King of the Mole Hill

"King of the Mole Hill"

Mark 10:35-45

"And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came forward to him, and said to him, 'Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.'"

It's not only astounding to me that James and John would make such a statement like that; but, also, where do they come off with such an air of entitlement?  How do they justify in their heads saying such a thing to Jesus?

It's a double headed dragon kind of statement.  One head of the dragon is that they certainly believed enough in Jesus' power that He can do anything and everything.  They certainly believed that Jesus was more than just some guy with a Napoleon complex.

But the other head of the dragon is James and John have no idea who Jesus is and what Jesus is about.  Have they not been paying attention?  They are well into a couple of years following Jesus around.  Yet they have totally misrepresented who Jesus is and what Jesus' teaching and ministry is about by making their demand of him.

We shouldn't be hard on the two disciples, though, should we?  Why should we not be hard on James and John?  Because it's pretty much the way most of us approach God.  "God, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you."

"We don't want you to ask any questions, God--just do what we ask."

"Don't challenge our thinking about what we ask, God--just do it."

"No matter how lame or self-centered our request is, God, we want you to make it happen."

"Even though our requests make us seem like a bunch of entitled whiners, God, we expect you will jump to fulfill our every desire."

I would really have liked to know what Jesus was thinking, when James and John spoke their selfish request.  We know how the other disciples felt.  Their response would have been my response:  They were "indignant."  And the other disciples were not "indignant" in their own minds about it.  Mark wrote, "When the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John."  Notice that little preposition in there, "at."  They put some kind of action behind their indignant thoughts.

In one respect, based on the American Way, we may not see what's wrong with what James and John requested.  From an early age we are taught to dream big, to strive hard to make something of ourselves, to not be satisfied with the lower rungs of the proverbial ladder of success, but to climb higher, to claw ourselves as near to the top as possible.  What's wrong with that kind of ambition.

Isn't it drummed into us to rise above the level of others?  To not be mediocre but to be great.  "You can be something great!" is the message.  To be a leader.  To have authority and power.  Who aspires to be average?  We figure there's something wrong with someone who gets on the corporate ladder and then decides the lower rungs are just fine and doesn't try to climb any higher.

Maybe that's how James and John thought.  They saw nothing wrong with their request.  They didn't want to hang around with the other disciples who were satisfied with just loitering at the base of the ladder.  James and John had their sights on higher things.  They had the dream of, "Some day when I'm at the top..."

Former Vice President, Nelson Rockefeller was one of those kinds of people who wanted to be great.  And once he got close to that top wrung of the ladder of success, he let people see it.  During one late night flight back to Washington from making a political speech in California, Rockefeller made a phone call.  His aides thought the call was something important, since it was made to someone in the Federal Government.

But what Rockefeller had done was call to tell someone he wanted the lights turned on at Mt. Rushmore.  A few minutes later when they were close, the private jet flew down for a private viewing of the monument, circling it a couple of times and then continuing on their journey.  One of Rockefeller's aides commented, "After that, I always figured the guy was immortal."

Notice that last comment.  Isn't that what James and John are aspiring to--immortality?  The top wrung?  To not just be obeyed, or admired, but worshipped?  There might be something in us that holds us back from the desire to be worshipped, but we'd sure like others to be in awe of our greatness, our power, our position, our God-likeness.

The sin of the Garden of Eden was the sin of the desire for that kind of power.  Adam and Eve wanted to be more, to have more, to know more than was their due or was their right or was their station as human beings.  They were tempted to "be like God."  That is what they were reaching for and attempting to grasp.  It was more than just the fruit they were reaching for.

When Muhammad Ali was in his prime as the world boxing champion, he was in a plane that was readying for take off.  The stewardess reminded him to fasten his seat belt.  He brashly retorted, "Superman don't need no seat belt."

To which the stewardess quickly shot back at him, "Superman don't need no airplane either."  Taken down a notch, Ali fastened his seat belt.

The sin of power is the yearning, or the desire caused by self-delusion, to be more than we were ever created to be.

Jesus had to remind James and John of that fact.  Notice he didn't just make his comments to James and John, but to all the disciples.  Let me remind you of what Jesus said:

You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them and their great men exercise authority over them.  But it shall not be so among you;  but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.

To do what Jesus is asking appears to be giving up, giving in, going back to the first wrung of the ladder of success-intentionally—and staying there willfully.  It appears to be just so much nonsense, to we upwardly mobile people.

It is, in fact, humility.  Humility is what Jesus is asking of his followers.  Humility is even a fake virtue of the upwardly mobile, but it is never practiced.

Humility is one of those qualities that no one ever wants to say they have, because they are afraid if they do, they aren’t being humble any more.  So I think we need to try to understand what humility is, so we can start making these characteristics part of who we are, and so fulfill the will of the Lord.

Basically, humility is power under control.  Nothing is more dangerous than power under the control of arrogance.  That becomes false humility, always contesting itself against all other humilities.

Like the member of a religious monastery who was asked what his order stood for.  “Humility, the monk said in a word.  Then he added, “At humility, we’re the best in the world.”

Power under the discipline of humility is teachable.  As the world in our time seen so many know-it-alls?  And all of them have a blog and are on the internet.  It may not be that they know it all, but that they think what they know is more important, or better, than what anyone else knows.

The man who helped design the power system at Niagra Falls was Nikola Tesla.  Tesla was recommended by a mutual friend to work with inventor Thomas Edison.  Tesla was not awed by the great Edison.  On more than one occasion, Tesla disagreed with Edison, trying to prove him wrong.  After Tesla had been working with Edison for a number of months, the mutual friend asked Edison, “Is Tesla as good as I said he was?”

“Better,” was Edison’s grudging reply.  “He’s as good as he says he is.”

Power under the control of humility is teachable not arrogant.

Also, power under the control of humility is self-limiting.  This is probably one of the hardest of the characteristics of humility to hear.  With all the drums of pop-psychology banging away at the themes of self-actualization, self-fulfillment, and self-determination, we don’t want to hear the word, “self-limitation.”

Just look at the history of the progression of our magazine titles.  We started out with Time.  That’s pretty wide ranging.  And then on to Life.  Not much is bigger than life.  Then the scope of magazines after that starts narrowing.  First, there was “People.”  After that came, “Us.”  And finally, we come the center of the universe with “Self.”  Self Magazine.  I’ll bet there aren’t any articles in there about self-limitation.

Think about how everything Jesus did was self-limiting.  God in the flesh was born in a stable.  He spent his ministry amongst the insignificant people of his day.  He died between two thieves on a hill for outcasts.  Yet Jesus is the pivot point of history.  The year of his birth is the turning point of the calendar system.  He is the most insignificantly, significant figure in the history of the world.  Jesus is what power looks like in the control of humble self-limitation.

Tied in with this thought is that power under the control of humility means vulnerability.  The symbols of Godly power are the manger and the cross.  It is power unrecognized as power.  It looks like weakness.

Therefore, and I know this is hard to understand because it goes against all the ways and values of upward mobility, God’s power under the control of humility leads from weakness.  Such a style of leadership and living goes in direct contradiction to the society led by the strong and forceful.  And look where that’s gotten us.  As you watch the presidential debates, both Republican and Democrat, see if there is anything you can identify as Jesus’ humble power.

Do you want some power.  You will find it in Jesus in it’s most potent form.  All you have to do is be teachable under the guidance and authority of God.  Be self-limiting to the point of being a slave.  Be completely vulnerable in light of the manger and the cross.  Lead from weakness.  Be humble.

LifeStory Conversations

"LifeStory Conversations"

Mark 10:17-22

There are at least three assumptions I'm making in this message, so I'm going to just tell you what they are right up front.

First, people need to hear the gospel.

Second, the Gospel will not make sense unless it makes sense in the listeners lives.

Third, therefore, based on the first two, the one who carries the gospel needs to know two things:  the message of Jesus Christ; and, the story of the person who is being told that message.  Most mistakes are made in sharing the Gospel because people are not listened to, their stories are made to be insignificant to the sharing of the Gospel, so they feel like targets at which the message of Christ--like a dart--is thrown at them.

I think people like to talk about themselves.  I have found this to be generally true.  There is a story about the actress Mae West who, at a party, talked and talked about herself.  Then finally she said to those who were listening, "Enough about me.  Tell me, what did you think of my last film?"  Most people aren't egotistical in a Mae West sort of way.  But we nonetheless like to find people who are interested in us and our story.

It is in conversation with people--listening and talking--that discoveries are made about each other, what their lives mean and what our lives mean in light of the Gospel.

This kind of conversation has been called "Lifestory Conversations".  There is a little booklet by this name that I have used with churches to help them reach out to non-Christians or non-church members in a healthy and significant way.  The booklet describes four such lifestory conversations you can have with people.  I want to go over three of the four with you in a brief way this morning, and hopefully get you interested so you will take the "Lifestory Conversation" Workshop I will be offering in the near future.

The first kind of Lifestory Conversation is called "Life Review."  A life review conversation can be started by asking certain kinds of questions, like:

What is one of the best things that's happened to you, and why was it so good?

By your own standards, what have been some of your most meaningful achievements?

Complete this sentence:  "It gave me real happiness when..."

These kinds of questions are a conversational way to help people survey their lives in their current situation.  From that survey they can then make some observations about any changes they might need to make.  And then reflect upon their past.

Some other questions that could be asked might be:

Where have you been?  (Not just geographically, but also emotionally, relationship-wise, etc.)

Where are you now?  (In other words, at what point are you at now because of where you have been?)

Where are you going?  (What's ahead for your future?  What are you looking forward to in life?)

I particularly like the third question because it has to do with future and hope.  It will give you an insight into the person you are talking to in terms of whether they are a person who is locked in the past and constantly looking backward, or if they are someone who is hopeful about their future.  Do they think their future is going to be bigger or better than their past?

I read an article recently about a homeless amnesiac.  He remembers working as a Wall Street banker, hearing his mother speak French, living in southern Florida, going skiing, and having a dog named Woofy.  But that's about it.

He was found one winter taking shelter in a luggage compartment on a Greyhound bus in Springfield, Missouri.  He was suffering from frostbite and exposure.  He had nothing on him that cleared up the question of who he was.

Even after doing nationwide searches through the FBI, no one is any closer to finding out who the guy is.  "He has a few nice memories," his social worker said in the interview.  "But without knowing much about his past, it's hard for him to put together his future," the social worker said.

So many people don't need to have amnesia to feel like they don't know where they are going in life.  They remember their past, but they may think their past is not substantial enough to build a new future upon.  That's the work of this first part of Lifestory Conversation:  helping people understand their past and present, so that they can then be engaged with the Gospel about their future with God.

The story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19, the wee little tax collector who climbed a tree to see Jesus is a great case in point.  At verse 7 Jesus went to be the guest of Zacchaeus the tax collector.  People were grumbling that Jesus got cozy with someone like Zacchaeus.  At verse 8, Zacchaeus told Jesus, "Look, Lord, half of my possessions I now give to the poor, and if I have cheated anyone of anything, I am paying back four times as much!"

My question is, "What happened between verse 7 and verse 8?  Did Jesus have a "life review" kind of conversation with Zacchaeus, and after hearing his story, Jesus knew what Zacchaeus needed to hear from the Gospel about his new future?   But Jesus may not have been able to get Zacchaeus to that place of amazing generosity without hearing Zacchaeus' story first.  Those are the conversations we need to have with others before we share the gospel.  If we listen first, help the person do some life review, then share the Gospel based on what the person told us, some amazing transformations can take place.

The second kind of Lifestory Conversation we can have with others is called "Search for Inner Meaning."

After you have laid the groundwork of life review, it is hard not to begin to see the meanings that are attached to the various events of our lives.  Often, if not most of the time, it is not the events and experiences themselves that create the impact on our lives, but the meanings we quickly associate with those events and experiences.

An engineer, a psychologist and a Pastor were on a hunting trip in northern Canada.  They came to an isolated cabin and knocked on the door hoping to get some shelter from the cold.  No one was home, but the front door was unlocked, so they walked right in.

Inside the cabin there was a large, potbellied, cast-iron stove, suspended in midair by wires attached to the ceiling beams.  Why would a stove be elevated from the floor?  The psychologist concluded, "It is obvious that this lonely trapper, isolated from humanity, has elevated his stove so he can curl up under it and vicariously experience a return to his mother's womb."

The engineer disagreed.  "This man is practicing the laws of thermodynamics.  By elevating his stove, he has discovered a way to distribute heat more evenly throughout the cabin."

But the Pastor said, "I disagree.  I'm sure that hanging his stove from the ceiling has a religious meaning.  Fire lifted up on the altar of his stove connects him to the ancient religious practices over the centuries."

Just then the trapper returned.  They immediately asked him why he had hung his stove by wires from the ceiling.  The trapper said, simply, "Had plenty of wire, but not much stovepipe."

The meanings we attach to the events in our lives can be just as outlandish as the three hunters did with the stove.  We take the odd, painful, exciting experiences of life and almost always interpret them as more than they simply are.  When we figure out the simpler, more honest meanings of the events we experience we can then be freed up to reinterpret those meanings and see the event differently--even our lives differently.

The story of Nicodemus in John 3 is a great example here.  Remember Nicodemus is that highly respected Pharisee who came to speak with Jesus in the dark of night.  He was in some sort of midlife crisis and needed help.  So he came under the cover of darkness to speak with Jesus.  How was Nicodemus interpreting the events of his life?  What were the meanings he attached to his life experiences that left him in a state of confusion and anxiety?

Thursday was National Poetry Day.  I immersed myself in poetry, posting a poem an hour on Facebook.  There were some powerful words in those poems.  One poem I found was by Jane Kenyon.  She wrestled with depression her whole life, as did her husband.  One of her poems is titled, "The Pear."

There is a moment in middle age

when you grow bored, angered

by your middling mind,

afraid.

That day the sun

burns hot and bright,

making you more desolate.

It happens subtly, as when a pear

spoils from the inside out,

and you many not be aware

until things have gone too far.

That is a sad meaning that many people attach to their lives. That their lives have rotted from the inside out and now it's too late to do anything about it.   And that's the sentiment behind Nicodemus' question to Jesus, "How can a grown man be born again?"  "How can I find a way to make the spoiled fresh again?"  Nicodemus can't see any other meanings for the events in his life other than utter hopelessness and unreclaimable deterioration.  Jesus, after hearing Nicodemus' story, reframes the meanings of Nicodemus' life in terms of rebrith, and all of a sudden Nicodemus sees he can be free and live differently into his future.

But Jesus wouldn't have been able to guide Nicodemus in that direction if he didn't first have that conversation with him.  Jesus needed to hear Nicodemus' story before he could reframe new meanings for Nicodemus and get him out of the hole he was in.

A final strategy of Lifestory Conversations is "linking our story with the story."  So much of our society has become hurried, surface activity.  So much of what we do is flat and one dimensional.  Our language has become more like empty blogger verbage, pushing away the depth of the poetic language of wonder and awe.

Samuel Miller, in commenting about our time, wrote,

In man's life everything has been denuded of its religious quality.  Birth, puberty, marriage, sin, death--once pivotal points of spiritual significance--have now lost their sacramental depth.  Everything has become natural, biological, social and quite clinical.  There are no distances, no depth, no essential mysteries.  Everything is on the surface.

Taking a look at our own story, and helping others take a look at theirs, can put us in touch with the realization that there is another whole story that is surrounding our own.  That we are part of something much, much bigger if we had just been paying attention.  There is a deep undercurrent with powerful rhythms, sometimes moving in an opposite direction from the surface.

Joseph's story of being sold into slavery by his brothers in the book of Genesis is a perfect here.  Remember Joseph was his father's favorite.  Joseph was given the coat of many colors by his father--which made the brothers jealous.

After being sold as a slave by his brothers, a series of circumstances led Joseph to eventually become the second in command to Pharaoh himself.  With a famine in the land, Joseph was in a position to get his brothers out of Israel and into Egypt to make sure they didn't starve to death.

Joseph's brothers can't believe it is him, and what he has attained.  They are afraid Joseph is going to have them killed.  But because Joseph saw the bigger picture, he was able to say to his brothers, at the end of their story, "As for you, you meant to harm me, but God intended it for good purpose, so he could preserve the lives of many people..."  Joseph saw God's larger story going on in his and his families life.  But his brothers only saw what they had done, but not the bigger movements of God, even in the negative circumstances of Joseph's slavery and imprisonment.

Here is the ultimate aim of Lifestory Conversations as a healthy form of evangelism:  to joyfully discover this other Story--this Story that is larger than ourselves that is of God.

The purpose of Lifestory Conversations in evangelism is to enable a person to hear the Biblical story and to say, "That is my story, too."  When that happens, gradually or suddenly, we can say conversion has taken place.  The Bible is the story of "every person" (and how God is working in every person's life).

But you can't lead anyone to that point until you have the conversation first--the Lifestory conversation that helps them understand and then embrace the God of the larger story. 

The Big D

"The Big D"

Mark 10:1-12

Think about all your relationships.

There were probably some people you grew up with, who were close friends, and you thought you would always be friends.  And then life happens.  You grow in different ways.  You make decisions; they make choices.  You both become different people.  You grow apart.

There were probably some people you met in college, with whom you grew close.  You were older.  It wasn't high school anymore.  You were more sophisticated.  You got a little smarter.  People in the dorm or a class seemed attractive as far as friendship goes.  Then college ends.  You and your friends graduated.  Maybe got married.  Life and miles and occupations happen.  You just grew apart.

You make friends over Facebook.  You shoot quirky messages back and forth.  You get to know each other.  But the more you communicate, the less you realize you have in common with that other person.  Or maybe they are someone you know, but they go all Facebook nasty on you.  So you "unfriend" them.  Cut them off from your Facebook world.  It happens.

So many of the relationships we have through life change and go by the wayside.    We may feel sad about that.  We may say, "That's life; that's just the way it is."  The loss of some relationships may not bother us a whole lot.  Other relationship losses may create a deep sadness.  But most loss of relationships, for whatever reason, just basically get absorbed in the ebb and flow of life.  We take those changes as a matter of course.

Except one.  Except one relationship.  Marriage.  When married couples split, and end their relationship, and go through the whole divorce process, the weight of that break up carries more stigma and social damage than if you "unfriended" someone, either on Facebook or more visibly from your circle of friends.

To say to a long time friend, "I am no longer going to have anything to do with you," just doesn't carry the weight of saying the same thing to a spouse.  To say, "We just grew apart," in describing a friendship ending just isn't the same as making that same statement about the one you are married to.  People might nod their head in understanding if you say that about the end of a friendship.  You may not get the same knowing nod when you say that out loud about your marriage partner.

A marriage relationship comes with much higher expectations and deeper resolves.  So when the marriage ends in divorce, as it does for half of us, there is more stigma, more shame, more misunderstanding and lack of understanding and empathy, than when other kinds of relationships end or slowly go their separate ways.

A large part of the reason for this is we don't stand up in front of a group of people at church when we declare we are pledging our friendship to another person.  We don't have a celebrative ceremony or rite for promising our lifelong friendship.  But we do when we get married.  We stand "before God and these witnesses" to pledge our undying and eternal love for each other as a married couple.  Because of that ceremony, we feel a deeper sense of regret and shame when that promise and vow just doesn't work out--for one reason or another.

Divorce has always been a great difficulty for couples and families to deal with.  So much so that a number of sociologists and psychologists have been writing lately, wondering if human beings are even capable of such a "forever" kind of relationship.

It certainly was so back in Jesus' day.  Divorce was a huge issue.  A totally unresolved issue.   There were two major schools of Rabbis that had two very different outlooks about divorce.  The school of the rabbi Shammai taught that divorce should be allowed solely if there was adultery involved.  If one or both in a couple were unfaithful, that was an unrepairable breach in the marriage, and it could and should be dissolved.

But the other school of the rabbi Hillel, one of the most famous of rabbi's in Jewish history, taught that divorce should be allowed for any reason that would cause the marriage to be broken.  And since the rights of the marriage laid more heavily in the husbands favor, if the wife repeatedly burned the meal, or he didn't like how his wife was raising the children, or if the wife talked funny,  papers would be written up and the wife was out.

Guess which school of rabbi's teaching on divorce was more popular at the time of Jesus.

Even though the divorce papers had to be approved by the Sanhedrin (the Jewish court made up of priests and Pharisees) the divorces were nearly always approved in favor of the husband.

One of the main pieces of scriptural law that the Sanhedrin used in approving a divorce was Deuteronomy 24:1, which reads:

If a man marries a woman and then it happens that he no longer likes her because he has found something wrong with her, he may give her divorce papers, put them in her hand, and send her off.

The main point of discussion from this verse, between the two schools of rabbi's was that little phrase, "...found something wrong with her..."  What exactly does that mean?  This statement is from Moses, remember, so it carries a lot of weight.  Moses doesn't give any further description of what "something wrong" might be.  And I'm sure, especially if you are a woman, you heard quite clearly, "...something wrong with her."  Not him.  Certainly husbands can do no wrong.

Although, there is that modern saying, "If a husband speaks in the woods, and his wife isn't there to hear him, is he still wrong?"

So divorce is one of those sticky, long-time issues (and I mean long-time) that just won't go away.  Is divorce permitted, and if so, for what reason?  That's the question the Pharisees came up and hit Jesus with:  "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

Mark told us that the Pharisees asked this question to "test" Jesus.  The word means to scrutinize.  It doesn't appear that the Pharisees were out to trap Jesus, like they did time-after-time.  They just wanted to know if Jesus sided with the Hillel or Shammai rabbinical school on this prickly issue of divorce.  It's not clear if Jesus would have gotten in trouble with his answer, if that answer sided with one Rabbi or the other.

It appears Jesus sided with Shammai.  That Jesus went along with the stricter definition of divorce.  Maybe that's what the Pharisees were hoping, since it was the more unpopular interpretation of Moses' words.  Jesus' answer would clearly make him unpopular with the people who liked the more "liberal" interpretation of divorce-for-any-reason.

But, as what usually happens with Jesus, he undercuts both schools of thought at the time, and establishes his own.  Look again at Jesus' full reply:

But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart, Moses wrote you this commandment.  But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'  'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.'  So they are no longer two but one flesh.  What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."  (10:5-9)

First, there are a couple of words I want you to pay attention to.  They actually are the same word, occurring at the start of two of Jesus' statements.  It is the word, "But..."  Think back to Jesus' Sermon on the Mount.  There was a part of that sermon where Jesus does a back-and-forth thing where he says, "You have heard that the Law of Moses says...But I say to you..."  The two Buts at the start of Jesus' teaching about divorce, thus signals for us that Jesus is about to make one of his great reversals.

The first reversal is to interpret Moses entirely different.  The Pharisees were reading the verse in Deuteronomy as law from the very mouth of Moses.  But Jesus discounts Moses by saying that Moses didn't utter this statement as if from the mouth of God, but simply because Moses felt like he had to make a concession to the total waywardness of the people.  Moses wasn't making law, Jesus was saying.  Moses was simply throwing up his hands at the total lack of commitment exhibited by the people in their marriage relationships.  Moses was giving in, while still trying to put forth at least a remnant of marital morality.

So Jesus' first "But" had to do with the Pharisee's total misinterpretation and misreading of Moses.  Moses' statement about divorce said more about the misguided and self-centered people rather than Moses' authority to issue a law on the subject of divorce.

Which leads us to the second "But" in Jesus statement.  Jesus' second "But" was followed by a quote from Genesis about God's intentions for marriage.  If the Pharisees were smart enough they would have realized Jesus was saying Moses doesn't even get a say about defining what marriage is all about and what it takes to dissolve that special relationship.  Jesus is forcing the Pharisees--and the disciples and the people listening in--to understand Moses isn't the authority on this issue.  God is.  God created marriage--created the male-female relationship--so it is God who must be consulted in all things concerning marriage.

So, what Jesus does to turn the tables, is first remove Moses and his statement from the acceptable justifications made for divorce.  Only God gets to do that.  Then, Jesus further upends the tables by telling what God's purposes are for marriage, not what God's allowances are for divorce.  That's where the emphasis should be--on God's purposes for marriage.

The first thing Jesus said about marriage is that it involves a male and a female.  God intentionally made two distinct genders.  God didn't make just one gender.  Instead, there was something that God definitely had in mind by creating two different kinds of humans.

Jesus then goes on to say that the intention of God for making two distinct genders was so that they could come together.  The word Jesus used for coming together literally means to be glued together.  God's intentions for the two genders--for a man and a woman--is to be glued, or stuck, together.  That these two genders will leave their parental, growing up family world, and be glued together so-to-speak.

And finally, as Jesus is defining what a marriage relationship is here, that the two different genders will become "one flesh."  The word one means one, but in terms of cardinal.  Like we would use that term in a sentence like, "This is the cardinal rule."  This is the one, most important thing to remember.  So, "one flesh" would be like saying, "This is the one cardinal relationship--two very distinct genders, coming together as if they were glued together, to form the one foundational and cardinal of all relationships.

And who did all this?  God.  This cardinal relationship of a man and woman being solidified together is the work of God, and done by the very intentions of God to form the basis of all other existing relationships.  All other relationships flow out of this one cardinal, basic relationship of a man and a woman coming together in a permanent unity under God.

Then Jesus makes the ultimate statement:  "What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."  In other words, we don't get to mess with God's intentions and creation of the marriage relationship.  We shouldn't be looking at all the ways we can creatively mess with that relationship that God created.  Instead we should be concentrating on what God intended for that marriage relationship:  a unity, a glue, for all subsequent relationships to flow out of that one, cardinal relationship of a man and a woman.

Without the strength of that one, cardinal, God built relationship, all other relationships that use the marriage relationship of a man and a woman as a foundation, will fall into ruin and disrepair.

Stop It Now

"Stop It Now"

Mark 9:43-48

Back when I was in high school, there was an article in the Seattle Times that caught a lot of attention--especially in churches and youth groups.  A young man--a college student--was found wandering around the University of Washington campus, delirious.  He was delirious because of loss of blood.  He had a loss of blood because he had cut off his hand.  He had cut off his hand because he had read these verses from Mark, and felt like he should do what Jesus said.

If I asked you all to raise both hands, I am pretty sure I would not see any stubs.  And the same if I asked you to hold up your feet.  And I do not see any pirate eye patches either.

That is OK.  I am not going to advocate that you do what Jesus said.  Because I am pretty sure Jesus does not want you to do that either.  If we all did what Jesus said, none of us would have any hands, feet, or eyeballs.  It would be an interesting looking congregation, though, huh?  What would be ironic about that is we would have to have our non-Christian friends drive us to church and wheel us into the building--which would have to all be on one level.  No drop down screen.  No bulletins.  No pews--just a large open space for us to park all our motorized wheel chairs.  It would be like blind, wheelchair bumper cars once the service was over.

We can kind of chuckle about this.  It would be a somewhat funny scene.  Maybe Jesus taught this with tongue in cheek, trying to make the consequences of his statement laughable for those who got it.  But that is not how Jesus meant it.  Jesus wanted his disciples to be terrified.  That is what the tone of the Greek words Jesus used is trying to convey.  It was Jesus' intent to so horrify the disciples that they would not ever want to go the way of sin anymore.

Jesus is heightening the disciples terror and sense of anxiety about their personal sin, and the consequences of causing your own downfall, that it would be enough of a motivation to keep from living the way of sin.

You have to understand that the inference Jesus is making is there are all kinds of opportunities out there for your hands, your feet, and your eyes that are sinful.  Sin is real.  Things that can cause your literal downfall are real.  They are out there enticing, calling out to you, wooing you.  As Paul wrote to the Ephesians Christians, "These are evil times, so make every minute count" (Ephesians 5:16).  That is a reality.  You have to deal with temptation every single day, or as Paul wrote, "every minute."  You can not avoid it.

In American Sign Language, the sign for sin looks like two fishhooks leading a person by the mouth.  That is how temptation works.  The temptation is the bait, not the hook.  The thing is, we can not get hooked unless we bite.

There are opportunities innumerable for your hands, your feet, your eyes to cause your downfall--in other words, to get hooked when we go for the bait.  Comedian Flip Wilson used to have a routine where he would say, "The devil made me do it."  He would list some messes he would get into, and then, instead of accepting responsibility, he would say, "The devil made me do it."

The truth is, the devil does not make you do anything.  The devil only puts the opportunity there--the temptation, the lure.  It is up to us as to whether we allow our feet to move closer to the lure, or allow our hands to reach for the lure, or even allow our eyes to look at the lure.  The devil presents the opportunity; you provide the action.  It is that simple.

Jesus is letting us know that causing our own downfall is a step-by-step process.  There is the enticement, whatever it is.  There is then catching a glimpse of the enticement with our eyes.  Then our movement towards the enticement by feet or hands or both.  Then there is the entrapment and eventual downfall.

It is what happened in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve.  That story says:

The woman looked at the tree: the fruit looked good to eat; it was pleasing to the eye and desirable for the knowledge it could give.  So she (reached out and) took some and ate it... (Genesis 3:6)

That is how it works.  Seeing the lure.  Moving toward the lure.  Reaching for the lure.  Biting on the lure.  I suppose there is another part to all this.  That is knowing what you should and should not be looking at.  God had already told Adam and Eve not to eat any fruit from that tree.  So the prohibition had been given.  They knew what the boundary was that they were to keep.  I suppose a temptation can not be a temptation if you do not know if it is good or bad, right or wrong for you to grasp at it.  In most temptations we know what we are supposed to do and not do, what is good for us and what will bring about our downfall if it is pursued.

I think another inference in what Jesus is saying here is that we are supposed to watch out for ourselves.  This is about you, says Jesus, taking stock of your own life under God.  We don't get to tell others what they should be cutting out of their lives.  This is our own personal "reality check."

The other side of that coin is that we do not get to blame somebody else for the ways we grasp at our temptations.  Jesus did not say, "If your hand causes you to sin, chop your parents hand off, because it is their fault for the way they raised you."  Or, "If your eye causes you to sin pluck your friends eye out because it is their fault they showed you that porn site on the computer."  Or, "If your foot causes you to sin, cut your bosses foot off because you were just following their orders."

Jesus does not let us blame others because we bite at lures we should not be biting at, getting ourselves hooked.  It comes down to our personal responsibilities and the choices we are making.

As I started out this message, one response is to start chopping.  I think Jesus' tongue-in-cheek here has to do with the fact that if you choose that route, if you start chopping and yanking at your appendages, you are only dealing with the symptoms, not the cure.

Let us say you start chopping, like the University of Washington student did.  Cut off a foot.  Cut off a hand.  Cut off another foot.  Cut off your other hand.  Pull out an eyeball.  Gouge the other one out.  Do all this in response to the temptations you are having and the sin you are succumbing to.

But once you have all that chopped off, what is left?  The trunk of your body and your head.  In the trunk of the body is the heart.  And in the head is your mind.  You have gotten down to what you should have been dealing with in the first place--your mind and your heart.  Your feet are not going to lead you anywhere your heart and mind do not tell you to go.  Your hands will not reach for that which your mind and heart is not directing you to reach for.  You will not look at that which your mind is not already turning your head to look at.

There is the problem.  And the humor and severity of Jesus' warning.  The problem is not in your feet, hands and eyes.  We are great at evading the real problem of head and heart by focusing on symptoms and trivialities.  We do severe damage to ourselves and others thinking we have taken care of the problem.  But after cutting everything else off, we finally get to where we should have started in the first place:  our minds and hearts.

So, if it is a matter of mind and heart, then the best way to look at what Jesus is saying is to keep your boundaries.  In order to stop sinning, in order to resist your own particular temptations is to set and keep Godly boundaries.

That is what God was trying to do with Adam and Eve.  "Look," God was saying to them.  "You have all these other trees and plants.  Enjoy!  Go get them!  I made them all for you!  Just do not eat off this one tree.  That is my boundary for you.  No to this one, single tree.  Yes to all these other trees, bushes and plants.  That is it.  Please, keep the boundaries I have set for you."  That is it.  It is simple, really.

Stop sinning.  Hold to your boundaries.  We all know what our temptations are.  Am I right?  Come on.  You each know what catches your eye, like the fruit did for Eve and Adam.  You each know what is calling your name, what it is that is exerting the power to try and make you take a step in its direction--lift our hand in its direction.  Right?  We all know what that is for us.

Set your boundaries.  Close your eyes.  Put your hands in your pockets.  Tie your shoe laces together.  Do what you need to do, with God's help, to resist that temptation.  Cutting stuff off could work.  But it still does not help you, under God, to deal with your mind and heart.

And the final inference of Jesus' words is that there is an eternal reality to the consequences of succumbing to or holding our boundaries against our temptations.   There are two eternal options here, according to Jesus.  If you hold your boundaries and resist your temptations you will "enter into life."  If you constantly succumb to your temptations you will "go to hell."  I am sorry, but there are not any other options that Jesus gives us.

How does Jesus describe hell here?  Jesus used the word Gehenna.  Gehenna was an actual place.  It is the valley of Hinnom, just below the mount upon which Jerusalem is built.  It was in this valley that King Ahaz, one of the ancient kings of Israel, committed the atrocity of burning children alive as living sacrifices to idols.  The valley later became the garbage dump for Jerusalem.  It would constantly smolder and burn--the fire, literally, never went out.

So hell, in Jesus' description is first a place where things are thrown out.  And, where things burn and keep on burning.

Also, because a lot of the carcasses of the animal sacrifices from the temple were thrown on that dump site, the place was full of maggots and other flesh eating insects.  Jesus used that image to add to his description of hell along with the burning image.

Jesus is using these powerful images, again, to bring home the idea that sin and dealing with temptation is serious stuff.  There are consequences you have to consider, and some of those consequences, if you don't hold to your Godly boundaries against sin and temptation, are disastrous--equal to being thrown out on to a garbage heap where you will be eaten by maggots, smolder and burn.  It kind of gets our attention, does it not?

The upside to Jesus' mention of consequences is that there can be some good ones.  To hold our boundaries against sin--to make sure our hands and feet and eyes are not being led astray by a weak mind and heart--if we do that, Jesus said we will "enter into life."  Jesus equates entering into life with the kingdom of God.

To understand this we can go to the Lord's Prayer that we say every Sunday.  There is the phrase, "Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."  To enter into life, to enter into the kingdom is to enter into a life now that is just like life in heaven.  To enter into life and the kingdom is to begin living in heaven on earth.

The kingdom, the way Jesus saw it, is not something that is outside of this life.  The kingdom is both now and later.  We can enter the kingdom life now, while we are alive, now, simply by making sure we hold to Godly boundaries, and not allow ourselves to become distracted and detoured--allowing our eyes to look at that which they should not be focusing on, by letting our hands reach for that which is not of the kingdom, and by allowing our feet to take us places that have nothing to do with life.

Rowing Against The Wind

"Rowing Against The Wind"

Mark 6:45-52

Row, row, row your boat

Gently down the stream

Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily

Life is but a dream.

Rowing your boat, or living life, is easy if you are rowing down stream with the current.  But rowing isn't so merrily when you have to row against the current, or up stream or against the wind.  Living against the wind gets tiresome and disheartening.  Especially if you have no choice.  It becomes awfully tempting to just pull in the oars and go with the drift, even if it is to your demise, or gets your life entirely off course.

Interestingly, there are some Bible scholars who think the boat, in the gospel of Mark, is a symbol for the church.  In Mark's gospel, more than any of the other gospels, Jesus and the disciples are often in the boat crossing Lake Galilee.  Back and forth.  Back and forth.

And there's always something important happening to the boat, or in the boat.  There's a storm.  Or, like in this story, there's a head wind.  The disciples argue in the boat.  They try and figure things out in the boat.  They catch a bunch of fish from the boat.  Jesus teaches from the boat just off shore.  So the boat is a prominent fixture in Mark's gospel.

At the time Mark wrote this gospel, the church was under attack.  Jewish oppression was hot.  But the worst of it was from Nero, the crazy Roman emperor who was covering Christians in tar and lighting them on fire, burning them alive, so he could walk in his gardens at night.

So, some scholars feel that Mark, in his gospel, is trying to give a message to the church--who were the first "boat people."  When the storms of oppression beat against the boat, rely on your faith in Christ.  When the going is hard, but not impossible, keep rowing--keep going.  The only place you're going to figure things out is in the boat--in the church with other believers.  When the going is tough, make sure Jesus is in the boat.  And, watch for him, because he's the only one who can keep himself above the chaos outside the boat.

If the church is to be the church, be followers of Christ--especially now.  We need to keep to the lessons Mark teaches in his gospel about life in the boat.

Trying to keep the church moving forward these days is difficult.  An old hymn has the line, "Like a might army, moves the church of God."  Some would like to change that to, "Like a might snail, moves the church of God."  There are certain prevailing headwinds.

There is indifference both within and outside the church.  Indifference in the church causes the rowers to not row as strongly as they should.  Personal time and resources are given to other concerns.  Indifference causes the rowers to cop out, convincing themselves that anything they do or say will not make a significant amount of progress for Christ or the church.  So they row less strongly or pull their oars completely out of the water, making the fewer others in the boat to pull a greater load.  "I won't be missed," is the self-justification; but those left rowing, having dwindled with each retreat of indifference, know what an impact is made in the negative.  Even though the force leveled against the boat/church is the same, it feels stronger to the fewer who are rowing, simply because there are fewer rowing.

The winds of opposition have always blown against the church.  At first, with Christ, it was the Jewish religious leaders.  With the early church it was the same, until the Roman government began to blow its weight against the faith--condemning, arresting, torturing, and executing Christians.  That's what was going on at the time Mark wrote this gospel.

Later, the church had to defend herself against people who tried to water down or change the gospel message to suit themselves.

In our day, in our western culture, it seems the winds of opposition have diminished.  At least that's what we've been lulled into thinking.   We think we're in a time of relative calm.  No one is breaking down our doors, seeking to arrest us and have us killed.  We don't appear to have a hard going of it.  Rowing, it seems, should be easy with no oppositional winds and a glassy, smooth surface of Christian living.

But we don't realize we Christians today may be rowing against the greatest winds that have blown against the church.  It is the wind of indifference and apathy--the gentle breeze that rocks the hammock while we fall asleep.  And while people sleep, nothing is getting done.  The church is slowly meaning less and less to more people.

I've mentioned before that denominations like the Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, and other so-called main line churches are losing thousands of members each year.  Presbyterian churches, nation-wide are losing 30,000 members a year.  Surveys have been done to see where those people are going.  Are they going to other churches?  Are they going to other religions?  Are they becoming new age crystal gazers?  No.  A majority of those leaving the church are going no where.  They are filling the religious void with nothing.  Maybe gardening.  Or sleeping in.  Or doing the wash.  Or reading the newspaper.

The Christian church has never faced a time before when the world has treated it and the faith with so much indifference.  Like, who cares?  What happens when the wind of indifference has blown its gentle, subtle force against the church, and lifted all but one believer out of the boat?  What happens when there's only one rower and that person has only one oar?  The boat just goes around in circles, never giving direction, or having any direction itself again.

Satan is laughing as his tactics and strategies are working.  Benton Stull gave a really good message last week about the deceiver and dividing tactics of Satan.  No longer launching frontal assaults on the church, trying to exterminate by brutal oppression, Satan has instead enjoyed greater success with the subtle approach.

As our numbers dwindle, as our fervor for the faith falls asleep, as we lift our oars out of the water and simply drift aimlessly, the devil's smile grows broader.  Each decision, each choice we make that distracts us from the faith, from the ministry and participation in the church, is a victory for Satan.  Every subtle breeze that leeches away a bit of the fervor we once felt in our believing is demonic victory.  Every rationalization that we allow to blow through our reasoning, that keeps us from staying at our oars, and keeps us from pulling Christ's church to move forward, stroke after stroke, is another notch in the win column for our satanic opposition.

For the most part, most Christians don't care.  And that's the whole problem.  That's the wind that blows agains the church today--an attitude shift towards indifference.  "I don't care.  It's not that important.  Things will keep going if I stop rowing, or get out of the boat altogether.  Somebody will keep it going."  And the devil laughs as he keeps the lulling breeze of indifference blowing against the boat.

This whole development has been compounded by the fact that the world doesn't care either.  The world doesn't care what the church--or an individual Christian--does or doesn't do.  The world doesn't think much about the church at all.  It used to be that society-at-large had some level of reverence or respect for the church.  There was a time when the church figured into just about everyone's lives during the week.

Socially and religiously, the church was the center of the community.  Not any more.  The church is not even in the top three of a community's priority list anymore.  Nobody's laughing at us or ridiculing us.  But nobody's taking us serious either.  We live in a world that has sidelined the church.  Nor does society see the church as a possible player on the starting team.  The church has never found herself in this kind of position of powerlessness ever in its history.  As a boat, as far as society is concerned, the church is dead in the water. Or, there are oars in the boat but no one is there to row any more--because few if anyone see it is worthwhile.

There is a Scandinavian saying: "The north wind made the vikings."  It was the harsh, cold realities that developed them into the hearty survivors as well as fearless explorers.

I've also read that the violin makers in the old days would always choose the wood for their violins from the north side of the tree.  It was that side upon which the wind and storms had beaten.  So, they would say, when they heard the groaning of the trees of the forrest at night, the violin makers would not feel sorry for them, because those trees were just learning to be violins.

So, we who strain against the winds of culture seem to do better, become more hearty followers of Christ, when those winds are harsh--even deadly.  Because we don't recognize the lullaby winds of indifference these days as particularly cruel or harsh, we  don't fight against them as hard, or at all.

It is that perspective I would beg you in the name of Christ to change.  The winds of sleepy indifference are dangerously deadly.  Christians are giving into them by the thousands.  If there was ever a time when Christians need to be at their oars, straining against that lulling wind, it is now.

Indifference to the church, indifference to the faith, is ultimately indifference to Christ.  Indifference is one of the most powerful schemes the evil one has used against the church.

What it comes down to are our own individual choices and actions that say,

"Yes, I will do my part--I will take hold of an oar, and I will row.  I will help move Christ's church forward against this and all winds.  I will do that.  Because if I don't then I have made the winds stronger and the church weaker."

When believers and followers of Christ become withdrawn and dispassionate, it is not the churches fault.  It is the individual believers fault in the choices they have made.  It is time to find your passion for Christ again, and get to your oars.

The Divider

“The Divider.”

By Benton Stull

A Protestant theologian, a Catholic theologian, and an Orthodox theologian all lived near each other in the same town.  They liked to get together and have discussions and study, as an Ecumenical practice, that is, a practice of unity between their different church traditions.  One day these three theologians heard about an Ecumenical conference happening in a nearby city, and they decided they would all go there together for the day.  So they drove there in one of their cars; the trip was about 3 hours, and when they arrived, they had a great day enjoying the unity of the church, and doing all kinds of Ecumenical things.  In the evening, as the conference ended, the three walked back out to where they had parked their car, but the first one to get there found his door locked.  As all of the doors were tried and found locked, one of the theologians looked in through the window and saw that the keys were still dangling from the ignition.  The driver, the Protestant theologian, had forgotten to take the keys with him.  The Catholic theologian spoke up first, saying “well, it’s no problem, we’ll just smash the window and when we get home I’ll pay to have it repaired.”  The Orthodox theologian thought that was unnecessary and instead suggested that they call a locksmith to come and open the door.  The Protestant theologian didn’t want the window to be broken, and he was certain that there would be no locksmiths willing to come out at this time of night.  The Protestant theologian suggested that he call his wife, and she could drive the spare key to the city so that they could unlock the door.  The Catholic theologian said that that would take too long, and if they just smashed a window, they could be on their way and be home in the same amount of time it would take for someone to meet them with a spare key.  Well, the argument continued, with each theologian believing he had the correct answer to their shared situation.  Eventually, as happens, each theologian gradually moved from defending his idea, to defending himself.  Passersby actually started gathering around and watching these theologians who had been yelling at each other around a parked car for 30 minutes or so.  Eventually, the Protestant theologian reached his breaking point, and said “Enough!  Now I don’t know how we’re going to solve this problem, but I know we have to solve this problem, and I know we have to solve it quickly.”  He pointed up at the sky, and there were huuuuge storm clouds rolling in.  The Protestant theologian continued, “In five minutes it is going to be pouring rain right here, and the roof of the car is down!”

I’ve been watching a bunch of lectures by a Father Emmanuel Charles McCarthy lately, and he told that joke at the beginning of one of them.  He was using this joke as an illustration of how the people of different churches often miss the obvious teachings of Jesus, and instead focus on the differences in our own ideas.  I think this joke illustrates equally well the ways we members of the Church are willing to divide ourselves from each other, over trivial matters.

 

My favorite theologian was actually not a theologian.  Jacques Ellul was a lay-theologian; he was not formally trained in theology.  For the most part, he was a sociologist and a law professor at the University of Bordeaux, in France.  And he was a Christian, so many of his works cross back and forth between theology and sociology very easily.  For example, he wrote a book called “The Meaning of the City” in which he talks about cities in the Old Testament, and discusses what it means that Cain is the first person in the Bible to build a City.  In one of his other books, Jacques Ellul lists six evil powers that are mentioned in the Bible.  He lists them as follows: Mammon, the prince of this world, the prince of lies, Satan, the devil, and death.  

To us, all of these powers are very similar, and they frequently all get rolled up into one red cartoon-like character.  The way Ellul tells it, each of these is a special name for a particular function of evil power.   The function of Mammon is greed, the function of the prince of this world is power, the function of the prince of lies is deception, the function of death is destruction.  We can easily see how each of these powers is very closely related to the others, but they all each have their own character also.  

As weird as it is for me to have chosen this subject, the ones I want to talk about today are Satan and the devil.  These two seem to be the most similar to each other.  In fact, these two names are pretty much interchangeable, but there are a couple of different meanings that can apply to either of them.  Satan means “the adversary,” and Satan and the devil can mean “the accuser” or “the slanderer.”  

In the Bible, “Satan” is usually used as “the Satan,” that is, it is a title bestowed upon a person who is an adversary or is making an accusation.  Ellul says: “… wherever in any form or for any motive an accusation is made… there is Satan.  Satan is then at work, is present, and becomes a person.”  So in this view, when we do the work of accusation on earth, we give a body to accusation.  Just as when we do the work of Jesus, we give a body to Jesus.  There’s a poem called “Christ Has No Body Now But Yours.”  No one knows for sure who really wrote it, but it’s a valuable idea, I think.  We can also apply it to these evil powers.  Satan cannot have a body unless we offer our bodies to Satan.  The work Jesus calls us to do on earth cannot be done without a physical body.  And Jesus does not have a body unless we offer our bodies to Jesus.

But even though Satan and the devil are used the same way, the word “devil” comes from the Greek word diabolos.  The divider.

Of this, Jacques Ellul says:

“The devil is not a person or individual but the reality of a fact, namely, division…  The devil is present wherever there is division, conflict, disruption, competition, combat, discord, disharmony, divorce, exclusion, maladjustment.  As in the case of Satan, the church is the favorite prey of the devil…”

When a scripture author speaks of the devil, the author is speaking of a power that divides.  Perhaps the author is even speaking of the devil as the division itself.  In Matthew 10, Jesus says “I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.”  Jesus then says that his message may break up families between those who want to follow him, and those who don’t.  Doesn’t that seem divisive?  

Looking at the names of all of these evil powers, we can see that some characteristic of Jesus is the exact opposite of the evil power.  Mammon is greed and wealth, Jesus preaches freedom from greed.  The prince of this world is earthly power, and Jesus rejects all forms of earthly power, especially violence.  The prince of lies is deception, and Jesus is the Truth.  Satan is the accuser, and Jesus is the forgiver.  Death is the destroyer, and Jesus is Life and Resurrection.  Just the same, the devil is the divider, and Jesus is the reconciler.  Jesus’ path is one of reconciliation between all people.  But to set off on that path may require us to leave some things behind.  Or, following Jesus may take us down paths that our loved ones cannot follow.  That’s what I think Jesus was referring to.  Not saying that he had come to purposely sow division between people.  Right after this, Jesus says “those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.”  

If we were there to follow Jesus, we would have seen that Jesus’ work in his life was to break down barriers that divided groups of people.  One reason Jesus didn’t get along with the Pharisees was that they were constantly dividing people into clean and unclean, and lawful and unlawful, and treating people badly as a result.  Jesus’ message is never one that allows us to treat other people badly.  And Jesus constantly went to those who had been divided from the better parts of society, and he embraced them and healed them.  One article I read on this subject reminded the reader that Jesus is not the devil.  That is, Jesus does not act in such a way as to be a minister of division.

In the scripture that we just heard from 1 Corinthians 3, Paul is encouraging a church to avoid dividing itself by loyalty to different leaders.  It was really easy to pick a scripture reading for today.  Not because I knew which one to pick, but because there are a lot of passages that talk about us being the body of Christ.  There are many members, each with different gifts and purposes, but all still members of the same body.  Ephesians 2:17-22, is a good one:

“So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father.  So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone.  In him the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you are also built together spiritually into a dwelling place for God.”

We belong to the body, but we do not own it.  There is room for each of us and all our different weaknesses and abilities and ways of thinking.  I think it is fairly risky for us to cut limbs off of the body of Christ, having decided that they are not wanted or needed.  Think about the amount of time and mental effort that some churches go through trying to decide who is in Jesus’ flock, who is out of Jesus’ flock, and why?  And another headscratcher is “When is the last time you heard of a church splitting up over something that Jesus actually talked about?”  Division in the church is nothing new at all, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be avoided.  The history of the PC(USA) church shows a few times when the church divided itself over something that was the most important thing in the world at the time, only for the pieces of the church to come back together 10 or 15 years later.  The church will never lose its spirit of unity and reconciliation.  The trick is to never allow our fears and insecurities to make us into servants of the diabolos.  Which is more important: being the one who is right, or being one of many who seek the Kingdom of God on Earth?  We cannot do the work of the devil on behalf of God.

The Needs of the Many Over the Needs of the Few

"The Needs of the Many Over the Needs of the Few"

Mark 6:30-34

And the apostles gathered themselves together unto Jesus, and told him all things, both what they had done, and what they had taught.

And he said unto them, Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest a while: for there were many coming and going and they had no leisure so much as to eat.

And they departed into a desert place by ship privately.

And the people saw them departing, and many knew him, and ran afoot thither out of all cities, and outwent them, and came together unto him.

And Jesus, when he came out, saw much people, and was moved with compassion toward them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd: and he began to teach them many things.

I don't know about you, but if I was one of the apostles, and I had just come back to regroup with Jesus and the other apostles, I'd be more than a bit nervous.  I would be tempted to act like a kid who's just come home from school on the first day of school, and you get asked a bunch of questions by your parents.  Only it would be Jesus asking the questions:

"How was it?"  ("Fine.")

"What did you do?"  ("Nothing.")

"Who did you talk to?"  ("Nobody.")

"I'll bet you're excited to go back out there and preach some more?"  ("Whatever.")

When Jesus asks who wants to share, I'm not sure if I'd want to raise my hand first or later.  Because you know Peter, or one of the others would shoot their arm in the air right away:  "Ooo, ooo, ooo; pick me Jesus!  I have lots to tell!!"  I'd be thinking, Do I want to get ahead of that, or follow it up and look lame by comparison?

The graduation card I got for Joseph Loomis showed this kid in class, raising his hand real high and saying, "I know it's the last day of school, but can we have some more homework?"  The caption on the inside of the card read, "The good thing about graduation is you don't have to put up with that kid anymore."  And then I wrote underneath that, "Wait a minute.  You were that kid, weren't you!?"

That's what I would be a little nervous about going back to report to Jesus--that disciple who comes back from his mission wanting even more homework from Jesus.  And I'd be glad just to be done with the first outing.

What set this whole story in motion was Jesus sending the disciples out to tell people about Jesus, preach the Gospel, and heal the sick.  Jesus sent the disciples out in pairs.  It's not clear how much time has passed from when the disciples were sent out, to this point when they've come back to report what happened.

So you and your preaching buddy are sitting there listening to the other's stories, kind of looking at each other with sideways glances, wondering if what you did will measure up.  Not only will it compare with what the other's accomplished, but will Jesus think what you did was adequate?  That's the real question.

The good thing about this little show-and-tell session is that a bunch of people kept showing up, interrupting your conversation.  If there are enough interruptions, maybe you wouldn't have to share your story, and have to hear Jesus say something like, "That's it!?  That's all you did?"

But the thing is, all the constant interruptions by the people, and then a little later when Jesus and the disciples try to get away to a "desert place" and when they get there, a huge crowd waiting for them--all that is proof that whatever the disciples did, it worked.

Previously, there were crowds following Jesus and the disciples around.  But they were smaller and more manageable.  Now there are thousands.

The story that follows this one about the disciples coming back from their ministry trips is the feeding of the 5000.  I'm lopping off that part of the story, because this one, about the disciples and Jesus is just as intriguing as the multiplied bread and fish.

The disciples, in their own loaves and fishes kind of way, took the words of Jesus, and the healing of Jesus, and multiplied Jesus' followers from hundreds to thousands.  That's why the disciples and Jesus were getting their little conversation interrupted so much--the disciples had done their job, and done it well.

When you do your job as a disciple, and you do it well, you will find out two things:  you will be invigorated and you will be exhausted.  You will be exhausted because of having to deal with all the rejection, and lame excuses, and people's screwed up priorities, and original fervor followed by back-peddling, and opinions based on ignorance, and so much more.  It's all exhausting.

But it's invigorating because when you see the light go on in a person's life that you have been working with, on behalf of Christ--it makes all the exhausting stuff worth it.  When someone finally gets it, it's a celebration!  That's how Jesus described it in the parables of the lost coin, the lost sheep, and the lost son.  What happened when they were found?  A feast!  A celebration!

Jesus could hear it in the disciples voices as he listened to their stories.  They had experienced the rejection and all that; as well as a celebration here and there.  And here they were, having to keep ministering to the people's insatiable need.  Jesus knew they needed some time away.  Some R & R.

Jesus knows that you can't give and give and give and not take some time for yourself to regroup, rest, and replenish.  Maybe that's why people shy away from being a fully committed disciple--once you start giving of yourself, meeting people's needs, you aren't left alone.

There are fewer and fewer men and women going into full-time ministry now than there were when I was in seminary.  Most of the ministers are my age and getting ready to retire.  And there are half as many men and women to take our places.  Dealing with the exhaustion and loneliness and life-in-a-fish-bowl is a large part of the reason why.  

If, as a disciple, you don't learn to take care of yourself, you will get buried by human need.  Most of the men and women I have known who retired from the ministry in the last 10 years, couldn't wait to get out.  They were used up.  Spent.  Had become cynical about doing ministry and life in the church.

It will happen, if you are a disciple.  Unless you listen to Jesus here and intentionally make that alone time.  Get away once in a while.  Get some distance.  Which is what Jesus was trying to do with the disciples: intentionally making some alone time in a "desolate" place.  The word desolate means isolated, solitary, wilderness.  But it doesn't have as much to do with geography as with getting away from people.  Being alone, so that God can be attentive to you.  Get away from all the human brokenness and let God heal your own brokenness.  Get away from all the human grasping, and be grasped by the One who called you.  Get away from all the people's expectations and just be with the One whose only expectation is to fall into those arms of love.  A sabbath from people.

Jesus tried to do that with the disciples.  They got in the boat.  They headed for some distant shore.  Desolate.  Peopleless.  But what happens when they get there?  "Much people..." as the King James Bible says.   Can you imagine how much the disciples shoulders slunk and their heads drooped and the air just went out of them.  How?  How were they found?  The disciples quickly prepare themselves to give up their desolate place in order to do ministry again.

In one of the Star Trek movies, "The Wrath of Khan," the reactor that runs the Enterprise is badly damaged during a battle.  Spock moved quickly and unnoticed to the engine room.  He assesses the situation and entered the reactor core.  Radiation is leaking everywhere.  He fixes the reactor, but at the cost of his own life.

Captain Kirk realizes what has happened and runs to the engine room.  He is held back from going into the core to rescue his best friend and first officer Spock.  It's too late.  One of the things Spock says to Captain Kirk with his last breath is, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," justifying the logic of his action.

That's another hard lesson the disciples have had to learn, and are learning again in, what they thought was going to be a desolate, unpeopled place.  Their needs were going to have to take a back seat, again, so that the needs of the many people they were facing could be met.

As stunned as the disciples are, Jesus is amazed.  His amazement turned to overflowing compassion.  He just stared at the throng of human need and must have whispered under his breath, but loud enough to be heard, "They are as sheep not having a shepherd..."

What did he mean?  What does a shepherd provide for the sheep, that if he weren't there, they would be much the worse off?  I have known a couple of sheep farmers during my ministry, and I've learned a bit about sheep.  I know sheep need at least three things: safety/protection; guidance (to food and water); boundaries.

So first, if sheep don't feel safe, they won't eat.  As I mentioned, the event that follows this story is the feeding of the 5000.  But before Jesus feeds the huge crowd bread and fish, he "began to teach them many things."  Jesus used his teaching to help the "shepherdless" people feel safe.  They had to feel a sense of safety so they could then eat their fill of the food Jesus supplied.

It's only by paying attention to Jesus' teaching that we also come to a sense of safety.  There are all kinds of words floating around out there in the world.  And there is all kinds of anxiety right now in our world.  All the words spoken by politicians, advertisers, movie stars, corporate leaders, or even our own words, do not make us feel safe.  But Jesus' teaching does.  Only his words make our anxious guts calm down so we can feel secure.

Secondly, sheep need guidance.  Basically sheep are stupid animals.  Without guidance, sheep will go wherever they want and it always ends up bad.  One year I was out in Colby our Christmas Program was a slideshow retelling of the Christmas story.  We took our Sunday School kids out to different real life sites to take slide pictures.  For the shepherds we took them to a farm that raised sheep.  We had the shepherds standing out in a field with the sheep.  We tried to herd them towards the shepherds for the picture and all of a sudden they decided to go helter skelter on us.  One of the kids  left a gate open and some sheep ran out that.  Some were jumping over fences.  What started out as a good idea on paper suddenly turned into a comical mess.  Sheep need to be given direction.

Jesus did that by "teaching" the people who had no direction.   Through Jesus' teaching we wayward sheep find out the way we're supposed to go, a direction for life.  We've seen too many people who think they know best the path in life they should take and end up in a mess.  We've done that too often in our own life choices.  It's time to pay attention to Jesus' teaching and find our way.

And lastly the sheep need boundaries.  This is related to my last point.  Sheep will constantly push their boundaries.  They will wander off a little bit more, then a little bit more, then a little bit more.  Pretty soon they are way off heck and gone.

A good shepherd will continually help the sheep remember where the outer boundaries are located.  In biblical times they did this with a sling and a rock.  The shepherds were so accurate with the sling, they could zing a sheep's nose with a rock from 50 yards.  Smacked up the side of the head with a rock, the sheep quickly got an idea where the boundaries were.

Jesus' teaching, Jesus' words were sometimes those up-the-side-of-the-head reminders of where the boundaries are for what it means to be a human being, and how we should act if we are God's children.

Let's tie these scenes together.  The reason Jesus led the disciples to a "desert" place was for rest and recharging, because actually doing the ministry is exhausting.  Then once they got away by themselves, they are quickly surrounded by a huge crowd of needy people.

Seeing the large crowd of people, Jesus saw the shepherding that needed to be done.  But again, the work of shepherding is difficult and tiring work.  Working at trying to keep your people safe and secure against the devices of the evil one means you, as the shepherd, have to always be on high alert.  Giving people direction to the nourishment of God's Word, who would rather be aimless, or are constantly making misguided, even stupid choices, because they aren't thinking Biblically, is exhausting.  And always reminding people where their boundaries are, and sometime having to bop some folks on the nose who are constantly pushing on those boundaries is thankless work.

But that's your work, your task, if you are a disciple and choose to be a shepherd of sheep people who would rather not be shepherded.