For years I have looked forward to teaching the book of Ecclesiastes in a church wide Bible study. Here are the PowerPoint and Adobe Acrobat files for the first presentation.
Ecclesiastes study presentation 1/4
Ecclesiastes study presentation 1/4 – PDF
I have one of the best jobs on the planet. Pastoring a small church whose primary ministry is with international students and scholars. Most of whom are here for a limited period of time. Many of whom are studying the Bible and learning about the Christian faith for the first time. We also have Americans and internationals who have been strong Christians for many years.
The thing about extremely intelligent and well educated internationals who are studying the Christian faith for the first time is that they ask questions that American Christians do not normally ask. Either because we have asked and answered them long ago. Or we avoid them because we have yet to find a satisfactory answer.
Jesus teaches us to forgive others. So why does God not forgive human beings unless we believe in Jesus? And why could God not forgive unless his son died on the cross? And yet God expects us to forgive others without such conditions.
Jesus teaches us to turn the other cheek and love our enemies. President Bush is supposed to be a Christian. So why did America go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Do not misunderstand me. I am not saying there are no satisfactory answers to these questions. Just that they sometimes ask questions that one does not hear from Americans who have grown up going to church. This Sunday they hit me with a good one. We were discussing the Psalms. A short study on different types of Psalm. Wisdom. Lament. Thanksgiving. And praise. For the last type looking at Psalm 146. How often we think “God must be on the side of those who prosper and must be angry with those who suffer”. And yet Psalm 146 clearly proclaims that God cares especially for the oppressed the hungry the imprisoned the blind the fallen the foreigner the widows and the orphans. We might think God must have been punishing the people of Haiti because they “made a deal with the devil”. And yet Psalm 146 invites us to see how God cares about them.
And how does God care for all these different kinds of people who are in need or are suffering? Does he make food *poof* appear out of thin air? Or does he help them through us? I do believe in miracles. That God can and does *poof* provide what people need. But I also believe strongly that we are junior partners with God. That we participate in his ongoing mission to heal and to forgive and to save.
And then someone asked:
Yes but why did God not prevent the earthquake in the first place?
I did not have a good immediate answer for that. Perhaps I should have. Yes there is Genesis 1-3 and the story of the Fall or more precisely the Falling Apart. We can talk about the brokenness of creation and how that goes back to when human beings first turned against God. Paul Achtemeier argues persuasively that the book of Romans is not primarily about the doctrine of salvation by grace which we receive by faith. It is really about the story of God and his relationship with a world in rebellion against him. And it is in that context as part of that story that yes indeed Paul the apostle brings up salvation by grace received by faith.
But somehow that does not seem to answer adequately the question my Chinese friends ask. Or does it?
We talk about how God saves. But these people from other nations who frankly are the best in their home countries ask why God saves but does not prevent in the first place.
In The Silmarillion by J. R. R. Tolkien why does Eru Ilavatar allow the drama to continue?
[I tried to add a good picture here but this just updated version of WordPress for some reason will not allow me to do that.]
Donald Miller in his excellent book Searching for God Knows What? wonders what would happen in an alien came over to our house to watch some of our television shows.
[The alien] would sit there watching basketball but not understanding why we play the game. Why do they do that? the alien might say. It’s a game, a competition, we would answer. But why? Why do they play the game? What are they trying to decide?
They are trying to decide who is the better basketball team, we would say. The better basketball team? the alien might question, wondering out loud why twenty thousand people would show up to find out which basketball team was better than the other. (93)
Congratulations to the New Orleans Saints for their victory in Super Bowl XLIV! And to the city of New Orleans and the people of Louisiana.
Who Dat???
I like most sports. Do not follow baseball basketball or football as most other Americans. Maybe because I do not play any of them well. (So what? How many avid fans play the sport well?) At least partly because we lived in Great Britain for five years when I was a teenager. My favorite sport is football aka soccer. Also enjoy golf badminton volleyball and even field hockey. And yes have played them and fairly well.
(Quick interesting anecdote. At the American school in England was asked to play with the girls’ field hockey team. No kidding. That’s how good I was. Of course I said thanks but no. Idiot.)
And it is not like I am not competitive. Just ask the family. I have to be the best. And I could get pretty ugly when my girls did soccer and basketball.
I tend to watch only the big games. Playoffs and bowls. And only the games in which a local team plays. Tigers or Saints.
Or – pay attention now – the Tennessee Vols or Boston Red Sox or even Buffalo Bills.
(Used to cheer for the New England Patriots but Belichick makes it hard.)
The morning after was listening to the Jim Engster show on local National Public Radio station. He called the Saints’ victory a “momentous event in the history of New Orleans”. I thought Are you kidding me?!? It’s a football game!?! When we beat the bloody British at the town of New Orleans now that is a momentous event!
Now stop and think about it. Why do we care so much? When how and why did sports become so important to us that when our team wins a game or especially a championship we call it a “momentous event”?
My wife thinks I do not get it.
I understand partly why this is a big deal. It somehow represents hope. How often did members of the New Orleans Saints say something along the lines of “this is not just for us – this is for the people of New Orleans and the people of Louisiana”? Somehow when our team wins it represents pride. We do not say “the team won”. We say “we won”.
And in the case of New Orleans and Louisiana the Super Bowl victory also represents hope. We say “we are back”. We have come back from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. At the least are coming back.
We can also talk about this in economic terms. How many millions of dollars have been generated because of all the excitement? People are making money. We certainly celebrate that.
To some extent sports represents “excelling at something we can do”. Hence the famous motto of the Olympic games is “Faster Higher Stronger” (Latin citius altius fortius). We have an ability that involves our physical bodies. (As well as our minds. How much of athletic competition is mental?) We work hard and train and practice. We do not just celebrate the victory. We celebrate the excellence.
“They lost but at least they played well”.
Back to the Donald Miller quote.
Why sports?
To what extent do sports give us a sense of importance? a sense of security? a sense that we are worth something?
Miller also writes:
The Fall has made monkeys of us, for crying out loud. Some of us are athletes and others of us are physicists, and some of us are good-looking and some of us are rich, and we all are running around, in a way, trying to get a bunch of people to clap for us, trying to get a bunch of people to say we are normal, we are healthy, we are good. And there is nothing wrong with being beautiful or being athletic or being smart, but those are some of the pleasures of life, not life’s redemption. (175)
“These are some of the pleasures of life, not life’s redemption”.
I am in the process of preparing for a series of Sunday evening Bible studies on the book of Ecclesiastes. A severely underappreciated book that might say two things to us that we hold in tension.
The New Orleans Saints won the Super Bowl?
This too is vanity…
This is what I have seen to be good: it is fitting to eat and drink and find enjoyment in all the work with which one works under the sun… this is the gift of God.
These are the pleasures of life. But they are not the salvation of our life – or of the state of Louisiana.
Nevertheless…
Who Dat???
(Oh yeah – shout out and love to Opinionated Catholic.)
Been strange but good this year. Enjoyed the time with my friend Chris Brady and chance to meet some of his friends and colleagues and fellow bibliobloggers. Lunch at Bacco’s was excellent and only $15. Dinner at Ralph and Kacoo’s pricey and not so good and service was weak. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge on Sunday morning for Sunday morning Bible study and worship. Dinner by myself in hotel restaurant was my first Kobe beef hamburger very good and cooked perfectly. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge again today for memorial service for Lois Draayer. Lunch at Middle East restaurant in French Quarter was decent. Right now waiting to meet Eric Mason for dinner.
I have not been to many sessions and papers largely because of the back-and-forth and how tired this has left me. Been focusing on sessions on Psalms – did not have enough energy for session on Sabbath this evening. Creation imagery and theology in the Psalms. And more insight into the formation of the Psalter. Caught end of a talk last evening by Shalom Paul on Late Biblical Hebrew in Isaiah 40-66 – was disappointed he made no reference at all to my work which does briefly touch on the issue and points toward a future article.
I have noticed that some biblical scholars use cliches and buzz phrases without(?) quite realizing what they are saying. In the Psalms sessions several references to “global warming” – I care very much about the environment but believe there is legitimate cause for questioning Anthropogenic Global Warming dogma. Many references to how Katrina “exposed injustice and inequalities in our community” along with some gratuitous and ill-informed Bush-bashing – but do people who throw that around really know what they are talking about? Plenty of middle and upper class New Orleans residents suffered and lost everything. It was in the recovery process that one sees more of the disparity. And although the Federal government responded poorly one should not overlook the colossal ineptitude of Louisiana authorities.
If some scholars engage in casual Bush-bashing and Global Warming kvetching during their talks – why do other scholars not engage in casual Obama-bashing and in digs against Anthropogenic Global Warming?
For years we have noted the abundance of facial hair. And how much biblical scholars dress in black. Biblical scholars male and female are a surprisingly good looking bunch.
Appreciate Andrew Das saying hi when I was waiting for valet to bring down my car.
I do feel a little out of place largely because I have fallen behind and not been involved much in my field. Wonder what it would take for me to get “back in academic shape” so as to produce new research and writing that would stand up and receive respect at this gathering. But I can no longer beat myself up so harshly for not ever having secured a position at a college or seminary. The competition in biblical studies is astonishing. About ten (10) open positions this year. For just one position at Judson College (my friend Eric is in charge of the search) they have sixty (60) people who are interested.
In other words you can be smart and good – and never get a teaching position.
The exhibitors’ hall is overwhelming. Booth after booth full of books and publications – which are worth buying? which are worth reading? And I wonder if all of them are necessary. To what extent do people write books because they need to in order to get a position or get tenure? That is a risky thing to say and perhaps I do not understand. Often congregants comment that my Bible studies are very “academic” rather than “practical” – to which I try to explain that good application will grow out of good academic(?) analysis. How many people thought Einstein’s theories were too academic? And yet they yield results that are deadly practical.
I do wonder sometimes why I spent so many dang years working on that PhD and that dissertation given what I do now. But I trust that God led me in that direction for a reason. That is what I have been struggling with. Given my gifts and education – what exactly am I supposed to be doing right now?
Update (11/24/09): Had excellent time with Eric Mason last evening. We hiked over to the Gumbo Shop and each of us got the 4-course “Creole dinner” special. Best meal I have had here so far. Main entree was Chicken St Peters which was outstanding. I have always liked Eric but was especially impressed to realize just how strong and productive he is in his field – focusing particularly on Hebrews and 2nd temple/Qumran. He is well involved in scholarly circles and produces an amazing number of articles papers and books each year. Toward the end of dinner a few large groups started to come in and Ralph Klein of Lutheran Theological Seminary in Chicago famous for his work on Chronicles (and Ezra-Nehemiah) came over to say hi. (Wonder if I should try to snag some Hermeneia volumes before leaving.) Grateful to God that I know Eric – he demonstrates you can be an excellent scholar and a great guy at the same time.
The Society for Biblical Literature annual meeting is coming to town!
Since graduate school I have attended nearly every meeting of this large national and even international organization for biblical scholars. The last two years I have missed partly because of financial reasons – which are related to my also going to another conference in October. Hard to be away twice in two months.
And to be honest the last time I went it was a little rough. A prominent Israeli scholar mentioned my book – and was “mean” to quote my major professor. And it received a devastating review in the Review of Biblical Literature. About least half of the review was fair and accurate criticism. But there was a certain excessive gratuitousness that was hard to stomach. So I have stayed away for a while.
But now it is in New Orleans for the second time in nine(?) years. One of my best friends will be there and I will be rooming with him. No hotel and no air travel means much less expensive to attend.
What is interesting is that there will be sessions devoted to the whole issue of diachrony (historical change over time) in Biblical Hebrew. I thought that debate had largely played out and that my “side” had lost. Most of the presentations appear to be from the chronological camp – those who think we can describe to a large extent how Hebrew changed over time. So perhaps the debate is not over. (H/T Chris Brady at Targuman for bringing this to my attention.)
The papers and presentations are important. And I have a good track record – I spend at least half or more of my time in sessions.
But arguably the larger purpose of such gathering is social – a chance to see and meet old friends and colleagues and also to meet and talk with scholars you have heard of and read. The “night life” during such academic conferences is remarkable. People dress up and go out to nice restaurants and hang out until late at night. Receptions galore! Some of them offer excellent food and drink.
Some go to interview for positions. I tried that a couple times. At this stage of my life – nah.
And strange as it may sound it is when we stock up on our libraries. Dozens of publishers famous and obscure will be there selling books at discounts typically 40-60% off. I plan to buy at least two sets of commentaries that we will keep at the church for ministerial staff to use. (We assume the senior pastor will take his library with him – and we use many of his books to prepare for Bible studies and sermons.)
See you in New Orleans!
“Our Primary Prayer”
Mark 10
Richard M. Wright
Church of the Nations with University Baptist Church
21st Sunday of Pentecost (B)
*********
What do you see? Young woman or older woman?
Can you see the deer?
Which direction are the birds flying?
Where are the elephant’s feet?
Sometimes we look at the same thing but see different things. Sometimes there is a difference between what we see with our eyes – and what he behold? perceive? discern? with our mind. Perhaps even our heart.
Then they come to Jericho. Jesus and his disciples – along with a large crowd – are leaving the city. A blind man – Bartimaeus (which means Son of Wisdom) is sitting begging along the way. When he hears that it is Jesus of Nazareth he begins to shout “Son of David – Jesus – have mercy on me!” People tell him to be quiet but he shouts all the more “Son of David – have mercy on me!” Jesus asks him “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man says to him “Master – that I will see”. And Jesus says to him “Go – your faith has saved you”. And immediately he sees again and follows Jesus on the way.
This week as I am doing research on this Bible reading I was surprised by how little Bible scholars have to say about this story. Even though it is short – only seven verses – it has a very important place in the book of Mark. It is the last healing story. It is the last story before we enter the Passion of Jesus – the last week when Jesus enters the city of Jerusalem / is arrested / is put to death on the cross.
This story also comes at the end of three chapters – chapters eight nine and ten – that focus on discipleship. For three chapters Jesus has been teaching the Twelve – his closest followers – teaching them concerning the way of Jesus. And for three chapter for the most part his closest followers do not understand. There is a sense in which this story is the last chance the book of Mark has to show us what discipleship looks like. To show us someone who does understand. “This is what it means to trust in Jesus Christ the Son of God and to follow him on his way. Pay attention! Can you see?”
And what does the book of Mark want us to see? How does this person cry out to Jesus?
<Huie Dawid Iesou – eleeson me> “Son of David – Jesus – have mercy on me”.
Once again – I normally do not post sermons because I do not think they are much worth posting. But this sermon received strong positive feedback yesterday. -RMW
“Priest-hood of the Believer(s)”
Hebrews 5
Richard M. Wright
Church of the Nations (and University Baptist Church)
20th Sunday Pentecost (B)
October 18, 2009
*********
“People kept driving by. No one stopped to help me”.
Monday evening in this room getting ready for a meeting. Raining raining raining outside. Knock knock knock. A man at the door from the courtyard – never seen him before. We let him in. He begins to explain his situation. Working in the neighborhood. Has a flat tire and needs to get all the way back to his home about thirty minutes away. And expresses some real frustration that he was on the side of Highland Road and people kept driving by and no one stopped to help him.
What did they see?
A stranger? A man with dark skin? Maybe does not take good care of his car? What is he doing in this neighborhood? What is he doing at this church on a dark and rainy evening when many women gather for Bible study? What does he need? What does he want? Is he telling the truth?
What did we see? How did we speak to him? What did we do for him?
Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray since he himself is subject to weakness. That is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins as well as for the sins of the people.
Our Bible reading for this morning from the book of Hebrews chapter five describes beautifully what a priest is and what a priest does. We talked about this last week. A priest represents the people before God and also represents God before the people. Remember that. Bring people into the presence of God and bring the presence of God to people.
And how does a priest represent God? How does a priest deal with people on behalf of God?
At the “Service of Reconciliation” the evening after the senior pastor resigned rather abruptly several spoke positively of the second worship service. Many along the lines of “as long as people are worshiping the Lord who cares what instruments they use?”
A little background. A couple years ago University Baptist Church went from one Sunday worship gathering (blended – traditional or contemporary style varying week to week) to two Sunday worship gatherings. The first “traditional”. The second “emerging” – as in “reach the emerging generation with more multisensory fluid participatory worship”. The senior pastor burned a lot of chips to pull this off and continued to take some heat over the move. There are some who think he resigned because of ongoing dissatisfaction with the second “emerging” worship gathering – both the style and the fact it occupied the more desired 11:15 a.m. time slot. I do not think that was the main point of conflict – but in such situations perception matters as much as reality.
(For the record I supported and still support this change.)
Anyways – so people at this “Service of Reconciliation” talk about how wonderful and important and necessary the second worship service is. More to the point they talk about worship. We should be glad that youth and young adults are here to worship God.
This prompted me to wonder “is every activity ‘worship’ just because we feel it is and call it such?” Just because a group of younger people play guitars and drums and lift their hands and say “we are worshiping God” does that make it worship? And while we are at it just because a group of older people sing from the hymnal to beautiful organ music and never lift their hands yet say “now this is worshiping God” does that make it worship?
What is worship?
What must worship include in order to be (authentic Christian) worship?
(Is an activity “worship” just because we say it is?)
This question has been on my mind a great deal since seminary. Partly because I was fortunate enough to take Introduction to the Old Testament with Samuel Balentine. Partly because of my interest in biblical studies in general the issue of ritual in particular – a topic which has gained interest among biblical scholars in recent years.
In his book The Torah’s Vision of Worship – and much of what Balentine taught in that Old Testament class came from his book as he was researching and writing it – Balentine notes that the subject of worship in the Old Testament has faded since the 1960’s and the work of H.-J. Kraus, R. de Vaux, H. H. Rowley, and W. Harrelson. Indeed there is no entry on “worship” in the massive and scholarly 6-volume Anchor Bible Dictionary.
Last Sunday I decided to discuss the issue of “worship” for the “evensong” service Sunday evening. (With the senior pastor gone the minister with college students and I will share responsibility for that gathering.) Developing two sermons is a bit more than I can handle in a week so typically what I share at evensong is a “conversation in outline” – some questions quotes and points on a topic such as “what is repentance?” Decided to talk about “what is worship? and what must worship include?”
And why should we even care?
My intent was not to critique this or that worship gathering (traditional or “emerging”). But it troubled me that when people in this church talk about “worship” it is unclear they have any conceptual or theological framework for doing so.
Do we even know what we are talking about?
So let me share from last Sunday evensong.
Balentine notes:
In 1969 Harrelson observed that a re-examination of Israel’s worship could help with the problems confronting the community of faith in an ‘ecumenical and post-Christian age’. Given the perceived secularism of that time Harrelson argued that a study of Israel’s worship could contribute toward restoring the quality of relationship between God and humankind and toward restoring and reappropriating God’s design for the world (Torah’s Vision of Worship, 4)
Those are two important issues not only for ancient Israel but for the Christian church today:
Worship is important.
Okay but what is it exactly?
We could approach “what is worship” etymologically.
English “worship” from Old English weorthscipe or “worth + ship”. Ascribing worth to God.
In German Gottestdienst “divine service” or Verehrung = “worship (in the sense of veneration)” or Anbetung = “worship (in the sense of adoration)”.
In Hebrew *h-l-l = “worship” (perhaps from a root which means sing or shout) or *h.-w-h as in hishtah.awe(h) = “bow (oneself) down” or `aboda(h) = “service” (similar to Gottesdienst) or *y-d-h as in ho(w)de(h) = “praise/thank” (perhaps from a root which means to throw or cast).
In Greek proskuneo = “bow down” (probably the most common term in the New Testament) or doxazo = “glorify/praise” or latreo = “worship (in the sense of ritual worship)”.
But etymologies only take us so far because ultimately words do not have meanings so much as they have uses. How are these terms used? Nor do they entirely answer the questions “what is worship? and what must worship include (to be authentic Christian worship)?”
I suggested five things.
First. And this is an assumption/assertion – the book of Psalms is our primary textbook for the language of prayer and praise. Therefore the language of the Psalms – not to mention the use of the psalter – needs to be present in our worship.
Second. Christian worship must be Trinitarian. One would think this is obvious but it is not. At the ACMI conference last summer (Association of Christians Ministering with Internationals) I noticed how so many of the prayers and songs and how much of the presentations was about Jesus. Follow Christ. Believe in Christ. Worship Christ. But what about the Father and the Holy Spirit? I have the same mild critique of emerging worship by Dan Kimball. He says emerging worship focuses on Jesus. I say Christian worship is not just about Jesus – it is about God fully revealed as Father Son and Holy Spirit. Authentic Christian worship needs to be Trinitarian – not just “Jesus-centered”.
Third. Worship needs to be consistent with Christian tradition. This is going to be a bit controversial. And the intent is not to make us slaves to the past. But can we at least be familiar with the past? With how Christians have worshiped through the centuries? We might want to pause and reflect before we do something that breaks radically and dramatically with centuries of Christian teaching and practice.
Fourth. Biblical examples. When people in the Bible are “worshiping” – what exactly are they doing? What do they do? What do they say?
Fifth. In his book Doxology and Idolatry Walter Brueggeman directs us to the Psalms scholar Sigmund Mowinckel who argued that “worship makes a world”. This may sound strange and can be difficult to understand. But when we worship we are either (a) describing the way the world is or (b) describing the way the world can be. A simple example is to say “Jesus is Lord” during the persecutions under the Roman Empire. Not only is that the way the world is – it is also a “counter-world” that challenges the “reality” of the Roman emperor. So when we worship we need to pause at times to consider what kind of a world do we make with our worship?
Similarly in the recent study of ritual scholars note that rituals have at least three primary functions:
Think about worship and rituals of worship in Scripture. We ordain someone to the ministry. Each month we celebrate Holy Communion. We pray for those who mourn. Perhaps not the best examples but you get the idea.
Let me close with another quote from Balentine:
My thesis is that the Torah conveys a ‘vision’ of worship. It portrays worship as a principal means by which a community of faith (or a community seeking faith) attains clarity about God, God’s design for the world, and the role of humankind in implementing and sustaining the world of that design. (4) [emphasis added]
Granted Balentine addresses specifically the vision of worship in the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament) but I would suggest this may apply to our understanding and practice of worship in general.
A turning point(?) in my theological understanding of death was when during Introduction to Christian Mission my fine professor Isam Ballenger rather strongly state “the Christian faith does not teach the immortality of the soul – it teaches resurrection of the body” and during the same class “when we die we do not move in space so much as we move in time”.
What did he mean by this? Probably that we do not move (spatially) to some place commonly called heaven so much as we move temporally to the eschaton and the resurrection of the dead. But what happens to the “soul” (using that term imprecisely for now) between the moment of death and the resurrection? Does it go (spatially) to heaven? I submit this is how Christians normally think and talk.
“Where is grandpa?”
“Grandpa is in heaven with Jesus”.
The Bible does and does not seem to address the issue that way. Paul writes:
21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22 If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! 23 I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; 24 but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body. (Philippians 1 – NIV)
Death means to be with Christ. (Which does not necessarily resolve the question of spatially or temporally?)
Paul also frequently uses the language of sleep to describe those who have died (at least those who have died in union with Christ). Indeed in the context of describing the resurrection he writes:
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed– 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. (1 Corinthians 15 – NIV)
For reasons I cannot entirely explain I spend a lot of time thinking about this issue. Perhaps because I make such a big deal about the physical dimensions of salvation. That is our bodies will be changed – not thrown away forever. Salvation is not escape from material reality – it is the redemption of spiritual and material reality. This issue also touches on very basic issues of theological anthropology – who are we? and what does it mean to be human and created in the image and likeness of God? Of course as John Zizioulas demonstrates in his book Being as Communion there is a sense in which our understanding of anthropology may determine our ecclesiology and soteriology. (But then I am not a theologian and may be completely misunderstanding Zizioulas.)
Of course there is a sense in which I want to know “where is my grandfather? where is my dad?”
And Christians frequently make rather glib statements about those who have died that are intended to comfort. “Grandpa’s looking down at us and smiling”. “I’m sure your mom is celebrating in heaven with us”. “Our baby is now one of God’s angels in heaven”. “God needed your dad in heaven”. But some of these statements while arguably comforting – the last one is anything but makes no sense and turns God into a cosmic jerk – are thoughtless and theologically nonsense. I do not have much patience with people saying things that are meant to comfort or encourage – but have no legitimacy or grounding in the teachings of the Christian faith.
Truth works best. And it works best because it is true. (That right there has become one of my strongest convictions.)
Without addressing this issue thoroughly or properly there are some who believe in “soul sleep”. When a person dies their “soul” does not travel off to heaven (wherever that is). Rather the person sleeps until the resurrection. I remember when we spent the night in Birmingham Alabama and it seemed there was a convention in town. Turns out it was a major gathering of Jehovah’s Witnesses. There was very well done (balanced and not critical) article in the paper the next day about this. And the article mentioned several distinctive points of their theology. Please do not be alarmed but I thought “dang – I agree with half of these”. And one of the points was “soul sleep”.
But we also have the clear teaching of the Bible that those who have died are somehow “with God”. So if they are asleep – how can they be “with God”?
I wonder if Protestant Christians have really thought through the significance of the story of the Transfiguration. I will use the account from Luke because of the extra remarkable detail it contains:
About eight days after Jesus said this, he took Peter, John and James with him and went up onto a mountain to pray. 29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning. 30 Two men, Moses and Elijah, 31 appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem. 32 Peter and his companions were very sleepy, but when they became fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him. (Luke 9)
Has the resurrection happened yet? No. Has the Passion happened yet? No. (This is important because we have two Old Testament figures with Christ. Christ has not yet descended into Hades. Of course how salvation touches on pre-Christ persons has always been a murky issue. And it does not help that Elijah never really died. And it is unclear if Moses died.) And yet here are these two people speaking with Jesus. They are somehow present. And – do notice this part! – they may be aware of what is happening in the world.
So if those who have died are “asleep” how can they also be present and aware of what is happening in the world? (And again – that this is Moses and Elijah complicates the question.)
What if those who die fall asleep – and are translated in time to the resurrection of the dead? Whereupon they live in eternity? Where time does not work the same way?
Our present cannot see those in eternity. But those in eternity can see us. (We are present to them but they are not present to us.) Sort of like a one way mirror. But instead of glass what separates us is time/eternity.
If x goes to y goes to z which can see x but x cannot see z… Presence and perception which only moves in one direction and never backwards. I tried to picture this in my mind and the closest analogy I came up with is a Moebius strip. Is this a Moebius syllogism?
Yeah I know. Pretty flimsy. Just thinking out loud.
Please note – I do not normally post my sermons partly because they are seldom worth posting. But I got strong positive feedback yesterday so decided to share it.
*********
“Perfect and Continuously Becoming”
(Ephesians 4)
Richard M. Wright
Church of the Nations
Tenth Sunday Pentecost (B)
August 09, 2009
*********
What is this? [Indicate piece of bread. Now tear or cut off one corner.] This is bread. It has certain properties and characteristics.
What is this? This too is bread. It has the same properties and characteristics of bread – the whole and the part. [Now tear or cut off a different corner.]
Is this bread? Does this also have the same properties and characteristics of the whole and this different part?
Let me begin with another question. Can something that is perfect change – and still be perfect? If bread is perfect – is this piece of bread also perfect? If I add these pieces together – are they perfect? If I break one of these pieces in two – is it perfect?
Can something that is perfect change – from place to place and/or from time to time?