That question in verse 38 has started my sermon thoughts for this passage-- "What are you looking for?" This is a good question not just for the two in this pericope but for me/us as well. What do we hope to find in Christ? A friend? fire insurance? A savior? a holy guide for this life as well as the next? It is early yet...
Joseph in SC
A couple of years ago, I started my Christmas Eve sermon with the questions, "Why are you here? What are you looking for?" The cute baby in the manger has grown up and is beginning his ministry. The warm feelings of Christmas have faded and now the real world begins again with its frustrations and cold weather and everyday stuff that we all have to face. How do we move from cute baby and warm feelings to a man's ministry and cold reality of the cross looming in Jesus' future? What are we looking for? A word of hope and comfort? The promise that God really cares for us in our despair? Joy? Love? Mercy? A teacher/Rabbi? A savior/Messiah? All of the above? What are we looking for?
I'm struck by verse 32. What does a person look like when the Spirit descends and "remains upon him"? I know someone who sees "auras" around certain people, usually people whom she would describe as "spiritual" -- for example, someone in a deep meditative state or in prayer. I'm trying to imagine what John saw..........
SueCan
I'm struck by verse 32. What does a person look like when the Spirit descends and "remains upon him"? I know someone who sees "auras" around certain people, usually people whom she would describe as "spiritual" -- for example, someone in a deep meditative state or in prayer. I'm trying to imagine what John saw..........
SueCan
I am struck by verse 42 - Andrew brought Simon to Jesus. Such a simple act. Yet Simon became, after much learning and struggle, the head of the church, the rock, the foundation. What might God be able to do if I brought some one to meet Jesus? Is this not, in part at least, what God invites me to do?
Bob in WP
I agree with Bob in WP, verse 42 is striking. This could be quite an evangelizing sermon. What if each person in the congregation brought another to Jesus - brought another to search for Jesus - brought another to church. The place could really rock. We could have a great air of expectation and excitement if we loved our friends enough to bring them to Jesus. Kelly in Alberta
Is anyone bringing Martin Luther King Jr into the sermon this Sunday? If so, how are you making the connection?
Patty
v29 "The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the World" Good religious jargon. But what did it mean to the hearers? Whatever does it mean to people today? I see our Christmas crib and nativity plays with cute lambs and shepherds wearing dressing gowns. But weren't the original shepherds caring for the lams that would be sacrificed in the Temple? A lamb without blemish. Have they now found one? JohnTheVicar Somerset UK
Patty, I recently borrowed a book from our library of Dr. Martin Luther King's sermons. Wow, check it out! I know he is best known to many for civil rights, but the man was close to God and preached the Word! LS
Yes, MLK will be part of my sermon. For me the connection is "The spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has annointed me to:......" (Lk 4 & Isaiah). The meaning of baptism is extensive and one of the meanings of Jesus baptism and ours is that it is a commissioning to service as God's chosen servant. Manzel
I am also going to address the question "What are you looking for?" (vs 38) this Sunday. It is my experience that so many congregations, certainly including the one I serve, have a tendency to forget what it is they are looking for? I think of Bailey's book, "You're God Is Too Small." I think I might also try to deal with the incongruity between Jesus' question and the response of the disciples. Are they confused, or are they rather just trying to change the subject?
NDT in Oregon
I am also going to address the question "What are you looking for?" (vs 38) this Sunday. It is my experience that so many congregations, certainly including the one I serve, have a tendency to forget what it is they are looking for? I think of Bailey's book, "You're God Is Too Small." I think I might also try to deal with the incongruity between Jesus' question and the response of the disciples. Are they confused, or are they rather just trying to change the subject?
NDT in Oregon
I think Jesus' statement "Come and see" is worth a sermon or two. It's an invitation. A proposition to trust Him.
I can picture Him, with a grin on His face, as He gestures to the disciples to follow him, to "come and see" what great things God has in store.
I think it's a way we should evangelize. We ought to be propositioning people to test God, to test Jesus. Follow Him and then see. Trust Him and your eyes will be opened. Submit to the idea that He knows where He is going and we don't. Then see what happens.
Rick in Va
To NDT in Oregon: I have a small paperback in my library (one of many I haven't read!) by J.B. Phillips titled "Your God Is Too Small." Is this the book you had in mind, or was it same title, different author? Doug in Riverside
I have JB Phillips' book, too. Phillips' translation of the New Testament is still by far my favorite modern re-wording of the texts. Maybe I'll read the passage from Phillips and then talk about "your God is too small." For Phillips, the invitation to "come and see" was a profound one. Yet Phillips discovered that though Jesus' changed his life, he didn't change everything about his life. Phillips himself struggled with terrible bouts of depression. He prayed earnestly for God to shine the light into his darkness and overcome it, as John declares in the prologue to this Gospel. But for J.B. Phillips, the darkness remained profound and terrible throughout his life. Still, the invitation to walk with Christ led to this beautiful modern wording of the Bible, one which surely reveals that God used Phillips in a wonderful way. The "wonder" of responding to Jesus' invitation to "come and see" is that we will be surprised what Christ has in store for us. It may not be what we expect--not even what we think we need. But it will surely take us where God wants us to be, which is with Jesus. That's an invitation, too, to the life "which is life indeed." -- Tim in Deep River
Yes, I agree with those who see this as an evangelizing sermon, of heralding the Christ. The boldness of John the Baptist is incredible, Behold the .... He states this openly to the crowd gathered. Again he proclaims the Christ ... and two of his own disciples respond and Jesus welcomes them as seekers. One of John's disciples proclaimed the Christ and his brother was drawn into this following. The question is are we in the business of evangelizing or prosylizing? (?) What does it mean to witness to Christ. Merton writes that Echart would have preached to the four courners of the church if it were empty - this is a dimension that we have lost, so eager to have the numbers.
tom in ga
King wrote an epistle from Paul to the churches in America.
http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/Docs/index.html
I plan to use part of it. Rev. King's insistence on love over violence came from his Christ centered life as a baptist minister. (For ye that are casting stones, he too had feet of clay...)
This is part of his epistle:
"Yes America, there is still the need for an Amos to cry out to the nation: "Let judgement roll down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream." May I say just a word to those of you who are struggling against this evil. Always be sure that you struggle with Christian methods and Christian weapons. Never succumb to the temptation of becoming bitter. As you press on for justice, be sure to move with dignity and discipline, using only the weapon of love. Let no man pull you so low as to hate him. Always avoid violence. If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in your struggle, unborn generations will be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness, and your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos."
HW in HI
Tom in Ga,
Evangelize is what we are called to do. The word proselytize has been used by many to negate evangelism. It is the progressive's (or postmodern)way of denuding the Christian doctrine of making disciples of all nations.
I say we proselytize because Christ has commanded us to.
Rick in Va
It's probably a side issue by now, but during Advent there was much discussion about whether Jesus and John the Baptist knew each other as children. Here in two verses (31 and 33), John says he didn't know Jesus (or is he just saying that he didn't know him as the Messiah...?)
Mary in Australia
To HW in HI: Thanks for your reference to the Martin Luther King site, which I've just read. I was born in 1955, so it's interesting to see what he was saying one year later. I've never read any of his writings before, and found them very moving.
Mary in Australia (again!)
In answer to Mary's question, I preached on John and Jesus being cousins which is something we forget, and I am sure that at family gatherings they met and talked, and probably fooled around as young boys are want to do, but I wonder just how much anyone knows anyone else. John knew Jesus as his cousin he also knew that as Jesus' star rose his must fall, yet John was human and must have hoped for a little better than dying at Herod's hands, maybe he had doubts while he struggled, alone in prison. But today I will connect with the Isaiah passage about Jesus being saviour of the world and that is how I will connect with Martin Luther, because we do not look like others or dress the way they do or wear our hair or clothes they way they do does mean that they are less or we are. Because people are a different color or nationality does not make us better or them less. This is how I will try to preach it, just some thoughts early on in the week.
Pastor Belle Downsville NY
Just a note to look ahead. If planning to preach on the sense of invitation, know that next SUnday is Matt 4:12-23 which includes Peter and Andrew, James and John answering the call of jesus to follow me.
DP in DL
It has been suggested that this passage, among others (especially in John) was written to show John affirming Jesus as God's chosen one, in response to the likelihood that there was some competition between John and Jesus and between their disciples...a likelihood that seems, well, likely!, given all the competing voices and messianic wannabes struggling to gain the ear (not to mention the hearts, minds, and denarii) of the people in first cent. Palestine. Of course, nowhere do we view this competition directly, as the gospel accounts have "cleaned up" and made politically correct the image they portray of Jesus...which reaches high art in John's work, the least historical of the gospels.
As I approach this text, I will probably try to examine to some extent the relationship between Jesus and John without holding back this likely scenario. Here is an opportunity for us to honestly deal with the divisiveness that Jesus brought, and the challenge he issued consistently and continually to the status quo religionists of his day and ours. Even such a righteous man as John could fall prey to the tempting and tantalizing (and very human, i.e., inevitable) tendency to revere one's own position, "inspired" thinking, and own understanding of the "truth" as the ONLY way...a tendency that seems to expand exponentially when that truth is challenged or a dent is made in its intellectual framework.
Maybe what I am speaking of is pride, perhaps? I harken back to the insightful posting last week from "The DDY_Lakeshore_Dean" who spoke of John the Baptist as "standing in the way of love" even if it is in humility. Not to say John the B. is guilty of false humility (how can we know that?). But if there was competition, certainly pride entered into the picture.
Another tack: J.D. Crossan and others explain the high christology and metaphysical Jesus of John in terms of "turning up the heat"...i.e., by John's time in the late 1st cent., the still-Jewish Christian community had been almost totally marginalized from their Jewish culture, which was telling the Christians "you do not represent us or portray our destinty". John's strongly anti-Jewish rhetoric was in-group speech, or "oppressed group behavior" (qoutes mine) as one group was losing to and being discounted by its own wider family. So it was increasingly necessary for John to lift up and magnify Jesus, to show him as superior to John the Baptist, and everyone/everything else, to bolster and inspire the faithful in the midst of severe and increasing persecution and pending exile.
Application: we Christians today are often in the same cultural boat; we must make a powerful witness to an increasingly hostile and secular world. And (in my humble opinion) the way to magnify and extol Jesus--the way I must proclaim that "I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God" (1:34)--is to focus on how Jesus cuts against all exclusive religiosity, all legalistic piety, all moralistic preaching, all doctrinal compulsiveness...ANYTHING that centers on anything other than the incomprehensible, astounding, amazing, shocking, even repugnantly inclusive love of God. If I must accept any group's Jesus solely on their terms, without first being solely and totally accepted and affirmed, healed and forgiven, loved and nurtured, then that group's witness is rejected by me, and in my opinion, probably by Christ. Indeed, would Jesus accept ANY of our witnessing, by any group/church/denom today..unless it meets the prima facie standard of unmitigated, uncontrollable, boundaryless (is that a word?), and "inhuman" love of God? If my group isn't daily grappling mightily with how to make its love and my love more like God's love, then what's the point, anyway? Is it more important for me to believe certain prescribed ideas about God and Christ...or to love like God and Christ?
My favorite bumper sticker: "My karma ran over my dogma."
Barry in OH
Oops...better be clear: I was speaking of competition between Jesus and John the Baptist, not John the Evangelist! Barry in OH
It has been suggested that this passage, among others (especially in John) was written to show John the Baptisit affirming Jesus as God's chosen one, in response to the likelihood that there was some competition between John and Jesus and between their disciples...a likelihood that seems, well, likely!, given all the competing voices and messianic wannabes struggling to gain the ear (not to mention the hearts, minds, and denarii) of the people in first cent. Palestine. Of course, nowhere do we view this competition directly, as the gospel accounts have "cleaned up" and made politically correct the image they portray of Jesus...which reaches high art in John's work, the least historical of the gospels.
As I approach this text, I will probably try to examine to some extent the relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist without holding back this likely scenario. Here is an opportunity for us to honestly deal with the divisiveness that Jesus brought, and the challenge he issued consistently and continually to the status quo religionists of his day and ours. Even such a righteous man as John could fall prey to the tempting and tantalizing (and very human, i.e., inevitable) tendency to revere one's own position, "inspired" thinking, and own understanding of the "truth" as the ONLY way...a tendency that seems to expand exponentially when that truth is challenged or a dent is made in its intellectual framework.
Maybe what I am speaking of is pride, perhaps? I harken back to the insightful posting last week from "The DDY_Lakeshore_Dean" who spoke of John the Baptist as "standing in the way of love" even if it is in humility. Not to say John the B. is guilty of false humility (how can we know that?). But if there was competition, certainly pride entered into the picture.
Another tack: J.D. Crossan and others explain the high christology and metaphysical Jesus of John in terms of "turning up the heat"...i.e., by John's time in the late 1st cent., the still-Jewish Christian community had been almost totally marginalized from their Jewish culture, which was telling the Christians "you do not represent us or portray our destinty". John's strongly anti-Jewish rhetoric was in-group speech, or "oppressed group behavior" (qoutes mine) as one group was losing to and being discounted by its own wider family. So it was increasingly necessary for John to lift up and magnify Jesus, to show him as superior to John the Baptist, and everyone/everything else, to bolster and inspire the faithful in the midst of severe and increasing persecution and pending exile.
Application: we Christians today are often in the same cultural boat; we must make a powerful witness to an increasingly hostile and secular world. And (in my humble opinion) the way to magnify and extol Jesus--the way I must proclaim that "I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God" (1:34)--is to focus on how Jesus cuts against all exclusive religiosity, all legalistic piety, all moralistic preaching, all doctrinal compulsiveness...ANYTHING that centers on anything other than the incomprehensible, astounding, amazing, shocking, even repugnantly inclusive love of God. If I must accept any group's Jesus solely on their terms, without first being solely and totally accepted and affirmed, healed and forgiven, loved and nurtured, then that group's witness is rejected by me, and in my opinion, probably by Christ. Indeed, would Jesus accept ANY of our witnessing, by any group/church/denom today..unless it meets the prima facie standard of unmitigated, uncontrollable, boundaryless (is that a word?), and "inhuman" love of God? If my group isn't daily grappling mightily with how to make its love and my love more like God's love, then what's the point, anyway? Is it more important for me to believe certain prescribed ideas about God and Christ...or to love like God and Christ?
My favorite bumper sticker: "My karma ran over my dogma."
Barry in OH
To Doug in Riverside: You're right, it was Phillips book I was referring to. I remembered the tittle but it's been so long that I got the authors confused. Can't find it here at home so it must be on the shelves in my office at the church. You might take a hour or so, I think you'll find it a good read. Thanks. NDT in OR
(1)."Lamb of God"! John declares his condition of "not knowing", on one hand, and yet declares Jesus to be the "lamb of God", on the other. The implied focus for me is the revelation of God, on one hand, and the gift of faith, on the other. (2). The "looking glass mirror", or the "pygmalion affect", become involved in the dialogue between John's disciples who follow the "lamb of God" and Jesus. The question is how do they come to know Jesus as the Christ? and also, How do they come to know themselves? Revelation and the act of faith are profoundly central to the question of "our knowledge of God" and "our knowledge of ourself",i.e., our self-understanding. [John Calvin's Institute of Religion, 1st two paragraphs]. When Jesus sees Simon he declares him to be the "rock" and when Simon finally expresses his faith vision concerning the identity of Jesus he proclaims him to be the "Christ". When John's disciples become transformed to be disciples of Christ, how does this occur except by God's revelation rather than their "blind" conclusion? It is not that they "assigned" to Jesus the role to be the "Christ" for they more than likely would not have made him to be the "lamb of God". The cross of Calvary would have as surely been the last place they would have looked for the messiah as the "valley of snakes death" might be the last place modern mankind would look! The knowledge of Jesus as the Christ, the Lamb of God, the Word of God incarnate, comes through the dynamics of and transaction between revelation and faith. It is not confined to the domain of an intellectual pursuit but is spelled out in the spiritual journey/process of our very being/becoming. It is not what we say with our "unclean lips" but what we "know" when we "relate" our selves to oueselves, in our understanding, and when we "relate" ourselves to "others", and implicit in both relations, when we "relate ourselves to God in contemplation and faith/life/action. Jesus as the Christ transcends our walk with him, or the roles we assign him, for many times he comes to walk with us, especially in our despair, and we see him then only to be a "stranger"! PaideiaSCO in Swampland reflecting.
PaideiaSCO in Swampland reflecting,
Great reflection.
How 'off' would I be if in trying to summarize your post I stated that it would appear that knowledge of Christ, ourselves and each other comes as a by-product of re-generation/conversion/being born again?
Rick in Va (you can call me Nicodemus)
Dear Rick / Nicodemus
Yes, we are indeed called to be evangelists, to be heralds of the Gospel. Yet as soon as I focus my attention on you, seeking to bring you to Christ, I become aware of may own inability to change, my own spiritual sclerosis which prevents the message of grace to enter my life. I must be about the business of being open to "christianize" every cell of my body before I think about changing you. Now if you are seeking change, there is another matter, perhaps I may be of assistance to you ... but until then I will try to keep my ears open to the divine Voice.
tom in ga
Here is an appropriate illustration from "The Fax of Life", dated Oct.05, 1998.
I suppose you've heard by now that Joe Miller died on September 3. What? You don't know who he is? You've never even heard of him? Neither had I -- until I read his four-column obituary in the New York Times of September 27, 1998. Please bear with me while I tell you a few things about him. They could be relevant to your own situation.
Mr. Miller was 95 at his death and had a brilliant business career. After earning a master's degree in chemical engineering from Yale and working for du Pont, he started his own industrial paint company. The Pyrolac Corporation made him a wealthy man.
According to his obituary, Miller "made a fortune" with a protective coating for bathroom fixtures. Then he "made an even larger fortune" by developing a metallic paint that allowed the American automobile industry to make cars available to consumers in a rainbow of colors other than black. He also created a heat-resistant coating that protected the Apollo spacecraft on trips to the moon.
Quite an impressive career, right? But none of these things from his résumé was responsible for the obituary -- complete with a 4" x 6" photo -- in the Times. Here was the headline: "Joe Miller, Who Did His Part For Baseball, Is Dead at 95." Baseball?
In high school, the sport Joe Miller loved above all others was baseball. And he had a big, strong friend at school who was skilled at soccer and football. The friend didn't want to play baseball. He resisted Miller's pressure to take it up. When he finally did, however, he learned quickly and soon outstripped his friend. He went on to have one of the most fabled careers in baseball history. He played in 2,130 consecutive games -- a record that stood until Cal Ripken Jr. broke it in 1995.
That's right. Joe Miller introduced Lou Gehrig to baseball! But chances are that you had never heard of him until now. So what's the point?
How do you intend to "make your mark in the world"? Must you always be out front and get credit? Are you threatened by people with more skill, personality, or promise than yourself? Do you only want support players for your own achievements?
Your greatest contribution to the company, your church, or your world may come in your unselfish development of another person. When Andrew brought his more outgoing brother, Peter, to Jesus, he was destined to be overshadowed by him. But maybe that was Andrew's greatest contribution to the Kingdom of God.
Thank God the world has its occasional Joe Miller or Andrew! Are you in position to be someone's mentor in your field? And there is no nobler spiritual feat than to introduce someone to Jesus. There would be no better way to be remembered.
(Posted by Jeeva in Canada)
Tom in Ga,
Maybe I've been misunderstood. I can't convert a soul and don't want to try.
Conversion/regeneration/being born again is the work of the Holy Spirit and the convertee/regeneratee/born-againee who submits to the Holy Spirit's work.
However, if I wait until every cell in my body is converted to evangelize, then I will wait forever.
Conversion by the Holy Spirit is a life long process. So I commit to imperfect evangelism, understanding that God is not finished with me yet but being excited enough about the work to want to tell others about how God can work in (and through) them as well.
Hope that clears up my viewpoint.
Rick in Va
I have a friend who has a poster in his office which speaks volumes. A pastor is in front of his congregation, preaching for all he is worth. Hundreds of parishioners sit before him. And there in the front row is Jesus ---- asleep.
I just saw this in the "humor" section of DPS. Just food for thought. How many of us would keep Jesus awake with what we say in our sermons? Let us not pervert the truth of God but preach His name with clarity (to be understood), with sincerity (to show our love), and with conviction (to not be afraid of the "world"). This is something we should do every week. Since no one ever sits in the front row at our church anyway....I will not put Jesus right there! It might make you feel unworthy to have Him there...I think it will make me feel all the more loved! Grace and Peace to you all. I enjoy your remarks! Brian in Texas
I meant to say that I "WILL" put Jesus right there in the front row! sorry about that. Brian in Texas
On the connection to MLKing: The baptist sees Jesus walk by and announces who he is, and what he is to do. His disciples begin to follow Jesus, forcing him to begin the ministry and call other disciples. There's a sense of having the ministry thrust upon him, in John's time, or God's. It's the same way with Dr. King -- while waiting for a position, he was pulled into the bus boycott and his destiny took over. There is also a sense of having the ministry thrust upon him, also at the right time, God's time. Not sure I'll preach it, but it is a handle on the action of God, for conversion or for outreach ministry. Peace: ogremtb -- PA
On the connection to MLKing: The baptist sees Jesus walk by and announces who he is, and what he is to do. His disciples begin to follow Jesus, forcing him to begin the ministry and call other disciples. There's a sense of having the ministry thrust upon him, in John's time, or God's. It's the same way with Dr. King -- while waiting for a position, he was pulled into the bus boycott and his destiny took over. There is also a sense of having the ministry thrust upon him, also at the right time, God's time. Not sure I'll preach it, but it is a handle on the action of God, for conversion or for outreach ministry. Peace: ogremtb -- PA
I'd planned to probably preach on Isaiah and the Psalm, but came over here for a look. Wow! "He brought Simon to Jesus..." I had planned to work with the evangelism messages of the other two texts. They all tie together very nicely.
To summarize my post from over in Psalms: I may respond to the double suicide that hit one of our local high schools last week witht the question of how serious we are about "light to the nations" (Is.), "the glad news of deliverance" (Ps.), and now "he brought ... to Jesus." When and how will we, the church, be so full of joy and amazement at what God has done for us that we will be overflowing with the news, no matter how "despised, abhorred" (Is.) and small we feel?
I'm looking for the closing story from Schindler's list, in which he realizes he could have saved just one more. Anybody? Kay
oops, that wasn't very clear. The tie-in with the suicide is the question, "what more can we, tiny strugling church, do to be sure that no more students in our community feel they have to take their own lives? How can we reach out as a light to the nations, etc.?" Kay
It's obvious, isn't it? "Behold the Lamb of God." It's the point of all our preaching, the essence of our faith. The Greeks came asking the disciples, "We want to see Jesus." So do we all.
OKBob
PaideiaSCO,
Does not God invite us, through the OT prophet, to reason with Him? Would you please describe your understanding of "revelation" as it relates to "reason."
OKBob
Hey, Brian,
Hate to bring this up, but in my church, people do sit in the front! Actually, the children sit in the right front pews till Children't Moment when they come up to sit with me, then they go to a mini-Sunday school. They do come back at the end of the service and sit in the back especially when we have communion. The choir sits in the left side front pews after singing their anthem.
And get this: NO ONE SITS IN THE BACK PEWS! Except for the sound man because the sound equipment is in the back pew on the left side.
I keep wondering what's wrong with these Christians cause they ain't acting like ordinary mainline Christians. They really care about their faith and want to work for God's kingdom! I've only been here six months and I'm already feeling the flame of the Holy Spirit to lead the people to great things in the name of the Lord.
Forgive me for bragging. I'm so excited about this church because there are so much potentials and I can't wait for us to take off!
Brandon in CA
Brandon in CA:
Cool! (Way cool....) I want to learn from you. Can you email me at:
Parsons-Wright@Prodigy.net
?
HWinHI
I heard on the radio yesterday, Being baptized by the Holy Spirit makes God the President of your life. Being empowered by the Holy Spirit makes God a resident. The pastor suggested there is a definite difference between being Baptized by the Spirit and being empowered by the Spirit. He suggested that not all of those who are baptized by the Spirit will be empowered by the Spirit. Thoughts? LS
Brandon - the children sit in the front at our church too. it is exciting to see all those little faces eager and anticipating what will happen that morning. the choir used to come down but hey have changed to staying behind me agian.
i really want to lift up andrew. the disciples of Christ have Andrew's cross on our logo, but how good are we at inviting others. we have a great God to worship, and so much to invite people to, and there are so many out there who are looking.
rachel
To NDT in OR: Thanks for the encouragement to read "Your God Is Too Small." It's been helpful. Since the title of my sermon is "Behold, the Lamb of God," I was particularly interested in what Phillips has to say about the Atonement: "Suppose now that God, who has become human and represents in one person both His own Godhood and Humanity, allows Himself, though personally guiltless, to be involved in the complex [of sin-suffering-death-helplessness]. God, now, who made the inexorable rules of cause and effect, deliberately exposes Himself to the consequences of the world's self-love and sin. Because He is God, to do such a thing once in time is indicative of an eternal attitude, and we view the Character of God in an entirely different light if we see Him not abrogating justice,...but overcoming a repugnance which we cannot begin to imagine by letting Himself be Representative [Human] and suffering in His own Person the logical and inevitable suffering and death which the world has earned....Christians believe that this act of reconciliation was the inner meaning behind the rather sordid historical fact of [Jesus'] death." (p. 106). I'm led to remember also the Prologue to H. Richard Niebuhr's "The Responsible Self," in which Niebuhr writes about our estrangement from God as the "key problem of human existence" and reconciliation (through Christ), or the "establishment of friendship" between God and us, as the answer to this problem. Doug in Riverside
Someone once said: "Perception determines behavior which leads to destiny." I thought of this when I counted how many times some form of the word see or look is used in this text. At least 12! And the result seems to be testimony. My preliminary thoughts are that it takes courage and boldness to name what you see. It's usually easier to keep quiet, a la the Emperor with no clothes, or the Cuyahoga (sp.?) River in Cleveland that everybody ignored it until it caught fire. I'm trying to find a sermon in this. I usually start with trying to establish the Big Three: Point, Problem and Power. Any ideas? -- Jim from B.C.
Have been struggling with what seems like a contradiction for me between Psalm 40: God does not want sacrifices and burnt offerings but in John , The Baptizer calls Jesus the "lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world". I read where Wm Willimon said that only the blood of the lamb was sufficient for our sins to be forgiven (not an exact quote). If God does want our sacrifices and I agree with the Psalmist and others (Micah) why does God require the "sacrifice" of Jesus? Deke of the North
Can I get a witness? This passage is not just about looking but also testifying! John testifies to what he sees as the identity of Jesus. Andrew testifies to Simon about what he sees as the identity Jesus. And Jesus testifies to what he sees as the identity of Simon.
MLK was not just a dreamer but a testifier! "Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!"
I want people to testify on Sunday! What have you found? What do you see? What can you tell a looking world? But testifying is a strange language for most these folks. If I simply invite testimonies I might get some people withdrawing behind defenses. I want to allow the Spirit to make bold..
Any ideas? Maybe the start is just to do some testifying of my own.
pHil
Come And See--Who has said that to you in your life? And what difference has it made.
During this week in Western PA. there was a newstory about a young woman (32 yr. old) who lived a life of prostitution and drugs outside of the Greyhound bus station in Pittsburgh. After a while she found that had no money, no food, no place. She approached a woman who was passing by and said--"I know you have no reason to trust me. You don't need to be afraid of me, I don't want to hurt you. I just want you to buy me some food." For some reason the woman bought the homeless woman some food, and took her under her wing. She took the young woman home, gave her a place to sleep, she abided with the woman. The young woman got back into prostitution after a few months. She was arrested and sentenced to jail. The woman she met on the street didn't leave her. She kept in touch, she encouraged her to enter a rehab program in prison and she was there when the young woman got out of prison. She took this young woman home, gave her a place to live, gave her someone to care for, gave her faith. On the newstory the young woman called this other woman, who didn't wish to be identified, as her gaurdian angel. To which the other woman replied that she was just living out her faith.
Those who are out there Looking? What will they see if we invite them to Come and see the life we live. How will they see Jesus in our life? If they abide in our life, will they see the grace and mercy of God, will they see the One who takes away the sins of the world?
JOHN in PA
Rick, i would be interested in your answer/experiece/affirmation of the relationship between "the lamb of God" faith vision of John and new birth. Last week we participated in the "birth/baptism" of Jesus. Is there a relational relationship between our birthing processes in the unfolding drama of our life story and the passion of faith in the "dasein" of being/becoming, i.e., cast into being there/here where we are, and the revelation of God who "speaks" and we with the world find our selves in creation? When we disrelate ourselves to ourselves, others, and ultimately God by the disobedience of "bad faith", then the birthing process becomes the frozen "paralyzed force" T, S. Eliot so beautifully describes in his poetry. We become alienated from our own "past" as a result of this sacred guilt. We become alienated from our present as a result of the anxiety of bad faith. We become alienated from our future in the disrelation of "hopeless despair". Certainly we need to be born again. I believe in the sacramental life there is the "anamnesis"/presence-of-Christ essential to the grace necessary for "new being" and "new creation". Forgiving love reunites us to our past and all of its precious memories. The power of the act and gift of faith transforms our relation with the present into creative energy/anxiety//spontaneity. The gift of hope restores the relational relationship with the future.......OKBob The question of the relation between revelation and reason, as you probably are aware, is a profound one that many theologians have addressed. I would refer you to those more prepared or adequate than my reflections, particularly the "method of correlation" from Paul Tillich, or even from some of his students today who have carried his work forward in their work, such as Rollo May in "The Cry for Myth". I would also refer you to the reflections of those on DPS this week who have raised the question about "Your God is too Small", which also implies "Let God Be God". The closure of Tillich's classic on "The Courage To Be" reminds us that God only appears in the "disapperance" and so we must have courage for that moment when we recognize the "idol" needs to be let go if we are going to emerge to a new level of faith in which the divine self-disclosure of God grasps us in a new way. I find this most expressed as we move from the "holy night" out of which Jesus emerges to the "epiphany" moment we now are in. The Old Testament is quite "new" with Christ in every word, as Luther affirmed, from this perspective. PaideiaSCO still reflecting on the sacramental mystery of the "lamb of God" who comes to me with new possibility through the love that feels the "pain of the universe", even mine...a God who suffers pain...what an amazing thought/grace!
tom in ga, I have perviously been refreshed with your visions of "anamnesis". In past days I believe I have heard you witness the "living truth" which goes beyond the limits of theological langusge or religious concept to the deeper relational reality comprising our "life story",i.e., beneath the intellectual domain of belief there are the emotive processes making up the on-going creation in the unfolding drama of our unique sacred story! In the spiritual journey of our being/becoming the revelation within the sacred stories of the Bible are written not with dead ink marks on the printed page but rather as Sam Keen states "on the text of our heart". I also expect it is written there by the "blood of Christ", the "anamnesis", the mystery of the sacred presence closer to us than breath....Always interested and inspired by your reflections...as well as Nail-benders. PaideiaSCO
rachel,
Good idea. Can I encourage you to also go back to John the Baptist? After all, he started what Andrew did. According to the book of John, Andrew was a disciple of John. Notice that verses 35-36 says that John was standing around with two of his disciples which one of was Andrew (verse 40) and when he sees Jesus going by, he says, "Look, here is the Lamb of God!" and the disciples begins following Jesus.
So John the Baptist started the ball rolling by introducing Jesus to two of his disciples surely knowing that they would follow Jesus. Of course, Andrew introduced Jesus to his brother, Simon Peter, who became more famous than him.
But what is so interesting is that the writer of John portrays two people who bring others to Jesus, even though it would mean they would end up on the lower rungs.
I myself will be coming from the angle of John the Baptist. I will go back a little to last Sunday. John the Baptist was called to prepare the way of the Lord which he did, even though he didn't know who the Messiah would be. He was faithful to God's calling. He finally finds out when Jesus comes to be baptized and then his message changes. The Messiah is here now! In fact, there he is!
We are luckier than John. We already knows Jesus has come. In fact, our whole message is that Jesus is the Son of God! Come to save us from our sins. And we can be like John or even Andrew, inviting others to come meet the Lord.
Notice that John was able to point people to the Messiah once he knew who he was. We too do the same thing. We invite people to Jesus once we know who he is. But I would like to go further. We need to know Jesus intimately in our lives before we will feel empowered to point others to Jesus. I think this is important. How can one point to something if one does not feel moved to do so? Before we can excite others about something, we need to be excited about it first.
I'm still trying to narrow down my thinking. Any help, anyone?
Brandon in CA
Oh, yeah,
pHil, I think that would be a good idea. Start testifying yourself and then invite others. In fact, maybe you could ask a couple of lay people before hand to think about doing so also. But don't come with a prepared note. Be off the cuff, if I could say that.
Brandon in CA
I'm a little hesitant to go too deeply into the "Lamb of God" imagery. First, the OT references are multiple and diverse, and, according to Ray Brown, John's usage is very different from the Pascal Lamb many of us know.
I've really enjoyed the various posts this week. I was especially interested in the points about the soon-to-be followers' question: What are you looking for? In our search for relevant preaching this question seems very current.
I am also fascinated by the re-naming of Simon into Cephas (Peter). Simon didn't seem to evidence any kind of extra-ordinary strength or determination. Actually, it was Andrew who brought him over. Still, there's nothig there to indicate that Simon was more "Rock-like" than any other. It's certainly not a major theme of John's Gospel. So what did Jesus see in this - borrowing from Synoptics - fisherman? What does he see in us?
PWinPA
PaideiaSCO,
I'm a simple guy with a simple intellect and I'm afraid I need clarification on your question to me.
Rick in Va (rrice@bcharrispub.com)
"Why does God require the 'sacrifice' of Jesus?" or put another way, why does J.B. call Jesus the Lamb of God?
The heart of the Christian faith. The centerpiece of what it is we [ought to] believe.
And we have clergy asking the question...
Things that make you go hmmmmmm...
Here's how I see God's reasons for sacrificing the Lamb of God.
Leviticus 17:11 teaches that in the blood is life. Elsewhere we learn that sin brings death. God is life. Sin is death. God gave to the Israelites, as a means of atonement (bringing life out of death), the sacrificial system, where blood from a lamb (or another suitable substitute... bull, goat, dove or pigeon) that is pure (perfect and complete specimen) is poured out sacrificially (and substitionally) to make amends for one's sin.
Death (and separation from God) brought about by sin is overcome by life (and reconciliation with God) brought about by the shedding of blood.
The Abraham and Isaac story, and the first Passover in Egypt are a foreshadowing of the eventual sacrifice of The Lamb of God.
Hebrews portrays Christ as the sinless high priest who offered himself as a sacrifice for sinners (7:27).
Peter stressed the sacrifice of Christ as redemption via "the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." (1 Peter 1:18)
Isaiah prophecied about Christ when he described one being "brought as a lamb to the slaughter." (Isa. 53:10)
Paul refers to Jesus as "our Passover" who has been sacrificed. (1 Cor. 5:7)
And the Book of Revelation uses the word 'lamb' 31 times in 29 verses, almost all of them referring to the Christ.
If we set aside J.B.'s declaration that Christ is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, we set aside that which makes the Christian faith unique.
Rick in Va
To Deke of the North,
I too am troubled by this contradiction...and it is one found not just in this text, but really lies at the heart of the doctrine of atonement, which is so central to many people's understanding of Christian faith.
But not for me. I cannot and do not accept a God who requires the death of his son, or the death of anyone. Sure, I think Jesus died for us...in the same way as Martin Luther King,Jr., or Gandhi, or any number of saints. He died totally committed to God and to his vision/understanding of God and God's will. He LIVED that vision unto death, "even death on a cross." He was "God incarnate" in that he submitted himself to God (ala Philippians 2) totally, and was totally transparent to the Spirit.
But the notion of sacrificial blood, which served its purpose in ancient times, and is undeniably rooted in the the cultic pratice of ancient Israel (and most other ancient, and some modern cultures still), need not be the only valid--or even the ceentral--image/metaphor/meaning ofr Jesus or his sacrifice. Indeed, even though saying so always meets staunch oppostion, I say it must be set aside to allow more fruitful, less arcane, and more scripturally-accurate meanings to move to the center of Christian life.
[For those either incensed enough, or intrigued enough, to comment back, reach me at revbmb@juno.com].
A final comment...it seems that we can readily apply our intellect to understanding Scripture, unless it contradicts one of these central doctrines...and then we often check our brains at the door. Why is that? So much of Christianity insists on our utter dependence upon God(with which I essentially agree)...but we do terrible things to each other and the world by our inaction, and through our interpretations, that God will do it all for us, because we are essentially bad, corrupt, and evil, and cannot help ourselves. What if the reverse were true...that we're are created essentially good, and our religious impulses to purify/judge/redeem ourselves and each other is actually corrupting our God-given goodness and creativty...just wondering...
Hey: And happy news years to all of you. I have been following your messages and dialogue for several weeks. They have been very helpful.
Is there anyone who is going to preach from the perspective of the testimony of John to convert and to give credit where credit is due, and the power of his testimony?
MLK was a man very much like John. An ordinary man with a lot of humility. My mother talks about the first time she saw and met him, before he became famous. She talks about how he was up for election as president in the National Baptist Meeting, and how unassuming he appear and unmoved by such a position. He impression of him was that he did not have anything on the ball, until he got up and spoke before the assembly. She states it was as if MLK's whole demeaner was transformed. Then, she says, she knew why some wanted MLK to be president. The power came from his testimony, his words and the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to transform an ordinary person into a powerful speaker that could impact and move people.
What are we looking for in our testimonies and in the testimonies of others?
Roz in WI
We make a big mistake when we focus on the death of our Lord on the Cross as the moment of sacrifice. Once we do that we make Jesus so special that he has very little to do with our lives. He is God after all, and God died for us on the cross. If that is our focus when we think of the LAMB we loose a deep insight. Our Lord's entire life was one of sacrifice "The Word became flesh, dwelt among us, his own knew him not." From the beginning Love came into the world. The sacrifice on the cross was the fulfillment of his life. We too are called to a life of discipleship and to the Law of Love, sacrificial living (however, that doesn't mean for us a wooden cross!).
tom in ga
We make a big mistake when we focus on the death of our Lord on the Cross as the moment of sacrifice. Once we do that we make Jesus so special that he has very little to do with our lives. He is God after all, and God died for us on the cross. If that is our focus when we think of the LAMB we loose a deep insight. Our Lord's entire life was one of sacrifice "The Word became flesh, dwelt among us, his own knew him not." From the beginning Love came into the world. The sacrifice on the cross was the fulfillment of his life. We too are called to a life of discipleship and to the Law of Love, sacrificial living (however, that doesn't mean for us a wooden cross!).
tom in ga
When one cannot and will not accept a God who requires the death of His son, one is treading in turbulent and deadly waters.
No greater love has one than this to lay down his life for his friends. God is love. He laid down the life of His Son for each of us.
Intellectually or rationally, this is next to impossible to comprehend. So what? Who cares? The fact of the matter is that God asks us over and over again to accept the incomprehensible. This however, takes submission. That is something that is against the nature of mankind.
Oswald Chambers puts it this way:
"Our notion of sacrifice is the wringing out of us something we don’t want to give up, full of pain and agony and distress. The Bible idea of sacrifice is that I give as a love-gift the very best thing I have."
God has given us the very best thing in His Son. To willfully reject (not accept) this love-gift for reasons of intellect, pride, whatever is that notion that every preacher/priest ought to be teaching and preaching against.
Respectfully but passionately, Rick in VA
Can you see that bony finger of locust-fed J Bap pointing to Jesus, "Here," here is what you were looking for, here is he, here is what will satisfy your inner souls, here is where the buck stops and God gets on, here is where you too will get on if that is what your heart is saying. That word just rings in my ears 2000 years later. And J Bap had chutzpa to point it out for all of us. Parrjo
thanks to the person who submitted the story on joe miller. to me that ties in as well with MLK jr. - who encouraged him? who introduced him to Christ? who were the little or unknowns in his background? i plan from there to encourage our group to use the gifts they have to intro others to Christ, even if they are what they might consider minor gifts.
i think one of the hardest things about this scripture is that there is so much! Craddock writes that "where are you staying" is like where are you "abiding" and that the 2 abide with Jesus. abiding is so important in John.
another note on conversion et al: God converts, but we have to plant the seeds or water or do whatever role God has assigned us, don't we?
and a note on name calling or labeling or whatever you want to call it. next week is prayer for Christian unity week, and lets not only pray, but practice it. nothing is gained by calling each other liberal conservative progressive pig-headed or whatever. we are in Christ's mercy one and all, and i truly believe that we are all trying to relate to God as best we can. Jeus prayed for unity, Paul pleaded for unity, i beg too - these words have torn the church apart, and that is sin, because it certainly isn't to the glory of God.
i haven't read to the end yet, so forgive me if someone else has already covered this.
grace and peace and joy, rachel (in Memphis where our world will never be the same since mlk jr.)
Some thoughts on the "Does God require the sacrifice of the Lamb?" debate: (1) The sacrifice motif is absolutely central to the whole Biblical saga. To try to clean it up or push some other image to the fore is to baudlerize the Book. (2) Process and other theologies are struggling with how a loving God could cause/allow/require suffering. This challenges us to creative thought. Personally I a seeking an understanding of God's will that allows for grasping both the reality of God's love and the reality of Jesus' work, which is very much a work of self-sacrifice. Self-sacrifice is also what is involved when we "follow and see." I am coming to see that God does not require sacrifice in the sense of "Hey, I want this, and you will have to do it." It is more a matter of the flow of the universe is going a certain way, toward destruction, and only a Messiah willing to sacrifice will be able to save our sorry boats. (3) What's the big deal anyway, since the Cross is not the end of the story? What's the Latin: "Agnes nostre vincit?" Our Lamb Wins! The game goes our way, because of a brilliant sacrifice play! Boyd in NC
BRANDON, I envy you! I just started at this church recently. They have 25 very steady members coming to church. ZERO children! My son is the only child there and he is 15. The church wants to grow but they do not want to change. I have gone door to door inviting people and will continue to do so as long as it takes. The church has no life, no desire to speak to people about Jesus and to invite them to church. I told them I wanted to start a youth group for wednesday evenings. They have not had a youth group for over 3 years. The average age in this church is about 70. I started a youth group last week and we had 8 teens show up and on this past wednesday night we had 12 teens there! They have complained that they do not like the noise these kids put out. The kids were well behaved but are typical teens. Please EVERYONE---be praying for this small church to grow and for this community to accept Jesus. I feel as though I am all alone here working for Christ (an honor for sure!) I have only been in the ministry for a little over two years, so my experience level is not too high. My confidence is strong because I know I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me! Thanks for letting me air this out here. I appreciate all of you! Brian in Texas
Brian In Texas,
Persevere... Pray... Persist!
I truly believe God has big plans for that church and for your ministry. Preach the Word. Work with those kids. Be enthusiastic. And watch God work, through you and in you and that church.
You have my prayers. You have God's promises.
Persevere... Pray... Persist!
Rick in Va
Brian in Texas, I've been enjoying DPS for several weeks. This is my first contribution. I'm in my first year of ministry as a second career. My church sounds just like yours. I'm interested in how to get a youth group started when there are no youth in church. I have many questions. How did you advertise? What did you do that first night that brought a 50% increase in attendance? Please email me at: math242@slic.com. NY Gin
Brian, Nine years ago we had 37, mostly over 65, and when we arrived, the Sunday School had closed two months before--no kids. The growth has not been spectacular since, but last year we averaged 101, 21 kids put on the Christmas Eve pageant, 125 attended on a snowy evening, we have raised over $250K for a capital campaign fund. It has been worth it for us, and we did not have that jewel of a teen in our family or younger. So work hard, keep the faith, look around you to see what else is happening, get involved in the community where you can, to make contacts, etc. And pray about one or two hours a day, exclusively. Seemed to work for us. God is good. Sees the ravens, and the fallen churches. May God richly bless you, parrjo
Did God require the death of Jesus? Here are my thoughts.
First, let us all admit that there is no single theology of atonement. That Christ's death on the cross breaks down that which separates us from God and our neighbour is the orthodox faith; how exactly that is done is explained in a number of ways both in scripture and in the tradition. I personally believe that the proper context for understanding the atonement is the Resurrection. Imagine you are Paul or Peter encountering the Resurrected Lord. Forgiveness is one of two or three central aspect of that experience (forgiveness for persecuting the church, forgiveness for denying Christ).
Second, I believe that the Incarnation is logically prior and independant to the Crucifixion. In other words, had there been no Fall, the Word would still have become Incarnate - because God so loves the World, period.
However, the world is fallen. Thus, the Incarnation sets the Word made flesh, God among us, upon a road that leads inevitably to a shameful death on a rising outside Jerusalem. The reality of the divine in this world is that it is attacked and hated; the death of God is the end result of this hatred.
Now this is the fourth and most wondrous point, the mystery of the cross. God uses the death of Jesus as a means to overcome our fallen state. To parapharse Athanasius, "God became human so that we might become divine." Jesus told his disciples, "As the Father has sent me, so I send you." In order for us to do this we need to become Christ-like, and we do this by entering into the death and resurrection of Jesus. We do this by faith, baptism, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (order of which is not less important than that the three happen).
In the wake of the cross and resurrection, I believe the disciples went back to the scriptures (i.e. the Hebrew Bible) and searched for passages that would help them to explain their faith. The servant songs of Isaiah would have leaped out at them. The author of the Letter to the Hebrews meditated on sin offerings and the Day of Atonement, as well as various passages from psalms. Out of this came the atonement theologies of substitution, ransom, sacrifice, redemption, a new exodus, and so forth.
It is for this reason that Paul was adamant with the Corinthians about the necessity of the cross and the apparent foolishness of it. Sure, it might be a stumbling block to Jews (the Messiah cannot be crucified?) and foolishness to the Greeks (where's the noble philosophy in Jesus' sickening death?), but for those of us who are called it is "the power of God and wisdom of God".
So, yes, God required his son to die on the cross, because when the divine enters this world, that's what happens (reflect on what is happening to Christians in India, Malaysia, and the Sudan, and you can see that it is still happening). But God, ever, always suprising God, takes what we do and turns it upside down and redeems it. Pilate and the soldiers thought that they were killing some bothersome Jew; in fact they were unwitting participants in opening the gate of heaven for all believers.
Jesus, then, is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. Grant us your peace.
Bruce on Pender Island, BC, Canada
Tom in ga, First off, I guess this would be better on the discussion site, as we are straying somewhat from John 1! But, it is precisely the divinity of Jesus that I question...or rather, the way we usually define it. I believe that scripture clearly shows us a Jesus who points beyond himself. He embodies the Divine, fully, completely, in his human psyche...and shows that we can too. Most of us will not, because (for whatever reason) we will not submit so totally and completely, will not surrender all to the Other. It is a matter of will and of "seeing things as they truy are", of avoiding control and illusion, of the deepest understanding of the sacred and what it means to be human. Jesus had such profound wisdom, the rarest kind. And in the rare and profound wisdom, he pointed to God, not himself, and I can't help but wonder how distressed he might be were he to see all the "Jesusolatry" we are capable of and perpetuate today. He would say "NO! Worship not me, but GOD!" And, we must remember that metaphors and titles such as "Lamb" are just that...human attributions that are inherently limited (like every metaphor)... "From the beginning Love came into the world."--yes indeed. Love created the world, and is its essence."We too are called to a life of discipleship and to the Law of Love, sacrificial living ..."--Amen, brother. We can, and should (if we will call ourselves "Christian") always be disciples of Jesus. He is our Teacher, and "Master" in that sense...and where he leads us and what he teaches us is God's love and how to embody it. As for his life being one of sacrifice, we really know very little about his life; but we do know what he made of it, in what cause he spent it, and how he anchored it in unearthly love.
Rick in VA, I knew my comment would spark passion in you, my brother; I hope only you will see that we are not that far apart, not really, as most theology is mere semantics anyway. Turbulent and deadly waters? Nah, because God is with me, and I try to live by grace...and if I'm all wrong, God will forgive. And I do, actually, accept God's love-gift, and it saved my life (speaking as a former addict). And for all I know, Jesus did indeed die for us all, and if so I do not comprehend it. I only know that the God of love I know and believe in would never require such a blood atonement (as we seeGod frequently doing in the Old Testament), and that the idea of blod atonement--which was not central to and probably not even present in the earliest Christian community--is an absolute contradiction to what Jesus taught and how he lived (but then, so is a lot of our dogma). It is most troublesome in how it almost immediately becomes exclusionary: "accept the gift OR ELSE. Be a Christian or be damned to eternal hell." Baloney. If I thought for a moment that the God I worship REQUIRED everyone to be Christian then I would indeed reject the gift and walk some other path. Just perhaps, Jesus taught/embodied such a pure and universal truth, and was (to repeat) so transparent to the Spirit dwelling within (another of those utterly irrational, incomprehensible things we must accept in faith) that all who experienced it knew/felt that they had directly experienced God...and so grew up around Jesus a well-intentioned but soon-misplaced and misleading cult of his divinity, or at the least, an interpretation of experience that did not weather well with time (ever try to explain an intensely personal spiritual expereince or epiphanic moment?...pretty tough). But I'm getting long-winded...I agree with you on submission, on the dangers of rejecting God's gift of love, pride, and even the limits of intellect. But, I also believe our intellect is one of God's greatest gifts, and not to use it is a holy crime..especially when we probe ultimate things. An open mind is a pathway for the sacred. By the way, are you familiar with Jim Fowler's "Stages of Faith"? I think you'd find it interesting. E-mail me sometime for further dialogue revbmb@juno.com).
Boyd in NC, You are right in asseting the primacy of "the sacrifice motif" in the biblical saga, and its central place there...especially in the Old Testament. I find it rarely in the New (certainly rarely in the gospels at least, and the earlier layers of the NT). And it certainly is not the only motif used to image/decribe Jesus. Indeed, the main motif of the first two centuries was "Pantocrator"...Jesus the Victorious Warrior King of Creation. Is it baudlerizing to posit that blood atonement (especially in relation to the Eucharist) was REPLACED by Jesus, (isn't that really what traditional theology says, anyway?) only we are too stuck in the language of 2nd-4th century hellenisic philosophy to get over it? I like your analysis of the "flow of the universe" stuff...but I guess I see God working in the opposite direction. I think Creation is good, and does not need redemption. We too are created good, and the redemption Jesus brings is not meanigful for me as a "once and for all" kind of thing... unless is meant by that an "every time I need it because I have misused/abused/poorly used God's good creative power in my life" kind of thing, and Jesus shows me that in grace and love I need not run from God, but to God.
Sorry folks...many of us are passionate. Will try not take up so much space again. Barry in OH
Thanks to Bruce for aticulating so well where at least some of us are coming from!
I would like to add one more thought. I do not believe that God was the one who wanted Jesus dead. We did. We DO! We are the ones who put Jesus on the cross, in order to humiliate him and discredit him and show that all that "love your neighbour" and "forgive your enemies" stuff was hooey. God took our incredibly cruel act and turned it around, so that Jesus was on the cross "for us," not for God. As has been pointed out above, then God did the most incredible thing: Jesus was raised, so that the "I love and forgive you" message of God could continue to be delivered to the world that mostly didn't (and mostly doesn't!) want to hear it.
If anyone is interested in reading a bit more on this perspective, might I suggest Gerhard Forde's "The Work of Christ" in volume 2 of _Christian Dogmatics_ by Braaten and Jensen. Believe it was published by Fortress, but I'm not sure of the year, sorry.
Rick in Canada, eh?