I woke early, ate breakfast, packed a lunch and arrived at work very early. I am spending most of my time preparing bible study notes on the parallel Gospels. It is tedious work, with lots of flipping from one commentary to another, cross referencing verses, pouring over the OT to find allusions and typing up something reasonably coherent for future use. Yesterday I created seven pages of text; roughly one an hour (I also worked on my Sunday sermon and did a few other things) and today I hope to match that.
As I drove in this dark and rainy morning, my car thermometer, sitting on 57 when I fired up the engine, continued to drop the entire drive. In 3.1 miles it had come to rest at 34 degrees. Two more degrees and the rain is snow or ice. And I know that when we say "about" that means plus or minus two or three degrees. So the "standard of error" covers the difference between wet and icy. Sometimes we are just that close. And the difference can be pretty radical. An inch of rain is a lot of snow (roughly 5-10 inches; the colder it is the more there is) and snow causes all manner of issues.
"Almost," therefore, is important. Missing by a few degrees, or a couple inches, or a few minutes can have radical impact. Ask a surgeon, an architect or an athlete. Or a priest. I am in a profession which focuses on ultimate things. In a sense, my "job" is "to help people go to heaven." While I find that turn of phrase problematic, in general, it is how most people describe what I do. It is literally what I have been told to my face numerous times. Now in a sense, it is quite easy. There is a reference book ("the Book," or as it sounds in Greek, biblios = Bible) and there are numerous passages in the Book which spell out pretty clearly what to do. There is also "The Church" which is the body of believers stretched out over twenty odd centuries which is led by the Holy Spirit and serves God by preaching His message. And, of course, we are equipped with minds and hearts, so reason, insight and 'feelings/intuition' are also at play. All of these together (starting with Revelation in Scripture) give us a pretty solid insight into what God wants. So that sums it up.
Except, The Book is full of all manner of things which trouble me. I worked on Matthew 9 and 10 all day yesterday; I was reading and pouring over several verses which shook me up. Some do not bother me [Mt 9:18 a man comes to Jesus and says, "My daughter just died" while Mk 5:21ff tells us the man (named Jairus) came to Jesus because his daughter was sick. She dies later.] because I believe the 'discrepencies' in factual detail are not important. I understand the writers are doing what we all do: shaping material to fit into the limited time and space needed to communicate and conforming to the message we are communicating. Now my Literalist brother or sister in Christ is upset by this. S/he will engage in all manner of pretzeling in order to twist and explain how this is possible (because The Word is "inerrant" and s/he defines inerrant by extra-biblical standards). Now I am only a few degrees away from a Literalist. Progressives and Secularists would call me a Fundamentalist (in fact they have, repeatedly!), but as we have seen, those few degrees make all the difference!
What bothers me is different. It is things like 10:1 (Jesus gave them power to exorcise and heal) and 10:7-8 (Jesus sent them to preach, heal, raise the dead, cleanse lepers and cast out demons) and especially the end of 10:8 (you received without paying, give without paying). First the former, although we have the healing ministry here and although we have had an exorcism, in reality, my normal day is not chock full of miracles. I do not know what the apostles experienced all day. The Book does not spell it out. However, signs and wonders are pretty rare around here. And cleaning lepers? I have seen little to no success with acne on a distressed teen. So it bothers me. We bury people but not one has been raised. At least not the physically dead. So, I wonder if my doubt or sin is a barrier to the power of Jesus at work in me? I wonder if it is a lack of prayer (and fasting)? I hear some folks claim that the power disappeared with the apostles. This raises another question, Why Jesus? Why give a gift and take it back? And even more confusing, what about all the places in the church where this happened (saints stories are full of miracles) or still happens today (like Africa)? And if the lack of signs and wonders is a measure of my faith, is it far off to wonder if I really have faith (and if faith is needed for salvation..... Well connect the dots and it looks potentially unpleasant).
I am even more troubled by the idea that the minister should be unpaid. As the commentary said, this may have been part of an early church debate on "professional" ministers. I read some theologians argue that ministers should not be paid, but they should work another job to support themselves (like Paul did). Of course, these theologians work at schools and, I assume, get paid. But that aside, the question still bubbles up: Is Jesus unhappy that I make a living doing what He meant to be done for free? What if at the judgment He asks me to explain all these years of a confortable life and good salary from church work? And what if He is frowning when He asks?
Lastly, there is 10:22 (which is repeated in 24:13) which comes in the midst of Jesus' promise that those who follow Him will be persecuted and suffer greatly. Here it is: "he who endures to the end will be saved." One commentator was obviously troubled by this verse as well. He said that there was a danger of misreading it because we are saved by faith not by works. He was clear. Perseverance is not part of salvation because salvation is by grace. And I beg to differ. I think holding on to the end is exactly what Jesus means. I think holding on is faith and I believe that it is in response to God's grace (a gracious call to be His people).
I was involved (very briefly) in a discussion group on marriage and Lent. One person, a highly respected Anglican priest in my circle (i.e. the people who are not happy with the way things are going in the Epsicopal church) wrote a comment in response to what I (and others) said. He called it "absurd." And the reason is because he is thoroughly protestant and I am not. We are both Christians, but we are separated by several degrees, probably 4 or 5. And that separation includes all manner of assumptions and modes of discerning. It impacts where we start, how we proceed and always where we end up. And our disagreements are not minor or insignificant. They impact daily pastoral decisions, the message we share and how we understand "getting to heaven." We both would say "Jesus" but the content of that message would differ. In fact, lots of Protestants would say we do not differ in degree, we differ in kind (sorry, my anaolgy shifted from thermometers to Aristotle!). We are, they say, not the same kind of thing (Christian) but two different kinds of things (they ar Christians, I am not, I am in error).
Some people say, "Don't worry about it. God loves us all." But, of course, that is also a position which may or may not be right. It may be close to truth, but off a couple of degrees.... And in a world where our choices make an impact (which medicine is best? which diet? which exercise program? which job? which spouse? etc.) it seems silly to say that choices about God do not matter. I do not advocate blowing off the eternal religous questions, even if and especially if the answers can never be arrived at with absolute surety. I think suffering through is part of the deal. And I do believe those who hang on and endure to the end will be saved. God's grace. Jesus' blood. (but with our blood, sweat and tears mixed in, too)
That is what I think the Holy Spirit has led the church to teach that the Bible says. And now it is your turn to decide what you think!
No comments:
Post a Comment