Strong and Courageous

31 08 2009

A Sermon preached at Southminster Presbyterian Church
Aug 30, 2009

Joshua 1

For those of you who have persevered through your Year of the Bible readings, I would like to congratulate you on finishing the Pentateuch! That is the Greek Word for the first five books of the Bible. In Hebrew, they’re referred to as the Torah, the teachings.

As we move deeper into the historical writings, beginning with Joshua, we’ll continue learning how the Hebrew people told the story of settling in the land of Canaan. I can’t promise that the readings will get much easier, but we are, at least, done wandering in the wilderness for a while.

But while the wilderness section may have come to its conclusion, the narrative is a continuation of Deuteronomy.

As we read Joshua, don’t look at it as a History text book. While it is based on the history of the settling of the Promised Land, it is not, primarily a historical document. The story it tells is at odds with the archaeological record. It is also at odds with the story we’ll read in the Book of Judges.

Most scholars believe the Hebrew people settled in the land of Canaan around 1200 BCE. The final text of Joshua, however, was not written until nearly 600 years later. So, imagine being asked to write down an account of the Protestant Reformation of the early 1500’s. Some of the details would likely be a little fuzzy, no matter what that time means to you. And your perspective on those events will influence how you tell the story too. If you were a Catholic, you would tell the story with a different perspective. A Catholic boyfriend of mine in college referred to that era of history as “the protestant revolt”. I, on the other hand, who considered naming one of my children “Calvin”, see it as an important period of growth, reform, and positive change in the church. We would write different stories of the same era.

So it is with the settling of the Promised Land. Joshua was compiled, 600 years after the fact, to preserve the ancient story of life after the wilderness, but it was mainly written to be a document of hope and salvation for people who had lost the Promised Land. By the time Joshua is written down, the people have been carted off to exile in Babylonia after the destruction of the southern Kingdom of Judah in 586 BCE.

So consider exile as you read through Joshua and Judges.

Yes, it is a violent book. Yes, it has God ordering war, genocide, and violence.

But the people were devastated by war and conquest and were seeking explanations for why they lost their land and ended up in exile. And what had Deuteronomy said would happen if the people disobeyed? Listen to these verses from Deuteronomy 28:

But if you will not obey the LORD your God by diligently observing all his commandments and decrees, which I am commanding you today, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you:

Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the field.

Cursed shall be your basket and your kneading bowl.

Cursed shall be the fruit of your womb, the fruit of your ground, the increase of your cattle and the issue of your flock.

Cursed shall you be when you come in, and cursed shall you be when you go out.

The LORD will send upon you disaster, panic, and frustration in everything you attempt to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly, on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken me.

So, in this light, exile was not about God’s abandonment of the people. It was God’s fulfilling “the covenant obligations for a disobedient people… The Deuteronomistic historian was not urging the Israelites to carry out a new holy war like that described in the book of Joshua. That was no longer even a possibility. What the writer was trying to convey was that God was owed single hearted loyalty.” (“Joshua:A journey of Faith” by Mary Mikhael, p. 9) God who had given them the land in the first place was the same God who was going to restore the land to them again, after exile.

Joshua, from whom the book gets its name, is Moses’ replacement. His name means “God delivers”. You might be more familiar with the Greek version of Joshua’s name, Jesus. This is not a book justifying or advocating war and violence. This is a book about the promise and the fulfillment of God’s deliverance. Joshua, God delivers.

Thus ends the classroom lecture part of the sermon.


So, listen now for God’s word to us today, from the first chapter of the book of Joshua:

After the death of Moses the servant of the LORD, the LORD spoke to Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ assistant, saying, “My servant Moses is dead. Now proceed to cross the Jordan, you and all this people, into the land that I am giving to them, to the Israelites. Every place that the sole of your foot will tread upon I have given to you, as I promised to Moses. From the wilderness and the Lebanon as far as the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, to the Great Sea in the west shall be your territory. No one shall be able to stand against you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will not fail you or forsake you. Be strong and courageous; for you shall put this people in possession of the land that I swore to their ancestors to give them.

Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to act in accordance with all the law that my servant Moses commanded you; do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, so that you may be successful wherever you go. This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth; you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to act in accordance with all that is written in it. For then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall be successful. I hereby command you: Be strong and courageous; do not be frightened or dismayed, for the LORD your God is with you wherever you go.”

Then Joshua commanded the officers of the people, “Pass through the camp, and command the people: ‘Prepare your provisions; for in three days you are to cross over the Jordan, to go in to take possession of the land that the LORD your God gives you to possess.’”

To the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh Joshua said, “Remember the word that Moses the servant of the LORD commanded you, saying, ‘The LORD your God is providing you a place of rest, and will give you this land.’

Your wives, your little ones, and your livestock shall remain in the land that Moses gave you beyond the Jordan. But all the warriors among you shall cross over armed before your kindred and shall help them, until the LORD gives rest to your kindred as well as to you, and they too take possession of the land that the LORD your God is giving them. Then you shall return to your own land and take possession of it, the land that Moses the servant of the LORD gave you beyond the Jordan to the east.”

They answered Joshua: “All that you have commanded us we will do, and wherever you send us we will go.

Just as we obeyed Moses in all things, so we will obey you. Only may the LORD your God be with you, as he was with Moses!

Whoever rebels against your orders and disobeys your words, whatever you command, shall be put to death. Only be strong and courageous.”

Strong and courageous.

Did you hear those words beating through this text as a drumbeat?

Be strong and courageous.

Strong and courageous.

I confess, most days, to feeling neither strong nor courageous.

But I encounter people every day who are.

Tomorrow, Boise students head back to school. I think some other districts started back this past week. Walking into a new class at the start of a year is exciting, but it also requires strength and courage. Students going off to college and their parents going home to empty houses—strong and courageous.

Job uncertainty or loss requires strength and courage.

Facing medical problems without health insurance.

I have friends who have suffered the death of one of their children. I think that every day they face, every birthday they make it through, they are strong and courageous.

Being with a dear woman as she faced her death with both strength and courage. Saying what she needed to say, even as she realized her opportunities to speak were coming to a close, required strength that I’m not sure she knew she had.

I think that every time you deliver Meals on Wheels, or volunteer with Hospice or at the Hospital, or whatever it is you do to serve, you are strong and courageous, even if you may not feel either. Because you are walking into a new land. Each situation you face is new and unpredictable.

That was the reality for the Israelites as they stood on the mountains of Eastern Jordan, looking down into the Promised Land. And it was the reality they faced in exile. What would the future hold in this new place?

Walking into unknown situations and new lands has a way of stripping away our carefully crafted illusions of control.

We like to think that we know what’s going on. That we are in control. That we plan out our future and have mapped out our path.

But, of course, we don’t. We try.


Have you heard the joke? Want to make God laugh? Tell God what you’ll be doing in 5 years.

Moses and the Hebrew people who left Egypt headed to the Promised Land. They knew where they were headed. Should have been a couple of months journey. But not one of them crossed the river. They spent 40 years wandering in the wilderness but it was only the next generations who entered Canaan with Joshua. This was not the way it was supposed to go.

Joshua wasn’t supposed to lead them across the river. Moses was. This was not the way it was supposed to go.

And 600 years later, Babylon wasn’t supposed to be able to defeat them and cart them off to exile. This is not the way it was supposed to go.

How often do we say that?

This is not the way it was supposed to go.

But, more often than not, I think we’re wrong. I think, often, things do happen the way they were supposed to. They just didn’t go the way we had planned.

So, perhaps, this speech is God’s way of reminding them about who is in charge.

“As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will not fail you or forsake you. Be strong and courageous; for I shall put this people in possession of the land that I swore to their ancestors to give them.”

And maybe being strong and courageous doesn’t involve trusting in our own skills and abilities. Perhaps being strong and courageous means trusting God. Letting go of our own needs to control the situation and trusting that it will work out.

I hear this speech that God first gives to Joshua, so Joshua can then give it to the Hebrew people, and I can almost imagine them standing there, looking around at each other and saying, “no, that’s okay. You can go first.” “No, really. I insist”. Perhaps this speech is to force them to take the first step into the future.

The future can be a scary place, even when you’re excited about it. Whether it is entering a new Promised Land or facing a terminal illness. Whether it is the first day of school or the first day on unemployment. We encounter new Promised Lands all the time. And I invite you to consider where yours might be today. And how can the words from Joshua 1 speak to your life, and to your situation? Hear God’s words to you this day:

“No one shall be able to stand against you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will not fail you or forsake you. Be strong and courageous; for I shall put this people in possession of the land that I swore to their ancestors to give them.”

God is calling you to be bold and courageous in God’s provision. To take that first step into your new Promised Land. May the journey not turn out as you planned. May it turn out exactly as it was supposed to go. Amen.


Comments : 2 Comments »

Categories : Joshua 1, Promised Land

What do you want me to do for you?

24 08 2009

A sermon preached at Southminster Presbyterian Church
August 23, 2009

Luke 18:35-43

Blindness is a popular image in scripture. The psalmist tells us:


The LORD opens the eyes of the blind.

The LORD lifts up those who are bowed down;

the LORD loves the righteous.


And Isaiah is fond of using blindness as a metaphor:

We grope like the blind along a wall,

groping like those who have no eyes;

we stumble at noon as in the twilight,

among the vigorous as though we were dead.

But Jesus uses blindness to describe people who may have sight, but clearly have no vision. They have the tools to recognize the Messiah, yet they don’t understand. In Matthew he says,

You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel!


I understand why it is such a popular metaphor in scripture. We still use blindness and the verb “to see” metaphorically. When something is made clear for us, we say, “Oh, I see.” How strange must that sound to new English speakers when they hear someone say, “I see” over the phone.


But I have a difficult time approaching these “blindness” texts only metaphorically. Because I know about real blindness. My father went blind when I was a little girl. He had multiple detachments of both of his retinas. He still has some vision, but is legally blind. I may have some ideas about what it must have been like for him, but I can only really say what the experience was like for me.


Things changed. He couldn’t work as he used to. So he became “Mr. Mom” and my mom had to go back to work. Many more dads stay home with their children now, but I was the only kid I knew whose dad was home when we got home from school. He wouldn’t have chosen that, I don’t think. It wasn’t what the men of his generation were doing. But it worked well for me. I think I got to know my dad better than a lot of my friends knew their dads. His blindness gave us time to be together. So there was grace in the midst of it.


But it also brought challenges.

In any case, having experienced how blindness affects a person’s life makes me a little sensitive when it gets thrown around metaphorically. “You’re so blind!”, we might tell someone when they overlook something obvious. But not being able to find your car keys on the kitchen counter is not equal to actually not being able to see what your children look like.


So, I approach this text cautiously. I will speak of blindness metaphorically, but know that I do not lightly use someone else’s disability as an object lesson for us.

So, we encounter our biblical blindman on the road. He’s begging—an occupation common for people for whom society can find no other employment, and he hears a commotion.

“What’s going on?”, he asks his neighbors.

“Jesus of Nazareth is coming by”, they tell him.

“Son of David, have mercy on me!” he cries out.


And then the paradox of community comes in. The same people who helped him by answering his questions and telling him that Jesus was coming are the same people who now try to quiet him. Because as a community will support an individual, even if only by answering his questions and allowing him to beg on the side of the road, the same community tries to control its image. “Jesus is coming. We want him to see the nice parts of Jericho. We don’t want him to know we have beggars. And certainly not beggars who bring politics into the mix!”

Because the blindman didn’t just call out Jesus’ name. He called out “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”

He’s connecting Jesus to the throne of David, which was both a political threat to Rome and a connection to the Messianic claims and hopes of Israel.


I hope that we, as a community, take note of this piece of the story. Because we, as a community, help individuals. We do what we can when we hear of the needs of individuals. You just helped fill 404 backpacks for kids in this community, after all! And if I mention that the food pantry is low, you fill it up within a week.


But do we also, like the people of Jericho, try to silence people who voice things that make us uncomfortable?

The blindman in our story, and the ones in our lives today, both real and metaphorical, will not be silenced. “Son of David! Have mercy on me!”, he yells even more loudly.

The man doesn’t have his sight. He doesn’t have a job. He doesn’t have much. But he has a voice. Don’t ever underestimate the power of your voice.

And he knows where to go for help.

“Jesus! Have mercy on me!”

Jesus stops.

“What do you want me to do for you?”, he asks.


I love this question.


It reminds us to stop and consider. Jesus is clarifying the issue. “What does mercy mean for you?”, Jesus wants to know. Is the man asking for money? Does he want attention? Is he asking forgiveness? Help?


Or, perhaps more likely, Jesus knows what the man wants, but wants to make sure the blind man knows what he wants.


And as people to whom this question is being asked, it calls on us to clarify our own thoughts too.

What do we want Jesus to do for us when he finds us by the side of the road?


I would have to stop and think about it for a while.


But the blindman knows.

Immediately.


“I want to see again.”


And this is where the physical healing and the metaphorical healing overlap again.

I do believe Jesus healed people. There are too many stories of his healing for this story to be seen only as a metaphor. But even as I believe in Jesus’ power to heal, I can’t begin to tell you why this particular blind man was healed while others were not.

But the blindman’s response, “I want to see again” is supposed to be our cry as well.

Since most of us are not legally blind, as is my father, this may not be a literal request we’re making.


What do we want to see again?

Do we want to see God at work in the world in ways we haven’t seen in a while?

Do we want to see restored relationships?

Do we want to see a future with hope?

Do we want to see justice?

Do we want to see truth?

Or, do we want to see our own truths?

I confess that I have plenty of illustrations I could share here this morning about people in our society who are blind. I think we should have a conversation about health care. And I don’t expect that everyone would agree with the plans on the table, but when I see people making posters of Obama looking like Hitler, I confess that all I see is their blindness. “How can they not see the truth about the need for affordable health care?!”, I want to scream out when I see those ‘townhall’ pictures. I can find the blindness in politicians and TV personalities. I can find the blindness in people with whom I interact.


But I have a harder time finding my own blindness.


“Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me!”


“What do you want from me?”


“Lord, let me see again”.

Did you notice the “again”?

In this passage, it is a word of hope and promise for me.


It means that the man once had sight and he wants it back. Again.

It means that he once could see and he values what he has lost. Again is a word of hope, because even though he’s lost his ability to see, he believes it is within him again to do so.


I had an “again” moment yesterday. The Presbytery met yesterday, for the first time since the meeting in April when we voted on the amendments to the Book of Order. If you recall, I was a little frustrated after that vote. I was, honestly, frustrated with some of my colleagues and was hurt by some of the things they said when we were discussing the amendments. Their blindness was apparent to me, let’s just say.


And yesterday, when I walked in to the meeting, those same people greeted me, asked me how my first year has been at Southminster, and genuinely welcomed me in friendship and as a colleague. During the meeting, when they raised their hands to speak, I confess that I braced myself for what they might say. But they made insightful and compassionate comments, leading the conversation in good ways. And I realized that I was seeing again.


I don’t pretend that our theologies line up on all points, and I still want to work for justice and inclusion in the church, but yesterday I realized I had more colleagues than I was aware of.


Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me.


This week, after you’ve asked for mercy, I invite you to prepare for Jesus’ question:

“What do you want me to do for you?”


And be prepared to see again.

Amen.


Comments : 22 Comments »

Categories : Luke 18:35-43, blindness

Answered Prayers?

13 08 2009

A Sermon preached at Southminster Presbyterian Church
Aug 9, 2009

Numbers 11

One problem we have as 21st Century Americans reading the Hebrew Scriptures is that we are very linear people. We like things to be in order. A happens. Then B. Then C.
And then we read our Bibles. Genesis, then Exodus, then Leviticus, and now Numbers. And we think we’re reading a linear story. Genesis first. Then Exodus. Then Leviticus. etc.
And to some degree it works. But these stories weren’t meant to be read only in a chronological fashion. If you have noticed, some of these stories sound familiar.

“Haven’t we already read about this?”

So, rather than seeing these texts in a line, try to think of them in a spiral. The story keeps circling around on itself, looking at the story from different angles, bringing different perspectives on the events.

And so, today, we have another perspective on how the people handled the diet of manna in the wilderness. This section of Numbers gives a different account of the story told in Exodus 16 and 17, from which it is normally preached. I invite you, this week, to compare the two. Why do you think they interpreted the story so differently? And why, do you suppose, the people who put together the lectionary chose the manna story from Exodus instead of this one from Numbers?

In any case, we find the people complaining in the wilderness. Haven’t we seen this before?

Yes.

And this time, the anger of the Lord is kindled against their complaints. I often tell people, and other places in scripture suggest, that it is okay to complain to God. Even in this passage, Moses complains to God about the people complaining to him! But Moses doesn’t get burned up in fire.

But the Israelites had already prayed for deliverance from Egypt, and God had heard their cries and freed them from slavery. God was continuing to provide for them, traveling with them and providing them with manna wherever they went.

They have, in some senses, already had their prayers answered. They now longer have to work for Pharaoh. They have their lives back and they are heading to the promised land, although admittedly on a somewhat indirect path.

And then they whine to God. About how great it was in slavery. About how good the food was in Egypt. About how much they MISS it and wish they were back there.
Personally, even though I’m uncomfortable with God who sets camp on FIRE and consumes God’s own people, I admire this God. I admire it when God says, “what do you people want from me???!! I saved your lives. I freed you from Pharaoh, which took some planning, by the way, and now you want to go back?”

How often are we like this? We pray with great conviction about what we want God to do for us, but then, sometimes we don’t know what to do when our prayers our answered. We can be fickle. We may pray for the church to grow, which is a good thing. But then will we complain when there is no place to park? Or when new people are sitting in the pews that have been in your family for 123 years?

The people complain about the food—“if only we had meat to eat!”—and God says, “you don’t like the manna? You think you want meat to eat? I can do that. I’ll send you meat until it is coming out of your noses!”

This version of the story is much more gruesome than Exodus’ version, but does a much better job of illustrating the adage, “be careful what you wish for”. There are quails in Exodus too, but the people aren’t buried in 3 feet of quails and they don’t all die from eating them.

This is one of those stories where God’s restraint seems to wear thin.

Perhaps this is one of those times when the Israelites thought, “maybe we didn’t really want you to answer that prayer, God.”

Because, in the words of the great theologian—and I know you’ve been waiting for this ever since I started talking about unanswered prayers—in the words of the great theologian Garth Brooks–“some of God’s greatest gifts are unanswered prayers”.

I asked some people this week about unanswered prayers. It seemed that most people had some experience with them. One of my friends from high school suffered three miscarriages. And with each pregnancy, she prayed to become a mother and carry those pregnancies to term. But she and her husband adopted children. And she said she is thankful that God answered the part of the prayer about becoming a mother. She also said she was thankful that she didn’t carry those pregnancies to term because she knows she now has the children God intended her to mother.

A number of friends told me about relationships they were in—engagements and marriages that didn’t work out. And they all prayed for the relationships to work, to improve. As difficult as it was for them to end those relationships—even relationships that had been blessed by God in a church wedding—they were now thankful that their prayers were not answered as they thought they should be.

A friend of mine from Albuquerque was hospitalized with pneumonia this past year, which was not what he’d been praying for. But his hospitalization allowed the doctors to discover another medical problem that would have likely gone undiagnosed.

And a number of people told me stories about the deaths of loved ones. So many of them had been praying for their loved ones, who were terminal and in great pain, to have an end to their suffering. But they were all thankful that God didn’t immediately answer those prayers because the time they had, even in the midst of the pain, allowed them to say things that needed to be said. Allowed them to heal and restore relationships.

For all of those illustrations, I’m sure each of you have your own memories of unanswered prayers for which you are thankful. And I’m sure more than a few of you have memories of prayers that you still wish God had answered for you.

That’s the tricky thing.
When we pray, we can’t see the whole picture. We just have the view of our lives right this minute. And most days I’m thankful for that. I’m glad to live each day as it occurs. Most days I’m glad I don’t know what’s going to happen five days or five years from now.
Perhaps you have seen the movie “Bruce Almighty”. Jim Carrey plays a self absorbed TV newsman who is dating Jennifer Anniston’s character, Grace. She is way too good for him. She gives blood, teaches pre-school, and generally tries to help people. He, on the other hand, thinks only of himself and complains that his life is unfair and that God could fix it all in 5 minutes if God were paying attention.

God, as played by Morgan Freeman tells Bruce that he can be God for a while. And so a few hours of movie hilarity ensues. In addition to the sports car that every man would drive, were they God, Bruce decides to answer every person’s prayers with “yes” to make them all happy.

One woman loses 47 pounds on the Krispy Kreme diet. Someone’s stock portfolio triples in 3 days. 400,000 people win the New York Lottery, which means that each person wins $17. But by the end of the movie, Bruce, who can’t see the big picture, has made a mess of things as God.

I invite you to watch this film. At the end, God and Bruce have a conversation about prayer. God tells Bruce to pray. And Bruce asks God for world peace. God tells him that is a fine prayer if you want to be Miss America. “But what do you really want?”

And Bruce prays for Grace. That she will be loved by someone who sees her through God’s eyes.

By the end of the film, as only seems to happen in Hollywood, everything comes together for Bruce.

But just because we don’t have access to the big picture doesn’t mean we shouldn’t still voice our dreams and wishes to God. It just means we need some awareness of our limited vision as we’re praying. So, rather than complaining to God, as Bruce Almighty and the Israelites did– “Give us meat to eat!”, perhaps the outcome would have been different had they started with gratitude. “Thank you God for the deliverance we’ve already experienced. For freedom from slavery. For life. For your guiding presence in the wilderness.”
Perhaps you have heard of the ACTS understanding of prayer.

Adoration—acknowledging that we worship a gracious and merciful God
Confession—acknowledging that we come before God as broken people in a broken world
Thanksgiving—thanking God for the gifts we’ve already received thus far on the journey
Supplication—asking God to hear the concerns, burdens, and worries that are weighing us down.

In our text today, the first three components were missing.

I don’t know what you are wanting to voice to God, but I encourage you to keep at it, even if we may someday be thanking God for another unanswered prayer.


Comments : Leave a Comment »

Categories : Numbers 11

At One Ment

5 08 2009

A Sermon preached at Southminster Presbyterian Church
July 26, 2009

Leviticus 16:29-34
Romans 3:19-31

I selected these texts from our Year of the Bible readings because they are each, in their own way, about atonement. Atonement is an interesting word. It isn’t a translation of Greek, Hebrew, or Latin. It is a word made up by William Tyndale in the 1500’s to better explain the Hebrew concept behind the word “kippur”. The Hebrew means “to cover over”, or “to pacify”. If a kid makes his or her parents angry, for example, they can often “kippur” by cleaning their room or unloading the dishwasher.

Tyndale thought that “cover over” and “pacify” didn’t fully measure up to the meaning of the Hebrew word. So he created one. “Atonement”. At One Ment.
Kippur is, in a Christian sense, God’s way of making us At One with God.
Yom Kippur, or Day of Atonement, is still a Holy Day in Judaism. And its roots trace back to Leviticus. Fasting, Sabbath, and corporate prayers of forgiveness are all a part of Yom Kippur.

We carry the practice of Kippur over into our worship each week with the prayer of confession. And I know some of you don’t like the prayer of confession. You may think it is depressing or a downer in the middle of a worship service.

But here’s the thing that they knew in the desert and we should know now. We need kippur. In the midst of our lives, kippur, atonement, has a place. And it isn’t to depress us or to make us feel bad. It is because, as Paul says, “all have fallen short of the glory of God.” That is not depressing. That is reality. And when we face our reality clearly, we can make better responses in the future. It gives us hope.

So, back to “at one ment”. Confession is a part of atonement, but atonement is bigger than our acknowledging that we need it. In Leviticus, if you’ve been reading along in the Year of the Bible, you read about the scape goat. Here it is from
Lev. 16:20-22When he has finished atoning for the holy place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall present the live goat. Then Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness by means of someone designated for the task. The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness.

My apologies to those of you who don’t like the idea of cute barnyard animals being sacrificed or set loose into the wilderness, but I like the tangible nature of this ritual. Here are our sins, we’re heaping them up on this goat, and sending them out away from us. There they go! All gone!

And in addition to being a visible sign, it is an act that requires humility. Because we can’t get away from our brokenness on our own. We need help. We need God.
Don’t underestimate what a countercultural message this is for us. Society would tell us that if we can’t do it on our own, we’re weak. If you can’t pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, then you are out of luck.

The concept of a Day of Atonement, where the community comes together to acknowledge that they individually, and corporately, need God, is very countercultural. And I suspect it was countercultural 3,000 years ago as well.
And then Jesus shows up.

He lives a life that was also countercultural. He, who knew the Holiness Codes so well, ate with sinners and touched lepers. And you know what happened? It wasn’t their uncleanness that spread. It was his holiness that spread. He treated women as human beings. He spoke to children. He spoke in parables. He spoke of the Kingdom of God. Was he the Messiah? The anointed one for whom they had been waiting?

But he never organized an army. He just collected a rag tag bunch of followers. How was he going to overthrow the Roman Empire with that bunch of fishermen from Galilee?

And then he was arrested. And convicted. And crucified. And three days later, his tomb was empty. There were reports. Of messengers. Of angels. There were sightings—by the disciples. By crowds.

And then they were left wondering what it all meant. Because all they were left with was their tradition, his teachings, the memories they had of his life, and what he told them about God’s kingdom.

And you can see how his followers would have seen Yom Kippur in a new way that next year, after the crucifixion. As they talked about God’s merciful act of at one ment that brought humanity into right relationship with God, you can understand why they would have thought of Jesus. As they looked at the scapegoat, carrying the sins of the people on its back, you can see how they would have thought of Jesus.

Listen to these words of Paul one more time.
“But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.”

These early followers of Jesus began to understand his death in terms of kippur, of atonement. Jesus never clearly spelled out a theory of atonement for us to study. But from the time the first letters of the New Testament were being composed, Christians have been struggling with what his death means. And we should still be thinking about it. What does the death of a Palestinian Jew 2000 years ago have to do with our lives today?

I’m going to give you some traditional theories of atonement to inform your contemplation. I don’t think, personally, that any of these theories, on their own, are the “right” answer. But I do think that as a whole, they better help us understand. And different Christian traditions emphasize different theories, so knowing these can help us understand each other and our different theologies.
So, for your entertainment and enlightenment, I present Three Classical Theories of the Atonement.

Christus Victor
Christus Victor is Latin for Christ as victorious warrior. If there is a battle waging between the forces of good and evil, Christ’s death is a ransom paid to correct original sin. But since Christ conquered death, the forces of good win the battle.
There are a few problems with this theory. One is that we don’t believe in dualism—that the forces of evil are equal partners with God. But it can be helpful, especially to people who feel they are under attack. If you need liberation in your life, the image of a victorious Christ can have powerful meaning. The scriptural images in this theory are found in Isaiah.

Substitution
Substitution Theory came from Anselm, who was a Benedictine monk in the 11th century. Looking at feudal relationships between peasants and Lords, Anselm made a connection to our atonement. If a peasant dishonored his feudal lord, a satisfaction would have to be paid. But the peasants were often unable to pay that debt. Similarly, in our relationship with God, we are unable to pay the debt. Only God can repay the debt, but God doesn’t owe it. Therefore, there had to be someone simultaneously God and human, who can both pay the debt and who owes the debt. The sacrificial death of JC that fulfills the debt, restores God’s honor and grants humanity forgiveness and eternal life.
This theory has its problems as well. Aren’t we saved by God and not from God? This theory can also break up the Trinity a little too much with Jesus as ‘good cop’ and God the Father as ‘bad cop’. But if we look at this as the act of a compassionate God, it is more helpful. And Anselm’s theory also draws on many different scriptural images.

Moral Influence
This theory was developed by Peter Abelard. He was a Scholastic and involved in returning the church to academic pursuits. He lived a generation after Anselm and you may know him best for “Abelard and Heloise”. In any case, Abelard emphasized it was Jesus life as well as death that transform us from within and make us new persons, capable of obedience to God. His theory does make good sense of Jesus deeds and words. also resonates with the way good teaching can change us and transform us. However, Christ is not just a great moral teacher. Abelard reminds us that it is appropriate but incomplete to say he died for our sins, because his life matters. The way Jesus led his life led to his death.

Modern theologians tend to approach the question of atonement differently than the classical church fathers. Picking up on Abelard’s focus on the LIFE of Jesus, as well as his death, theologians suggest that it is in the WHOLE of who Jesus was that we can best understand his death. And, as people living in a world that is saturated by violence, crucifixion shows that the world of violence is under God’s judgment and will lead to its destruction.

Christ’s death extends the healing love of God to all who are violated and extends forgiveness to all violators. What happens on the cross is that God takes violence into God’s own self, absorbs all the violence. in so doing, Christ stops the cycle of violence. He offers healing and forgiveness, instead of retribution.

As we keep reading in the Year of the Bible, you’ll notice that each writer has a different understanding of atonement. We begin reading Luke’s gospel soon, and his understanding of Jesus’ death is different than what you have just read in Matthew and different than what you’ve read in Paul.

So, if you don’t agree with the theories I shared today and if you don’t agree with some of the different voices in scripture, that is okay. Scripture is God’s word to us, but it is also a collection of voices who were doing what we’re doing—trying to figure out their relationship with God.

The important piece in all of this is that you keep trying to figure things out.
Keep reading scripture, expecting God to speak to you.

Keep reading scripture, expecting God to challenge you.

And keep thinking of atonement, paying attention to the different voices. And ultimately recognizing that while the scripture writers have different images and ideas informing their understanding of both kippur in the Hebrew Bible and of kippur in the death of Jesus, they all acknowledge our need of it.

It is through the mercy and grace of God that we receive the gift of at one ment. May our knowledge that we have been made at one with God allow us to share that grace with others. Amen


Comments : Leave a Comment »

Categories : Atonement, Leviticus 16, Romans 3