He Carried You

For the past several weeks, I have been leading a course on Timothy Keller's book The Prodigal God.  This book centers on what many call "The Parable of the Prodigal Son" found in the Bible; Luke Chapter 15.  In addition to the course I teach on Wednesday evenings, I have worked with the adult Sunday School class to delve deeply into Luke Chapter 15 to study the literary context of Jesus' parable. 

(Henceforth, I will be referring to the parable as "The Parable of the Two Sons" for, indeed, the parable isn't just about one son.  It's about both sons and their relationship with their father.) 

As I was preparing for the next adult class session, I focused my attention and study on Luke 15:3-7.  This is actually the first parable of two which lead up to the Parable of the Two Sons.  It's a familiar one to most Christians who grew up in the Church:

3 So Jesus told them this parable: 4‘Which one of you, having a hundred sheep and losing one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness and go after the one that is lost until he finds it? 5When he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders and rejoices. 6And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them, “Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.” 7Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who need no repentance.

I consulted four different commentaries and was pulling quotes from each that we might discuss said quotes this Sunday.  One particular quote grabbed me as I finished typing.  It was from Joel Green's commentary on Luke found in The New International Commentary on the New Testament:

Because sheep are gregarious creatures, a sheep lost from its flock becomes quickly agitated and disoriented and must be carried back to the other sheep; for lengthy journeys this is most easily accomplished by placing the sheep on one’s shoulders.

For a moment, I paused.  Yes, the imagery is touching when you imagine that Jesus was 1) talking about God's seeking out of those who have gotten lost from the fold and 2) Jesus was defending His ministry of "eating with tax collectors and sinners."  The thought of God seeking out the lost, and Jesus manifesting this has offered great comfort to many, many people throughout the years.  But this is not what caught my eye.  This did: for lengthy journeys, this is most easily accomplished by placing the sheep on one's shoulders. 

Have you traveled a great distance with a load on your shoulders?

When my children were younger, oftentimes I would hoist them on my shoulders to walk around the store or the zoo or some other venue.  Before too long, my back began to ache.  My shoulders felt the weight of the burden, and they began to protest.  My leg muscles began to let me they were not used to such added weight.  I know some people train for such things--for long hikes with backpacks and the like, but most folks I know aren't deliberately walking around with burdens on their shoulders.  Most folks I know begin to feel such burdens after only a few minutes.

The Good Shepherd puts the sheep on His shoulders and carries it long distances to bring it back into the fold.  If this is a full grown sheep...do you know how much that weighs? 

Now, if we are talking about a juvenile--that could be 20 lbs or so.  Not terribly heavy, but after a while, even that starts to hurt.  Minimum for an adult ewe is 90 lbs.  Minimum for an adult ram is 100 lbs.  Try carrying that for any distance.

Can you imagine the exertion?
Can you imagine the muscles crying out in pain?
Can you imagine trying to keep your balance and walk with this living thing on your back moving and perhaps struggling to get away?
Can you imagine the perspiration and heavy breathing?

All that work for the sake of a sheep.
To bring it back into the fold.
Without a second thought.
And then throwing a party when he gets back.

Oh, and it gets better.

For how is it that Jesus brings us back into His flock?
What burden did He bear on His shoulders?
What caused His muscles to cry out in pain?
What caused Him to perspire profusely and breathe heavily?

All for the sake of those who had rejected Him
Who had deserted Him
Who had mocked Him
Who had betrayed Him
Who had denied Him

So that even they might be united with the flock?

The cross.
God and sinners reconciled.

And a party is thrown!

Oh, I know that someone will point me toward verse 7.  Believe me I am not ignorant of it.  "7Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who need no repentance." 

"The party will only be for those who repent!" you might say.

But I remind you of what  John Nolland in his Word Biblical Commentary on Luke says:

The place of repentance here takes us right outside the framework of the parable, which focuses exclusively on the role of the shepherd.  Studies often protest that this verse obscures the fact that Jesus scandalized the Pharisees precisely by his failure to demand repentance in the normal way...

This is a very important point...one that I didn't quite realize until John pointed it out.  You see, Jesus' call for repentance comes as a response to what He has done.  Repentance, for a Christian, comes as a result of contemplating the nature of what Jesus has already done for you.  The cross leads to repentance.  It was contrary to what the Pharisees taught then.  It is contrary to what many, even within the Church, teach now. 

For when you see the pains that the Good Shepherd endured for your sake
When you see He carried you to God through the cross
When you see His nail pierced hands and feet
When you see His sacrifice on your behalf

It changes you deeply.
There is no way you could ever live the same.
Once the Shepherd, at great cost to Himself, has brought you home.
And thrown a party because you were there.

Freedom of Religion and Discrimination

Life gets rather messy when two incompatible objects butt heads.

Arizona has placed themselves right in the crosshairs with its bill to allow forms of discrimination based upon religious belief.

I am none too pleased with this particular bill as I believe it is a warping of the nature of religious freedom as preserved in the Constitution.  Not only this, I believe it flies in the face of Jesus' own teachings regarding how a Christian is called to interact in society.

First, let's deal with the issue of religious freedom.  I would like to make a distinction here between religious belief and religious practice.  It's not necessarily healthy to do such a thing because usually our practices flow from our beliefs.  Yet, there is a reason I want to make such a distinction at this time.

There are a lot of world religions.  There are the major five or six, but there are a host of others throughout the world.  Many of them have particular beliefs instilled in them--among those beliefs the secondary citizenship of women (many Islamic as well as Christian sects), the marginalization of the poor (the Hindu caste system), the severe punishment of homosexuals (many sects of Islam as well as some Christians).  There are other such beliefs to be covered, but I think these few are enough to highlight a substantial problem: when religious belief clashes with guaranteed rights endowed in the U.S. Constitution.  In our nation, we do not adhere to a caste system; we guarantee the rights of women and homosexuals despite what religions believe about them.  And since the U.S. Constitution is the highest law of the land, the Constitution takes precedence over religious belief.

There might be some who decry this, especially some of my more conservative brothers and sisters of the Christian faith.  YOU say that we should deny our religious beliefs and make them subservient to the U.S. Constitution?  Not your beliefs.  Your practices--especially ones which conflict with the basic understanding of human rights (more on this later as I will try to show that discrimination has no basis in Christian practice).  Why do I say such a thing?

Let's put it plain and simple.  What happens if a religion comes along that practices human sacrifice as per the ancient Mayan and Aztecs?  Let's just say theoretically a person comes along looking to re institute such a practice.  Because we have religious freedom, should we let that person go ahead with the plan?  Should we let the person claim that it is well in line with his religion to capture people and then sacrifice them to appease the gods?

I think most of us would revolt at the idea.  I also realize this is taking this to almost an absurd conclusion; however, complete and total religious freedom would allow for such a thing to take place.

On a more concrete note of possibilities, it would be quite easy for a store owner to put up a sign which said, "No blacks allowed.  It's against my religious belief."  Back to Jim Crow with legal underpinning.  Not good.  Not good at all.  On a practical level, this law has many, many problems, and while protecting individual freedom to believe is important--it should not trump the basic human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Secondly, from my own faith tradition, I do not think such a law is compatible with how Jesus taught His followers to act.  Yes, as Christians we are to stand against sin.  Yes, as Christians we are to strive for perfection.  Yes, as Christians we are not to condone sinful behavior.  But we are called to give people freedom to sin.  We are called to give people freedom to go against God.  We are called to give people freedom to reject our beliefs and practices and do their own thing.  And we are called to keep loving them no matter what they do.

My favorite illustration to show this is the Parable of the Prodigal Son.  I think we should rename it as the Parable of the Prodigal Father personally, but that is beside the point.  The Father in this parable is the main focus--particularly in how He acts toward His sons.

The first one would be considered the one living in sin.  The youngest son comes to the Father and demands his inheritance early.  Basically, he tells the Father, "I wish you were dead so I can have my money now!"

What does the Father do?  Does the Father do what most of us dads would do?  Does He scoff at His son and tell him to get back to work under threat of punishment?  Does the Father scold the son and make him feel two inches tall?

No.

With a radical love, the Dad gives His son the portion of the inheritance and lets him go make his own way.  The consequences are dire!  The son squanders his money and has to work at a degrading job not making enough money to feed himself.  The son "comes to himself" and says, "I messed up.  I need to apologize.  I can go work for dad as a servant."

The son heads home, but before the kid has a chance to apologize, the Father comes running to embrace His son.  Before the kid has a chance to grovel, Dad is exuding love once again.  Dad even throws a party, much to the chagrin of the older son.  This welcome; this party; is an example of pure grace.

Interestingly enough, the older son, gets quite upset with Dad.  The older son refuses to go to the party Dad is throwing.  This is actually an insult to the Father as well.  The son might not necessarily be aware of it, but he is sinning just like his younger brother does.  And what does the Father do?  He comes out to the son and invites him to come in.  Grace is extended once again.

Both sons are sinful.  Both need the Father's love.  Grace rules the day.

I think one of the greatest points to be made in this parable is the Father reaches out to both of His sons and extends them love--not by telling them what to do; not by discriminating against them; not by trying to make them conform to His will, but by giving them freedom to pursue their own course.  He counts on His love being the thing which will bring them back under His roof.

This tells me a couple of things.  #1. I am not the Father.  I don't have that kind of love.  #2. This means, in all reality I am like son number one or son number two.  #3. I am either a wayward sinner or a self-righteous sinner.  #4. I am in need of the Father's love to get into the party one way or the other.  #5. If I need the Father to come to me to get me in, then I have no business being self-righteous or haughty.  Grace brought me in, not my own actions.

As Christians, we should know we are not the Father in this parable.  We should know we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.  We should know we are still captive in sin and incapable of living the life God has called us to.  We should know we are no different than anyone else living in sin.

And what was Jesus' response to us when we were living in sin?  What did Jesus demand of us?  Did He say, "Get your stuff together, and then I will die for you?"  No.  He died for us while we were still sinners.

How many of us are willing to die for someone else we consider living in sin?  How many of us are willing to die to our own egos to show kindness to someone we disagree with vehemently?  How many of us are willing to be convicted by grace and humbled enough to serve someone who we consider to be breaking God's commands?

Jesus did that for us and then said, "Go and do likewise."  Through love people are brought to repentance, not through discrimination.

I, for one am hoping the law passed by the legislature in Arizona is vetoed.  I do not think it compatible with our Constitution or with Christianity.  I know others may vehemently disagree.  It's okay.  I still love you.