Sermon for October 15th, 2017 - Revision history

Iraneal at 02:44, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T02:44:56Z

Show changes

Iraneal at 02:14, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T02:14:30Z

Iraneal at 01:32, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T01:32:30Z

Iraneal at 01:21, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T01:21:19Z

Iraneal at 01:03, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T01:03:34Z

Iraneal at 23:29, 13 October 2017

2017-10-13T23:29:41Z

Iraneal at 22:19, 13 October 2017

2017-10-13T22:19:23Z

Iraneal at 22:17, 13 October 2017

2017-10-13T22:17:26Z

Iraneal at 21:57, 13 October 2017

2017-10-13T21:57:39Z

Iraneal at 21:42, 13 October 2017

2017-10-13T21:42:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:14, 14 October 2017
Line 71:		Line 71:
	By the way, I also said at the beginning of today's message that the current definition of atonement was a horrible distortion of the word's original meaning. What was the original meaning of atonement? Look at the word itself. At - one - ment. Or, the process of becoming one with God, with each other, with the universe. Unification. Reconciliation. I believe this is what Jesus was talking about when he spoke of the "Kingdom of God."		By the way, I also said at the beginning of today's message that the current definition of atonement was a horrible distortion of the word's original meaning. What was the original meaning of atonement? Look at the word itself. At - one - ment. Or, the process of becoming one with God, with each other, with the universe. Unification. Reconciliation. I believe this is what Jesus was talking about when he spoke of the "Kingdom of God."

−	As we evolve, as we grow in understanding of each other and of the world around us, we grow closer together, closer to the dream and vision of the carpenter from Galilee. Our atonement, our at-one-ment, our one-ness is still limited. But it ~~has~~ limitless ~~potential~~.	+	As we evolve, as we grow in understanding of each other and of the world around us, we grow closer together, closer to the dream and vision of the carpenter from Galilee. Our atonement, our at-one-ment, our one-ness, is still quite limited today. But the hope, the promise, the potential contained within the seeds of our story, our meme, as it continues to grow and spread throughout the world, is truly limitless.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:32, 14 October 2017
Line 66:		Line 66:

	Ironically, the term "meme" was coined by Richard Dawkins, an well-known atheist and student of Darwinian evolution. He first used the idea of the meme as a cultural analog to the replication and spread of genes in biology. Ideas, in essence, evolve, spread, fight for survival, and ultimately improve humanity over time in the same way as natural selection.		Ironically, the term "meme" was coined by Richard Dawkins, an well-known atheist and student of Darwinian evolution. He first used the idea of the meme as a cultural analog to the replication and spread of genes in biology. Ideas, in essence, evolve, spread, fight for survival, and ultimately improve humanity over time in the same way as natural selection.
		+
		+	The ideals that we as Christians espouse--self-sacrifice, love, peace, compassion--continue to grow and spread in every generation (and I truly believe that we are getting better and better, not worse and worse). But in every generation, there continue to be those who just don't get it. Hence, "limited" atonement. Fortunately, that limitation grows smaller and smaller with every passing generation as we evolve, grow, and learn.
		+
		+	By the way, I also said at the beginning of today's message that the current definition of atonement was a horrible distortion of the word's original meaning. What was the original meaning of atonement? Look at the word itself. At - one - ment. Or, the process of becoming one with God, with each other, with the universe. Unification. Reconciliation. I believe this is what Jesus was talking about when he spoke of the "Kingdom of God."
		+
		+	As we evolve, as we grow in understanding of each other and of the world around us, we grow closer together, closer to the dream and vision of the carpenter from Galilee. Our atonement, our at-one-ment, our one-ness is still limited. But it has limitless potential.

@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 A meme is an idea, an image, a video, a quote that gets passed from person to person around the internet, gaining traction and going viral, eventually influencing larger and larger segments of the population.  Chances are all of you have, at some point or another, forwarded a clever email or shared a Facebook post with all your friends and acquaintances.  Maybe it was something cute, or funny, or inspirational and deeply meaningful.  Something within you was moved, and felt compelled to share it with the people you love.  If so, congratulations: You have participated in a meme.
-But how can a meme be a metaphor for atonement?  I would contend that the story of Jesus--not just his death, but his life, his teachings, his compassion for others, and ultimately the sacrifice all that for the sake of others--this is truly the greatest story ever told.  It was passed on by his followers, and then by artists, musicians, writers, poets, theologians, and philosophers.  It would not have spread so far, so wide, so thoroughly, if it were not the most powerful, most viral meme in human history.  Not only
+But how can a meme be a metaphor for atonement?  I would contend that the story of Jesus--not just his death, but his life, his teachings, his compassion for others, and ultimately the sacrifice all that for the sake of others--this is truly the greatest story ever told.  It was passed on by his followers, and then by artists, musicians, writers, poets, theologians, and philosophers.  It would not have spread so far, so wide, so thoroughly, if it were not the most powerful, most viral meme in human history.
-Ironically, the term "meme" was coined by Richard Dawkins, an well-known athiest and
+Not only did it spread (long before the advent of the internet and social media) but it also visibly influenced the entire world--sometimes (admittedly) in negative ways, but most often for good, toward the ideals of self-sacrifice, caring for the poor, loving one's neighbor, turning the other cheek, and striving for peace, compassion, and human dignity.  Other stories and other religions have certainly carried their share of similar influence, but few with as much effectiveness as the story of Jesus, the humble carpenter from Galilee.
+Ironically, the term "meme" was coined by Richard Dawkins, an well-known atheist and student of Darwinian evolution.  He first used the idea of the meme as a cultural analog to the replication and spread of genes in biology.  Ideas, in essence, evolve, spread, fight for survival, and ultimately improve humanity over time in the same way as natural selection.
-−
--atonement as at one ment

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 Incidentally, lest you set yourself up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it.  I'm reminded of the story about the man driving home from work one day, when his wife calls him on his cell phone and says,  "Honey, please be careful. There was a story on the news just now--some lunatic is driving the wrong way down the highway."  "Oh it's worse than that," he replies, "there are hundreds of them!"
-I said at the beginning of today's message that the central premise in Christian theology is that the sacrifice and death of Jesus on the cross somehow fundamentally changed the relationship between God and humankind, atoning for all of our wrongs and making us right with God.  But how exactly does the death of an innocent man who died 2,000 years ago have any effect on the lives of not-so-innocent people today, or in any century?  What are the "mechanics" of atonement? How does it work?  Is it magic?  Is it logic?  There are countless theories about how atonement work, most of them using some kind of metaphor or another.
+I said at the beginning of today's message that the central premise in Christian theology is that the sacrifice and death of Jesus on the cross somehow fundamentally changed the relationship between God and humankind, atoning for all of our wrongs and making us right with God.  But how exactly does the death of an innocent man who died 2,000 years ago have any effect on the lives of not-so-innocent people today, or in any century?  What are the "mechanics" of atonement? How does it work?  Is it magic?  Is it logic?  There are countless theories about how atonement works, most of them using some kind of metaphor or another.
 John Calvin was, by training, a lawyer.  And so he envisioned the plight of humanity as it might play out in a courtroom, with God as the judge, and mankind as the defendant, accused of breaking God's law.  Mankind is clearly guilty of this, and the punishment (for whatever reason) is death.  Medieval law established a value, or price for the life of every individual--a different price for a slave, for a farmer, for a nobleman.  In a court of law, that price could be paid in substitution for a death sentence, or an individual whose life was of equal value (a brother, a father, a friend) could offer to stand in place of the guilty party and take the punishment instead.
@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 For Calvin and the Reformers, this is what Jesus did.  His life, being perfect, was equal to or greater than the lives of all humanity, and therefore his voluntary death substituted for the death sentence we would have otherwise received.
-Sometimes, I think that in modern Christianity, we forget that all of this is just a metaphor.  There is no courtroom.  God is not really a judge with a gavel, sitting on a bench wearing a black robe.  And last week, I laid my own cards on the table, declaring that I don't equate that "death sentence" to an eternity in the fires of hell after we die, or "salvation" to an eternity in the clouds of heaven.
+Sometimes, I think that in modern Christianity, we forget that all of this is just a metaphor.  There is no courtroom.  God is not really a judge with a gavel, sitting on a bench wearing a black robe.  And the medieval laws that so influenced the Reformers are now 500 years out of practice, no longer reflective of our justice systems or even our conception of what is just and fair.
 -atonement as at one ment

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 On the day of the court case, the judge walked in...accompanied by a seeing eye dog.  Guthrie says that Officer Obie "looked at the seein' eye dog . . . and then at the twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy pictures . . . and then at the seeing eye dog . . . and Officer Obie began to cry."  Guthries goes on to say that this was truly a case of American Blind Justice.
-In the end, it did not matter how accurate, comprehensive, and thorough Officer Obie's preparation was...it was simply not effective for its intended recipient.  The judge did not "choose" to disregard the evidence.  Through forces beyond his ability to control, he was simply unable to see it, and therefore, for him, it was ineffective.
+In the end, it did not matter how accurate, comprehensive, and thorough Officer Obie's preparation was...it was simply not effective for its intended recipient.  And it wasn't because the judge "chose" of his own accord to disregard the evidence.  Through forces beyond his ability to control, he was simply unable to see it, and therefore, for him, it was ineffective.
-Jesus' sacrifice on the cross (according to classic Calvinism) is not limited in its scope or power. But it is limited in its effectiveness.  Not because of individual choice, but rather for reasons beyond our ability to fully understand or control. Hence limited atonement.
+In the same way, according to classic Calvinism, Jesus' sacrifice on the cross is not limited in its scope or power. It is limited in its effectiveness--and not because of our individual choice, or any limitations on God's part, but for reasons beyond our ability to control or even fully understand.
-My friend and mentor, Rev. Bill Schlesinger, explains limited atonement this way:  "Not everyone gets it."  Not because they're stupid.  Not because they're stubborn.  Not because they're bad.  Everyone comes from a different context, is formed by a different set of experiences and circumstances, has different perspectives...and different blind spots.  Not everyone gets it.
+My friend and mentor, Rev. Bill Schlesinger, explains limited atonement this way:  "Not everyone gets it."  Not because they're stupid.  Not because they're stubborn.  Not because they're bad.  Everyone comes from a different context, is formed by a different set of experiences and circumstances, has different perspectives...and different blind spots.  And so not everyone gets it.
-Incidentally, lest we set ourselves up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it.  I'm reminded of the story about the man driving home from work one day, when his wife calls him on his cell phone and says,  "Honey, please be careful. There was a story on the news just now--some lunatic is driving the wrong way down the highway."  "Oh it's worse than that," he replies, "there are hundreds of them!"
+Incidentally, lest you set yourself up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it.  I'm reminded of the story about the man driving home from work one day, when his wife calls him on his cell phone and says,  "Honey, please be careful. There was a story on the news just now--some lunatic is driving the wrong way down the highway."  "Oh it's worse than that," he replies, "there are hundreds of them!"

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:19, 13 October 2017
Line 47:		Line 47:
	My friend and mentor, Rev. Bill Schlesinger, explains limited atonement this way: "Not everyone gets it." Not because they're stupid. Not because they're stubborn. Not because they're bad. Everyone comes from a different context, is formed by a different set of experiences and circumstances, has different perspectives...and different blind spots. Not everyone gets it.		My friend and mentor, Rev. Bill Schlesinger, explains limited atonement this way: "Not everyone gets it." Not because they're stupid. Not because they're stubborn. Not because they're bad. Everyone comes from a different context, is formed by a different set of experiences and circumstances, has different perspectives...and different blind spots. Not everyone gets it.

−	Incidentally, lest we set ourselves up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it. I'm reminded of the story	+	Incidentally, lest we set ourselves up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it. I'm reminded of the story about the man driving home from work one day, when his wife calls him on his cell phone and says, "Honey, please be careful. There was a story on the news just now--some lunatic is driving the wrong way down the highway." "Oh it's worse than that," he replies, "there are hundreds of them!"

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:17, 13 October 2017
Line 39:		Line 39:
	The song tells the story of how Guthrie and some friends were taken to court for littering in the small town of Stockbridge, Massachusetts. The arresting officer, Officer Obie, was enthusiastic about the case since it was, in the words of the song, "the biggest crime of the last 50 years" in such a small town. To prosecute the case, Officer Obie assembled a massive body of evidence, including plaster tire tracks, footprints, "twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one . . . pictures of the approach, the getaway, the northwest corner, the southwest corner . . . not to mention the aerial photography!"		The song tells the story of how Guthrie and some friends were taken to court for littering in the small town of Stockbridge, Massachusetts. The arresting officer, Officer Obie, was enthusiastic about the case since it was, in the words of the song, "the biggest crime of the last 50 years" in such a small town. To prosecute the case, Officer Obie assembled a massive body of evidence, including plaster tire tracks, footprints, "twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one . . . pictures of the approach, the getaway, the northwest corner, the southwest corner . . . not to mention the aerial photography!"

−	On the day of the court case, the judge walked in...accompanied by a seeing eye dog. Guthrie says that Officer Obie "looked at the seein' eye dog . . . and then at the twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy pictures . . . and then at the seeing eye dog . . . and Officer Obie began to cry."	+	On the day of the court case, the judge walked in...accompanied by a seeing eye dog. Guthrie says that Officer Obie "looked at the seein' eye dog . . . and then at the twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy pictures . . . and then at the seeing eye dog . . . and Officer Obie began to cry." Guthries goes on to say that this was truly a case of American Blind Justice.
		+
		+	In the end, it did not matter how accurate, comprehensive, and thorough Officer Obie's preparation was...it was simply not effective for its intended recipient. The judge did not "choose" to disregard the evidence. Through forces beyond his ability to control, he was simply unable to see it, and therefore, for him, it was ineffective.
		+
		+	Jesus' sacrifice on the cross (according to classic Calvinism) is not limited in its scope or power. But it is limited in its effectiveness. Not because of individual choice, but rather for reasons beyond our ability to fully understand or control. Hence limited atonement.
		+
		+	My friend and mentor, Rev. Bill Schlesinger, explains limited atonement this way: "Not everyone gets it." Not because they're stupid. Not because they're stubborn. Not because they're bad. Everyone comes from a different context, is formed by a different set of experiences and circumstances, has different perspectives...and different blind spots. Not everyone gets it.
		+
		+	Incidentally, lest we set ourselves up in judgment--when it doubt it's probably safer to assume that YOU are the one who doesn't get it. I'm reminded of the story

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 You can see, I'm sure, why this view of limited atonement (and hence, predestination) is unpopular.  But it's also pretty misguided, and not at all what Calvin and early Calvinists advocated.
-They firmly believed that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross was more than sufficient to cover the sins of all humanity.  But they also looked at the world around themselves, and realized that not everyone embraced or accepted this sacrifice.  Some later theologians (and many Christians today) argued that that was the result of individual freedom of choice--God wants everyone to be saved, but like a cosmic gentleman does not force himself upon us; he respects our choice one way or another.  Calvin and the early Calvinists rejected that view specifically because of countless verses in the Bible where they read that God himself "hardened the hearts" of individuals.  Verse 8 of today's passage: "GOD gave them a sluggish spirit, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day."
+They firmly believed that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross was more than sufficient to cover the sins of all humanity.  But they also looked at the world around themselves, and realized that not everyone embraced or accepted this sacrifice.
 They believed that if you, as an individual, had to do something, if you had to "choose" God, then God's salvation was no longer truly unconditional, there were strings attached (remember last week's doctrine of unconditional election).
-There's a story that I think illustrates this beautifully.  Some of you may be old enough to remember Arlo Guthrie
+There's a story that I think illustrates this beautifully.  Some of you may be old enough to remember folk singer Arlo Guthrie, and his famous 1967 song, Alice's Restaurant, which was later turned into a film by the same name.
-*Alice's Restaurant

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 I'm going to start with what I think is the incorrect, misguided, but commonly accepted version of this doctrine.  Then I'm going to move more in the direction of what Calvin and his followers actually intended, for better or worse, in the 16th and 17th centuries.  Finally, I'm going to  propose a way of understanding Limited Atonement today--one that breaks somewhat with traditional Calvinism, but honors its methodology and logic, and brings it into a 21st century, scientific view of the world.
-Limited Atonement.
+So. Limited Atonement.  I think we all understand what "limited" means, but what about atonement?  The Oxford English Dictionary defines atonement as "The action of making amends for a wrong or injury."  That is an absolutely horrible distortion of the word's original meaning...but fair enough when it comes to the way it is commonly used today.
 *Alice's Restaurant