Trinity Sunday: In the Beginning Is the Word

A dozen youth had the task of leading congregational worship from start to finish on Trinity Sunday, 2017. Themes of the day (aside from the obvious) were mystery, mish-mash, dialogue, creation, and creativity. One child served as a visual pastorist, i.e. pastor-artist, painting on a 20"x36" canvas we'd hung on the wall, and another as a vocal pastorist, singing a solo version of Holy, Holy, Holy. Everyone else was eager to read, pray, and speak. The kids delighted in their different ways of contributing.

Our opening and closing hymns were by Ruth Duck: Sacred the Body and Colorful Creator, while our hymn following the sermon was Thomas Troeger's Source and Sovereign, Rock and Cloud.

We also involved the congregation in a bit of music that tested our abilities of timing and communication: For a short Song of Praise, we sang the first verse of This Is the Day as a call-and-response, and for a song to prepare us to hear the scriptures, we sang Listen to the Word That God Has Spoken as a round - I think it's one of my new favorites. The lyrics were especially poignant for the day:

Listen to the Word that God has spoken;

Listen to the One who is close at hand;

Listen to the voice that began creation;

Listen even if you don't understand.

And the mish-mash of everyone's voices overlapping, singing the same parts at different times, had exactly the order-within-cacophony effect I was going for!

We had five readers share the whole of Genesis 1, which was in our lectionary for the morning - two alternating narrators, and three alternating voices of God. We also read the Psalm and Gospel, but focused most of the day on the Hebrew text.

Later, two youth shared a short sermon I prepared with them in mind. It's based largely on letters and conversations we shared together, and what we learned during our January Gender Series about always honoring someone's self-identification. The full text is below, and you can also hear them deliver the message here (5 min).

In the Beginning Is the Word

A: Tohu va bohu!

B: It sounds like a spell from Harry Potter –

A: -- or a sneeze --

B: -- but it’s actually a phrase used in the first Creation story in Genesis, and nowhere else in the Bible. Since it’s only used once, it’s hard to say exactly what this ancient Hebrew phrase means.

A: In this morning’s passage, it’s translated to “formless void,” as in, “…when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void.” And in some modern languages like German and Hungarian, it means “confusion or commotion.”

B: But judging by the sound of it, it’s a nonsense word. It just sounds funny. So another way of saying tohu va bohu in English is “mish-mash.” Imagine how much less formal Genesis would sound if it began with, “In the beginning… y’know, back when the world was just a mish-mash…”

A: We can easily imagine people gathering around a fire under a deep night sky, telling each other how they believed the world came to be.

B: Their words likely gave ancient communities a sense of shared history and peace about things that were unknown and mysterious to them.

A: Speaking of divine mysterious things: Today is Trinity Sunday, a day when we remember a core mystery of our faith.

B: If our church year were a novel, days like Easter and Pentecost would be plot points. They’re events when we celebrate certain things the Triune God does.

A: Trinity Sunday is more like a chance for a character study on who God is – who God has been revealed to be, all throughout the Story we’ve been telling and re-telling.

B: The Companion to the Book of Worship tells us that Trinity Sunday “celebrates the unfathomable mystery of God’s being as Holy Trinity. It is a day of adoration and praise of the one, eternal, incomprehensible God.”

A: It’s a day to remember that even what we cannot fathom is worth celebrating, and even what we cannot understand is worth receiving.

B: There are biblical passages like this morning’s Gospel text which directly name the three persons of the Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, or similar names. But, for more reasons than we could discuss in a year, let alone in a morning, Genesis chapter 1 is a surprisingly good narrative to help us reflect on this mystery of faith.

A: The simplest reason being – because Creation doesn’t end with tohu va bohu.

B: And neither does God.

A: We can acknowledge that the fullness of God confuses us and is beyond our human understanding, while still recognizing the numerous ways that the Divine is revealed to us – through words or in spite of them.

B: It is both our responsibility and our pleasure to take great care to use language that is based on God’s self-revelation to us and to the keepers of Scripture, and not something we or our ancestors have forced without holy collaboration. The challenge is knowing the difference.

And as any cat owner can tell you – there’s a big difference between being put into a box and choosing to get in one yourself.

A: Though if the Trinity is as much God’s self-identity as we say it is, it figures that God would climb into a box as un-boxlike as the Trinity.

B: We’re about to sing a hymn written by Thomas Troeger, a graduate of Yale University ordained in both the Presbyterian Church USA and the Episcopal Church.

A: The hymn is called “Source and Sovereign, Rock and Cloud” and explores an impressive collection of 40 names or images for God, every one of them in some way biblically based. You may also notice that the structure of the verses reminds you of the Trinity. Each group of images focuses on the various roles associated with one of the three.

B: It’s our hope that this hymn will express just how much possibility exists in co-creating with God in the midst of what may feel to us like mish-mash.

A: And we also hope that the refrain does justice to the Holy One who – forgive us for saying this so un-biblically – has out-catted the cats.

B: It seems that whenever we humans name something, we are either taming the unknown, or claiming it as newly familiar.

A: One suggests an act of control, the other an act of intimacy. But both intimacy and control are capable of misunderstanding the heart of whatever we name.

B: May this hymn, and all of today’s worship, help us to center ourselves in religious language that is creative and never coercive, intimate and never assuming, and rejoices in the ability to know something of the unknown.

Both: Amen.

Do Not Be Daunted

A sermon I wrote for four children, ages 13, 10, 10, and 8, to preach in worship at First Presbyterian Church of New Haven on December 18, 2016.

For context, much of the congregation had recently read the book Faithful Resistance: Gospel Visions for the Church in a Time of Empire (compiled and partly written by Rick Ufford Chase). The Gospel reading of the morning was Matthew 1:18-25. Shortly after the reading, the children acted out a play which elaborated on the text, and the play led directly into the sermon. Find the scripture passage here.

-----

L: “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.”
A: “Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now.”
M: “You are not obligated to complete the work--”
R: “--but neither are you free to abandon it.” *

A: Did you know that Jesus was Jewish? This is something that surprised me when I first learned it. When we read our Bible as Christians, we don’t want to make it sound like God left the Jewish people or thought their faith was not good enough. Joseph and Mary were Jewish, too. That’s why in our play, Joseph makes a point of telling his sister that he still loves God and Torah, which is the Hebrew Law.

M: Later on in Matthew, Jesus even says that he has come to fulfill the Law, not to abolish it. Sometimes it isn’t really obvious, but most of the things that Joseph, Mary, and Jesus do are in light of their faith, not in spite of it. In today’s text, Joseph has a decision to make. What does the Law require of him?

L: “What does the Lord require of you? Do justice. Love kindness and mercy. Walk humbly with your God.” Micah 6:8. His faith would have taught him to honor both justice and mercy.

R: The Bible says Joseph planned to “dismiss Mary quietly.” We don’t know what really made him decide that, but we do know he didn’t want to hurt her or shame her. A public accusation would have done that. So why isn’t it good enough for Joseph not to hurt Mary? Isn’t that both justice and mercy? Why does he decide to stay with her, and what difference does it make?

M: “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.”
R: “Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now.”
L: “You are not obligated to complete the work--”
A: “--but neither are you free to abandon it.”

R: The Harper Collins Commentary tells us what it means for Joseph to be a righteous man. Besides valuing justice and mercy, Joseph is also “open to divine revelation that corrects his traditional way of thinking.” In other words, Joseph is open to God telling him something that Joseph wouldn’t recognize as holy without God’s help. This too is righteousness.

A: Joseph dreams that an angel tells him who Jesus will be and what his birth will mean. This is the Messiah the Jews have been waiting for. This is Emmanuel, “God with us.”

M: Faith does not only challenge us to be more just and more merciful. Faith challenges us to stay with God and the vulnerable people God loves.

L: When people are in danger or pushed to the edges of power, even if the threat doesn’t affect us directly, it still changes our lives. It must.

A: “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.”
M: “Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now.”
R: “You are not obligated to complete the work--”
L: “--but neither are you free to abandon it.”

R: Faith changes how we witness crisis and pain. The Global Bible Commentary tells us not to ignore the political implications here: “Having hope is a political act of resistance against death-wielding powers.” These powers might be government, economics, social norms, or religious convictions.

L: In our play, Joanna shows us what’s at stake for Mary. Mary agrees to help bring Jesus into the world, but even if she tells people the whole story, they might not believe her. Because of social and religious customs, acting on her hope could put her in danger.

M: Brian Merritt writes in Faithful Resistance that salvation is not something a person can own. Instead, “we understand salvation to be resistance that pushes … toward equality and compassion for all living creatures.”

A: Along with Joseph, we might also learn that there is more to loving people than sparing them from harm. Sometimes faithful resistance means being a friend or companion to someone other people wouldn’t blame you for ignoring.

L: Merritt writes, “This is why direct action and mutual aid are so central to our own spiritual growth. These actions put us at risk in ways similar to the constant condition of those who are oppressed. It may be our only opportunity to find Christ in this world.”

A: Remember, Joseph is not the Savior here. Jesus is.

R: And God’s salvation work will happen whether Joseph decides to participate or not.

M: But through the dream, God tells Joseph exactly what it is he has the chance to do. And just like with Mary, God already knows what Joseph’s answer is going to be.

R: “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.”
L: “Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now.”
A: “You are not obligated to complete the work--”
M: “--but neither are you free to abandon it.”

-----

*Citation: This quote, used here as a refrain, is commonly attributed to the Talmud and appears to paraphrase/be influenced by a few voices, such as Rabbi Rami Shapiro.

God Is the Child in the Backseat of the Car

Source

When I first met Frog Girl, she was old enough to be in Girl Scouts and young enough to need to ride in the backseat of the car.

As we drove, we talked.

At times I lived vicariously through her, seeing the world anew through her eyes as she navigated school and extracurriculars and a family and a social life.

And at times her questions and insights forced me to reflect on my own life - past, present, and future - in a way that I hadn't anticipated. She talked to me like I was Someone Who's Gone Before, like I had wisdom to impart, but so many of her ideas encouraged me, entertained me, and made me appreciate being alive.

While I waited for her to finish gymnastics or swimming, I would sit and muse about whatever wise, witty, funny, wonderful things she had said so far that day.

When I had a pen handy, I wrote them down. I did the best I could to capture her words and the inflections of her voice on a scrap of paper that couldn't do her justice.

Sometimes she'd said so many clever, quotable witticisms that day that I knew I was forgetting some of them.

One day during my time working with this family, I thought back on my experiences of God - and, more specifically, my experiences of the silence of God. I had been struggling to make sense of a dark night of the soul that defied easy explanations. At first I'd known little except that it was somehow part of my journey.

Maybe, I thought, God is not so unlike the child in the backseat of the car who surprises me day after day with her interest in my life and her sense of humor and her thought-provoking lens.

When there are lulls in our conversation, the silence is still companionable. Just another part of our travels. No less real or appreciated.

And besides, it gives me a chance to savor all the gems I want to remember.

Getting What We Deserve

A sermon I delivered in class this month, based upon Job 2:1-8 (NRSV). I preached off of notes and pictures rather than written text, so this is just an adaptation of that presentation.

I invite you to read Job 2:1-8 first, noting that the Hebrew for "(the) Satan" also translates to mean "the accuser."

By the time we catch up with Job in the beginning of Chapter 2, he's already lost his numerous sons and daughters and all of his livestock and property. Job was a well-respected man in his community, and having all of these things had helped to shape his high social status. They're the kinds of things that made other people in the community look at him and say, "That Job must have done something right to be so blessed."

And then, just when it looks like it can't get any worse, he even loses his very health.

For the people of Job's time and place, all of this loss indicates one thing: Job must have done something wrong and now he's getting what he deserves. People believed that God would dish out rewards and punishments, an idea well established in Deuteronomy, which the storytellers and early audiences would be thinking with here.

But for the life of him, Job can't figure out what he could have done to be suffering this series of unfortunate events. His friends use common sense and religious tradition to make their point, but in the face of all of this logic and theology, Job only knows that this doesn't line up with his own experience. He has to rethink what he and his community have believed about God.

This is what Job's integrity is really about - being authentic. Not just doing good things or praising God (and by Chapter 3 Job won't seem as patient as we might think); but also standing by what he knows to be true.

Even if we don't experience the same losses that Job does, we 21st century Christians have plenty of voices competing to explain suffering to us.

Some voices ask, "Why do bad things happen to good people?"

Some say, "You're too bad to be forgiven."

Some voices pray, "Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven," and then urge people to be stoic and to bear pain and hardship - even the kinds that humans cause one another - because somehow God derives glory from this.

Being apathetic or desensitized to pain is not the mark of strong faith. Seeking the power of God, even in the midst of human weakness and crisis, can be the mark of strong faith. Having the strength and compassion not to condemn someone for their own suffering can be the mark of strong faith.

Unfortunately, we - the church, the world - may have come up with even more ways to justify suffering than to alleviate it.

Over the course of history, religious peoples have:

...claimed that the pain of childbirth was inflicted on women because of Eve's part in the Fall,
...identified illness and disability with demon possession,
...blamed victims for bringing acts of violence upon themselves,
...speculated that AIDS arose to punish homosexuality,
...sanctioned genocide and slavery in the name of God,
...and - just like Job's friends - touted the adage that "you reap what you sow."

It's time to realize that suffering, like grace, is not so conditional. It's a realization we need to face for all of those people like Job whose hardships only become worse when accusations rain down on them.

Accusations.

And it's even more than that: it's important for everyone who has ever been told that they are "undeserving" in one way or another - too innocent to face pain, too guilty to find grace.

Because if we don't acknowledge that bad things can happen to people in spite of the good that they do, how can we ever accept the idea that grace can come to people in spite of their sins and mistakes? How can we accept forgiveness for what we ourselves have done?

Do you know that you are forgiven? For everything. No matter what.

We must believe that grace is just as real and unconditional as suffering is - and ultimately more triumphant.

The Gospel of Matthew says that God causes the sun "to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."

So what's the point?

Maybe the point isn't our righteousness or whether or not we deserve what comes our way, but that God aches with human suffering, and rejoices when we find grace and hope in spite of it.

Give Up Everything You Have

This comic by David "Naked Pastor" Hayward, "graffiti artist on the walls of religion," explores the idea that we may need to be willing to relinquish more than our physical means in order to be at peace with God.


"Trash Your Theology"

Of course, Hayward and some of his readers discovered a rather meta loop, unable to avoid theologizing about the possibility of relinquishing one's theology. But the significant point remains: that if we go so far as to ascertain that our own understandings each somehow fall short of Ultimate Truth, it seems inevitable that there will need to be some sort of adjustment involved before either we embrace Truth or Truth embraces us... whatever the case may be.

The most common interpretations of Jesus' command for someone to give up everything and follow him are to leave behind one's former work or personal life (the first disciples, for instance) or to sell one's possessions (the wealthy man who received exactly that word of guidance).

Certainly, material and monetary accumulation and major shifts in one's path are all worthwhile topics for discussion and self-reflection. These matters are more profound than self-denial or suffering. Loss of this nature opens up the possibility for an incredible gain. Consumer culture tends to teach us that the only good "loss" is weight loss. What little else are we readily willing to give up?

But simply put, as Lois A. Lindbloom writes, when we say "no" to one thing, we simultaneously say "yes" to something else, and vice versa (Cultivating Discernment As a Way of Life). I would extend that: when we say "no more" to one option - in habit or lifestyle, relationship or career, location or mindset - we simultaneously embrace something new, even if we aren't quite sure yet what it is.

So I find the idea of dying to self as an ideological liberation to be inspiring and perhaps less thoroughly explored terrain. The first time I noticed the concept articulated well was in the book Three Simple Rules: A Wesleyan Way of Living.

Author Rueben P. Job writes: "Are we ready to give up our most cherished possession - the certainty that we are right and others wrong?"


Questions for Discussion and Reflection:

What do you think you may need to shed before you can move on? Consider the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual facets of your life.

Today, what might God be calling you to let go? ...to embrace?

Meditate or journal on your views about loss.

What do you think it would look like to attain a balance of trusting in what you believe to be true and giving up the certainty that you are right?

Overheard in Madison: Hell Is...

Bits of a conversation I overheard in town today.

Note that all use of the word "you" was implied not to mean the listener, but a generic, indiscriminate person.

Teen to Adult: "But the thing with me is, I don't believe in God. I don't believe you're going to heaven or hell. I believe your belief is a choice. And if you believe in God, I respect that. . . . I believe there's a heaven, a hell and a purgatory. And hell is where you live in your nightmares, and purgatory is neutral."


Source

The teen never did give an idea of what heaven might be. I think this is a theology in progress.

Religious Anti-Environmentalism at Its Worst

In the midst of working on my final papers for a course called The Spirituality of Ecology with the proficient Dr. Laurel Kearns, I found more than enough motivation - in fighting the myths offered under the guise of spirituality.

This video suffers from inordinate misinformation and lack of evidential support:



How many "false assertions" (as they would say) can you spot?

I'll start you off.

First major inaccuracy: supporting environmental justice means putting the wellbeing of nature ahead of that of people.



Fact: Ecological degradation disproportionately affects the poor, the indigenous, and minority populations.

Let's be clear.

The "environment" is not just wildlife or the Grand Canyon or Algonquin Park. It is also the plant in Newark, New Jersey, the site of the chemical accident of Agent Orange; it is a landfill; it is Chernobyl; it is the Ironbound District; it is the slaughterhouse; it is Doremus Avenue, the "Chemical Corridor." The environment is our surroundings, whether placid and flowery or a pit of squalor and waste. And people live in both settings.

In the Ironbound District of New Jersey, signs of environmental degradation and the risks it poses to the humans living there are evident. For just a few examples:

-A community pool had to be constructed on lifts to prevent contact with hazardous chemicals in the ground.

-There is approximately one half acre of green space per 1000 people, versus the average 7-8 acres per 1000 people.

-When the community implemented an Astroturf soccer field, it was eventually found to be poisoned with lead. Residents and environmental workers needed to fight hard for lead-testing for the children who had walked and played there, including preschool students whose teachers had often taken them across the field.

And if that isn't enough to swallow, to help people to fathom one individual's impact, "ecological footprint" tests are available; they evaluate, based upon lifestyle, such a question as: "If everyone lived as you do, how many earths would be needed?" Even the most ecologically-minded are shocked to discover that their practices only go so far. When people who already live extraordinarily lightly on the earth are scoring two, three, four planets we know we are in dire trouble.

As for the claim that the environmentalist movement has become its own religion which threatens - I'm sorry, that is, "is deadly to" - the Gospel of Jesus and the good of the church...?



Not so.

There's "an elephant in the way," folks, but it isn't the environmental movement.

First of all, if we're going to argue the idolatry angle, then as Dr. Laurel Kearns has said, consumerism itself is a system of beliefs and values - not the least of which are low prices, budgeting, and possessing gadgets. Let's not forget that.

Second, the Bible is perhaps the most frequently misunderstood and misquoted source. This case is no exception.

According to Dr. Catherine Keller, natural science is a crucial ally to eco-theologians. And some non-religious authors have referred to creation as "divinely inspired," which is more scripturally accurate than many Christians' perspective of dictatorially imposed creation.

The often misinterpreted Genesis story does not claim creatio ex nihilo – creation from nothing, from a formless void – but rather from tohuvabohu – an uninhabitable mishmash, literally a word that cannot be translated except as what seems a sparingly-used rhyming colloquialism. Creation occurs at the edge of chaos. If there is too much chaos, there is disillusion; if there is too much order, nothing can emerge.

Possibly an even more commonly disputed interpretation of Genesis is that it grants humans "dominion" and the right to "subdue" nature to humans' own means, rather than describing a human role of steward and caretaker.

But this simply cannot mean exploitation; rather, it entails power with responsibility and wisdom, that humanity should view creation with love and awe. The Bible prohibits waste, the cause of extinction, and the cause of pain to living creations.

Humans have an emaciated understanding of the world – often using the dualistic terms "we" and "they" in all matters. "We" as a species claim superiority, deeming the rest of nature as inferior forms of life.

Nevertheless, "we" forget that, according to Christian principle, we are judged by the way that we treat the least powerful, and we continue to wreak destruction – actively and passively – on a creation which cannot restore itself.

This is only the tip of the (rapidly melting) iceberg. If this is at all new to you, as it was for me this past year, I hope you'll consider delving more deeply into the subject. Don't take my word for it, and don't take scare tactic videos like the above at face value, either. This issue is far too critical not to do one's own investigation.


Tipping my hat to Scotteriology on this one. Please read his blog post on the subject here.

The Devil's Greatest Trick

Or, "At the Risk of Being Heretical"

Years ago, when I had frequent theological debates with a friend (or two) and was gradually restoring my faith, I also confronted the issue of whether or not the devil exists, and if so, in what form.


This would not have been my first guess.

Amidst her responses, my friend said, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled is convincing the world he doesn't exist." (Which I now know to be a quote from The Usual Suspects, 1995.)

And I came to believe that. Perhaps not - as my church history professor would say - as a "True Truth," but at least acknowledging that - yes, it would even be logical that the devil (whatever that is) would stand to gain even more from people denying its existence.

It's more difficult to reject something if you do not recognize what it is. If you do not acknowledge that something exists at all, you may or may not exhibit it, follow it, experience it, or succumb to it from time to time; you depend upon its assumed nonexistence to validate the assumption that you have not exhibited it. Followed it. Experienced it. Succumbed to it. And if you did, how would you know? How would you recognize it?

I realize that's wordy and weirdly written. So take, for example, jealousy.

Suppose you believe that jealousy does not exist; never in your life before have you experienced or witnessed it. Then your sister receives a special award. Your brother succeeds at work. Your lifelong friend has only one extra ticket to an event and wants to invite... the new grocer. Why weren't you awarded, successful, or invited? Oh, but you don't want a logical answer! That would only add insult to injury. You simply indulge in the indignant feelings until someone tells you that you've been jealous.

Then it's up to you to decide again whether or not you believe that it exists (as opposed to deciding whether or not it exists). But because jealousy is a definable something, it would be difficult for you to convince others - who operate in a reality in which jealousy is not only existent but identifiable - that this is not the case.

Just for fun, try that line of thought on your own with something like "poverty" or "war." If only saying that they don't exist could be enough.

But I don't intend to debate on the existence of the devil. The examples here of jealousy, poverty and war have the advantage of involving "familiarly real" things. It would seem that the concept of the devil is more abstract, in a sense, than the range of human emotions and experiences that a majority of people (I venture to generalize) consider real. I don't presume to have proof that the rest of humanity hasn't been privy to. So allow me to take the liberty of not going there.

I would like to say, however, that I have a new perspective on this "great trick."

The devil's greatest trick is not convincing the world that it doesn't exist, though that's a mighty good one. Props, devil.

No. The devil's greatest trick is convincing people of Peace, those who believe that Peace is graciously given and not earned, that anyone who does not also practice a specific means of Peace is exempt from or undeserving of Peace.

Utterly defeated by the ultimate sacrifice of a Creator that loves the created world more than any language can articulate, the devil finds yet one more way to fight:

Allow humans to believe that this love, this act, this divinity can be contained. Let them receive guidance toward a life of Peace - fine. Ah, but then let them resist it at its core! Let them ask, "Which of us is first? Who will sit on your right and on your left?" (See Mark 10:35-45.) Let them develop hierarchies, both for the sake of power and even in an innocent effort to maintain order. Let them suffer disorder and divide in spite of themselves. Let them enjoy the wonder of spiritual exploration, the blessing of self-expression, the miracle of experiencing the sacred - and then let them organize it, categorize it, name it, and proclaim it for some and not for the rest! Let them honor the Word of God and in the same breath presume to comprehend it in its entirety! Let them commit over and over the first sin of humanity: wishing to be God, idolizing themselves, invoking without restraint the authority of God! Let them follow the Way and let them lose their way within it!

Following Christ is far more than following rules so as not to be chastised or punished. One must actively follow the way of Peace - the way of Christ - in order to create, nurture, and perpetuate that Peace. To fail to act in accordance with the all-encompassing love that Jesus Christ exuded and tried desperately to help us understand is to disrupt that Peace and create something lesser in its place. To claim the Peace of Christ for only those who proclaim his name is to reject and oppose the very Peace intended by Christ's life and death and resurrection; it is to assume the salvific authority of God. Perhaps the clearest way to "deny Christ" - as some would posit is means for separation from God (debatably contrary to Romans 8:38-39) - is to deny the very unconditional nature of God's grace. Perhaps one most directly rejects Jesus Christ by first believing in his existence and authority, and then refusing to accept everything that Jesus means.

And the most miraculous part of all of this? Not only does God, through Christ, initiate a covenant with all people, but God forgives those who deny the existence of that all-encompassing covenant, who seek God exclusively for themselves and the like-minded! Those who choose Christ yet lose the Way are nevertheless allowed the grace that they are afraid to extend to anyone else, the grace that God is practically bursting at the seams to give.

And that is the Good News of Jesus Christ.


Now, I must ask another question of you. Have I proof-texted? Have I made illogical claims or twisted the truth to placate my own deep-seated desire to reconcile people of all beliefs? If I'm wrong, I pray God forgive me. Please do not take anything I have said for authority beyond my own expressed thoughts - particularly my application of the Bible. I'm in theological school, yes - I am a student, and even when I am no longer a student I will only have all the more to learn. I never intend to have the divine understanding of God alone, but I cannot help but want to understand more than I do now.

So help me investigate!