Oh how often we go to serve and end up receiving service.
My church has a food ministry affectionately called "Soup Kitchen," although I haven't seen them serve soup. I've been going for about a month and have learned a lot. I often stand on a soap box (at least to preach at myself) about the growing theological divide in the church. I'm not talking about the much discussed divide between the church and the academy (aka, Jerusalem and Athens). Rather, I'm talking about the divide between the rich and the poor.
Friends, alongside the broccoli casserole, chicken pot pie, and store-made desserts, they're serving theology at that soup kitchen.
This last week I saw an older lady linger by the trash cans. My attention was focused on the people with whom I was eating; my peripherals paid her little attention. DJ had a heaping plate of seconds that he could not finish, so he got up to throw it away. At least, I think he intended to throw it out.
Instead of tossing the food in the garbage, he gave it to the lady lingering by the garbage. Maybe she asked for it. Maybe he offered it. Either way, he handed it and she took it. I saw her tip the plate over and let all of the food fall into her plastic bag. The ham, broccoli salad, and cole slaw slid off the plate into a gooey conglomeration in a plastic, grocery bag.
I wonder who else's leftovers were in that bag. Did she have any way to keep the food cold or secure from the bacteria we tupperware-laden people fear? How long did she have to carry that bag before she could set it down? Did she have anywhere to take it?
If my theology doesn't affect her life, then it is all for nought, my friends. We can argue about orthodoxy, the trinity, and The Shack until we're blue in the face, but time is running out on whether or not we can help people like that lady. I care about the theology that matters to her. The kind of theology that tells me to serve her food and keep her warm. The kind of theology that tells me to be Christ to her--which means to do Christ-like things to her, which means to eat with her, be her friend, and judge her not.
"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone," Jesus said.
The only stone Jesus cast was a word of a loving, unconditional forgiveness.
===
Last week I also made the acquaintance of DJ and Shanika. We are probably about the same age and the young couple really warmed up to me and my friend Dave, who are a good 40 years younger than the next youngest volunteer. DJ was rubbing Shanika's belly and told me, with a grin as large as Cheshire cat's, that she was pregnant. Shanika turned and looked so proud and so fulfilled. Their young joy gave a new meaning to the cliché, "living on love."
Those two loved kids. They already have two young ones and they separately asked me and Dave if we had any. In their struggles to stay afloat, I imagine love really is what keeps them going--loving and being loved in return.
DJ also told us he was glad for his younger brother who was going into the marines. He wanted his brother out of this life and into the marines. I want to cry about how right DJ's desire might be. As a young man in Shelby, DJ's could easily have a life of poverty and gang violence in his life. DJ's brother could learn from the streets how to be violent and kill or he could learn it in the marines, where at least he would have plentiful food, health care, and the opportunity to go to college.
I'm not sure DJ's brother had the luxury of making a right decision. Perhaps he could get out of gang violence, but I am no one to judge, not being in his shoes. And how could he pass up food, shelter, health, and education, even if it means selling his body to the warring capitalist system? With little sight of a "right" decision, ethics is out the window.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Loaves and Fishes
The Feeding of the 4000. The Feeding of the 5000. The Miracle of the Five Loaves and Two Fishes. The Miracle of the Seven Loaves and Fishes. The Multiplication of the Loaves and Fishes. "The sign that he had done" (John 6:14). Or whatever you want to call it.
Matthew 14:13-21; 15:32-38
Mark 6:31-44; 8:1-10
Luke 9:10-17
John 6:1-15
Either or 4000 or over 5000 people were listening to Jesus. Jesus wanted them to be fed. Sometimes the disciples wanted the people to eat. Sometimes Jesus wanted them to eat. In every story but the one in John, the disciples had food, just not much. Every time it was bread and fish.
Jesus prays over the food and breaks the bread, and the disciples give the food out. Everyone eats. Food is left over. The disciples gather that food and have more than they started with. In every telling but John 6, that's the end of the story. In John, the narrator says, "When the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, 'This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world.'"
Only two of the stories said the people had nothing to eat (Mark 8 and Matthew 15 ). And maybe none of the people had any food, except for that boy who only appears in John's account. And the disciples, of course. With well over 4000 people in both situations, I'm unsure how the disciples would know whether or not people had any food.
None of the stories say Jesus multiplied the food. John calls it a sign, even though he doesn't call the very next story a sign, the story of Jesus walking on the water. I'm not saying no miracle occurred, but I want to work with a different interpretation for a moment. I mean, even those who believe differently than us have fruitful thoughts, don't they?
I don't know if I heard it in a sermon or in class or read it in a book. Regardless of its source, some people think the "miracle" here is a moral one, not a physical one. These people say the disciples and/or a young boy started handing out bread and fish, which inspired other to give out of their abundance. They presume other people had food, but the disciples didn't know about it. Jesus was wise though.
In these interpretations, Jesus didn't multiply loaves and fishes, but caring and sharing. I don't know who is right, because the text does not tell us. Either interpretation, what a miracle!
===
I lamented to a friend the other day. I told him I only had small ideas, but big goals. I want to cure AIDS, but I only have a box band-aids and lips for kissing boo-boos.
"Loaves and fishes," he said. (Actually, he might have said, "loaves and fish." I like "fishes.")
I can't end homelessness or poverty or racism or sexism or bigotry or hypocrisy or oppression or people's aversion to deconstruction.
I can't do it; a trip to Miami solves no problems.
You can't do it; smiling to someone at the DMV doesn't fix anything.
But I've got a few loaves in the shape of a trip to Miami. You've got some fish for a smile. Together, we could feed a few. And with the Bread of Life at work, we're going to see others sharing their loaves and fishes. We're inspired by Jesus to share and sharing that inspiration.
Hunger will be no more when God does multiplication.
Loaves and fishes, friends.
Loaves and fishes.
Matthew 14:13-21; 15:32-38
Mark 6:31-44; 8:1-10
Luke 9:10-17
John 6:1-15
Either or 4000 or over 5000 people were listening to Jesus. Jesus wanted them to be fed. Sometimes the disciples wanted the people to eat. Sometimes Jesus wanted them to eat. In every story but the one in John, the disciples had food, just not much. Every time it was bread and fish.
Jesus prays over the food and breaks the bread, and the disciples give the food out. Everyone eats. Food is left over. The disciples gather that food and have more than they started with. In every telling but John 6, that's the end of the story. In John, the narrator says, "When the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, 'This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world.'"
Only two of the stories said the people had nothing to eat (Mark 8 and Matthew 15 ). And maybe none of the people had any food, except for that boy who only appears in John's account. And the disciples, of course. With well over 4000 people in both situations, I'm unsure how the disciples would know whether or not people had any food.
None of the stories say Jesus multiplied the food. John calls it a sign, even though he doesn't call the very next story a sign, the story of Jesus walking on the water. I'm not saying no miracle occurred, but I want to work with a different interpretation for a moment. I mean, even those who believe differently than us have fruitful thoughts, don't they?
I don't know if I heard it in a sermon or in class or read it in a book. Regardless of its source, some people think the "miracle" here is a moral one, not a physical one. These people say the disciples and/or a young boy started handing out bread and fish, which inspired other to give out of their abundance. They presume other people had food, but the disciples didn't know about it. Jesus was wise though.
In these interpretations, Jesus didn't multiply loaves and fishes, but caring and sharing. I don't know who is right, because the text does not tell us. Either interpretation, what a miracle!
===
I lamented to a friend the other day. I told him I only had small ideas, but big goals. I want to cure AIDS, but I only have a box band-aids and lips for kissing boo-boos.
"Loaves and fishes," he said. (Actually, he might have said, "loaves and fish." I like "fishes.")
I can't end homelessness or poverty or racism or sexism or bigotry or hypocrisy or oppression or people's aversion to deconstruction.
I can't do it; a trip to Miami solves no problems.
You can't do it; smiling to someone at the DMV doesn't fix anything.
But I've got a few loaves in the shape of a trip to Miami. You've got some fish for a smile. Together, we could feed a few. And with the Bread of Life at work, we're going to see others sharing their loaves and fishes. We're inspired by Jesus to share and sharing that inspiration.
Hunger will be no more when God does multiplication.
Loaves and fishes, friends.
Loaves and fishes.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
My Reflections Hebrews 13: Jesus' Death Against Politics & For Love Withour Borders, The Sacrifice of Sharing, and Gay Marriage
"For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also suffered outside the city gate in order to sanctify the people by his own blood. Let us then go to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured. For here we have no lasting city, but we are looking for the city that is to come. Through him, then, let us continually offer a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that confess his name." Hebrews 3:11-15
Atonement happened inside the sanctuary, but the leftovers went outside and were burnt. They were unclean; even the people burning the carcasses had to wash before entering the city (Lev. 16:27).
Hebrews tells us Jesus was sacrificed outside the city, where the unclean things happened. The language of "city" and "camp" separates the reforming remnant of the Israelite religion from the increasingly civil "religion." Hebrews separates Jesus from the politics of the city, from the politico-ethno-centricism surrounding Zion, because Jesus died outside the city in order to sanctify "the people" (ton laov, for you Greek readers out there). The people. Not the Judaeans. Not the Israelites. Not the "Jews." The people. Especially those outside the city. The ones who get dirty.
And what did Jesus do to sanctify them? He died. Done. Sanctification achieved. Sanctification specifically achieved for those who did nothing to deserve it but exist.
No, "get a job, then I'll die for you."
No, "clean up your life, then I'll become a living sacrifice for you."
No, "move to a safer area, be more like me, and then I'll die for you."
And what are we to do? Likewise.
Love without reserve.
Love without borders.
===
"Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God." Hebrews 13:16
Share. And remembered the preceding verses? The ones about "the people," those outside the city? Those who are not part of the politico-ethico-religion inside the city? That is, those who aren't "Jews," or, in our case, Christian? Share with them, too.
There are different kinds of living sacrifices. Sharing is just one of them.
===
The following is a bit judgmental. Please forgive my tone. Don't forgive the love that boiled into a bit of anger.
In Light of Maine's Recent "Defeat" of Gay Marriage
Consider Hebrews 13:4: "Let marriage be held in honor by all, and let the marriage bed be kept undefiled; for God will judge fornicators and adulterers." None of us can lay aside our biases, as much as we would like to. Therefore, I am not "objective" in my reading of this passage in light of Maine's recent vote on gay marriage.
But my bias on gay marriage doesn't matter right now. If you think homosexual couples are defiling the marriage bed by being homosexual, then your reading of a verse like Hebrews 13:4 says why you should be concerned: for love of the homosexuals. The author of Hebrews wants no one to be judged by God and therefore tells people to keep the marriage bed holy.
If you think homosexuality is wrong and you care for homosexuals, why place your concern in the ballot? Let's be honest, homosexuals are going to have sex whether you let them get married or not. Sex is marriage in the Bible, friends. When Jacob met Rebekah at the end of Genesis 24, he took her into a tent and they became married when they copulated. The only marital bed you can keep holy is your own. If you are concerned about the judgment of homosexuals--which means you care about the homosexuals, actively--then you need to befriend homosexuals. Really befriend them. Friendships don't start off with judgments, by the way.
After you love GLBT persons, then go to the voting booth. What will you accomplish there, anyways?
Atonement happened inside the sanctuary, but the leftovers went outside and were burnt. They were unclean; even the people burning the carcasses had to wash before entering the city (Lev. 16:27).
Hebrews tells us Jesus was sacrificed outside the city, where the unclean things happened. The language of "city" and "camp" separates the reforming remnant of the Israelite religion from the increasingly civil "religion." Hebrews separates Jesus from the politics of the city, from the politico-ethno-centricism surrounding Zion, because Jesus died outside the city in order to sanctify "the people" (ton laov, for you Greek readers out there). The people. Not the Judaeans. Not the Israelites. Not the "Jews." The people. Especially those outside the city. The ones who get dirty.
And what did Jesus do to sanctify them? He died. Done. Sanctification achieved. Sanctification specifically achieved for those who did nothing to deserve it but exist.
No, "get a job, then I'll die for you."
No, "clean up your life, then I'll become a living sacrifice for you."
No, "move to a safer area, be more like me, and then I'll die for you."
And what are we to do? Likewise.
Love without reserve.
Love without borders.
===
"Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God." Hebrews 13:16
Share. And remembered the preceding verses? The ones about "the people," those outside the city? Those who are not part of the politico-ethico-religion inside the city? That is, those who aren't "Jews," or, in our case, Christian? Share with them, too.
There are different kinds of living sacrifices. Sharing is just one of them.
===
The following is a bit judgmental. Please forgive my tone. Don't forgive the love that boiled into a bit of anger.
In Light of Maine's Recent "Defeat" of Gay Marriage
Consider Hebrews 13:4: "Let marriage be held in honor by all, and let the marriage bed be kept undefiled; for God will judge fornicators and adulterers." None of us can lay aside our biases, as much as we would like to. Therefore, I am not "objective" in my reading of this passage in light of Maine's recent vote on gay marriage.
But my bias on gay marriage doesn't matter right now. If you think homosexual couples are defiling the marriage bed by being homosexual, then your reading of a verse like Hebrews 13:4 says why you should be concerned: for love of the homosexuals. The author of Hebrews wants no one to be judged by God and therefore tells people to keep the marriage bed holy.
If you think homosexuality is wrong and you care for homosexuals, why place your concern in the ballot? Let's be honest, homosexuals are going to have sex whether you let them get married or not. Sex is marriage in the Bible, friends. When Jacob met Rebekah at the end of Genesis 24, he took her into a tent and they became married when they copulated. The only marital bed you can keep holy is your own. If you are concerned about the judgment of homosexuals--which means you care about the homosexuals, actively--then you need to befriend homosexuals. Really befriend them. Friendships don't start off with judgments, by the way.
After you love GLBT persons, then go to the voting booth. What will you accomplish there, anyways?
What Could You Leave?
As many of us are wont to do, I'm thinking about when Jesus asked that man to sell everything he had and give the money to the poor (btw, I don't understand why Jesus didn't suggest that man give some of his nice things to the poor) (also, it is late and I'm not going to look up references, but I'm pretty sure this one story occurs in multiple gospels).
I am glad many of us contemplate this story so often, even if it is so seldom pleasant, if it is ever pleasant. Just as each baby is a unique human, so does each spiritual birth yield something new and being born again means something different for each of us (note, the born-again story only occurs in John 3). I am not born again the same way you are, even if we both said the same "sinner's prayer" when we were in VBS so many years ago.
Like rebirth, we probably all won't respond to this story in the same way. I'm not sure many stories are meant to be applied to every human being in the same way. I cannot tell you to sell everything, because I haven't. But, I most definitely will not advise you against it. Anyways ...
The Jesus of the gospels asks people to leave a lot of things, from family to possessions. I was wondering, what would be some of the hardest things to leave, if God "asked" you?
First and foremost, it would hard for me to leave the people I love. I mean, it is hard enough to by spatially distant from people, let alone truly and indefinitely absent from them. Although, I guess sometimes we do have to leave people in a sense, when they die or disappear.
Next would be my laptop and my saxophone. Probably my laptop would be harder, because it allows me to communicate, write, and read. I could give up my books. I probably won't even bring them all with me when I move from Boiling Springs. But my laptop? That would be rough. And I don't even play that saxophone very often, but I love her so much. It is nice to just know she is there and know she'll sing with me, no matter how much I neglect her.
Oh, and somewhere in this top three, I need to include food or access to food. I mean, I "go hungry" sometimes, but I'm a fan of eating. Some people drink, others smoke, different ones take drugs, and still others have different addictions--from sex to cutting. I enjoy food. Taste is a gift from God, my friends. And, friends, since I like almost every food, I have been blessed!
What's your top three?
I am glad many of us contemplate this story so often, even if it is so seldom pleasant, if it is ever pleasant. Just as each baby is a unique human, so does each spiritual birth yield something new and being born again means something different for each of us (note, the born-again story only occurs in John 3). I am not born again the same way you are, even if we both said the same "sinner's prayer" when we were in VBS so many years ago.
Like rebirth, we probably all won't respond to this story in the same way. I'm not sure many stories are meant to be applied to every human being in the same way. I cannot tell you to sell everything, because I haven't. But, I most definitely will not advise you against it. Anyways ...
The Jesus of the gospels asks people to leave a lot of things, from family to possessions. I was wondering, what would be some of the hardest things to leave, if God "asked" you?
First and foremost, it would hard for me to leave the people I love. I mean, it is hard enough to by spatially distant from people, let alone truly and indefinitely absent from them. Although, I guess sometimes we do have to leave people in a sense, when they die or disappear.
Next would be my laptop and my saxophone. Probably my laptop would be harder, because it allows me to communicate, write, and read. I could give up my books. I probably won't even bring them all with me when I move from Boiling Springs. But my laptop? That would be rough. And I don't even play that saxophone very often, but I love her so much. It is nice to just know she is there and know she'll sing with me, no matter how much I neglect her.
Oh, and somewhere in this top three, I need to include food or access to food. I mean, I "go hungry" sometimes, but I'm a fan of eating. Some people drink, others smoke, different ones take drugs, and still others have different addictions--from sex to cutting. I enjoy food. Taste is a gift from God, my friends. And, friends, since I like almost every food, I have been blessed!
What's your top three?
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Highlights from Goodman E-mails
I scrolled randomly to a point in my e-mail inbox, just wasting time. I happened across a few e-mails from Dr. Goodman and then searched for all of our correspondence so I could share with all of you, some highlights. A little later, I would really like to share some interactions we had in an on-line forum Dr. Goodman organized for one of our classes (a class Dr. Goodman tried hard to convince me to take, as you'll read below).
After reading through these, I'm not sure I'll delete many more e-mails.
===
10/10/07, 3PM
"Students usually want to talk and they learn better when they interact with the subject. But if discussions are poorly framed and overly broad (e.g., “What do you think about that?” or “How do you feel about this?”) then they don’t really further our understanding all that much. The questions need to be tighter, more focused, and more purposeful, if that makes sense."
Goodman always asked good questions and always encouraged his students to do so. I still don't ask good questions, but I consistently try to reach his standards. This same e-mail reflected an amazing memory as Goodman referred multiple times to things I had said during class discussion, things I probably didn't even remember saying.
===
12/10/07 1:20PM
"Your total class participation grade for the semester (25% of your final course grade) is a 107 (outlandish, I know! But that’s the average for a 116 quiz average and a 98 seminar discussion average)."
Goodman gives extra-credit opportunities and always made a big deal about it when somebody received the extra credit, but obviously didn't need it. It amused me.
===
12/12/07 7:49AM
"Someday, when you’re universally hailed as the successor to Jacques Derrida, I’d like to be able to pull out my grade book from Fall ’07 and say, “Here’s what Mr. Genius did in my class oh so many years ago. Deconstruct this!”
And with that, I thrust my middle finger in the air…"
However, I'm sure he wouldn't thrust his middle finger in the air. What would his mother think?
===
12/13/07 8:06AM
"By the way, I saw Into the Wild last night. Do you know the story? You may have read the book (I haven’t). Fascinating. A 22 year-old young man graduates from Emory, sends his life’s savings to Oxfam, and quite intentionally disappears from his family to escape society. He spends a couple of years drifting west. His ultimate goal is to make it to Alaska to live off the land, which he does but with tragic consequences. It’s a true story, but I didn’t remember it (happened in 1992). Anyway, thought of you several times in the movie. Lots of literary and philosophical currents to it (more in the book, from what I’ve gathered; I came home and spent a couple of hours reading more about the story).
Hope you have a great Christmas. Are you heading to Maine ?"
A movie that made him think of me now makes me think of him. I'm not always sure what made him think of me, but I treasure the thought that it did. I remember being a bit surprised with the end of that e-mail. I was often pleasantly taken aback when Dr. G breached the professor-student relationship with words of friendship.
===
04/09/08 11:20AM
"Not sure if you've ever come across this group, but their monthly newsletter is always interesting and thought provoking. I'm not even clear about who they are--I think they're "progressive evangelicals." I'm impressed with how they engage culture, philosophy, and literature. And their stuff looks smart! So sorry to add another email to your inbox, but I thought you might be intrigued by this outfit (though this issue of their newsletter doesn't look as good as other issues have looked)."
===
04/10/08 8:51AM
"And I will remember earnestly in my prayers and best wishes (I don’t always differentiate between the two, you know?) in the days and weeks ahead. I promise. You’re a gifted guy and super-important to this community and to a lot of people in this community, myself being one of them. Anything that I can do to help share the burden, please know I’m more than willing to do so.
Blessings, friend."
Priceless.
===
08/04/08 11:19AM
"Hope you’re enjoying your summer—hard to believe we start it up again in just a couple of weeks, huh?!?
Any chance you’ve changed your mind about participating in the Jewish-Christian Relations Travel Study class this Fall? Never hurts to ask!
[...]
I’m hoping to finish the course syllabus this week and, while working on it, I thought I’d see if there was any possibility that you might reconsider and decide to join us for our week on the road in October. If not, I certainly understand. I ask not to bother you but only to indicate my confidence in how much you’d have to contribute to our experience."
===
After telling Dr. Goodman I would take the class ...
08/14/08 1:02PM
"Well, this is the best news I’ve heard all day! Glad you’re in and looking forward to your contributions to the class. If there’s anything I can do along the way to help, don’t hesitate to ask, ok?"
===
12/08/08 12:27PM
"Just a note about our final exam tomorrow night. I’d like to bypass a traditional exam or take-home writing assignment (you have done a decent amount of writing and reading this semester—I don’t really see the point in asking you to write-up rehearsals of material we’ve already covered just for the sake of a final exam assignment)."
Finals are often a waste of time. Goodman didn't waste time.
===
After we took the non-traditional final exam referenced in the previous e-mail ...
12/10/08 11:26AM
"The peer-grading for your final exam performance was, as you would guess, generous! One student who shall remain nameless wrote this note at the bottom of his/her grade sheet: “I can’t give anybody less than an ‘A.’ They all got up there and did the best they could.” Imagine a heart patient adopting that mindset with his heart surgeon, or an Olympic judge approaching her evaluation of a gymnast that way!! Some of you are just too nice for your own good!"
After reading through these, I'm not sure I'll delete many more e-mails.
===
10/10/07, 3PM
"Students usually want to talk and they learn better when they interact with the subject. But if discussions are poorly framed and overly broad (e.g., “What do you think about that?” or “How do you feel about this?”) then they don’t really further our understanding all that much. The questions need to be tighter, more focused, and more purposeful, if that makes sense."
Goodman always asked good questions and always encouraged his students to do so. I still don't ask good questions, but I consistently try to reach his standards. This same e-mail reflected an amazing memory as Goodman referred multiple times to things I had said during class discussion, things I probably didn't even remember saying.
===
12/10/07 1:20PM
"Your total class participation grade for the semester (25% of your final course grade) is a 107 (outlandish, I know! But that’s the average for a 116 quiz average and a 98 seminar discussion average)."
Goodman gives extra-credit opportunities and always made a big deal about it when somebody received the extra credit, but obviously didn't need it. It amused me.
===
12/12/07 7:49AM
"Someday, when you’re universally hailed as the successor to Jacques Derrida, I’d like to be able to pull out my grade book from Fall ’07 and say, “Here’s what Mr. Genius did in my class oh so many years ago. Deconstruct this!”
And with that, I thrust my middle finger in the air…"
However, I'm sure he wouldn't thrust his middle finger in the air. What would his mother think?
===
12/13/07 8:06AM
"By the way, I saw Into the Wild last night. Do you know the story? You may have read the book (I haven’t). Fascinating. A 22 year-old young man graduates from Emory, sends his life’s savings to Oxfam, and quite intentionally disappears from his family to escape society. He spends a couple of years drifting west. His ultimate goal is to make it to Alaska to live off the land, which he does but with tragic consequences. It’s a true story, but I didn’t remember it (happened in 1992). Anyway, thought of you several times in the movie. Lots of literary and philosophical currents to it (more in the book, from what I’ve gathered; I came home and spent a couple of hours reading more about the story).
Hope you have a great Christmas. Are you heading to Maine ?"
A movie that made him think of me now makes me think of him. I'm not always sure what made him think of me, but I treasure the thought that it did. I remember being a bit surprised with the end of that e-mail. I was often pleasantly taken aback when Dr. G breached the professor-student relationship with words of friendship.
===
04/09/08 11:20AM
"Not sure if you've ever come across this group, but their monthly newsletter is always interesting and thought provoking. I'm not even clear about who they are--I think they're "progressive evangelicals." I'm impressed with how they engage culture, philosophy, and literature. And their stuff looks smart! So sorry to add another email to your inbox, but I thought you might be intrigued by this outfit (though this issue of their newsletter doesn't look as good as other issues have looked)."
===
04/10/08 8:51AM
"And I will remember earnestly in my prayers and best wishes (I don’t always differentiate between the two, you know?) in the days and weeks ahead. I promise. You’re a gifted guy and super-important to this community and to a lot of people in this community, myself being one of them. Anything that I can do to help share the burden, please know I’m more than willing to do so.
Blessings, friend."
Priceless.
===
08/04/08 11:19AM
"Hope you’re enjoying your summer—hard to believe we start it up again in just a couple of weeks, huh?!?
Any chance you’ve changed your mind about participating in the Jewish-Christian Relations Travel Study class this Fall? Never hurts to ask!
[...]
I’m hoping to finish the course syllabus this week and, while working on it, I thought I’d see if there was any possibility that you might reconsider and decide to join us for our week on the road in October. If not, I certainly understand. I ask not to bother you but only to indicate my confidence in how much you’d have to contribute to our experience."
===
After telling Dr. Goodman I would take the class ...
08/14/08 1:02PM
"Well, this is the best news I’ve heard all day! Glad you’re in and looking forward to your contributions to the class. If there’s anything I can do along the way to help, don’t hesitate to ask, ok?"
===
12/08/08 12:27PM
"Just a note about our final exam tomorrow night. I’d like to bypass a traditional exam or take-home writing assignment (you have done a decent amount of writing and reading this semester—I don’t really see the point in asking you to write-up rehearsals of material we’ve already covered just for the sake of a final exam assignment)."
Finals are often a waste of time. Goodman didn't waste time.
===
After we took the non-traditional final exam referenced in the previous e-mail ...
12/10/08 11:26AM
"The peer-grading for your final exam performance was, as you would guess, generous! One student who shall remain nameless wrote this note at the bottom of his/her grade sheet: “I can’t give anybody less than an ‘A.’ They all got up there and did the best they could.” Imagine a heart patient adopting that mindset with his heart surgeon, or an Olympic judge approaching her evaluation of a gymnast that way!! Some of you are just too nice for your own good!"
Monday, October 5, 2009
The Glad Game III
Every once and while, I take a cue from Pollyanna, thanks to a friend of mine, Ms. Jennifer Walker. Another friend, Ms. Jessica Heath, has tried to show me the benefits of this game, whether she knows it or not. So, today I'm taking the much needed time to play the glad game. Please, feel free to play along. To play, you just list things that make you glad. I write a little something-something about most of them, because it makes me even more glad.
1. The Wehmuellers. I went to the "early service" at my church today, the one with the "contemporary" music. I haven't been to that service very frequently since I started preparing for the fall semester at work. Two of the musicians are teenage brothers. Andrew plays the bass and Eric plays the drums. Eric and Andrew are pretty cool in my book. When they were done playing their music, they came at sat next to me. It made me feel super special.
2. Getting slapped on the knee by an man in his 70s. John Campbell is a retired pastor in my church and he has been attending the same small group I attend at church. We haven't interacted very much, which is probably largely the fault of my shy side. I haven't warmed up to everyone just yet, but I'm starting to. Tonight we interacted a little during the discussion time. Near the end, John was trying to summarize something he read in Romans 8. At the time, I couldn't recall what exactly he was talking about in Romans, but I thought I had picked up on what he was saying. When he was done, I said, "I like that. It's that born-again thing," and his face began to light up as I continued, "but not at one point, but your whole life." John shifted in his chair and slapped my knee, grunting a loud noise of approval, his face beaming. Another lady started speaking after, and although my gaze shifted towards her, I noticed John's eyes lingering at me, still pleased. At the next lull in the conversation, he told me I was the presence of God for him tonight, because I was listening to him and managed to capture what he was saying. I think I may have missed something in what he said that time or I simply didn't understand why he was so pleased, but it was enough just to see him so happy, to make the connection with hand and mind. It was beautiful. God touched each of us through the other.
3. Friends, of course! I think I've mentioned friends the last two times I played the glad game in the blogosphere. But they're just so awesome! Today I was fortunate enough to have a bunch of them accompany me to church, another joined me for lunch, and then a bunch came over and had a meeting in my apartment. Yesterday a few just stopped by to say hello. It was great. At this time in my life, these are the sorts of interactions I crave and I need. Sometimes you are blessed to look at a part of your life and say, "This is just what I need." Most of the time you can only utter that phrase when reflecting on the past. Sometimes, those times when joy surprises you, you can say it as it happens. I've been saying it a lot lately. Thanks, friends, whether I mentioned you by name or not.
4. My tattoo. I really like having my tattoo. I enjoy it when my shorts move just enough for my tattoo to sneak out and see the light. It makes me smile. I like art. I like art on me. I like being reminded I, too, am art.
5. Interpretive communities. Interpreting is fun. I think it is an art form. If not, it is at least part of the meaning-discovering (meaning-making?) process. Fun as it is to do sitting alone, working in community with authors, it is also great to interpret with people sitting in the same room. Lately, people have asked me some really good questions, causing me to think a lot. I like talking with those people about those questions, because we interpret life and texts together. How great to live in community! To investigate what is important to us and to bring our diverse and similar experiences and minds together! I've also really enjoyed this small group at my church. We're interpreting a lot together. I really enjoy being in community with people so much older than me. A couple of them aren't so much older, one is the same age, more or less, but three of them are a lot older. And they're offering a lot of life experience--and listening to me, too. It is awesome to respect and be respected by them. I love it.
6. Pandora. Pandora has let me love music I don't own. Modest Mouse, one of Dr. Goodman's favorites. Ingrid Michaelson. Norah Jones. Regina Spektor. Ben Folds. The Weepies. Jack Johnson. Sinatra. Ella Fitgerald. Louis Armstrong. John Coltrane. Coconut Records. The White Stripes.
7. T'ai chi.
8. Learning to love people and doing it.
9. Seeing beautiful people. Have I mentioned I have beautiful friends, beautiful acquaintances, beautiful family, and beautiful residents? How did I end up knowing so many good-looking people?
10. Sharing with my friends ten things that make me glad.
1. The Wehmuellers. I went to the "early service" at my church today, the one with the "contemporary" music. I haven't been to that service very frequently since I started preparing for the fall semester at work. Two of the musicians are teenage brothers. Andrew plays the bass and Eric plays the drums. Eric and Andrew are pretty cool in my book. When they were done playing their music, they came at sat next to me. It made me feel super special.
2. Getting slapped on the knee by an man in his 70s. John Campbell is a retired pastor in my church and he has been attending the same small group I attend at church. We haven't interacted very much, which is probably largely the fault of my shy side. I haven't warmed up to everyone just yet, but I'm starting to. Tonight we interacted a little during the discussion time. Near the end, John was trying to summarize something he read in Romans 8. At the time, I couldn't recall what exactly he was talking about in Romans, but I thought I had picked up on what he was saying. When he was done, I said, "I like that. It's that born-again thing," and his face began to light up as I continued, "but not at one point, but your whole life." John shifted in his chair and slapped my knee, grunting a loud noise of approval, his face beaming. Another lady started speaking after, and although my gaze shifted towards her, I noticed John's eyes lingering at me, still pleased. At the next lull in the conversation, he told me I was the presence of God for him tonight, because I was listening to him and managed to capture what he was saying. I think I may have missed something in what he said that time or I simply didn't understand why he was so pleased, but it was enough just to see him so happy, to make the connection with hand and mind. It was beautiful. God touched each of us through the other.
3. Friends, of course! I think I've mentioned friends the last two times I played the glad game in the blogosphere. But they're just so awesome! Today I was fortunate enough to have a bunch of them accompany me to church, another joined me for lunch, and then a bunch came over and had a meeting in my apartment. Yesterday a few just stopped by to say hello. It was great. At this time in my life, these are the sorts of interactions I crave and I need. Sometimes you are blessed to look at a part of your life and say, "This is just what I need." Most of the time you can only utter that phrase when reflecting on the past. Sometimes, those times when joy surprises you, you can say it as it happens. I've been saying it a lot lately. Thanks, friends, whether I mentioned you by name or not.
4. My tattoo. I really like having my tattoo. I enjoy it when my shorts move just enough for my tattoo to sneak out and see the light. It makes me smile. I like art. I like art on me. I like being reminded I, too, am art.
5. Interpretive communities. Interpreting is fun. I think it is an art form. If not, it is at least part of the meaning-discovering (meaning-making?) process. Fun as it is to do sitting alone, working in community with authors, it is also great to interpret with people sitting in the same room. Lately, people have asked me some really good questions, causing me to think a lot. I like talking with those people about those questions, because we interpret life and texts together. How great to live in community! To investigate what is important to us and to bring our diverse and similar experiences and minds together! I've also really enjoyed this small group at my church. We're interpreting a lot together. I really enjoy being in community with people so much older than me. A couple of them aren't so much older, one is the same age, more or less, but three of them are a lot older. And they're offering a lot of life experience--and listening to me, too. It is awesome to respect and be respected by them. I love it.
6. Pandora. Pandora has let me love music I don't own. Modest Mouse, one of Dr. Goodman's favorites. Ingrid Michaelson. Norah Jones. Regina Spektor. Ben Folds. The Weepies. Jack Johnson. Sinatra. Ella Fitgerald. Louis Armstrong. John Coltrane. Coconut Records. The White Stripes.
7. T'ai chi.
8. Learning to love people and doing it.
9. Seeing beautiful people. Have I mentioned I have beautiful friends, beautiful acquaintances, beautiful family, and beautiful residents? How did I end up knowing so many good-looking people?
10. Sharing with my friends ten things that make me glad.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The Sign of Jonah (Sermon 10/04/09)
Matthew 12:38-42, 16:1-4; Luke 11:29-32
The Sign of Jonah?
We're not talking political-rally signs. No signs saying "Vote for so-and-so for such-and-such."
We're not talking ASL.
We're talking a signifier signifying a signified. A reader interacting with a signifier to see how and what can be signified. The process of meaning, however (im)possible.
Words are signs. The word "sign" means different things, as just shown. Consider the word "literally," too. If I tell you all I "literally" ate a whole pie last night, you'll understand the signifier "literally" to mean I actually ate a whole pie. On the other hand, If I say, "I literally ate 20 million pies last night," then you're going to understand "literally" to mean quite the opposite of what it signified in the previous example. Signs don't always mean one thing. Sometimes they mean one thing or another. Sometimes they mean multiple things at the same time to different people.
Three times in the gospels, Jesus mentions the "sign of Jonah." And as the gospels are wont to do, none of these stories are the same. In two of these instances, Jesus is asked for a sign--something to point to Jesus' identity and mission. Each time the sign of Jonah is mentioned, it is surrounded by stories of a compassionate and teaching Jesus and stories evoking questions of Jesus' identity--is he of God or the devil?
The sign of Jonah is juxtaposed with these other signs, signs that reveal his glory, as the Gospel of John puts it (2:11). Although the sign of Jonah points to the same things these other signs point to, it is a different sort of sign as it specifically alludes to a book of the Bible whereas the other signs are provisions of food for the hungry, the healing of the lame and sick, the exorcism of the demon possessed, and such.
In Matthew 12, Jesus explains the sign of Jonah as foreshadowing his death and resurrection: "just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the son of man will be in the heart of the earth" (v. 40). But the sign of Jonah is not just about the fish.
In Luke, Jesus describes the sign a little differently. Jesus says, "just as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so the son of man will be to this generation" (11:30). Whereas Jesus actually explained the sign in Matthew, in Luke, he only complicates the matter further, comparing the sign of Jonah to the sign of the son of man.
Here and in Matthew, the sign of Jonah is somehow wrapped up with the people from Nineveh and their repentance. Jesus isn't telling us everything, expecting us to know more about the story of Jonah. So, let's take a deeper look by reading the whole story--it's short. Feel free to read along if you like. It's one of those small books near the end of the Old Testament: "... Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, ..." Don't be ashamed to look in the table of contents to help you find it.
As I read, pay attention to things that are weird. Jonah is a weird story, I think. I think we are drawn into the story of Jonah by being forced to explain things the story leaves unexplained--what I call filling in the gaps.
Read Jonah.
We've already heard an explanation from Matthew about the sign from the first half of Jonah's story, so I'm going to focus on the latter part of the story, which is just as fishy as the first if you ask me.
Why did Jonah deliver such a short, harsh message? The message in the book leaves a little bit to be desired. Did Jonah really deliver the whole message and nothing but the message that God gave him? Or does the book give us a summary of what Jonah said?
"Forty days and Nineveh is overturned!" Not really the most eloquent of sermons. No hope. No call to repentance. Why even deliver the message? Why give them a timeline? Since when is the God of Israel--Jonah's God and our God--a sadist? Certainly God didn't want the Ninevites to run around town panicking for forty days as they await their ineluctable doom.
I just can't imagine God sent Jonah only to bring news of destruction. Maybe Jonah didn't learn his lesson after the fish and doesn't say what God wants, or maybe the book emphasizes or summarizes Jonah's message. I don't know. But, whatever Jonah said, I doubt it was all rainbows and butterflies, but in spite of Jonah's message, God still held out hope for the Ninevites.
And so did the Ninevites. After one day of a depressing message, the whole city somehow manages to repent. I have no clue how word got to the whole town without someone tweeting, updating their facebook status, or taking the story to the weekend update. What exactly compelled them to believe? What compelled them to fast and wear sackcloth? Did their discomfort and hunger grab God's attention by proving their genuineness? Did it prove genuineness to the community, thus holding each other accountable? Maybe a little of both?
Here's a better question: Why did they make the animals fast and wear sackcloth? Was their too much gossip going on in the barnyard? Too much oppression? Maybe the white sheep were treating the black sheep according to some poor stereotypes. Maybe the bulls wouldn't associate with the steers. And surely the ostriches were ostracized.
Cheesy puns aside, God's reaction is crazier than animals being forced to fast and wear sackcloth because of a message of destruction from an angry prophet who probably smells like fish guts.
According to Hebrew scripture, repentance involves sacrifices and in order to be in God's favor you have to obey the law, be circumcised, and engage in worship at the temple. The Ninevites likely had little knowledge of Israel's covenant relationship with God and likely stayed ignorant of that relationship and the subsequent laws. And God still accepted their repentance. And boy did it make Jonah mad.
God wasn't bound by how Jonah read scripture, even the straightforward parts. Regardless of what Jonah thought, God knew about God's love. God knows everyone is redeemable. Despite God's love wasn't emphasized in Jonah's message, it was still given away freely and in abundance. It seems our God is a God who refrains from destroying the penitent, even when the penitent aren't even completely sure what they are repenting from and how to repent from it.
While Jonah preached hellfire and brimstone, God was singing, "Come just as you are." And brothers and sisters, let me tell you Jonah didn't like that hymn one bit. He was irate. He wanted Nineveh to be destroyed or at least to have to respond to God the same way Israel did. He didn't want to hear "come just as you are," he wanted to hear, "come just the way I asked Jonah and Israel to come."
In all this anger and bitterness, what kind of sign was Jonah to Nineveh? A sign of human judgment and nonacceptance? A sign of trying to put God into a theological box? A sign of reluctance to accept God's actions?
I hope not.
There must be more.
Yes, Jonah had a grudge against Nineveh, a grudge that somehow put him in an awkward situation. Nineveh was part of this empire that bullied Israel and eventually took them over, forcing the people to leave their homes. I don't think we can completely understand that sort of grudge today. Nations, empires, nationalism, and patriotism operate too differently for us to understand Jonah by comparing Israel to the US. For Jonah, his ethnicity was his citizenship and his religion. Being Hebrew meant being Israelite and being in a covenant with God. For us, ethnicity does not necessarily mean you're from the US and neither does it mean you are Christian. We have to get at Jonah another way.
I think Jonah was called to minister to those who had wronged both him and those he loved. And not just those who wronged him and those he loved. He was called also to those he associated with them--people who did nothing wrong but be born who Ninevites. Jonah was sent to those who validated a stereotype and those who simply wore the label.
It's like God calling us to minister to any group of people we judge based on a stereotype. Since I don't know any of you, I can't say who is your Nineveh. And even if I knew you, it isn't my place to judge. But knowing qualities of Nineveh, I can give a few possibilities.
For some of us, it could be another race, nationality, or skin tone. For others, it could be those affiliated with a certain political party. Maybe it is people who dress a certain way or listen to certain music. People who use words we might not use. It could be people with a certain amount of money--rich or poor. Perhaps it is anyone whose ever been to jail--thieves, murderers, sexual offenders. It might be people who believe things you don't believe, do things you don't do, or approve of things you don't approve of.
Part of the message of Jonah's story is the redeemability of all humanity. No matter what we do, we still carry the image of God. That, my friends, is what I see as the sign of Jonah and the sign that Jonah became to Nineveh. He walked in despising those around him, preaching hellfire and brimstone, but found out God loves the people Jonah doesn't. And no matter what Jonah did, no matter what he said, God still showed mercy to a whole city of people outside of God's covenant relationship with Israel.
And so did Jesus, praise God. Without him, we may never have realized how far God's love extends and we wouldn't be part of a different covenant relationship with the of God Israel. Jesus ministered to those who were the sores on Israel's society: the tax collectors who cheated and lied; the prostitutes, adulterers, and others sexually different from the norm; the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, and the other elite who thought they knew everything about God; the Samaritans, Romans, and other Gentiles who, according to much of the Old Testament, had no earthly right to be loved by God; and Jesus also went to the ever ambiguous "the sinners," which, as we know, is everyone. Everyone. Not just people who respond to God the way we expect them to. Everyone. Literally.
Now, as Jesus says in Luke, "something greater than Jonah is here" (11:32) and the story of the Ninevites bears witness to it. God loves whom God loves and we can't do a thing about it, no matter how much we pout and misunderstand.
Jesus referred to himself as the something greater than Jonah. After his ascension, another thing greater than Jonah came: the Spirit who dwells within us.
The Spirit dwells within us, Church. Because of that indwelling, today, we are the something greater than Jonah. We embody Jesus the Christ. We are called to be filled with the spirit: to die to ourselves and be raised from the belly of a sea monster, to love--to really love with our actions--the Ninevites wherever they be and whoever they are, which is everybody, everywhere.
We can judge however we want,
but God's love isn't bound by us.
Our judgments destroy,
but the Spirit heals all.
No matter how we judge them,
Jesus still loves them.
The Sign of Jonah?
We're not talking political-rally signs. No signs saying "Vote for so-and-so for such-and-such."
We're not talking ASL.
We're talking a signifier signifying a signified. A reader interacting with a signifier to see how and what can be signified. The process of meaning, however (im)possible.
Words are signs. The word "sign" means different things, as just shown. Consider the word "literally," too. If I tell you all I "literally" ate a whole pie last night, you'll understand the signifier "literally" to mean I actually ate a whole pie. On the other hand, If I say, "I literally ate 20 million pies last night," then you're going to understand "literally" to mean quite the opposite of what it signified in the previous example. Signs don't always mean one thing. Sometimes they mean one thing or another. Sometimes they mean multiple things at the same time to different people.
Three times in the gospels, Jesus mentions the "sign of Jonah." And as the gospels are wont to do, none of these stories are the same. In two of these instances, Jesus is asked for a sign--something to point to Jesus' identity and mission. Each time the sign of Jonah is mentioned, it is surrounded by stories of a compassionate and teaching Jesus and stories evoking questions of Jesus' identity--is he of God or the devil?
The sign of Jonah is juxtaposed with these other signs, signs that reveal his glory, as the Gospel of John puts it (2:11). Although the sign of Jonah points to the same things these other signs point to, it is a different sort of sign as it specifically alludes to a book of the Bible whereas the other signs are provisions of food for the hungry, the healing of the lame and sick, the exorcism of the demon possessed, and such.
In Matthew 12, Jesus explains the sign of Jonah as foreshadowing his death and resurrection: "just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the son of man will be in the heart of the earth" (v. 40). But the sign of Jonah is not just about the fish.
In Luke, Jesus describes the sign a little differently. Jesus says, "just as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so the son of man will be to this generation" (11:30). Whereas Jesus actually explained the sign in Matthew, in Luke, he only complicates the matter further, comparing the sign of Jonah to the sign of the son of man.
Here and in Matthew, the sign of Jonah is somehow wrapped up with the people from Nineveh and their repentance. Jesus isn't telling us everything, expecting us to know more about the story of Jonah. So, let's take a deeper look by reading the whole story--it's short. Feel free to read along if you like. It's one of those small books near the end of the Old Testament: "... Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, ..." Don't be ashamed to look in the table of contents to help you find it.
As I read, pay attention to things that are weird. Jonah is a weird story, I think. I think we are drawn into the story of Jonah by being forced to explain things the story leaves unexplained--what I call filling in the gaps.
Read Jonah.
We've already heard an explanation from Matthew about the sign from the first half of Jonah's story, so I'm going to focus on the latter part of the story, which is just as fishy as the first if you ask me.
Why did Jonah deliver such a short, harsh message? The message in the book leaves a little bit to be desired. Did Jonah really deliver the whole message and nothing but the message that God gave him? Or does the book give us a summary of what Jonah said?
"Forty days and Nineveh is overturned!" Not really the most eloquent of sermons. No hope. No call to repentance. Why even deliver the message? Why give them a timeline? Since when is the God of Israel--Jonah's God and our God--a sadist? Certainly God didn't want the Ninevites to run around town panicking for forty days as they await their ineluctable doom.
I just can't imagine God sent Jonah only to bring news of destruction. Maybe Jonah didn't learn his lesson after the fish and doesn't say what God wants, or maybe the book emphasizes or summarizes Jonah's message. I don't know. But, whatever Jonah said, I doubt it was all rainbows and butterflies, but in spite of Jonah's message, God still held out hope for the Ninevites.
And so did the Ninevites. After one day of a depressing message, the whole city somehow manages to repent. I have no clue how word got to the whole town without someone tweeting, updating their facebook status, or taking the story to the weekend update. What exactly compelled them to believe? What compelled them to fast and wear sackcloth? Did their discomfort and hunger grab God's attention by proving their genuineness? Did it prove genuineness to the community, thus holding each other accountable? Maybe a little of both?
Here's a better question: Why did they make the animals fast and wear sackcloth? Was their too much gossip going on in the barnyard? Too much oppression? Maybe the white sheep were treating the black sheep according to some poor stereotypes. Maybe the bulls wouldn't associate with the steers. And surely the ostriches were ostracized.
Cheesy puns aside, God's reaction is crazier than animals being forced to fast and wear sackcloth because of a message of destruction from an angry prophet who probably smells like fish guts.
According to Hebrew scripture, repentance involves sacrifices and in order to be in God's favor you have to obey the law, be circumcised, and engage in worship at the temple. The Ninevites likely had little knowledge of Israel's covenant relationship with God and likely stayed ignorant of that relationship and the subsequent laws. And God still accepted their repentance. And boy did it make Jonah mad.
God wasn't bound by how Jonah read scripture, even the straightforward parts. Regardless of what Jonah thought, God knew about God's love. God knows everyone is redeemable. Despite God's love wasn't emphasized in Jonah's message, it was still given away freely and in abundance. It seems our God is a God who refrains from destroying the penitent, even when the penitent aren't even completely sure what they are repenting from and how to repent from it.
While Jonah preached hellfire and brimstone, God was singing, "Come just as you are." And brothers and sisters, let me tell you Jonah didn't like that hymn one bit. He was irate. He wanted Nineveh to be destroyed or at least to have to respond to God the same way Israel did. He didn't want to hear "come just as you are," he wanted to hear, "come just the way I asked Jonah and Israel to come."
In all this anger and bitterness, what kind of sign was Jonah to Nineveh? A sign of human judgment and nonacceptance? A sign of trying to put God into a theological box? A sign of reluctance to accept God's actions?
I hope not.
There must be more.
Yes, Jonah had a grudge against Nineveh, a grudge that somehow put him in an awkward situation. Nineveh was part of this empire that bullied Israel and eventually took them over, forcing the people to leave their homes. I don't think we can completely understand that sort of grudge today. Nations, empires, nationalism, and patriotism operate too differently for us to understand Jonah by comparing Israel to the US. For Jonah, his ethnicity was his citizenship and his religion. Being Hebrew meant being Israelite and being in a covenant with God. For us, ethnicity does not necessarily mean you're from the US and neither does it mean you are Christian. We have to get at Jonah another way.
I think Jonah was called to minister to those who had wronged both him and those he loved. And not just those who wronged him and those he loved. He was called also to those he associated with them--people who did nothing wrong but be born who Ninevites. Jonah was sent to those who validated a stereotype and those who simply wore the label.
It's like God calling us to minister to any group of people we judge based on a stereotype. Since I don't know any of you, I can't say who is your Nineveh. And even if I knew you, it isn't my place to judge. But knowing qualities of Nineveh, I can give a few possibilities.
For some of us, it could be another race, nationality, or skin tone. For others, it could be those affiliated with a certain political party. Maybe it is people who dress a certain way or listen to certain music. People who use words we might not use. It could be people with a certain amount of money--rich or poor. Perhaps it is anyone whose ever been to jail--thieves, murderers, sexual offenders. It might be people who believe things you don't believe, do things you don't do, or approve of things you don't approve of.
Part of the message of Jonah's story is the redeemability of all humanity. No matter what we do, we still carry the image of God. That, my friends, is what I see as the sign of Jonah and the sign that Jonah became to Nineveh. He walked in despising those around him, preaching hellfire and brimstone, but found out God loves the people Jonah doesn't. And no matter what Jonah did, no matter what he said, God still showed mercy to a whole city of people outside of God's covenant relationship with Israel.
And so did Jesus, praise God. Without him, we may never have realized how far God's love extends and we wouldn't be part of a different covenant relationship with the of God Israel. Jesus ministered to those who were the sores on Israel's society: the tax collectors who cheated and lied; the prostitutes, adulterers, and others sexually different from the norm; the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, and the other elite who thought they knew everything about God; the Samaritans, Romans, and other Gentiles who, according to much of the Old Testament, had no earthly right to be loved by God; and Jesus also went to the ever ambiguous "the sinners," which, as we know, is everyone. Everyone. Not just people who respond to God the way we expect them to. Everyone. Literally.
Now, as Jesus says in Luke, "something greater than Jonah is here" (11:32) and the story of the Ninevites bears witness to it. God loves whom God loves and we can't do a thing about it, no matter how much we pout and misunderstand.
Jesus referred to himself as the something greater than Jonah. After his ascension, another thing greater than Jonah came: the Spirit who dwells within us.
The Spirit dwells within us, Church. Because of that indwelling, today, we are the something greater than Jonah. We embody Jesus the Christ. We are called to be filled with the spirit: to die to ourselves and be raised from the belly of a sea monster, to love--to really love with our actions--the Ninevites wherever they be and whoever they are, which is everybody, everywhere.
We can judge however we want,
but God's love isn't bound by us.
Our judgments destroy,
but the Spirit heals all.
No matter how we judge them,
Jesus still loves them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
