is the creating one who brings everything into being; the covenanting one who calls Abraham; the liberating one who frees God's people from captivity; the patient one who puts up with God's people in the wilderness; the seeking one who sent prophets to call God's people back to life and to faithfulness; the Promise keeping one who does whatever it takes to insure that the promise to bless the world will become a reality.

The book of Second Kings however shows us another image of God which is not quite as nice as those that had come before. This book tells the story of the Israel's relationship with Assyria. In 755BC Tiglath-Pileser III came to the Assyrian throne and began a dramatic expansion of the kingdom including sweeping into Israel and Judah. Those nations surrendered and agreed to pay tribute. Over the next 33 years Israel would have a series of kings who were at first obedient to Assyria and then would rebel. Most of the kings were ultimately assassinated either by those who wanted to rebel or those who wanted to give into Assyria. Ultimately Assyria had had enough of Israel and after a three year siege captured Israel's capital, burned it to the ground and either killed or deported 90% of its people. Those who were deported would never be heard from again.

While these events could be seen from a strictly geo-political point of view they offered a difficult theological conundrum for God's people. If Israel was part of the people of the Promise how could God allow them to be destroyed and diminish the Promise? The answer came from the writer of Second Kings who put it this way,

"Now this came about, because the sons of Israel had sinned against the Lord their God, who had brought them up from the land of Egypt from under the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and they
worshipped other gods and walked in the customs of the nations whom the Lord had driven out before the sons of Israel, and in the customs of the kings of Israel which they had introduced. (2 Kings 17:7-8).

 

In other words God had had enough of Israel and let them suffer the consequences of their greed, pride and idolatry. This new image showed that God's patience was not eternal; that ultimately God's promise did not insure the survival of all people of the Promise. If the people would not carry out their part of the mission they would be removed from the equation.

 

As we look to our own vision we need to keep this new image in mind. It is a constant reminder that we as a church have a mission…to work toward the releasing, renewing and restoring of God's world. We are not a spiritual country club but a missional agency. And if we are not faithful in our work we will fade away, and rightfully so. The good news though is that we know our calling and have the gifted, caring people to make it happen. So as we seek our vision for the future let us be mindful of our calling as God's covenant partners in God's amazing restorative work.

Visions from Our Story: The Promise Begins to Drift

God's people divided themselves, north (Israel) and south (Judah). The potential for pushing forward the promise to bless all people through the descendants of Abraham appeared to be fading.

In order to insure its religious as well as political independence Israel (northern kingdom) established its own centers of worship at Bethel and Dan. King Rehoboam even created two golden calves and declared that they were the gods who had led the people out of Egypt. He continued the struggle for independence by ordaining priests who were not Levites (I Kings 12). These actions were the beginning of a long and tortured slide by the Northern Kingdom into arrogance, apostasy and finally self-destruction.

The books of First and Second Kings tell this tale with an eye not only to the failures of the people but also the faithfulness of God in the face of God's rejection by the people. The story offers a clear vision as to the wrong turns taken by Israel on their way to annihilation.

Step one: Worship - Political independence became more important than right worship. By replacing the worship of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob first with golden calves and then the gods and goddesses of their neighbors, the people lost any sense of their calling to fulfill the Promise. This alternative worship focus led them not only to forget God but the life giving ways into which God had called them to live. Their worship ultimately involved human sacrifice and sorcery (II Kings 17:17).

Step two: Ethics – The shift to worshipping other god's allowed the people to forget God's commandments to love neighbor, care for the widow and orphan and welcome the stranger. The Northern Kingdom became a nation in which wealth and prestige were the only criterion by which people's importance was measured. Abuse and slavery, the original reasons for declaring independence, became part of the fabric of the culture.

Step three: Leadership – While the Southern Kingdom (Judah) maintained its kingship through the lineage of David (sons following fathers) the Northern Kingdom (Israel) was one in which assassination and violence were the means by which the kingship changed hands. This meant that no leader was safe and the tenure of kings tended to be short and ineffective.

Step four: Arrogance – Because of its geographical position the nation became wealthy and powerful. Trade between Africa (Egypt) and the east (Assyria, Babylon) traversed the region and Israel reaped the rewards. The wealth they accumulated led them to believe that they were invulnerable and had no need to listen to God or God's prophets.

The amazing thing about God is that God loved the people and continued to pursue them. God continued to send prophet after prophet to call the people to repentance and new life. Great Prophets like Elijah and Elisha risked their lives to call the people back to the life giving faith offered by God. Their refusal to listen to the call had both immediate and eternal consequences.

The challenge for us is to examine our communal life and ask whether or not our vision assists us in avoiding the same step by step process which led Israel away from God? Are we rightly worshipping? Are we living rightly? Are we encouraging long term leadership? Are we living humbly? By assessing our vision with these questions we can become the kind of community God would have us to be.

Visions From Our Story: A House Divided will Fall

The Kingdom of Israel sat on the edge of a knife. Solomon "the Wise" had built his wealth and fame on the backs of the people. His oppression was not only in violation of the Law of God it was not a long term practical political strategy. The people of the north had spent too many generations as tribal units to allow any king to dominate them for an extended period of time. They were restless even before Solomon's death and a variety of opponents had arisen (I Kings 11). With Solomon's death however the opportunity arose to solidify Israel as a nation and not merely as a loose tribal confederation held together by intimidation and power. Whether or not this would happen was up to Solomon's son and heir Rehoboam.

Rehoboam began his reign with promise. He went to Shechem in order to be crowned king. Gathered at Shechem were the leaders of the Northern tribes. They were ready for change…for a king who would treat all people fairly and disband the hated forced labor which Solomon had created. They told the king-to-be that if he would release them from this service they would serve him willingly. Rehoboam was not sure what to do. Therefore he consulted his advisors. First he began by seeking the advice of the older more mature members of Solomon's household. Their counsel was to agree to the dismantling of the forced labor system. Rehoboam did not like their advice so he consulted his friends.

What we have to understand about Rehoboam's friends is that they all grew up in the palace in positions of wealth and power. They were the privileged elite of the land. Their advice was different from that of the older men. They advised Rehoboam to threaten the Northern tribes with harsher work than Solomon had ever laid on them. After all, he was going to be king. Who would dare to confront the king? Rehoboam took their advice and said to the Northern tribes, "My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke; my father chastised you with whips, I will chastise you with scorpions." (I Kings 12:11)

Chances are the response Rehoboam thought he would get, was not what he received. The Northern tribes left prior to his being made king and publically stated that they were no long under his authority. Ignoring such talk Rehoboam sent his forced labor czar to conscript more people. The Northern tribes killed the labor czar and came after the newly crowned king. Rehoboam barely escaped with his life. (I Kings 12:18-20) The Northern tribes then crowned their own king, a man named Jeroboam, who had led an earlier revolt against Solomon. Thus the nation was divided…forever. The Promise would be imperiled then by almost continual war between these two nations (Judah in the South and Israel in the North), as well as the fact that a divided nation was easier prey to outside kingdoms than a united one.

Jesus understood quite clearly that a house divided against itself cannot stand (Matthew 12:25…later quoted by Abraham Lincoln). Any organization, church or otherwise, needs to be united if it is to accomplish the tasks for which it was created. While unity should never be the primary value that trumps all others, it is a necessary ingredient to success. This does not mean we all have to agree on everything. The issue is being able to create an environment in which there is diversity within our unity. In other words while we may not agree on everything, we are united in the essentials which define our life together (our Core Values). As we move forward in seeking our vision let's be sure to leave room for a variety of voices and views so that we insure that the one voice we may really need to hear is not silenced but is given room to speak.

Visions From Our Story: Success Can Get in the Way of the Promise

The wisdom of King Solomon (the king who followed David) was legendary. He expanded the kingdom's borders and secured trade which enriched the nation. He built the Temple in Jerusalem. Even today his name still evokes images of wealth and power (the movie King Solomon's Mines is just one such example). One would think then that Solomon's tenure as king would have been the time when the promise, even if it was not fulfilled, would have become evident in the lives of God's people. Unfortunately, once again, that would not be the case. Instead Solomon, for all of his wisdom began to see the promises of God as his personal possession intended to benefit him alone.

Solomon's beginnings were in many ways a mixed bag of both death and discernment. On the one hand he became king through the machinations of his mother Bathsheba (Solomon was not the oldest of King David's sons…but Bathsheba was David's favorite wife) and others close to his father King David. Solomon then had his rivals and their supporters either executed or exiled (I Kings 1-2). On the other hand one of his initial acts as king was to pray not for wealth or power but for wisdom (I Kings 3:3-9). The Bible tells us that God was so pleased with this prayer that God granted Solomon the power and riches for which he did not pray along with a large dose of long life.

It would be easy at this point to buy into the carefully crafted image that Solomon was the most wise and benevolent ruler by which God's people were ever privileged to be governed. That image was crafted by telling stories of his wisdom at work (the famous "cut the baby in two pieces" story…I Kings 3), the awe of other rulers at his wealth (the visit by the Queen of Sheba…I Kings 10) and ultimately by his building of the Temple in Jerusalem (I Kings 6-9). The claim that he wrote the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes additionally enhances the picture of Solomon as the perfect ruler.

There is however a second tradition which tells a different story. In this tradition Solomon became the epitome of the kind of king against which Samuel the prophet warned the people (I Samuel 8). How so? To begin with Solomon conscripted his own people without pay in order to build all of his famous cities (essentially making them short term slaves). He forcibly recruited others into his service at the palace. He taxed the people at extraordinary levels in order to pay for his excessive lifestyle. Finally and most importantly he married the daughters of foreign kings and allowed them to bring their gods with them into the palace (I Kings 11). Eventually Solomon began worshipping these other gods. That act would ultimately set the stage for the undoing of all that Solomon and his wisdom had accomplished.

It has often been said that success can be an organization's worst enemy. Success can cause an organization to lose its way and focus. This is what happened to Solomon. He saw his success as his success and not as God's blessing. Our challenge then is to be wary of our own success (more members, meeting the budget, serving the community) in such a way that we are continually asking, how are we being faithful to God's calling to be releasing, renewing and restoring the world? True wisdom is not measured in the bottom line, but is measured in our faithfulness to God's vision for our life together.

John

Visions From Our Story: the Past Was Never Perfect for the Promise

They had it all. The nation of Israel was independent. Their enemies were defeated. There were no great world empires to contend with. David, who was "a man after God's own heart", was acknowledged as king by all of the tribes of Israel. There was a national capital at Jerusalem which housed not only the king's palace but the Ark of the Covenant…the icon of the nation's religious identity. In addition God gave, through the prophet Nathan, a promise to King David that one of his descendants would rule the nation for ever. (II Samuel 7). This then should have been the moment when the promise of God to release, renew and restore the world ought to be unleashed on the world. Yet it was not. So what went wrong?

In some ways we might simply say that the time was not right. The nation itself though living under King David was, as we will discover, still very much divided by its ancient tribal allegiances. The people of God still were not at a place where they could see themselves as a single, coherent community. While there was political stability, it would prove to be temporary.

A second reason why this would not be the time of God's blessing flowing to the world is that David, though a mighty warrior was rather incompetent when it came to ruling his nation or running his family. David had the ability to motivate people to great deeds. He had the integrity to show appropriate deference to his predecessor Saul. He had the cunning to survive threats from every direction. Yet he was not an administrator. He established no means for running his empire. This led to corruption, betrayal and the deaths of many innocent people.

David did not have the ability to control his family as well. He watched as one son raped one of his daughters, and then another son killed the rapist. Neither was adequately punished by David. We are never completely clear as to David's reasons for such behavior. However we might assume it was based on how own behavior as regards Bathsheba. David committed adultery with Bathsheba, then had her husband (a very loyal soldier) killed in battle with Israel's enemies. It was as if David's guilt over that incident paralyzed him from taking appropriate action as regards his family.

In the end, while David's tenure as King was often lifted up as the best of times, it was in many ways far from it. There were unresolved issues which would haunt the kingdom for generations; which is perhaps where we ought to turn with our vision seeking process.

There is a tendency in many churches to look to the past in order to find a vision for the future. People believe that there was a mythical time in which everything was perfect in the life of the church and if we could only return to that time everything would be fine. The problem with such a belief is that our mythical times were never perfect. There were issues which divided churches and relationships. There were failings on the part of staff and session. The challenge of any vision seeking congregation is to take the best of the past and combine it with God's plans for the future. God is always pointing us forward toward a deeper and more faithful life in community. So let's mine the past and seek Christ's future that we might be ever more faithful with each passing year.

John