Yesterday, at church, the minister said he was going to share one of these devotionals, which he had read during the previous week, with us. It had two pieces of scripture: Philippians 4:6, and Luke 12:22-32. The verse from Philippians is part of Paul’s exhortation to the church at Ceserea Philippi, and it reads:

…do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God

That scripture is used a lot by people who live by the “God is in complete control” mantra, and who bother him with every mundane thing in their lives. That’s not the scripture I want to talk about, though verses 2 & 3 make a great case against those churches who use Paul’s writings to subjugate their women. Perhaps I’ll write about that another time.

The editing I’m concerned with is from Luke. The selected verses read thus:

And he said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat, nor about your body, what you will put on. For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass, which is alive in the field today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things will be added to you.

“Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

Notice how that last line begins another quote and how it isn’t closed. That means there’s more to it. Here are verses 33 and 34 (emphasis mine):

Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

These two lines, also, are part of a larger discourse, and still do not end the quotation, but this is enough to make my point. I am not innocent of this, but Christians over the past 50 years or so have gotten into the mindset that “God wants me to prosper.” I’m not saying that God does not want us to be happy, or to have the things we need; the bulk of this passage says that he does. But the part that was omitted from the devotional was the part about selling your things and giving the proceeds to the needy. We don’t like to think about that. This stuff is mine. I worked hard to get it. Why can’t that bum just get a job and take care of himself, right? That may be our attitude, it has certainly been mine at times, but time and again, Jesus tells his followers to sell their possessions and give to those who have none. We give anonymously, sure. We toss a few bucks in the collection plate as it’s passed around on Sunday mornings, but are we really willing to sell what we have, and give to those who are in need? That’s a very difficult proposition.

A brief story. Thursday, I was driving over to Trader Joe’s to get some things. I was stopped at the traffic light at Roswell Road and Hammond Drive, when I saw two homeless people on the sidewalk. The woman was in a wheelchair and was missing a leg or two (I can’t remember if it was both or not) and the man was holding a cardboard sign, which read, “Can you help?” Both were filthy, as you might guess, but the man had a cheerful expression on his face, which surprised me. (He also reminded me of the Atlanta local guitar player Glenn Phillips.) I then remembered that I had a trash bag in the trunk that was full of change from when I cleaned out my old car and moved into the new one. I pulled into the nearest parking lot, scooped all the change into an envelope and walked over to where they were sitting. As I walked up, the women was lighting up a cigarette, which caused a visceral reaction in me, that I’ve had many times: if they can afford cigarettes, why should I help them? But then I paused for a second and thought to myself: homeless people can have addictions, too. If I can help them, regardless of what I think of how they might spend the money, shouldn’t I? Did Jesus say, “Sell your possessions and give to the needy, as long as they will spend the money the way you want them to?” No, he didn’t. Am I feeding their nicotine addiction? Perhaps. Did I possibly give them enough money for dinner that night? Maybe. Anyway, I walked up to them handing the envelope to the man, saying, “There’s not much here, but maybe it will help.” Both of their faces lit up with genuine gratitude. The man looked at the envelope and said, “No, man, there’s probably four or five dollars here. Thank you so much.” Both smiled at me, I smiled back, said good-bye and went back to my car.

I tell you that story, not so you can see what a great, compassionate Christian I am, but to illustrate that even in the act of charity, I was still caught up in the fact that I was about to give them my money and they better spend it how I think they should. Never mind that someone could have given them the cigarettes. Never mind the “give a man a fish/teach a man to fish” argument. These people looked like they needed help. I was in a position to give them a small amount of help, and I felt like they really did appreciate it.

Anyway, so we selectively edit scripture to fit a particular message, or to fit nicely with a pithy saying. So what about logical conclusions? Well, as I was thinking about the scripture, the minister was going on about how we need to “stop worrying” and just know that “God is in complete control” and blah blah blah… I’ve always hated that way of thinking. I despise the Sandy Patty song, “God Is In Control,” because I do not believe that is true.

People like to say that he is in complete control, when things are going well, and when things aren’t going well, they say it again, hoping for a return to well-ness. But here’s the rub: if you believe that he is in “complete control” then you have to take that to its logical conclusion. If you believe that every good thing that happens to you is because God wanted it to be that way, then you must also accept that every bad thing that happens to you is because God wanted it that way. It’s all a part of “His Plan” or some such. If you believe that God wanted your team to win your softball game, then you must also believe that he wanted that seven year-old to get cancer and suffer for a couple of years before dying. If you believe that God wanted your plane to land safely, then you must also believe that he wanted those two planes full of innocent people to fly into the World Trade Center on 9/11. That’s an uncomfortable thing.

This only applies to those who subscribe to the “God is in complete control” way of thinking. It does not, necessarily, apply to those who believe in God and believe that he does, on occasion, answer prayers. That’s actually something I’ve never understood from the “complete control” believers: if he’s in complete control, and we are merely pawns on a chessboard, why is prayer even necessary? He already knows what he wants to have happen, regardless of what you want, right? Why do you need to tell/ask him?

Now, I will say that I do believe there is a God. Apart from the fact that I was raised believing that, and it’s a part of who I am, it makes as much sense to me as the “something from nothing” argument. Yes, it means we then have the question of where did God come from, but that at least pushes the question out another level, and I don’t have to think about it as much. :-) God does answer some prayers, but it’s pretty much impossible to figure out which ones he will answer and why. There’s another pithy saying, which I also hate, which goes, “God answers all prayers, but sometimes the answer is ‘no’.” That’s a way to rationalize why person A’s prayer seemed to get a favorable answer while person B’s did not: there was an answer, but the answer wasn’t what person B wanted, and person B just needs to accept that it’s part of the “plan” or the “big picture” and move on. Why do some people seem to receive miraculous healing, while my wife suffers with a degenerative nerve condition that keeps her in pain, 24 hours a day? That’s a very good question, and I don’t have an answer.

This is getting long and a bit rambling, so let me sum up. Any time you are reading a devotional, or in church, and you see that the scripture reading ends before a passage is complete or, worse, you’re supposed to skip some verses in the middle of a larger passage, go ahead and read those extra verses and see if it changes the meaning of the scripture. It won’t always make a difference. Sometimes, it’s just boring details that really have no bearing on the meaning. But sometimes, like in the case of Luke 12, it makes a big difference. And remember where logic takes you and what believing in absolutes means you have to accept.

Now, most of you know that I’m a Christian. I have been for a long time, though I never had a “born again” moment that so many people think you have to have. My son was born into a Christian home, so I doubt he’ll ever have one of those moments either. (I just read a very interesting discussion on the B-Greek mailing list concerning how the passage about how you must be “born again” could also be translated as “born from above,” but that’s a topic for another day.) So anyway, this guy was shouting about how much “Jesus loves you,” alternating with how homosexuals are all going to burn in hell. It’s crap like this that gives all Christians a bad name. When you talk about the same God loving “you” and damning certain people in the same breath, there’s something wrong. I’ve heard of “love the sinner, hate the sin,” which I think is fine, but that’s not what this guy was saying.

I think it is presumptious for humans to declare what God will and will not accept. There is scant evidence from the Bible that homosexuality is the mortal sin that some seem to think/claim it is. I believe in a benevolent God who wants his creations to eventually come back to Him. How and when that happens, I don’ t know. If you read your Bible, you’ll see that it isn’t exactly spelled out. There are lots of grey areas when it comes to “the path to salvation.” I tend to think that a truly loving God, and that’s what the New Testament tells us we have, would provide as many ways as possible to ensure that His creations found their way back to him. My way is through Jesus. Some find their way through Buddah. Some through various Hindu gods. Some through Allah. Some through other means. There, I said it. (I have one particular friend, whom I know is reading this right now, whose heart probably just skipped a beat at what I just said…) Baptists would throw me out for that. Presbyterians would probably laugh, since everything’s already been decided, anyway. Methodists, of which I am one, would probably call me misguided. My Sunday School teacher would call me enlightened, because that’s exactly how he feels. I truly believe that people who are doing their absolute best to live moral lives, to treat fellow human beings with respect and kindness and to make our world a better place, even though they haven’t “accepted Jesus as their lord and savior,” I still believe those people are going to be welcomed back into God’s presence, somehow. You don’t have to agree with me, but that’s what I think.

I also don’t believe that “hell” exists as the fiery furnace of eternal torment that some believe it to be. I believe that “hell” is actually eternal (?) separation from God. People gleefully and self-righteously telling others that they must “turn or burn” really annoy me. Anyway, I’m sort of rambling at this point and alienating my Christian friends. I do wonder, if we were to sit down with those street preachers, how many “rules” from the Bible we could find that they are breaking, and thus putting their own souls in harm’s way. I would be willing to bet there’d be at least one.

But sure enough, in Romans 15:24 – 28, Paul says 

I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a while. At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem bringing aid to the saints. For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. For they were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings. When therefore I have completed this and have delivered to them what has been collected, I will leave for Spain by way of you.

I had never noticed that before. It is not known if Paul ever made it to Spain or not. The apocryphal book of I Clement makes reference to Paul “having reached the farthest bounds of the West,” which some scholars speculate could mean Spain, since that is certainly as far West as could have been known at that time. There is also speculation that not only did he make it, but he stayed there for nearly two years, before heading to Asia Minor. Of course, there’s no way of knowing for sure.

Why has this piqued my interest so? I think it’s because it was so unexpected. You sort of get into, not a rut, but a pattern of expectation when dealing with the Bible. At least, I do. So when something comes along to shake that pattern, it’s very interesting. The only problem now is that there’s really no more information to be had about Paul and Spain.

My first thought upon hearing this was “Man, I hope this guy rots in hell for this” but upon further consideration, that’s probably not the Christian thing, is it? Anger and revenge seem to feel so much better than forgiveness, and that’s one of the things I struggle with. I’m quick to anger and quick to condemn, but a “proper” Christian response would be to condemn the act but not the one who did it. Unfortunately, it’s not as easy to separate the two as preachers make it sound.

Yesterday I dealt with the whole ἐυδοκία vs. ἐυδοκίας issue in Luke 2:14, but today I ran across something interesting in Luke 2:16. The Greek for this verse is

καὶ ἦλθαν σπεύσαντες καὶ ἀνεῦραν τήν τε Μαριὰμ καὶ τὸν Ἰωσὴφ καὶ τὸ βρέφος κείμενον ἐν τῇ φάτνῃ

which is translated essentially the same in most translations. The ESV says

And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger.

while the KJV says

And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.

But the Greek word that is in bold, ἀνεῦραν, is the 3rd person aorist plural form of ἀνευρίσκω, which seems to mean a bit more than simply “found.”

The Greek New Testament from the United Bible Societies, version 4 has a lexicon that defines this word as

find (by searching)

Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines it as

to find out by search

and Mounce’s Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament defines it in the strongest terms

to find by dilligent search

I think it is interesting that this word seems to imply that some real effort had been applied before the finding, yet no translation makes a note of that. Maybe I’m reading more into this word than I should, but if you used one of these definitions, then it makes it sound like the shepherds had to expend a bit more energy than simply walking to Bethlehem and “finding” the holy family. I asked a friend what he thought and he suggested “discovered” instead of “found.” I think I like that; it conveys a bit more work on the part of the shepherds. But it still doesn’t really point out their efforts to find them. What do you think? Have I read too much into this word?

Eucharistic theology created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Zwingli You are Ulrich Zwingli. You believe that bread and wine are symbols of the absent Jesus. You believe in interpreting Scripture reasonably. Zwingli 94% Calvin 81% Luther 63% Orthodox 50% Unitarian 19% Catholic 13%

]]> http://joeygibson.com/2007/11/22/my-eucharistic-theology/feed/ 0 http://joeygibson.com/2007/05/11/what-a-lovely-christian/ http://joeygibson.com/2007/05/11/what-a-lovely-christian/#comments Fri, 11 May 2007 22:22:00 +0000 Joey Gibson http://WhatALovelyChristian Continue reading →]]> There are some “Christians” who give the rest of us a bad name. Some TV-preacher jack-ass called Bill Keller is one of them. He’s going off on Mitt Romney for being a member of a “cult” and being evil and having a forked tongue, a bifurcated tail and carrying a hay-fork. Yeah, he doesn’t like Mormons. I just love hearing so-called “Christians” joyously telling everyone who will listen how someone else is “going to hell.”

I first heard the name when I read Bart Ehrman’s book Misquoting Jesus last year. Metzger was a leading figure in the world of biblical textual criticism, and the general editor of the New Revised Standard version of the Bible. As it happens, I started reading the 4th edition of Metzger’s 1963 book The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration on Monday. So I was about 30 pages into it when he died. It’s funny how things work out sometimes.

I have no real affiliation with the man, but his book is fascinating. I saw one blog yesterday remark that this book should be considered the “standard work” on textual criticism. I have nothing to back that up, but the book certainly is interesting. I have only scratched the surface of textual criticism, but I feel compelled to dig deeper. It’s interesting (and strange, at the same time) seeing ancient variant readings of Biblical passages, and frequently reminds me that, as I said before, God did not write the Bible.

There’s a big discussion going on over at the Rapture-Ready Message Board concerning the current state of affairs in the Middle East. Lots and lots of people there are all a-flutter that “the Rapture” is nigh and they’re busily packing their spiritual suitcases in pregnant anticipation of “being raptured.” I got there through this Boing Boing post. Read through the posts; it’s pretty sad.

But the impending rapture is not what I’m on about. While reading some of those posts, I noticed one person’s signature line, which read:

The Bible is the only book whose Author is always present when you read it.

Sigh… People, God Himself did not write the Bible. The Bible is not a single book containing chapters with names like “Genesis,” “Exodus,” “Matthew” and “John.” It is, in fact, an anthology of many books written by many authors under many circumstances for many purposes. The authors of these books were not, as some seem to believe, taking dictation from God. They may have been inspired by God to write what they wrote, but He didn’t say “OK, Ezekial, write this down. ‘And lo…’.”

The Bible was written by human beings, who wrote for various reasons. Many years after all of these people were dead and gone, their writings were collected into a canon of works that were deemed important or useful for good Jewish and, later, Christian living. To hold up the Bible as something that God Himself wrote is missing the point.

Do I “believe” the Bible to be true. To that I give a qualified “yes.” I do not believe that every story in the Bible is historical fact. The bible contains history, allegory, myth, parable and, as such, it can not be completely true or completely false. I believe that the stories it contains are there to teach something and the point is to get to that “something.” As an aside, I am currently learning Greek so that I can try to read “the original Greek” manuscripts (of the New Testament) to get closer to the source. I put “the original Greek” in quotes because there is no such thing. The original manuscripts are long since lost. We have many copies, of various antiquity and various quality, that we can use, but “the originals” no longer exist. For an interesting read on this topic (textual criticism), check out Bart Ehrman’s book Misquoting Jesus. My Sunday school class just finished this book, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Anyway, my point is that one should not hold up the Bible as something to be worshiped or “believed” with blind faith. God gave us brains and the power of rational, logical thought for a reason. Don’t waste them.

17:42 Update: It appears that the folks at Rapture Ready have locked down their discussion boards. The link to the page I mentioned above now requires a username and password. You can still read some of the choice postings by following the Boing Boing link.