June 30 sermon - Living Between Good And Evil: To Resist Evil!

All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.” Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that He may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on Him because He cares for you. Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings. And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 5:5b-11)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

     I was amused (or perhaps it might be better to say that I was amazed, because the two words can often be interchangeable) when I discovered a while back that the powers that be in Hollywood had decided to remake the movie “Red Dawn.” I was amused and/or amazed for a couple of different reasons. First, the original “Red Dawn” was released when I was 21 years old, which means that Hollywood is now re-making movies that were released when I was an adult! Setting aside whatever that may say about my age, I was also amused because - to be honest - the original “Red Dawn” wasn’t that good. Still, while it may not have been a great movie, it fit the tenor of the times. On March 8, 1983, in a speech to an evangelical Christian group in Orlando, Florida, US President Ronald Reagan had denounced the Soviet Union (remember it?) as “the evil empire.” All of a sudden evil had a face - a face that revolved around politics and ideology and nationalism, which means that spiritual considerations had been effectively drowned out. This was the Cold War, of course. The enemy had to be identified - and it was the Soviet Union, and Communism in general, and Hollywood took up the cause. “Red Dawn” was released a year later. It was the story of a vicious and sadistic Soviet invasion of the United States, where, high in the mountains of Colorado, a group of high school students formed a resistance movement and played a leading role in bringing the evil Soviet aggressors to their knees. A year later, Hollywood stayed on the Cold War theme, as Rocky Balboa came out of retirement in “Rocky IV” to take on the very personification of evil - the Soviet boxing champion Ivan Drago, a machine like, cold as ice, apparently unbeatable mountain of a man. I remember Drago and Rocky meeting at the centre of the ring as the fight was about to start, with Drago looking at Rocky and saying “I must break you!” You have to admit, the Cold War gave Hollywood script writers some great opportunities.

     Well, it might have been a glorious opportunity for screenwriters, but the Cold War unfortunately lent itself to developing a “good vs. evil” mentality in all the WRONG ways. The point of the Cold War and the associated trappings and propaganda (and really, of any war of any kind) is that “we” (whoever “we” might be) become the good guys, and that means we let ourselves off the hook. The “evil” in those situations is always “them” - it’s the other; it’s the one who threatens us; it’s the one we fear. And because “we’re” good and “they’re” evil, then we allow ourselves to act in evil ways every now and then, because (of course) in those circumstances, the ends always justify the means. So along with some laughable Hollywood scripts, the Cold War also lent itself to the “Red Scare” and the “McCarthy hearings” where the reputations of totally innocent people were ruined and sometimes their lives destroyed because they simply knew the wrong people, and that was enough to make them suspicious. And it still happens today. Who are the evil ones today? Radical Islam, and that’s given rise to Guantanamo, and to what’s euphemistically called “Enhanced Interrogation” - a kinder way of saying torture. It’s justified because those who are doing the enhanced interrogations are the “good guys” and doing evil can be justified because the evil is being done by the good guys and directed against the evil ones, thus making the evil acts of the good guys actually good, even though they’re evil, because they’re directed against evil, so they must be good. Get it? You see how easy it is for those who think they’re on the side of “good” to fall into “evil.” It doesn’t take much. In fact, it’s so easy, it should make us all nervous! Perhaps, as Peter discusses the nature and reality of evil in our passage this morning, it explains the way the passage starts: with a call to humility. “Clothe yourselves with humility,” he says. So, don’t be proud and don’t even look proud. Be humble, and let humility be what defines you. In other words, the message seems to be, “we’re just as susceptible to evil as anyone else, so let’s not fall into the trap of thinking that only ‘they’ do evil.” That’s prideful, and it’s dangerous, because it sets us up for failure by making us complacent in our daily lives and walks with Christ.

     Peter wants to make the point (if we ever doubted it) that evil is a very real and powerful force in the world around us, and therefore in our lives. “Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour,” is how he puts it. Whatever you think of the personification of evil as “the devil” the point is clear - we shouldn’t take evil for granted, and we shouldn’t assume that we’re not susceptible to it. The truth is that some of the most evil things I’ve ever heard of were committed by those who claimed to be Christians - and who, at one time in their lives, may well have been very good Christians, but they took evil lightly, they became proud perhaps, they thought that they couldn’t be tempted, and they fell. And sometimes they fell hard, and sometimes a lot of people got hurt in the process. No, let’s never assume that we’re too “good” for “evil” to ever be a temptation. Lots of “good” people have fallen before its power. Peter wants us to be aware that evil is not only present - he wants us to know that it’s a threat to us, and he wants us to know that no matter how “good” we think we are - and no matter how “good” we’ve been up until now - we’re not so good that we can’t fall! And so, Peter says, “Resist him, standing firm in the faith ...”

     I suppose, in a way at least, this brings us back to “Red Dawn.” Whatever its’ flaws - and it WAS a bad movie (and I’ve heard that the new version is even worse) - it highlights the need to resist evil. In the movies, of course, (and too often in everyday life) you resist evil by adopting the end vs. the means type of attitude; so you can justify doing evil in order to resist evil. But while that might be a human response, it’s not a Christian response. You can’t resist evil by becoming as evil or more evil than the evil you’re fighting against. It doesn’t work that way. Fighting evil with evil only leads to more evil. Jesus did away with the “eye for an eye” mentality in the Sermon on the Mount. “You have heard that it was said, ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,’ but I say to you - love your enemy. Do good to those who persecute you.” “DO GOOD.” There’s the key. Peter said that we should “resist evil [by] standing firm in the faith.” How do we “stand firm in the faith?” By doing good! Paul said in Romans 12:21, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” The point here is not to be good - because none of us can be perfectly good and without fault or failure 24 hours a day 365 days a year for our entire lives. As Jesus said, in some words I reflected on at the beginning of the month, “Only God is good.” Only God is good by nature. Only God cannot be tempted by evil. But if we can’t “be” good, then Scripture tells us that we are to “do” good. And that’s our way of resisting evil. We resist by drawing close to God, praying for strength, always building up our faith, and letting that built up faith express itself in “doing” good - and the opportunities to resist evil by doing good are all around us all the time.

     Our United Church’s “New Creed” tells us that as Christians we are to “seek justice and resist evil.” And the good news is that resistance is NOT futile! Evil can be beaten. The fight is not hopeless. We don’t see Cold War movies anymore, because the Berlin Wall fell, and the Soviet Union collapsed. That’s a human way of understanding evil, as I said, but it makes the point. Evil never wins, no matter how strong it seems, as long as we commit ourselves to doing good. Edmund Burke said in words that are now famous that “all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” We don’t have to “do nothing.” Even if we can’t be perfectly good, we can still do good. Ultimately, good will always triumph over evil - because God will always triumph over evil! That’s our faith; that’s our hope; that’s our assurance. As Peter wrote, “To Him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.”

A Thought For The Week Of June 24

"This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5) Deep in our hearts there is probably nothing as terrifying as darkness. Think about it. What's the first thing most people are scared of? The dark! I've known adults who sleep with the lights on because they're uncomfortable with darkness. Darkness can be ominous and overwhelming. I once got caught in the midst of a tornado warning in Chicago. No tornado struck in the end, but the wind was howling, rain was pelting down, tornado sirens were blaring. That was bad enough - but the most disconcerting thing was how dark it became, and how ominous that made all the other things seem. The primitive parts of our brain, I think, tell us that darkness is not our friend. Darkness is threatening, and it's full of dangers. Maybe that's why the Bible is so consistent in linking God and Jesus with light - a light that no darkness can extinguish, John's Gospel tells us. Another way to think of it might be to say that thanks to God there is nothing that should be so frightening or so discouraging that it should cause us to lose hope. Eventually - sometimes in ways we can't understand - light wins out over darkness. Let's also not forget that as those who believe in Jesus, we're called to be lights for the world - taking away people's fears and introducing them to the light of a good God who will never abandon them.  We know that, because God has never abandoned us in the tough times. Have a great week!

June 23 sermon - Living Between Good And Evil: Totally Depraved And Yet Abundantly Good Too!

“No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of.” (Luke 6:43-45)

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

      As we continue our look at the reality of both good and evil around us (and, admittedly, sometimes even doing battle within us) I’ve taken some time to discuss the fact that our natures are a combination of both. In our original design by God, we were created for good; in many of the choices we make we choose that which is closer to evil. Both goodness and sin, in other words, are simply a part of who we are. To deny our innate goodness is to fall into the trap of either false modesty or self-hatred; to deny our innate sinfulness is to fall into the trap of either self-aggrandizement or false pride. I think it’s better to avoid both traps! If we take this concept seriously - that there are elements within each of us that can choose either good or evil at any given moment then the question becomes how we allow goodness to flourish from us and sinfulness to decline within us, and that’s essentially what I want to talk about today. It isn't just a matter of making a choice - because I suspect (I hope) that all of would would make goodness our choice. But beyond making the choice, the challenge is living the choice in a world where the temptation to choose the other way is very strong, indeed - and sometimes those temptations (sometimes small, sometimes gigantic) seem all around us. Making a choice is easy; living the choice is hard work. Sometimes it can seem like a lost cause - and sometimes (probably more often than we would like) it’s Christians and the church that make it seem like a lost cause!

      Far too often over the centuries the church has drummed into our heads the fact that we’re sinful creatures. That’s why, when I started speaking on this theme I started by discussing goodness - the goodness of God, and then our own innate goodness with which humanity was created. Goodness is an integral part of who and what we are. So we have no reason to be overwhelmed by evil or sin. We have, indeed, the potential to overcome evil or sin - with a little help and guidance from God along the way. But sometimes we get stuck, and I wonder if the reason we get stuck is not because we misunderstand a term that’s entered Christian lingo (one that goes all the way back to Augustine in the 4th) - and that’s the idea of humanity being “totally depraved.” Martin Luther said it; John Calvin said it. It still gets thrown around today, and I suspect it turns a lot of people away because we interpret it through a modern, colloquial filter. To say that something is “depraved” today means that it’s horribly evil, or morally sick or ethically bankrupt. But those things are just extreme examples of what totally depravity can do to us. Really, the phrase means that we’re totally helpless or totally dependent. To say that humanity is totally depraved is to say that we are completely dependent on God to bring forth both salvation within us and goodness from us. In other words, both salvation and goodness are the result of the Holy Spirit working within us and transforming us. The presence of the Holy Spirit assures us that we do not face a hopeless battle!

      I find myself quite taken with the Psalms on this point, which assure us over and over again that thanks to God we can in fact choose goodness in ever greater abundance in our lives! Psalm 34:14 tells us to “Turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.” Psalm 37:3 tells us to “trust in the Lord and do good,” and then later on in v.27 it tells us once again to “turn from evil and do good.” The point, to me, is that even if we’re totally depraved in the sense of being totally helpless and totally dependent on God, we nevertheless have it within ourselves to choose goodness no matter how much evil might seem to tempt us, and the end result of the choice is that we not only choose good or evil, we choose the kind of life we have. Jesus said, “seek and you will find.” Now, that’s a little out of context, I admit. He wasn’t talking about “goodness” and “evil” - but the principle works. You generally find what it is that you’re looking for. I’ve heard it said that when you buy a new car you’re suddenly amazed as you drive around in it at how many other people drive the same kind of car. It’s not that your purchase set a trend; it’s just that now that you’ve made the purchase you’re more inclined to see the car that you purchased. In the same way if you commit yourself to goodness (both showing it yourself and finding it in others) you find it. If you look for the worst, you’ll probably find it as well. And so often people choose the latter. A person does all sorts of good things, but they screw up once and that’s all we focus on and we never let it go. It’s also why forgiveness is so important to a Christian life, but that’s another story for another day. The point is that we see what we look for and what we expect to find. Proverbs 11:27 puts it this way: “He who seeks good finds goodwill, but evil comes to him who searches for it.”

      So if we want goodness in ever increasing abundance to be the mark of our lives, then we have to seek it out and sometimes we have to seek it within - which is where the Holy Spirit dwells: within us, touching us, moving us to deeper faith, calling us to greater love, encouraging us to works we never dreamed possible. And as we seek goodness, we eventually find it. “A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart,” said Jesus. It is stored in our heart - in the very depths of our being - because this is where the Holy Spirit dwells within each of us; because we are made in the image of God. As we search our hearts, and as we search for God, we find that godlike goodness within, and we bring it forth in ever increasing abundance, touching the lives of those around us. That’s what happens if we seek good.

      Unfortunately, we don’t always seek good. There are those who seek something other than good.  There are those who possess what you might call a critical spirit, who see the worst in everything and everyone and fixate on that worst. No one gets the benefit of the doubt; everyone is a suspect of some sort. There are those who are indeed depraved to the point at which they seek only their own well-being and their own pleasure and to fulfil their own desires at the expense of others, not matter how many get hurt as they do so: “ … an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart.” 

      I suppose all of us to some extent fall into that trap. We’re all selfish at times. Sometimes we look to ourselves more than other. But essentially, if we have the reservoir of goodness with us that I spoke of a couple of weeks ago, then I believe that if we seek it out and tap into it, it ultimately reaps goodness from our lives and back into our lives. That’s why our faith calls us to be guided by God’s Spirit in our daily lives. When we allow that to happen, the Spirit leads us to goodness in abundance, even if we are “totally depraved” - which is to say, totally helpless and totally dependent on God.

Just Some Thoughts On Church Governance

A couple of weeks ago I noted with some degree of delight the unexpected opportunity to actually share some theological "stuff" with members of my church council. In that entry I shared what my thoughts were on evangelism in the modern world. Today, I'm going to the other issue I had the chance to talk with my Council about - ecclesiology.

I admit right off that this is somewhat denomination-specific. The United Church of Canada is currently engaging in what's being called a "Comprehensive Review." Put simply, in the light of challenges related to finances and membership, we're thinking about how to be and do "church" in the 21st century. One of my criticisms of the United Church over the years is that it often doesn't do ecclesiology (the theology of the church) very well. In fact, I'd be so bold as to say that we often don't do it at all - which is a problem, because if you set out to reform the church without relation to what the church is supposed to be with reference to Scripture and broader theological disciplines, then, well, you're probably not going to accomplish very much. I'm not actually going to discuss the Comprehensive Review. Our congregation has expressed a willingness to participate; now, we await the invitation. I am aware of the fact, though, that as the "crisis" approaches, there are a number of things already being done which could well change the nature of the United Church, all of which relate in one way or another to the structure of church governance we use. By "church governance," of course, I mean the system by which the church makes its decisions. Broadly speaking there are three options: congregational, conciliar and episcopal. A congregational form of governance is one in which each congregations governs itself completely. A conciliar system essentially is a federated system of governance, where there are specific people called to leadership at various ascending or descending (depending on where you begin and how you see the system operating) levels of church governance, who make decisions specific to their level. An episcopal system is governance by bishops. There can be variations. A congregational system can also be conciliar (so the congregation is governed by elders, essentially, rather than by the congregation as a whole) and an episcopal system can be either limited (with bishops working in tandem with various "councils" and/or having mostly moral authority to offer guidance or it can be absolute, where the bishop makes the decisions.

I've argued for years that the United Church is sliding toward a congregational form of governance - a slide accelerating as time goes on. Based on my experience with congregations, I would say that 90-95% of the people sitting in United Church pews on an average Sunday (and that might be a conservative estimate) don't especially care about the higher courts of the church or what they're doing. They might be oblivious to them, they might be disinterested in them or they might be antagonistic toward them - but one thing most people sitting in the pews would agree on is that they don't want these "higher courts" interfering in the life of the congregation. I also believe that eventually the United Church will adopt a congregational system of governance - or else it will die - for the simple reason that the church can't continue to exist when its members simply don't support its structure. Most councils are already finding volunteers in short supply. But there's a pushback. The higher levels of the United Church in some cases are starting to establish what look very much like episcopal systems.

I'm aware of one of our Conferences, for example, which is requiring that applications for vacant ministry positions be sent to the Conference Office for confidential matching with vacant pastoral charges. That, of course, shifts the balance of power very much toward the Conference Office, making the Conference Officer the gatekeepers for ministers wanting to apply to vacant pastoral charges. It also seems to me to violate the polity of the United Church, which states in the newest edition of our Manual: "The Joint Search Committee [a committee made up of members of the pastoral charge and the presbytery] is responsible for setting the process that it will follow." Hmmm. What if the Joint Search Committee wants to set a process that DOESN'T involve the Conference Office dealing with those who are sending applications for the vacancy? Seems to me based on that section of the Manual that they have the right to say to the Conference Office, "butt out. We'll involve you in the process we set at the appropriate time." Personally, I hope some Search Committees say that - because what we see here is structural change to the church (which is more important than it might sound) being made not on the basis of ecclesiology, but more likely on the basis of "efficiency" and "fear" - fear that some legal mistake is going to be made by the Search Committee. Efficiency and fear are not legitimate grounds for making changes to how the church governs itself. And that's optimistic. Of more concern is the possibility that this particular structural change is a control issue! No. Not in the United Church. It couldn't be.

For what its worth, I think that limited episcopacy is an arguably biblical form of church governance. Paul's letters clearly demonstrate that there are those who are recognized as being in a position to be sought out for advice and to offer that advice (and perhaps to give even unsolicited advice.) The tenor of some of Paul's letters also suggest that this was a limited episcopacy, as it's clear that not all the churches he wrote to actually abided by his wishes! I'm unconvinced that the type of governance we have right now (the multi-layered conciliar system) is biblical at all. I see no warrant in the New Testament for churches that turn over areas of responsibility to joint decision-making. I also think that congregational governance is biblical - perhaps the most biblical form of church governance that we have.

My concern is that this will turn into a battle over power - who gets to control what in other words - and that there will be precious little theological reflection done on the very complex question of "what is the church?" That's a question I think we have to come to terms with before we even think about reviewing our governance structures or mission. It's work that I don't think we do anywhere near well enough!

A Thought For The Week Of June 17

Thought for the week: "Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear?’" (Matthew 6:31) We spend so much of our time worrying. I once heard a speaker say that we could get rid of most of our worries if we'd just stop worrying about things we can't change or things that are probably never going to happen, because most of the things we worry about fall into those two categories. I've not done exhaustive research on what people worry about, but I kind of suspect that's true. Worry does a lot of damage to us. It causes stress and a variety of related health problems. But it's spiritually unhealthy as well. Those who spend an excessive amount of time worrying are really showing a lack of faith and trust in God. In this passage from the Sermon on the Mount, that was Jesus' point: worrying accomplishes nothing. That isn't to say that we shouldn't take normal precautions like fastening seat belts, but it does mean that we have to let go of irrational worries. Faith in God helps us to do that. This was the direction Jesus was pointing us to: let go of your fears and worries and have faith in God to help you through the tough times. Have a great week!

June 16 sermon - Living Between Good And Evil: The Problem Of Original Sin

You know the story of how Adam landed us in the dilemma we’re in—first sin, then death, and no one exempt from either sin or death. That sin disturbed relations with God in everything and everyone, but the extent of the disturbance was not clear until God spelled it out in detail to Moses. So death, this huge abyss separating us from God, dominated the landscape from Adam to Moses. Even those who didn’t sin precisely as Adam did by disobeying a specific command of God still had to experience this termination of life, this separation from God. But Adam, who got us into this, also points ahead to the One who will get us out of it. (Romans 5:12-14, The Message)

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

      Having spoken last week about what I called “original goodness,” but also having acknowledged that one of the problems we can have is falling too far on the side of goodness and ignoring the whole issue of sin, it seemed appropriate that this morning I’d try to offer the necessary balance by following my discussion about original goodness with some thoughts on what’s commonly called “original sin.” It’s the idea that the so-called original sin of the Book of Genesis (the choice of Adam and Eve to eat the fruit off the forbidden tree) has effectively tainted human nature so that we’re all “sinners by nature” so to speak. That’s the very traditional way in which it’s spoken of. But as I was reflecting upon the idea of “original sin” one of the things I started thinking about was the definition of “sin.” What exactly is “sin?”

      Most people probably think it’s a very simple thing. The kneejerk reaction if asked the question is probably to say that “sin” is breaking the rules that God has laid down for us. And yet, if we think about Scripture as a whole, we might discover that sin is both more than that and less than that all at the same time. Clearly, it’s not just about breaking rules. Setting aside the fact that we as Christians believe that Christ came to set us free from the law (which are the rules, if you will) there’s also the fact that Romans 5:14 refers to “those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam.” The point here isn’t that there were those who never sinned, but rather that there were those who sinned even though they did not break a command. So, obedience to what God wants of us appears to be more than just slavish devotion to a bunch of rules and regulations, and sin itself has to be more than simply breaking the rules and regulations. As usually happens, when we start to think deeply enough about any topic related to faith we find that it’s a lot more complicated than it might appear at first glance. One thing that I have reflected a lot on over the years is how to interpret Scripture. Most people “interpret Scripture” so to speak through a very narrow lens. They pick and choose their favourite Bible verses, and they make those Bible verses the be all and end all of what Scripture says - both in terms of what it promises and what it condemns. But the Holy Spirit has been suggesting to me, especially over the last few months for some reason, that there’s a different way of interpreting Scripture. Scripture - God’s Word - is about more than the words on the page. Even Jesus acknowledged that, for example, in the Sermon on the Mount, when He discussed the law with the repeated refrain “You have heard that it was said … but I say to you …” In other words, Jesus was saying that you can’t just recite the words; you have to go a little deeper than just the words on the page. God’s Spirit has to guide you into what Scripture is saying. You might say, then, that properly interpreting Scripture has less to do with the letter of Scripture and rather more to do with the spirit of Scripture. 

      When we think about sin, the mistake we most often make is to choose the letter of Scripture over the spirit. When we do that, the problem is that we usually start with ourselves and our own biases rather than with discerning God’s will. So we decide what we like or don’t like, and then we search the Bible to find verses that support our position, and we ignore anything that doesn’t fit with our pre-conceived notions. But the spirit of the gospel goes beyond the letter of the gospel. As an example, let’s consider Adam. What was his sin?

      Is that a silly question? I mean, it’s kind of obvious, isn’t it? After all he did violate a commandment. God said, “don’t eat the fruit off that tree,” and Adam (and Eve) did it anyway. But is that really the point? Was that really the sin? Or, at least, was that really what led to the consequences? Think about the story. “When they heard the sound  of God strolling in the garden in the evening breeze, the Man and his Wife hid in the trees of the garden, [they] hid from God.” The issue in Genesis isn’t so much the eating of the fruit; it’s the destruction of the intimate relationship that humanity had enjoyed with God up to that moment. Adam and Eve ate the fruit, but what was far more important was that they chose to try to hide from God. From that, I believe that the spirit of the word is that “sin” isn’t so much violating rules (which we all do, and which God is willing to forgive) it’s doing anything that so damages our relationship with God that we’re unable to believe that God can forgive, or it’s anything we do that damages someone else’s relationship with God in that same way. That also seems to be Paul’s point when he speaks about the Genesis story: “... sin disturbed relations with God in everything and everyone …” 

      We sin when we deliberately close ourselves off from God; we sin when we decide that breaking a rule places us beyond the ability to be reconciled with God; we sin as well when we damage other people’s relations with God. That comes right out of the Gospels. When you think about the life and teachings of Jesus, and how He related to those around Him,  you discover that He was always harshest not on those whom we would normally consider the sinners (you know who I mean - the adulterers, the prostitutes, the thieves, whom Jesus was always willing to associate with and forgive) but rather on those (such as the Pharisees) who set themselves up in judgment against those with whom Jesus associated, those whom Jesus loved and those whom Jesus forgave. It seems to me that those today who rely on the letter of Scripture and take it upon themselves on the basis of that letter to judge and condemn others for their actions and to tell them how sinfully they’re acting really need to do some soul-searching of their own. 

      As I seek to immerse myself in the spirit of the gospel (in the spirit of God’s Word) it seems to me that at its heart real sin (the dangerous kind that leads to all sorts of negative consequences) is that which we do that holds us back from loving God, or that which we do that holds others back from believing that God loves them. That’s the original sin of Genesis - Adam deciding to hide from God; humanity deciding to cut itself off from God - which sometimes we do simply by ignoring the spirit of God’s Word and its ability to change us and instead relying on the letter of God’s Word and changing it to suit our biases and prejudices.

      We all do that sometimes. Being humble requires us to admit that we all do it sometimes. So, if that’s true, then where’s the good news in all this? Paul shared it at the end of today’s passage: “... Adam, who got us into this, also points ahead to the One who will get us out of it.” The good news is Jesus, Who came to bring us back into a true, grace filled, loving relationship with God, summed up by the word “salvation.” We’re not being saved from sin; we’re certainly not being saved from God. Mostly, we’re being saved from ourselves. Jesus came to do that for us. Jesus came to be “Emmanuel” - God With Us - and that tells us something important. We can’t hide ourselves from God - whether we try to do it out of our own feelings of shame or guilt, or whether we try to do it because of the feelings of shame or guilt that others have heaped upon us - we can’t hide ourselves from God. No matter how broken and irreparable our relationship with God might seem to us, God is still seeking us out. “Where are you,” God called to Adam. Not because God didn’t know where Adam was, but as an invitation to Adam to come out in the open and re-enter the  relationship. That invitation is there for all of us all of the time!

A Thought For The Week Of June 10

"Bear with one another and, if anyone has a complaint against another, forgive each other; just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive." (Colossians 3:13) This may be the toughest part of living as a follower of Jesus Christ: forgiving. Let's be honest - who among us really wants to forgive. After all, if you're in the position of forgiving someone, it's probably because either they've hurt you or they owe you something - or possibly both. And, often, the last thing that comes to mind is forgiveness. All too often, what we want to do is hold on to the grievance or the debt, hold it over the other person's head, or at least let it gnaw away at us to the point that it eventually destroys our soul - because that's really what unforgiveness does. It doesn't hurt the person you can't forgive. The very fact that they need to be forgiven probably means that they don't particularly care if you can't forgive them. Our example, as always, is Jesus. "Father, forgive them," he cried from the cross. Think of the forgiveness he offers to all of us, even though so many of us turn away so often. So must we forgive those who hurt us or turn their back on us in a time of need.  By not doing so, we only hurt ourselves. After all, how can we, who have received forgiveness in such abundance from God, refuse to offer it to others? So, if there are hurts in your life inflicted by others, let them go, move on and forgive. That really is the gospel way. Have a great week!