Mark #2: Building Up our Neighbor Spiritually

Today, we come to the second mark of the church presented in Romans chapter 15 verses 1-6.  Verse 2 reads, “Each of us must please our neighbor for the good purpose of building up the neighbor.” 

On the surface, this looks to be rather simple.  Most world religions and philosophies teach that we should be kind and compassionate.  Most world religions and philosophies teach us to care for those in need and ease the needs of the poor and downtrodden.  Nearly every world religion and philosophy has some form of the teaching, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”  So, we as Christians are supposed to be nice people.  We are supposed to be kind people. We are supposed to treat others with such niceness and kindness.  That’s it, right.  End of sermon.  Done.  Let’s call it a day.

You knew it wouldn’t be that simple, didn’t you?  The Greek wording of this sentence adds a little bit of nuance.  A better reading would be this: Each of us must please our neighbor for the good purpose of building up the neighbor spiritually.  One of the marks of the church that first falls deeply in love with Jesus is the deep desire to build up our neighbors spiritually.

Now, first off, let me say that this does not excuse us from helping those who are in need.  There is wisdom in the statement that it’s awful hard to hear someone saying, “God loves you,” when your stomach is rumbling; you’re cold and shivering, and you have no place to sleep.  Furthermore, Jesus is very, very clear that when we feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, and visit the sick and imprisoned, we are feeding, clothing, and visiting him.  We must care for our neighbor’s physical needs, but we are called to care for our neighbor’s spiritual needs as well–to build up our neighbor spiritually.  This is where things can become complicated.

How do we build up our neighbor spiritually?  It’s easy to give someone something to eat when they are hungry.  It’s easy to give someone a drink when they are thirsty.  It’s easy to give someone clothing when they are naked.  It’s easy to visit someone when they are sick or in prison.  These needs are visible.  We can see them without difficulty.  But how do we build up our neighbor’s spirituality?  How do we help them grow in their relationship with God–and in particular grow in their relationship with Jesus Christ?  That’s not so easy, not so easy at all because we cannot see where people are at.  We cannot see if they even believe in God.  We cannot see how deeply they believe in Jesus Christ.  We don’t know where their faith is at; if they have faith at all; or even if they want to grow in their faith.  How can we begin to build up others spiritually if we cannot see where they are at?

Some of you may have heard the parable about the blind men and the elephant.  For those of you who haven’t let me tell it once more.  A group of blind men stumble upon an elephant in the jungle.  They all want to figure out what the elephant is like, so they each touch a piece of the elephant.  Afterwards, as the men continue their travels, they begin arguing what the elephant is like.  One who touched the tail argues, “The elephant is like a rope, long and stringy.”  One who touched the torso says, “The elephant is like a wall, solid and strong.”  One who touched the tusk says, “The elephant is like a spear, long and with a sharp point.”  One who touched the leg says, “The elephant is like a tree stump, short and stout.”  And on and on it goes as the men argue with one another what the elephant is like.  Now, this parable is usually used to talk about religion saying that each religion has part of the truth, but none has the full truth.  Don’t get too comfortable with that conclusion–it’s easily refutable.

But I don’t want to use that conclusion today.  What I would like to comment on is that oftentimes we do such things with one another when it comes to the faith life of another person.  We observe from afar.  We see someone going to church, and we assume that their faith is very strong and that they are a Christian.  We observe someone staying home every Sunday, and we infer that they have no faith.  We observe someone covered with tattoos and body piercings, and we think they are an atheist.  We observe someone clean cut and wearing a suit on Sunday morning, and we assume they are a deacon in a congregation.  Oh, this is just a short list.  We could add many other observations.  And oftentimes, we base our conclusions on just these observations.  Meanwhile, others make different observations and come to different conclusions.  Then, we end up like all of those blind men arguing on the roadside.

But here is a revolutionary thought–it’s not mine.  I actually heard a pastor by the name of Kevin DeYoung use it.  What if the elephant could talk?  What if the elephant could express itself?  What if the elephant had the capability of describing itself to you and telling you exactly what it was like?  How would that change the parable?

Well, if you refused to talk to the elephant, it wouldn’t change things much at all.  You’d still be left guessing, but if the elephant could talk, and you actually engaged the elephant, you might find out some very, very interesting things.  You might find out a whole lot more than you ever thought you knew. 

Now, I am certainly not trying to call our neighbors elephants.  God forbid!  That might cause a bit of a stir, but what I am suggesting, rather strongly, that in order to truly build up our neighbors spiritually, we have to get to know our neighbors.  I mean, really get to know our neighbors.  This isn’t a superficial, “Hey how are you?” kind of knowing.  This isn’t a, “I know your name, your address, and your phone number kind of relationship.”  This is an engagement so that we come to know the height, depth, and length of our neighbor’s relationship with God or lack of it.  For if we don’t know about our neighbor’s relationship with God, how can we even begin to build it up?

The answer is, “We can’t.”  Before I continue just a moment, let me please dispel one thing that sometimes arises at this point.  Sometimes, good intentioned people say, “But pastor, isn’t the church supposed to worry about growing the faith of its members?”  The answer to that is absolutely, positively yes!!  Indeed, the church is here to help the faith of its members grow, but let me add this note–Paul here is very intentional in his wording.  He uses the term neighbors after a long stretch of using the word brothers.  He changes the terminology because for him, brothers means fellow Christians.  He intentionally indicates here that as your faith grows and deepens, you no longer just look to your own growth and building up; you no longer just look to the building up of your fellow Christians, you look outside yourself and outside your church into your community to help others come into a relationship with Jesus Christ and grow into that relationship.

And so, the mark of a church that is growing in its relationship with Jesus Christ is that its members seek out people in the community; seeks out their neighbors to get to know them; to learn about them; to understand them as people; to come to love and cherish their relationship, and then to lead them to Jesus Christ or help them deepen their relationship with Jesus Christ.

I am reminded about the story of two literary giants.  Perhaps you have heard their names: J.R.R. Tolkein and C.S. Lewis.  Tolkein wrote The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.  C.S. Lewis wrote The Chronicles of Narnia, Mere Christianity, and a host of other well known Christian books.  What you may not know is that C.S. Lewis was originally an atheist.  He railed against Christianity and called it a myth like any Norse mythology.  False.  Untrue.  For five years, J.R.R. Tolkein talked with his friend C.S. Lewis.  For five years, Tolkein got to know Lewis; ate with him; drank with him; engaged him with conversation.  Then, on September 19, 1931, Lewis converted from atheism to theism.  Lewis came to believe in God.  But, Lewis did not convert to Christianity.  It was not until two years later that while staying up past 3 a.m. with Tolkein and another professor that C.S. Lewis came to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of the world.  For you mathematicians, you know that this took seven years.  Seven years of investing in a friend.  Of engaging.  Of questioning.  Of not becoming offended. Of caring.  Of genuine concern for the building up of the neighbor.

The question becomes, are we as a church; are we as individual Christians willing to invest so much time?  Are we willing to grow in our faith so that we can help others grow over such a long time?  Are we willing to be long term people in a short term world?  Are we willing to do what it takes to really and truly get to know our neighbors, understand where they are coming from, and truly seek their coming to know Jesus as Lord and Savior?  Will we be willing to invest in our neighbors like Jesus invested in us and continues to invest in us to help us grow?

For Jesus sought to win our hearts by dying for us when we least deserved it.  He did not coerce us with fear or anger, but with grace, mercy, and forgiveness.  Yes, He confronted us with our sin, but he did not hold that sin against us.  Instead, He took that sin upon Himself and paid the price for those sins by dying on the cross and facing hell for us.  He then showered us with hope as He showed us what awaits for us when we trust in Him–resurrection and the reversal of all evil.  And now, He walks with us daily living enthroned upon our hearts whispering to us of his love; whispering to us of his grace; whispering to us his guidance and continued support; whispering to us that no matter what we face in life, He will see us through and bring us to something glorious–the Kingdom of God.  It is this love that we are called to share.  It is this love that we are called to pass on to our neighbor.  It is this love that will build our neighbor up.  Amen.

What do You Live For?: Romans 6:1-14

Whatever you live for will drastically affect how you live.

Let me try and clarify that statement.  Whatever you live for will dramatically affect how you live your life and the things that you do.

In C.S. Lewis’ famous book The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Edmund meets the white witch.  Now, the white witch is the enemy of Narnia who has made it perpetual winter.  She asks Edmund if there is anything she can get for him, and he, being cold and hungry, asks for some Turkish Delight.  As you read the story, you can tell that this Turkish Delight isn’t just any ordinary Turkish Delight.  It is bewitched in some fashion, because once Edmund eats it, he cannot stop thinking about it.  He wants more and more, and he knows only the witch can provide it for him.  The desire for the Turkish Delight becomes so severe and consumes him so much, that he betrays his brother and sisters to obtain it.  He doesn’t care that his actions put his brother and sisters in peril.  He doesn’t care that he is helping the white witch maintain her control of Narnia.  He is consumed with Turkish Delight.  He is living for Turkish Delight.  And what he is living for is drastically affecting how he lives.

Now, admittedly, this is a fictional story, but it is not far from the truth.  You yourself probably know what it means to be living for something.  You know how it effects your behavior.  If you can’t see it in yourself, I know you can see it in others.  Parents who live for their children generally helicopter over them trying to protect them from anything that can harm them physically or emotionally–sometimes working even to get them better grades or put in classes they do not deserve to be in; or it causes them to confront coaches and demand playing time–time the kid doesn’t deserve.  Living for their children affects how they behave, and most of us have seen such examples.  Some people live for their paycheck.  They work harder and harder, putting in more and more hours increasing the amount in the box.  Soon, they are getting up before the break of day and staying at work long into the night neglecting housework, children, families and friends.  Living for their pay tremendously affects their lives.  There really is no other need to delve into more examples, is there?  Can you see in our world and in our society how what people live for dramatically affects how they live?  Please keep these thoughts in mind as we turn now to chapter six in the book of Romans.

We need to recap last week’s lesson for just a moment because this book all runs together.  Paul leaps from one point to the next building on the previous point.  If you don’t understand the previous point, you won’t understand the next one.  Last week, Paul left us with representative thought.  In the ancient world, oftentimes one person represented an entire nation, and whatever happened to that one person effected the entire nation.  Therefore, in battle, if a representative lost, then the entire nation lost and was labeled losers.  If the representative won, then the entire nation won and was labeled winners.  Paul argued that there are two representatives for the world–there is Adam who represents sin, death, and condemnation, and there is Jesus who represents forgiveness, life and justification.  Those who choose Adam as their representative continue to find sin, death, and condemnation.  Those who choose Christ as their representative find forgiveness, life, and justification–even to the point where Paul says that when the law made trespasses increase, the grace of God through Jesus Christ super-abounded!

Which leads us straight away to Paul’s question to begin chapter six: “What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound?”  Most scholars believe that Paul is dealing with an early criticism of the Gospel.  What incentive do you have for changing your behavior?  If God just forgives sin and enjoys forgiving sin, shouldn’t I just keep sinning so that God can keep forgiving?  Shouldn’t I keep sinning so that the glory of God’s grace can continue to be revealed?  One modern day critic even coined the phrase, “God likes to forgive.  I like to sin.  Therefore I should continue to sin and God can continue to forgive.  It’s a win/win proposition!”

Paul’s words are very, very strong.  “By no means!” he says.  Perhaps the English translation is a bit weak.  “God forbid!” would be adequate.  “You’ve got to be kidding me!” also would work.  “You must be stupid if you believe that!” is close.  Paul utterly rejects the idea because, as he then says, “How can we who died to sin go on living in it?”  In the next verses, Paul lays out his reasoning in the rest of chapter 6.  It takes the form of two arguments, and we will deal with the first one today.  Like last week, the argument is complex and wordy, so I will not be going verse by verse point by point.  Once again, I am going to try and encapsulate the argument and then show why it is important not only for Christians, but for those who might be outside the Christian faith.

Paul returns to his use of representative thought to promote his argument.  Remember, in representative thought, the thought that often dominated the ancient world, whatever happened to the representative happened to you.  If your representative lost.  You lost.  If your representative won, you won.  Paul applies this to the relationship that we have with Jesus Christ as our representative.

Paul essentially says, “Look, when you were baptized, you were joined to Christ.  He became your representative.”  Paul does not go into the details of how this happens.  He does not give us a play by play about how baptism somehow joins us to Christ.  He takes for granted that folks know this.  He takes for granted the fact that they know that somehow, mysteriously, sacramentally, when we are baptized, we are joined to Jesus Christ–He becomes our representative so that what happened to Jesus happens to us.  Let that statement sink in because it is crucial to Paul’s argument–what happened to Jesus happens to us.

I know that this is strange thought.  I know that it is tough for us to get our minds around this. We generally don’t think in this fashion.  It involves a shift in our thinking.  It means giving up power and control of our lives.  It means placing our entire life and being in Jesus.  We generally don’t like that. We generally like to hold onto our own lives and identities.  But Christianity isn’t about self-preservation and self-affirmation.  It’s about dying to self and rising to new life.  And Paul makes this point.

For he lays out what happened to Jesus and how it also affects us.  Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried, and then on the third day, He was resurrected.

Let’s work through this trying to get our heads around it.  Jesus was crucified and he died.  Paul says this means we have died as well.  Now, this is not a literal death for us.  Obviously, we are still walking, living, breathing, and moving.  So, this must mean we have died in some other fashion, and Paul lays this out by saying, “When you have died, you are freed from sin.”  Now, be careful here.  Last week, I reminded you that sin is not just the things we do.  Sin is also a power that moves and corrupts the world.  Everything is under its influence.  When you die, this power no longer has a hold over you. This power can no longer corrupt you.  This power can no longer influence you because, well, you are dead.  Nothing can actually harm you or otherwise.  Yes, you are dead, but you are free.  If Christ as your representative has died, then somehow you have died as well.  Therefore, you are freed from the power of sin.

Of course, this does not mean that you don’t sin.  You are not under the power of sin, but that power is still around.  It is still trying to exercise authority over you.  It is still trying to corrupt and warp you, but Paul asserts that it cannot dominate you if you don’t let it.  This is why Paul says in verse 11, “Consider yourselves dead to sin...”  The Greek is better translated, “Reckon yourselves dead to sin...”  This is an accounting term.  It means to add things up.  “If you are joined to Jesus, add it up.  See that he died.  See that you died.  See that death renders sin powerless.  Know that sin has no power over you unless you allow it.”   This is now why Paul also says, “Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. 13No longer present your members to sin as instruments of wickedness.”  Paul says you are no longer blindly under sin’s influence.  You can see it coming.  You can resist it.  But the key to resisting it also has to do with what you now live for.

This is the second part of Paul’s assertion here because not only have we been crucified, died, and buried with Christ. We have also been resurrected with Him.  Again, we need to see that Paul’s words have a dual function here.  They do not only point to the future.  They do not only tell us what will happen to us on that day when God the Father makes everything new.  They do not only point towards a future resurrection.  They also indicate that we experience resurrection life right now!  Just as Christ was raised–we are raised.  And Paul is very clear about what kind of resurrection life Christ lives.  “The life he lives, he lives to God.”  Paul is saying unequivocally that the resurrected life is concerned with God–adoring God, seeking God, growing in God, striving for the things of God, living for God.  And, with Christ as our representative, what happened to Him, happens to us.  We share in the resurrection life of living for God.  We strive to adore God, seek God, grow in God, strive for the things of God, and live for God!

Now, let me ask you this question: if you live for God, do you intentionally seek to sin?  If you live for God do you intentionally seek to do the things that He hates?  If you live for God, do you want to break His commands and statutes? Of course, you don’t.  You want to serve God.  You want to please God.  You want to do anything and everything in your power to promote Him and His kingdom.  This is what is at the heart of Paul’s final admonitions, “Present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments of righteousness.”  Why?  Because in doing so, you are living for God!  And if you are living for God, you don’t seek to sin so that grace may abound.  You seek to avoid sin because you know God abhors it.  If you are living for God, the last thing you want to do is sin because that dishonors the One you live for!

Before I go into why this is important, let me make a brief comment about verse 14.  Paul makes a bit of a shift here as he says, “14For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.”  One would expect that Paul would have continued his representative thought here and said, “since you are not under Adam but under grace.”  But he doesn’t.  There is a reason for this, and much of that reason will be outlined and dealt with in chapter 7.  We will wait until then to address it.  For the time being, let’s return to living for God, because this is crucial.

When you live for God, it means much more than simply that you no longer desire to sin.  Remember, what you live for drastically affects your behavior.  And when you live for anything else besides God, you will eventually find yourself in dire straights.  Now, I know that some of you would readily agree that there are certain things that if we were to live for then, that would lead to destructive behavior.  We have plenty of examples of such things: people who live for arguing; people who live for drugs; people who live for filling every selfish thought and desire.  But what about living for things we consider to be good?  What’s wrong with living for them?

Early on in this sermon, I talked about living for children and living for a paycheck.  Now, neither one of these things are bad.  In fact, kids are great.  I love mine dearly and would die for them.  I also love earning a paycheck.  I like being able to buy things.  I also love justice. I love peace.  I love people.  I love food and drink.  These are all good things.  But what happens when you make them the ultimate things?  What happens if you elevate them to the status of an idol?  I talked about that earlier.  When you live for your children, you can actually do more harm than good, and then when they go off to live their own lives, you will be empty, purposeless, and have no meaning in your life.  If your paycheck dominates your thoughts, you will become a workaholic and all other aspects of your life will suffer.  If you live for justice, you will be a tireless advocate for the poor and disenfranchised, and you will burn out having achieved very little to change the structures of the world.  You will also demonize those who you believe to be the oppressors and hold them in contempt.  If you live for people, you will constantly try to please them and make them happy until they suck every ounce of energy out of you.  Every single good thing that you try to live for will eventually do this to you.  Everything.  It may not be right away, but I guarantee you, it will happen.  Sin will corrupt even good things and lead to destruction if you live for them.

There is only one thing that will not be corrupted by sin. There is only one thing that will not suck the life and energy out of you.  There is only one thing to live for that will fill you with abundant life, joy, peace, and energy, and that is God.  He alone will not let you down. He alone will give you the proper perspective and view so that nothing else will consume you. He alone will pour Himself into you so that you will not burn out or be overwhelmed by the things of life.  He has already poured out His life for you on the cross and loved you with an amazing love.  He has already so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that all those who believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world not to condemn you but to save you.  When you live for Him, He will not allow you to perish, but He will continue to pour Himself back into you so that you may know the fullness of His love.  And your life will be drastically affected–in a very good way.  Amen.

A Family Intervention

    We all have that one relative.  You know the one I am talking about.  It’s generally the relative that you absolutely loved when you were a kid.  Maybe it was that crazy uncle or the cousin who was always doing risky stuff.  This relative always pushed the boundaries and brought some excitement into your life.  As a kid, you absolutely, positively loved it!  You couldn’t wait to see this particular relative, but as life moved on and you matured, you started viewing things a bit differently.  As you matured, you found out that your relative didn’t.  While you stopped acting like a child, your relative never did.  The risks actually became greater.  The behavior became more self destructive.  You wondered why you ever thought your kin was so cool.

    Sometimes, such family members begin to have very destructive behavior.  Sometimes they begin to drink heavily or delve into drugs.  Sometimes they become abusive.  Sometimes they begin gambling or neglecting themselves or the rest of their family.  In such cases, family members get together and work to change their loved one’s behavior.  We have such a word for this process.  It’s called an intervention.  These can be very important times in a family’s life.  They can bring healing and wholeness and restoration–not only for the one committing the destructive behavior, but for the entire family as a unit.  Interventions are sometimes very, very necessary.

    Jesus’ family thought so too.  Jesus’ family believed they needed to intervene in His life as well.  We have a very interesting bibilical snippet before us this morning from the book of Mark.  It’s actually two stories sandwiched together by the writer Mark.  Now, I personally believe Mark is a tremendous writer and storyteller.  I believe there is very much a purpose behind much of Mark’s writing.  Details are important to Mark as he conveys to us the story of Jesus’ life and teaching.  There is a reason Mark puts these two stories together.  He is trying to tell us something very important.

    As I said before, the story begins with Jesus’ family deciding they need to perform an intervention.  The translation from the Greek we have before us is a little muddied.  The English in the NRSV is not exactly what is portrayed in the Greek.  It should read, “21When his family heard it, they went out to restrain him, for they were saying, ‘He has gone out of his mind.”  The Greek does not add any extra “people.”  Jesus’ family believes He has gone out of His mind.

    This presents a bit of a conundrum as we take a look at the rest of the Gospel stories.  I mean, included in Jesus’ family, we find just a few verses later, is Jesus’ very own mother.  Mary is included in those who are coming to arrest–that’s literally what it says later–Jesus.  This is the Mother of our Lord who had the angel announce to her that she would give birth to the Savior.  This is Mary who heard the witness of the wise men and pondered these things in her heart.  This is Mary who had stood up at the wedding at Canaan and pronounced, “Do whatever He tells you to do.”  If Mary knew her child was the Son of God; if she knew He was the Messiah; then why did she allow the rest of the family to proclaim Jesus crazy?  Why did she go with them to arrest Him and participate in the intervention?

    As I thought about it, I wondered if Mary didn’t quite understand exactly how her son would fulfill His Messianic duties.  I wonder if the rest of the family had the wrong idea about what Jesus was supposed to be doing as the promised Messiah–I mean you don’t really think Mary would have kept that a secret from the rest of them, do you?  Before I get too convoluted with the questioning, let me explain.

    You see, Jesus was going around the region proclaiming, “The Kingdom of God is at hand.  Repent and believe in the good news.”  Jesus had also been proclaimed the Son of God at His baptism, and as Jesus went about the region casting out demons, the demons would shout out, “You are the Holy One of God!”  Even though Jesus commanded them to be silent, word was spreading.  Jesus was also coming into conflict with the religious authorities.  He was forgiving people of their sins even though they had not offered the appropriate sacrifices.  He was healing on the Sabbath.  Such behavior was a recipe for disaster.  How so?

    Well, if Jesus was going around saying, “The Kingdom of God is at hand,” He was directly undercutting the ruling, Roman authorities.  The Romans had instituted the Kingdom of Caesar.  Proclaiming the Kingdom of God was seen as sedition.  It carried the death sentence.  By casting out demons; healing the sick; making the lame to walk; and proclaiming a forgiveness of sins while undercutting some of the laws of the Old Testament, Jesus placed himself squarely in opposition to the religious authorities.  They would not have been pleased with one undercutting thousands of years of tradition.  They would not have been happy with one who was teaching things which were borderline blasphemy.  If they believed Jesus was leading the people astray, they could try Him and convict Him of blasphemy and ask that the Romans put Him to death.  Do you find it interesting that this is exactly what happened to Jesus later?

    His family could see this.  They could see the end.  They could see Jesus’ self-destructive behavior.  They could see where this path was leading.  They knew that He knew this as well.  “He must be crazy!” they thought.  “This is not how the Messiah is supposed to act.  We’ve got to put a stop to this.  It’s time for an intervention.”

    And now we have a break from this story as Mark inserts a related anecdote.  The scribes send a delegation from Jerusalem to deal with Jesus.  Remember what I said earlier about Jesus’ teaching and healing.  The scribes are not happy with Jesus, and they want to discredit Him.  They begin to tell the people, “He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of demons, Jesus casts out demons.”  They are obviously trying to paint Jesus as evil–as outside the bounds of the Law and the Prophets.  They are saying Jesus is not from God and anyone who associates with Jesus is buying into such deceit.

    Jesus points out the flaw in their logic.  “How can Satan cast out Satan?”  In other words, “We can all agree that getting rid of a demon and freeing a person is a good thing.  No one would argue that.  Why would evil seek to do good?  If evil seeks to do good, then it is divided and its kingdom will fall.  If Satan is casting out Satan, then he is ushering in his own demise.  Do you really think Satan would do that?”  The answer is obviously no.  Not a chance.  Satan would do no such thing.  But Jesus isn’t finished.  He makes one more pronouncement, “Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins and whatever blasphemies they utter; 29but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin’— 30for they had said, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’” 

    This passage gives some folks difficulty.  It’s not surprising.  What is such an eternal sin?  Have I committed an unforgivable sin?  Several commentaries noted, “If you are asking whether or not you have committed this sin, then you haven’t.”  That’s a bit comforting, but it still leaves us asking, “What is it?  What is this unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit?” 

    I think Mark closes things out and brings us full circle by bring us back to Jesus’ family and their attempts at intervention.  I think Mark gives us an answer to that question.  Let us turn there now.

    As I said earlier, Jesus’ family, including His mother, show up to arrest Him.  They didn’t just show up to restrain Him.  They want to arrest Him; seize Him; stop Him from this insanity.  They can’t get into the house because of the crowd, so word spreads through the crowd that Jesus’ family has arrived.  Jesus hears, and He makes a startling pronouncement:

    33And he replied, ‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’ 34And looking at those who sat around him, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.’

    Now, if you aren’t shocked by that statement, then you really don’t understand the ancient world.  For family was everything in that world.  From your family, you received your identity.  You received your value.  You received your worth.  Think about that for a moment as you hear Jesus say, “Who are my mother and my brothers?”  Essentially, Jesus is denying His origin!  He is denying where everyone would find the source of their identity; their value; and their worth.  No one in His right mind would do such a thing!!  At least in that time and place.

    But then, Jesus does something more.  Looking at those around Him–most commentaries suggest that Jesus looks at His disciples–Jesus says, “Here are my mother and my brothers!  Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.”

    Let’s think about this for just a moment.  Jesus points to those sitting around Him–they may be the disciples.  They maybe the entire crowd in the house.  It doesn’t really matter in my estimation.  The question that I want to ask is, “What are they doing?”  Jesus says they are doing the will of God, so what are they doing?  What activity are they participating in?  Are they living perfect and upright lives?  Are they staying free from any and all sexual sins?  Are they doing justice, loving kindness, and walking humbly with God?  Are they loving God and loving neighbor?  Are they offering sacrifices for sin and atoning for their wrongdoings?  Are they feeding the hungry; giving drink to the thirsty; visiting the sick and imprisoned; and trying to transform the world into the Kingdom of God.  No.  They are doing no such things.

    What are they doing?  They are turning to Jesus for healing.  They are turning to Jesus for identity.  They are turning to Jesus to understand God.  They are placing their trust in Him and following Him.  They have made Jesus the most important thing in their lives.  Jesus’ family was placing a higher value upon the status of the family and their own expectations of what Jesus should be.  The scribes were putting a higher value upon Jewish law and upholding their status as religious leaders.  Neither were letting Jesus be who He was intended to be: The Lord and Savior of the world.

    Which leads us to the sin against the Holy Spirit.  What is that sin?  It is the Holy Spirit which brings us to the knowledge that Jesus is no lunatic or liar.  It is the Holy Spirit which calls us through the Gospel to see Jesus as the Savior and Redeemer of the world.  It is the Holy Spirit which leads us to place our trust in Him above any and every other thing.  To sin against the Holy Spirit is nothing less than to place our trust in something other than Jesus–to desire something else more than Jesus–to trust in our own selves and our own actions or in the actions and promises of something other than Jesus.  And why should you put your trust solely in Him?

    No other God is willing to die for you.  “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that all those who believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life.  For God sent the Son into the world not to condemn the world but that the world might be saved through Him.”

    C.S. Lewis once said the following, “A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God.”  Jesus’ family thought He was a lunatic.  The scribes thought Him a liar.  The crowd and the disciples saw Him as Lord.  What about you?  Amen.

Go Ahead. Protest. For All the Good it Will (not) Do.

My thoughts turned to the protests occurring in select areas of the U.S. after several stories showing questionable to infuriating behavior by police:

The Michael Brown case in Ferguson, MO
The Eric Garner case in Staten Island, NY
The Tamir Rice case in Cleveland, OH

In two cases, grand juries did not issue indictments against the police officers.  We are still waiting on the third. 

People are angry.  Some of them justifiably.  They are taking to the streets; to the schools; to colleges and universities; and other arenas to voice their displeasure with the system and call for change and justice.

Good luck.

As the Occupy Movement I think has discovered, so will these: no real change will be forthcoming.  There will be no justice. 

Why do I say such a thing? 

It's not because I am a pessimist.  It's not necessarily because I am a realist.  It's because I don't think we have a shared agreement of what justice is.  We are a nation that is floating and adrift because we no longer have shared understandings about what words mean.  We have lost any sense of transcendent meaning.  We have no idea what Justice--with a capital J--means.  We have lost any sense of what is ultimately right and what is ultimately wrong, and you cannot have Justice without knowing what is right and what is wrong.

We live in a society where we parse words and sayings, take them out of context, and mold them and shape them to suit our own understandings and definitions.  We twist things to suit our own particular motivations and agendas.   In doing so, we can excuse certain behaviors and actions that blatantly contradict the law.

For instance, the U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights is explicit in Amendment 4:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Try to cite it as you go through an airport.  Is it "reasonable" to search every single person who boards a plane?  Think about it.  If you question being searched, you will be detained--possibly arrested, certainly inconvenienced. 

Amendment 2

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

For the better part of the history of our nation, this was an assurance that folks could own fire arms without any infringement.  Not so today.  Not in the least. 

In both of these cases, Constitutional scholars disagree vehemently as to how these texts should be interpreted.  They parse and define words to suit their own particular points of view, and leave many scratching their heads as to how such interpretations are arrived at.

How does such a thing happen?

In a word: postmodernism.  Rooted and grounded in Nietzsche's philosophy (reason taken to its ultimate, logical conclusion), postmodernity has removed any sort of transcendent, overarching narrative which joins any culture or people together.  It removed any shared definition of words and stories.  Everything now hinges upon perspective.  You see something from one particular point of view.  I see it from another, and who is to say who is correct?  Who is to say whose interpretation is true?  If you even think to know the Truth, then you are arrogant and wishful. 

This train of thought has seeped into our culture and infected it.  Yes, I used the term infected purposely for perspectivism leads down a dark road--a very dark one.  For there can be no agreed upon definition of good.  There can be no agreed upon definition of evil.  There can be no agreed upon definition of justice.  Ultimately, it is the ones who are in power who call the shots and define the terms as they see fit.  And if you wish to rise up, you may.  However, make sure you are strong enough and powerful enough to overthrow those in power.  For in the end, only might makes right.

You might think me jesting in such commentary, but allow me to take us to Ferguson, MO for just a moment and to the aftermath of the grand jury's decision.  Let us visit the riots and looting and burning of local businesses. 

Who of us if walking into one of these stores broke windows and doors and took merchandise would not be guilty of burglary?  Who of us would not stand accused and arrested if caught?  Many would consider our actions wrong for they violate the law.

But were there those excusing such behavior?  Were there those defending those who did such things appealing to extraneous circumstances?  Yes.  So that which is wrong wasn't necessarily as wrong as once thought because of the reasons behind the looting and rioting and burning.

Right isn't necessarily right.
Wrong isn't necessarily wrong.
It just depends upon where you sit and from what perspective you view the events.

And yet, there is the cry for justice?  Will the shop owners get justice?  Or is justice the crowd's burning of those shops?  Tell me.  Please.  Inquiring minds want to know.

Until we can begin to arrive at a place where we share definitions...
Until we can arrive at a place where we have an understanding of right and wrong...
Until we can arrive at a place where we have an agreed understanding of justice...

Your protests are meaningless!!  They will not change anything!!!

But it is not enough simply to point out that which is wrong.  Alternatives must be offered.  I point toward C.S. Lewis as a starting place.

C.S. Lewis in his book the Abolition of Man includes the following allegory about his own journey to Christianity.  During that journey Lewis was "captured" by the Spirit of the Age.  Here is what Lewis writes:

Every day a jailor brought the prisoners their food, and as he laid down the dishes he would say a word to them.  If their meal was flesh, he would remind them that they were eating corpses, or give them some account of the slaughtering: or, if it was the inwards of some beast, he would read them a lecture in anatomy and show the likeness of the mess to the same parts in themselves...Or if the meal were eggs, he would recall to them that they were eating the menstruum of a verminous fowl, and crack a few jokes with the female prisoner.  So he went on day by day.  Then I dreamed that one day there was nothing but milk for them, and the jailor said as he put down the pipkin:

'Our relations with the cow are not delicate--as you can easily see if you imagine eating any of her other secretions.'

Now John had been in the pit a shorter time than any of the others: and at these words something seemed to snap in his head and he gave a great sigh and suddenly spoke out in a loud, clear voice: 

'Thank heaven!  Now at last I know that you are talking nonsense.'

'What do you mean?' said the jailor, wheeling round upon him.

'You are trying to pretend that unlike things are like.  You are trying to make us think that milk is the same sort of thing as sweat or dung.'

'And pray, what difference is there except by custom?'

'Are you a liar or a fool, that you see no difference between that which Nature casts out as refuse and that which she stores up as food?'

'So Nature is a person, then, with purposes and consciousness,' said the jailor with a sneer.  'In fact, a Landlady.  No doubt it comforts you to imagine you can believe that sort of thing;' and he turned to leave the prison with his nose in the air.

'I know nothing about that,' shouted John after him.  'I am talking of what happens.  Milk does feed calves and dung does not.'

Are we willing to point out the lies and the foolishness of those who want to lead us down paths of relativism?  Are we willing to challenge those who say there is no transcendence?  Are we willing to say unequivocally, "There is such a thing as Justice!  There is such a thing as Truth!"

Of course, you might say, "Isn't this an arrogant sort of approach?  Are you telling me that you have the Truth?"

No.  I don't.  But I think the late Dallas Willard was onto something when he said, "Truth in belief and idea is, in a certain respect, similar to the sighting mechanism on a gun or rocket: if correctly used it enables us to hit what we hope to.  But in truth's case we need not see what we are aiming at.  Truth and the meaning upon which it rests takes care of the aim itself."

I am not certain we relish a search for Truth.  I am not certain we are willing to argue it passionately and vehemently anymore.  In the name of tolerance, we have pushed the quest for Truth to the back burners and decided should accept the idea of truths.  It won't work.  Not now.  Not in the long run.  Without any semblance of Truth, we will never have Justice.  Remember that as you protest.

Why Change?

Ismael commented on my last sermon, and he asked a very good question:

If I'm doing good and helping other people causing as little harm as I can... why to change?

Why indeed?

Of course, the simple answer is, one shouldn't.  I mean, I think we should all do good and cause as little harm as possible.

But let's delve a little bit deeper.  First, let me ask: what is good?  How do you know what is good?  What is bad?  What is indifferent?

Do you judge it based upon a particular outcome or the results?  Do the ends justify the means?
Do you judge something to be good because there is such a thing as intrinsic good and intrinsic worth?

If there is no God and no transcendent reality, then there is no such thing as intrinsic worth and intrinsic goodness.  That which is good or that which is bad is only a matter of perspective.  (Nietzsche)  I have seen a few attempts to argue for transcendence (Luc Ferry, A Brief History of Thought), but I think they fail to establish any sort of true argument for something beyond; or in other words to get to an "ought" from "is".

And if there is no way to establish something good because it is necessarily good by definition, then one is almost forced to enter into teleological ethics.  (The end result is the most important.)  Of course, teleological ethics rests on the premise that we should do the greatest good for the greatest number, but why should that be the case?  What grounds do you have for suggesting that this ought to govern our thought?  (That is the first problem.)  The second problem comes when the greatest good for the greatest number adversely affects the minority.  It was the greatest good for the greatest number to have slaves do all the agricultural work in the U.S. 200+ years ago.  It was not good for the slaves themselves, of course; but what recourse do you have for proposing that things should change?  The arguments against slavery all came from establishing the fact that slaves were people who had intrinsic value and worth and should not be claimed as property.  It was an appeal, not to the greater good, but to the Greatest Good--transcendent goodness.

We could probably spend more time arguing this point, but I will not belabor it any longer.  Ismael agreed with much of what I said in my sermon by his own admission in regards to transcendence and ethics.  Therefore, I will move on to the next issue--the issue of motivation.

Why does one engage in doing good and limiting the amount of harm caused?  If one is not engaged in doing good because something is inherently good (there is no transcendence), then essentially there are two motivations for doing good: 1) I like doing good and feel like what I am doing is good.  2) The other person needs me to do something for them, and I do it for their sake.

#1, I think we can agree is selfish motivation.  If I am pursuing good because of how it makes me feel, then I am engaging in it because I get a certain benefit from it.  I feel better about myself.  I feel good about what I have done and accomplished.

One may ask: what is wrong with this?

Nothing, to begin with.  The problem comes when others do not share your vision of what is good.  If I am a tolerant person who believes in allowing folks freedom to do things, then (by definition) I must also be tolerant of those who are intolerant.  Rarely does anyone do this.  In fact, those who preach tolerance are oftentimes vehemently opposed to those they deem intolerant.  They become just as self-righteous as those whom they deem intolerant!  Examples abound of this throughout the blogosphere.  One will suffice.

Before the ELCA website Living Lutheran changed its format and did away with comments, a very interesting exchange took place in a discussion over the ELCA's change to allow practicing homosexual clergy.  "Michael", a proponent of the change, adamantly defended the church's new position by saying, "If there are those in the church who don't like the decision, then they can just find another church."  Do you see the hypocrisy in the statement?  For if "those in the church who do not like the decision" should just find another church, then why didn't "Michael" do so when the church held the opposite position previously?  Why did "Michael" and others who fought for change simply leave previously?  Answer: Self-righteousness.  It pervades our churches and our society.  Why?

This is the inevitable outcome of doing things for one's self.  It becomes all about me, and I become self-righteous, narcissistic, and I even use others to accomplish what I want, convinced I am doing good.  (I do not say such things as someone who is immune from this.  I have been there, done that in a real way and am in a constant battle with my self-righteous, self-centered self.)

#2, might not seem to be such a bad thing.  I mean, we should do good to others for their sake and not our own.  We should be sensitive to their needs and concerns and do our best to ease their suffering.  There doesn't seem to be a downside to this one.

On the surface.

But as one who has experienced such things; as one who works in a helping profession, I can say quite honestly, if you live for others and try to satisfy their needs and ease their sufferings, you will burn out.  There is not enough of you to go around.  Plus, you will run into someone who does not have any boundaries who will literally suck you dry and take every ounce of energy you have.

You will strive to live up to their expectations and their needs, and you will eventually fall.  Evidence abounds for this among care-givers.  Not only will you burn out, but you will spend your entire life seeking your value and worth from others.  You will desperately want to hear their affirmation.  You will desperately want to receive their pats on the back.  And when such things are not forthcoming, you will fall deeply into despair.  It is not a pleasant place to be. 

Now, here is where things get interesting because one could argue for a third option.  One could "change one's mind" --remember, we are not talking about changing one's actions because I think we can agree that the actions of doing good and helping others are laudable--and say, "I neither act for myself nor act for others.  I seek to do good because there is an ultimate Good."

For the sake of this blog post, I will call that ultimate Good, God.  Why?  Well, if there is an ultimate Good--an ultimate sense of what is right and what is wrong--then that had to come from somewhere.  We didn't make it up.  If we did, we are right back to perspectivism and Nietzsche.   If there is a natural law of what is right and wrong, then it is logical to assume a Law Giver--an ultimate Good. (C.S. Lewis develops this argument much more fully in Mere Christianity.)

Now, I must ask myself whether or not I achieve that ultimate Good?  Do I accomplish the good I need?  Do I do a reasonable enough job of accomplishing enough good and easing the suffering of others?  Do I fulfill this sense of the natural law that I find inherent in nature?

I think, if we are honest with ourselves, we know that we do not.  We know that we do not ease the suffering of others as much as we could.  Most of the time, we give out of our abundance--where it doesn't affect our lifestyle or our ability to do the things that we want to do.  We give as long as we are comfortable.  We ease the sufferings of others as long as we don't feel put out by it.  We enjoy the fruits of others' labor even if that labor cost someone else dearly.  At the very least, we are contributors to the brokenness and injustice of this world.  We do not live up to that natural law.

One may choose to argue this point, so let me delve into it just a little further.  C.S. Lewis showed in his book The Abolition of Man, that nearly every culture and philosophy shared the common axiom "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."  Nearly everyone I know believes this axiom should be followed.  Some folks do relatively well in sticking to it, but not fully.  How so?  Well, if I am going to do unto others as I would have them do unto me, then if I were poor and hungry, then I would want folks to help me out whenever I was in this state.  I would desire them to give me enough that I might be able to have the necessities of life.  Perhaps an individual would not be able to give me enough to sustain me, but through a collective effort, I would have enough.  This would mean, that if I had enough, I would give a little bit to every poor person I encounter.  I would willingly and graciously give to everyone who begged, even if it were a trifle amount.  The question is: do I do so?  Do I give even a little bit to everyone who begs from me--who believes him or her self poor and in need?  Regardless if I do not think they are in need, do I still give because the other believes he or she is in need?   Does anyone fulfill this to the extent of what is required?  Short answer: no.

So, where does that leave us in relationship to the Law Giver?  If we are not fulfilling the Law to the extent necessary, where does that leave us?  If we have no sense of shame or guilt, then it leaves us exactly nowhere.  I can simply go about my life thinking I am good enough even if I don't follow the universal axioms.  I can convince myself that I'm doing my part and should be satisfied with doing that part even if it isn't the fullest extent of what I can do.  If you find yourself in this category, then I simply make one observation: you cannot judge another person ever.  You cannot make any sort of moral judgement or statement about the beliefs and practices of another for you have no moral high ground to operate from.  You cannot tell anyone "you should do unto others" because you are not following the axiom yourself, and you must be content with what others choose to do and allow them to be just as satisfied with the job they believe they are doing as you are satisfied with yours.

But if I know that I do not follow the axiom to the extent it needs to be followed, and if I have a sense of shame and guilt about this, then I know I need to do something to rectify the situation.  I need to somehow make amends for not following through in doing what I know I am supposed to do.  I need to make things right within myself and with the Law Giver.  And how do I do that?

Every other religion and philosophy says, "Try harder."  "Do more."  "Overcome your selfish nature by your own strength."

The problem is, we cannot.  Why?  Well, first off, we are acting in our own self-interest when we do such things.  We are not acting in the interest of others or in the interest of the Greatest Good.  Our self is at the center, and we will head right down the path of self-righteousness.  Secondly, even when we try harder, we still will not accomplish the extent of following the axioms.  "Do unto others..."  If I followed this to the extent necessary, I would exhaust my resources and then be dependent upon others to give to me.  In a perfect world, that might work out, but we do not live in a perfect world...  History is replete with folks who say try harder, and time and again, it doesn't work out.

Only Christianity offers an alternative.  Only Christianity says, "You cannot make amends for your failure to follow the axioms of the Law Giver.  You cannot overcome your guilt and shame by trying harder.  You cannot walk a path that will not lead to self-righteousness or to self-destruction on your own.  You will either be dominated by self or be dominated by others.  Therefore, since you do not have the ability to change and overcome; since you cannot break out of this reality, the Law Giver will act to change the situation."

And the Word became flesh and lived among us...

God took on flesh and lived among us, not to take advantage of us (as in many of the Greek and Roman myths), but to die for us.

In no other religion or philosophy does God die on behalf of His creation.  Only Christianity.  (There is much, much more to it than this.  Books have been written explaining this further.  I am trying to condense it into a very small blog post, and I am just not doing it justice!!!)

And Christianity says, "To the extent you believe in what God has done for you, you will be able to overcome your selfish nature and accomplish following the great commands; not because you have to or because your self-worth or satisfaction or salvation depends upon it, but because you are thankful for what has been done on your behalf."

It is a radical departure from every other train of thought, and it is either crazy because it goes against the way the world works, or it is brilliant because its origins do not originate in the way the world actually works. 

And it is this last point which leads me to say this is why one should change.  For in Jesus we find a path that does not lead to self-righteousness (it can't because we have to acknowledge our inability to follow the universal axioms).  Neither does it lead to destruction of self through trying to please others (for we do not get our value and worth from pleasing others and doing all the right things).  It also answers how we are justified in not following the universal law or axioms (not by our own action but by the action of the Law Giver), and frees us from the guilt and shame of not fulfilling what we know we should do.  And last, it gives us the ability to point to what we ought to do because the Laws are still in effect--they are our guide in right and wrong, but we point to them in humility not in arrogance.

(If you would like to delve into this more, I highly recommend C.S. Lewis' book Mere Christianity and Timothy Keller's book The Reason for God.  I cannot even come close to doing justice to what these apologists have done in explaining the Christian faith.)

I Know it was only a Dream, but...

Have you had one of those dreams?

One of those dreams that is so vivid and real?

A dream where you are heading to a place of beauty and serenity?

A dream where as you travel toward the destination, the colors become more vivid, more eye-popping, more unbelievable?

A dream where you rise and climb and from a distance see a place that words cannot describe?  Because it is so overwhelming in how it looks?

And yet, this destination is at a distance.  You know you will not arrive there--at least for the time being.  But the destination is not altogether strange.  It is somehow familiar.  Somehow, deep in the recesses of your heart and soul, you know of this place.  Somehow, in some way, the imprint of this place was molded into you.

And so, while it is new and exciting and different, it is also familiar and comforting and old.

I dreamed this dream.

I saw this place.

The Christian says, "Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exist.  A baby feels hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex. If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing. If that is so, I must take care, on the one hand, never to despise, or to be unthankful for, these earthly blessings, and on the other, never to mistake them for the something else of which they are only a kind of copy, or echo, or mirage. I must keep alive in myself the desire for my true country, which I shall not find till after death; I must never let it get snowed under or turned aside; I must make it the main object of life to press on to that country and to help others to do the same.”  --C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

 

The Importance of Reformation Sunday

  

 Why is Reformation Day so important?

    C.S. Lewis, in his appendix to the book The Abolition of Man showed how nearly every single culture in the world; every single philosophy; every single world religion espoused one particular axiom.  In effect, C.S. Lewis showed that the axiom “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” is a universal truth and teaching found in every culture and teaching.  That’s a rather astounding thing considering how diverse cultures are throughout the world.  It’s rather astounding since they all begin with different assumptions about how the world works and how it came into being.  It’s rather astounding that as varied and as different as we are as human beings, there is one universal thing we all claim to grasp and understand.  We should do unto others as we would have them do unto us. 

    But there is an interesting corollary to this universal axiom.  It’s a corollary that is not usually talked about in various academic circles.  Because if the axiom “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” is indeed a universal teaching, the corollary which follows is, no one does it.  No one does to others what we would like them to do unto us. 

    Think about it.  Think about it really hard, and think about it honestly.  How many of us are as patient with others as we would like them to be patient with us?  How many of us as are considerate of others as we would like them to be considerate of us?  How many of us are forgiving of others as we would like them to be forgiving of us?  How many of us truly talk as kindly of others as we would like them to talk kindly of us?  How many of us are as generous to others as we would like them to be generous to us?  And the list goes on and on and on.  If we are honest with ourselves, we do not even come close to following this universal axiom.

    And if we are honest with ourselves, we know we have no excuses.  We know what we should do.  We know how we should act.  But we don’t do it.  Either because we can’t or because we won’t.

    St. Paul knew this.  He knew it well, and so he penned these words from the third chapter of the book of Romans, “Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.  For ‘no human being will be justified in his sight’ by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.”

    What is Paul saying?  He’s saying exactly what I just said about doing unto others.  We know we should, but we know we don’t.  And when we are honest with ourselves, we are silenced.  We know we have no room to talk.  We know we have no room to tell anyone else to shape up because we are out of shape.  We know we have no room to condemn anyone else for failing to follow the teaching because we don’t follow it ourselves.  Our mouth’s are silenced.  And if this axiom comes from God–which most folks believe it does, then we must be held accountable to God because we have broken His command.

    And here’s where things begin to get a little interesting.  Because here is where Christianity begins to make a clean break with the rest of the world.  Every other philosophy and every other religion’s answer to accountability is thus, “Try harder.”  Yep, you heard right.  If you aren’t doing such a good job of doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, try harder.  Work harder.  Try to be a better person.  Satisfy God and justify yourself by following that command. 

    And why shouldn’t that be the answer?  I mean, that is what we are taught from the time we are infants and throughout adulthood.  When you are starting to walk and you fall down, parents say, “Get up and try it again.  Sooner or later, you will get it!”  When our kids have trouble in school learning math or reading or writing, we say, “Practice, work harder.  You will get it!”  When we start working at a job and not doing so well at it, our supervisor (if he or she is patient) says, “Keep after it.  You will figure it out before too long.”  Over and over and over, we get told this.  Over and over and over, we implement it.  Sometimes we are successful, and oftentimes we get the idea in our heads that if we simply just keep trying; if we just keep after it long enough; things will come together and we can accomplish anything!  Nothing can ever hold us back!  And where does that lead us if we truly have this mindset?  Where does this lead us in regards to others who struggle and have a hard time?   Do we become patient with them?  Do we become understanding with them?  Do we offer them positive encouragement over and over and over?  Maybe some of the time, but certainly not always.  For it is far too easy to become contemptuous and angry at those who don’t seem to get it as quickly as ourselves.  It is far too easy to become self-righteous and say, “I was able to do it; they should be able to do it too.”  And we look down our nose at others.  Do unto others...do you like it when others look down their nose at you?  Of course not.  Very few do.  But this is inevitably where “try harder” gets you.  It gets you right back to breaking the command–the very place you tried to get away from to begin with.

    Christianity is different; however.  Christianity offers a different path.  Instead of try harder, Paul lays out the alternative:
 
    “For ‘no human being will be justified in his sight’ by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.”  Following the law doesn’t justify us.  It only leads to despair or self-righteousness.  It cannot break us out of the cycle.  It can only show us what we have done wrong.  I wouldn’t know I was breaking the speed limit unless I saw the speed limit sign.  Because there is a sign, I know I am breaking the law!  Slowing down doesn’t justify me from having broken the law in the first place!!  So what does?  What does justify me?  What makes things right?

     “21 But now, irrespective of law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 23since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; 24they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith.”  The answer Paul gives is, “It’s not your actions.  It’s Jesus’ actions.”  By breaking the command of God, you have earned His punishment.  You have earned His anger and His wrath.  You must pay the price for doing what you know to be wrong.  God cannot allow such breaking of the command to go unpunished because then God would not be just.  But instead of you facing the punishment; instead of you facing God’s wrath, Jesus–the God made flesh–stepped in on your behalf.  Jesus, offered Himself to die and endure the wrath of God upon the cross so that you wouldn’t have to.  This is the sacrifice of atonement Paul spoke of.  He took your place.  He took the punishment which you were destined for.  You couldn’t do unto others; Jesus did.

    In some ways this doesn’t make sense to our way of thinking.  If you commit the crime, you should be held accountable.  If you do the wrong, you should face the punishment.  If you break the law, you should face justice.  On one level, we know this very, very well.  But let me put it to you another way–a way I think you may grasp very easily.  Most of us who are parents have a rule for our children: don’t play in the street!  It’s a pretty hard and fast rule for many of us.  Now, what parent who sees his child playing in the street with a car approaching would allow the car to run over the child because, after all, the child broke the rule and deserves what he or she gets?  What parent would allow his or her child to be gravely injured or to die because the rule got broken?  What parent would allow this tragedy to befall his son or daughter?  None that I know of.  And yet, I know of many a parent, who would gladly and willingly run into the street, breaking the parent’s own rule to save his or her child.  I know many a parent who would gladly die to save his or her child from immanent death.  Take my life instead because I love my child.  The answer would not be try harder to follow mommy and daddy’s rule.  The answer at that point–when the rule is already broken and death is immanent–is save your child even at the expense of your own life.

    “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son so that all those who believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life.  For God sent the Son into the world not to condemn the world but so that the world may be saved by Him.”

    And now, we put our trust in this saving action.  We put our faith in this saving action.  We do not trust ourselves to follow the commands because we know we cannot fully accomplish them.  Instead, we throw ourselves on the mercy of Jesus who did follow the commands and who took our place.

    “Then what becomes of boasting? It is excluded. By what law? By that of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.”  And since we are justified–we are made right by what Jesus has done and not what we do, can we boast?  Can we brag about how well we have done unto others?  Can we brag about how well we have followed the Law and made ourselves right with God?  Can we brag that we have done enough to warrant God’s love for us?  No.  We can’t.  Because we did nothing.  Jesus did everything.  We are justified apart from the works of the Law.  We are justified by Jesus and trust in His action not our own.

    Oh, there are more than a few folks–even within the church–who would like us to operate the way the world works.  There are more than a few folks–even within the church–who would like to think our salvation is contingent upon our actions and our ability to follow the Law.  They would gladly tell us to get our lives in order lest we find ourselves damned.  They would gladly tell us we must do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with God lest we incur God’s wrath.  They would gladly tell us to stop drinking, smoking, dancing, and expressing our sexuality or the devil will play with our souls for eternity.  They would gladly tell us we must give 10% of our income to the church or God will strike us down.  They will gladly tell us God sends things like the Ebola virus or famine or drought to punish us for what we do–hoping that we will repent and cease our destructive behavior.  They will gladly try to rope us back into trying to be like every other philosophy or religion that is out there.  They will gladly try to get us to try harder.

    But that is why we need Reformation Day.  That is why we need to be reminded of the Gospel.  This is why we need the Martin Luther’s of the world–we need to be reminded that Christianity is not basically about what we do, but about what God has done through Jesus Christ saving you by His grace through faith.  Amen.