tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23524791323024301492024-03-14T00:32:58.382-05:00All Things NewThe reflections and thoughts of Pastor David Young.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.comBlogger334125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-62797392341915788002015-10-07T20:00:00.000-05:002015-10-07T20:00:58.107-05:00Review: Kings and Presidents<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X6yRM6oMuY4/VhWmyYYTaOI/AAAAAAAA6bA/A4eWCManLGA/s1600/Kings%2Band%2BPresidents.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X6yRM6oMuY4/VhWmyYYTaOI/AAAAAAAA6bA/A4eWCManLGA/s320/Kings%2Band%2BPresidents.jpg" width="206" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.nph.com/nphweb/html/bhol/itempage.jsp?itemId=9780834135314&nid=srch&catalogId=NA&catSecCd=NA&subCatSecCd=NA&subSubCatSecCd=NA">Kings and Presidents</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I once found myself in a Sunday School class where the teacher asked something like "If there is anything you could communicate to today's youth, what would it be?" Someone in the class jokingly said "Vote Republican!" Although the response was offered in jest, it seemed likely to me that it represented a very sincere sentiment. It was a sentiment that I had encountered many times throughout my life in the Church; namely, that one's Christianity could be validated or called into question depending upon one's political persuasions. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
In <i>Kings and Presidents</i>, Timothy Gaines and Shawna Songer Gaines draw on the stories of 2 Kings in the Old Testament and their own pastoral experience to offer an alternative vision of politics and the Kingdom of God. At the heart of that vision is a sharp contrast between the World of Kings and the World of the Kingdom. These authors characterize the World of Kings as one where power, wealth, and influence are utilized to gain more power, wealth, and influence. It is a world with clear winners and losers where one seeks out winning at virtually any cost. The World of the Kingdom, on the other hand, is defined primarily by the faithfulness of God's people. It is not the world of the rich and powerful but of the ordinary and unknown quietly living into God's vision of reality and trusting God to bring about that reality through their faithfulness. In the World of the Kingdom, success has little to do with winning elections and much to do with imitating the savior who empties himself on behalf of others (see Phil. 2:5-11).</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
This is a message that the 21st century American church desperately needs to hear..... over and over and over again. Entirely too often, we have allowed the gospel to be co-opted by the two party system of our nation - imagining that somehow one party or the other has a corner on the market of what it means to be Christian. We are led to believe that Democrats and Republicans are polar opposites and that, as a result, everything hinges on who wins the next election. In this all or nothing contest, it then becomes all too easy to regard the other side as our mortal enemy. Although Tim and Shawna spend very little ink discussing Democrats and Republicans specifically, their contrast between the World of Kings and the World of the Kingdom does a nice job of unmasking this charade that portrays our two largest parties as being so radically different. So long as they are both vying in the same arena for the same power, they both play by the same rules of power, wealth, and influence. For whatever real ideological differences exists between these parties, they go about accomplishing those ideologies in remarkably similar ways and thereby reveal that they are not so different after all. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But neither is this book a call to passivity or inaction. By no means are the authors advocating that all Christians abstain from the political process. Quite to the contrary, this book calls for Christians to be explicitly political. While voting for a certain candidate may be what comes to mind when we hear the word "politics," at its most basic level politics is about how people organize themselves. It is about the ways that their relationships are structured with one another, how they distribute power among themselves. In turn that structuring of relationships and power distribution says something about the beliefs and character of that group of people. A large part of this book's challenge is for the Church to be a people whose relationships - whose politic - reflect the character of the God they claim to serve. After all, the Church has always said that it is the love of this God that will ultimately transform the world - not the next election. The manner in which we engage the politics of our world may be one of the most telling measures of just to what extent we really trust that claim. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DSN02a4_xtY/VhWmfXA27qI/AAAAAAAA6a4/GQigXtMwBSc/s1600/K%2526P%2BBlog%2BTour.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="131" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DSN02a4_xtY/VhWmfXA27qI/AAAAAAAA6a4/GQigXtMwBSc/s400/K%2526P%2BBlog%2BTour.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-34710593343378378262015-08-10T14:04:00.000-05:002015-08-10T14:04:25.417-05:00Review: Theology of Luck <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<img border="0" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/415ZpRpDkeL._SX322_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg" height="320" width="207" /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Theology-Luck-Fate-Chaos-Faith/dp/0834134969/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1439229195&sr=8-1&keywords=A+theology+of+Luck"><i>Theology of Luck</i></a></div>
<br />
<br />
"Everything happens for a reason."<br />
<br />
"It's all a part of God's plan."<br />
<br />
"God is in control."<br />
<br />
These maxims get tossed around in most churches like hand grenades masquerading as pearls of wisdom. At first glance, they seem appealing - even comforting. Surely, that is the reason they are most often offered; to bring comfort in times of grief and tragedy. They shimmer and sparkle with the very best of intentions in those times of pain and need, perhaps even offering what appears to be a certain kind of beauty so long as we don't think about their ramifications too long or too deeply. Indeed, these kinds of ideas have become so pervasive in many parts of American culture that they are not limited merely to those who identify as Christian but are often employed by those who would otherwise be unlikely to utilize religious vocabulary.<br />
<br />
But when we do begin to ponder statements like these more deeply, their implications often show themselves to be explosively destructive and harmful - bringing more injury than healing. "If God is in control, then why does God allow so much injustice?" "If God's plan includes genocide, maybe we would do well to have a different plan." If everything happens for a reason, do my choices and the choices of others matter at all?" In <i>Theology of Luck</i>, Lane and Fringer help their audience to consider precisely these kinds of questions. By way of accessible and enlightening illustrations, they urge readers to reflect more deeply about what we are really saying when we say things like "Everything happens for a reason."<br />
<br />
Most importantly, Fringer and Lane urge their readers to consider what statements like these say about God's own character and nature. In addition to attempting to offer comfort, statements like "God is in control" also serve to emphasize God's power and sovereignty. That is, it seems that for many Christians these statements are offered as a way of affirming God's greatness. Lane and Fringer, however, argue that they do just the opposite. When we make every atrocity in history a part of God's detailed and sovereign plan, we may very well succeed in painting God as powerful but we surely do so at the cost of God's loving character - the most fundamental aspect of God's nature.<br />
<br />
Indeed, at its heart <i>Theology of Luck</i> is a theology of love. It argues repeatedly that the most important thing we can say about God is that God is love. All other statements about God - even those concerning God's power, sovereignty, and perfection - must be measured against the statement that God is love. By urging their readers to consider that not every single incident in life is a part of God's pre-scripted plan, that some things are simply what one might refer to as luck, Fringer and Lane are simultaneously urging their readers to give love the primary place in one's theology and thereby in one's own life as well.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-42506526064633410222015-01-19T14:26:00.000-06:002015-01-19T14:54:53.814-06:00A Dream Not Yet RealizedIt seems to me that many Americans operate under the assumption that racism is a thing of the past. Sure, there are a few racists out there but they are the exception rather than the rule. After all, our nation elected a black president. How could racism possibly be a real and widespread issue in our nation today? We left those kinds of discriminatory attitudes behind long ago. Now we live in a colorblind society where everyone has the same opportunity to succeed and prosper.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The unfortunate reality is quite different. People of color, especially African-Americans, continue to face discrimination that has a regular impact on their life and well-being. Of course, it is difficult for most white folks to imagine this since we don't experience it for ourselves - and when you don't experience it on a regular basis it easy to discount the anecdotal stories or the flashes of media attention as exaggerated biases in perception. After all, I'm not racist, we think to ourselves, and most of the people I know don't seem to be racist so who is it then that is keeping people of color at such a disadvantage?<br />
<br />
But the racism that exists in America today typically isn't the brazen and outspoken racism that existed in the Jim Crow era. It is much more subtle than that. It often exists at the level of subconscious biases that we don't even know - or are afraid to admit - that we have. The kinds of biases in perception that <i>all</i> people have - even otherwise good and kind people who would willingly give of themselves on behalf of others. It seems that one of the side effects of demonizing racism in our country is that we've convinced ourselves that only someone who is truly demonic could be racist when, in fact, all one has to be is human. It doesn't take lots of brazenly racist individuals to perpetuate racism. It only takes the subtly biased perceptions of those who hold power - those who control access to jobs, loans, housing, education, and the law - aggregated and multiplied millions of times over across our country to perpetuate a system of injustice that keeps whole groups of people at an overwhelming disadvantage in our society. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That is one of the reasons I've compiled the data below. It is my hope that something like this can be one lens that helps us to see what we might otherwise not be able to see.<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Housing and Loans</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“...blacks and Latinos experienced discrimination in
approximately half of their efforts to rent or buy housing….three housing
studies have shown that when paired with similar white counterparts, blacks are
likely to be shown fewer apartments, be quoted higher rents, or offered worse
conditions, and be steered to specific neighborhoods.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref1"><sup>[1]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a 2000 audit of twenty-three <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region> cities,
whites were given more information about rentals and were shown more potential
rental units and houses. The study also demonstrated an increase in geographic
steering by real estate agents which perpetuated segregation.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref2"><sup>[2]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“In 2000, national black isolation was 65 percent and
remained 80 percent or higher in cities such as <st1:city w:st="on">Detroit</st1:city>,
<st1:city w:st="on">Newark</st1:city>, and <st1:city w:st="on">Chicago</st1:city>. Due to higher white flight of
families with children to segregated suburbs, white children are the most
segregated (68.3 percent) by neighborhood.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref3"><sup>[3]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“72 percent of black Americans born into the lowest economic
quartile of neighborhoods reside in poor areas as adults, compared with only 40
percent of whites. Furthermore, race is also the most salient predictor of
intergenerational downward residential mobility, with ‘the odds of downward
mobility 3.6 times as large as odds for whites.’”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref4"><sup>[4]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a study in <st1:city w:st="on">Detroit</st1:city>
“...53 percent of whites stated their preference for neighborhoods that are
‘all’ or ‘mostly’ white, only 22 percent of blacks preferred neighborhoods
described as ‘all’ or ‘mostly’ black. In fact, 62 percent of blacks preferred
neighborhoods described as ‘half and half.’”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref5"><sup>[5]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“...studies done in <st1:city w:st="on">Chicago</st1:city>
and <st1:state w:st="on">New York</st1:state> revealed discrimination in seven
out of ten lending institutions in <st1:city w:st="on">Chicago</st1:city>
and in the one institution studied in New York City.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref6"><sup>[6]</sup></a> National
data from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act shows that black applicants are
denied mortgages at least twice as frequently as whites of the same income and
gender. Finally, a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of <st1:city w:st="on">Boston</st1:city> found that after controlling for a
number of variables, blacks on average are denied loans 60 percent more times
than whites.” <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref7"><sup>[7]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Education</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Civil Rights project at Harvard observed a trend
starting in 1986 toward the resegregation of schools in the U.S. Due to this
pattern throughout the 1990’s, schools were more segregated in the 2000-2001
school year than they had been in 1970.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref8"><sup>[8]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Black students are suspended or expelled at triple the rate
of their white peers, according to the U.S. Education Department's 2011-2012
Civil Rights Data Collection, a survey conducted every two years. Five percent
of white students were suspended annually, compared with 16 percent of black
students, according to the report. Black girls were suspended at a rate of 12
percent -- far greater than girls of other ethnicities and most categories of
boys.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the same time, minority students have less access to experienced
teachers. Most minority students and English language learners are stuck in
schools with the most new teachers. Seven percent of black students attend
schools where as many as 20 percent of teachers fail to meet licensure and
certification requirements. And one in four school districts pay teachers in
less-diverse high schools $5,000 more than teachers in schools with higher
black and Latino student enrollment.”<sup><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null">[9]</a></sup><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Politics</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are currently 18 black members of the U.S. House of
Representatives (4.1% of the 435 total members).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are currently 2 black senators in the U.S.
Senate (out of 100) which is the most it has ever had. There have only been 8
black senators in the history of the U.S. Senate.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref10"><sup>[10]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Blacks hold only about 1 to 2 percent of all elected offices
across every level of government in the <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref11"></a></st1:country-region><sup>[11]</sup></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Since 2003, thirty four states have implemented voter ID
laws<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref12"><sup>[12]</sup></a>… Although it is claimed that these
laws are race-neutral, research from the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Delaware</st1:placename></st1:place>
showed that racial animus was the best predictor of support for the law,
regardless of political party. Some of the legislatures, such as those in <st1:state w:st="on">Florida</st1:state> and <st1:state w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:state>,
implemented these laws despite openly claiming that voter fraud was not a
problem…”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref13"><sup>[13]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Employment and Economics</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2003, the median black family income was 61 percent of
the white median family income.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even when blacks and whites of similar characteristics are
compared (work experience, education, etc.) the income gap between blacks and
whites was still found to be about 14 percent.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref14"><sup>[14]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Blacks earn less than whites at every educational level. In
fact, starting at the Associate’s degree level, the disparity between black and
white earners grows with each successive degree attained.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref15"><sup>[15]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On average a black man who has graduated from college earns
less than a white man who never finished high school.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref16"><sup>[16]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even as blacks move up the occupational hierarchy, their
income falls further behind their white peers.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref17"><sup>[17]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a study in <st1:city w:st="on">Milwaukee</st1:city>,
job applicants were divided into four groups: whites without a criminal record,
whites with a criminal record, blacks without a criminal record, and blacks
with a criminal record. White applicants with a criminal record were more likely
to be called back for an interview than black applicants without a criminal
record.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref18"><sup>[18]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Blacks owned only 3 percent of <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>
assets in 2001, even though they constituted 13 percent of the <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>
population. In 2001, the median net worth of whites, $120,989, was over 6.3
times that of blacks, which was only $19,024. Calculation of mean net worth
reveals that, in 2001, the average black family had 17 cents for every dollar
of the average white family.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref19"><sup>[19]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Every Day Perception</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“A survey was conducted in 1995 asking the following
question: “Would you close your eyes for a second, envision a drug user, and
describe that person to me?” The startling results were published in the
Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education. Ninety-five percent of respondents pictured
a black drug user, while only 5 percent imagined other racial groups.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref20"><sup>[20]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“One study suggests that the standard crime news ‘script’ is
so prevalent and so thoroughly racialized that viewers imagine a black
perpetrator even when none exists. In that study, 60 percent of viewers who saw
a story with no image falsely recalled seeing one, and 70 percent of those
viewers believed the perpetrator to be African American.” <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref21"><sup>[21]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“One study, for example, involved a video game that placed
photographs of white and black individuals holding either a gun or other object
(such as a wallet, soda can, or cell phone) into various photographics
backgrounds. Participants were told to decide as quickly as possible whether to
shoot the target. Consistent with earlier studies, participants were more
likely to mistake a black target as armed when he was not, and mistake a white
target as unarmed, when in fact he was armed.” <sup><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref22">[22]</a></sup></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Law Enforcement</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One third of all black males born today can expect to serve
some time in jail if current trends continue.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Eight to nine percent of all blacks are arrested every
year….Although blacks have always been overrepresented in the inmate
population,... this overrepresentation has skyrocketed since 1960. By 1980, the
incarceration rate of blacks was six times that of whites.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref23"><sup>[23]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Almost one in four black men aged 20 to 30 are under the
supervision of the criminal justice system any given day.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref24"><sup>[24]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“The rate of incarceration of blacks for criminal offenses
is over eight times greater than that of whites, with 1 in 20 black men, in
contrast to 1 in 180 white men, in prison.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref25"><sup>[25]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“...according to the Federal Judicial Center, in 1990 the
average sentences for blacks on weapons and drug charges were 49 percent longer
than those for whites who had committed and been convicted of the same crimes -
and that disparity has been rising over time.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref26"><sup>[26]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“... of the people killed by police, over half are black;
the police usually claim that when they killed blacks it was ‘accidental’ because
they thought that the victim was armed although in fact the victims were
unarmed in 75 percent of the cases…”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref27"><sup>[27]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Whites who kill blacks in Stand Your Ground states are far
more likely to be found justified in their killings. In non-Stand Your Ground
states, whites are 250 percent more likely to be found justified in killing a
black person than a white person who kills another white person; in Stand Your
Ground states, that number jumps to 354 percent.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref28"><sup>[28]</sup></a> 24
states have adopted these laws since 2000.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref29"><sup>[29]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“... the probability of arrest for cases [of rape] in which
the victim was white and the suspect black was 0.336, for cases of white
suspects and black victims the probability dropped to 0.107. Blacks represent
65 percent of those exonerated for rape and half of the exonerations of men
convicted of raping white women, even though less than 10 percent of rapes of
white women are by black men.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref30"><sup>[30]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“The Baldus study researched more than 2000 murder cases in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Georgia</st1:country-region> and
“found that defendants charged with killing white victims received the death
penalty eleven times more often than defendants charged with killing black
victims. <st1:country-region w:st="on">Georgia</st1:country-region>
prosecutors seemed largely to blame for the disparity; they sought the death
penalty in 70 percent of cases involving black defendants and white victims,
but only 19 percent of cases involving white defendants and black victims.
Sensitive to the fact that numerous factors besides race can influence the
decision making of prosecutors, judges, and juries, Baldus and his colleagues
subjected the raw data to highly sophisticated statistical analysis to see if
nonracial factors might explain the discrepancies. Yet even after accounting
for thirty-five nonracial variables, the researchers found that defendants
charged with killing white victims were 4.3 times more likely to receive a
death sentence than defendants charged with killing blacks.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref31"><sup>[31]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<st1:country-region w:st="on">Georgia</st1:country-region>’s
district attorneys also invoked the “two strikes and you’re out” sentencing
scheme (life imprisonment for a second drug offense no matter how small) only
1% of the time against white defendants but 16% of the time against black
defendants. “The result was that 98.4 of those serving life sentences under the
provision were black.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref32"><sup>[32]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“One widely cited study was conducted by the San Jose
Mercury News. The study reviewed 700,000 criminal cases that were matched by
crime and criminal history of the defendant. The analysis revealed that
similarly situated whites were far more successful than African American and
Latinos in the plea bargaining process; in fact, ‘at virtually every state of
the pretrial negotiation, whites are more successful than nonwhites.’”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref33"><sup>[33]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“A report in 2000 observed that among youth who have never
been sent to a juvenile prison before, African Americans were more than six
times as likely as whites to be sentenced to prison for identical crimes.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref34"><sup>[34]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“In <st1:state w:st="on">New Jersey</st1:state>,
the data showed that only 15 percent of all drivers on the New Jersey Turnpike
were racial minorities, yet 42 percent of all stops and 73 percent of all
arrests were of black motorists - despite the fact that blacks and whites
violated traffic laws at almost exactly the same rate. While radar stops were
relatively consistent with the percentage of minority violators, discretionary
stops made by officers involved in drug interdiction resulted in double the
number of stops of minorities. A subsequent study conducted by the attorney
general of <st1:state w:st="on">New Jersey</st1:state>
found that searches on the turnpike were even more discretionary than the
initial stops - 77 percent of all consent searches were of minorities. The <st1:state w:st="on">Maryland</st1:state> studies produced similar results: African
Americans comprised only 17 percent of drivers along a stretch of I-95 outside
of <st1:city w:st="on">Baltimore</st1:city>,
yet they were 70 percent of those who were stopped and searched. Only 21
percent of all drivers along that stretch of highway were racial minorities,
yet those groups comprised nearly 80 percent of those pulled over and searched.
What most surprised many analysts was that, in both studies whites were
actually more likely than people of color to be carrying illegal drugs or
contraband in their vehicles. In fact, in <st1:state w:st="on">New Jersey</st1:state>, whites were almost twice as
likely to be found with illegal drugs or contraband as African Americans, and
five times as likely to be found with contraband as Latinos.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref35"><sup>[35]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In Feb 2007, the NYPD released stats showing that they
stopped 508,540 pedestrians in the previous year - 1,393 per day. More than
half of those stopped were African American.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref36"><sup>[36]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“A criminal record today authorizes precisely the forms of
discrimination we supposedly left behind- discrimination in employment,
housing, education, public benefits, and jury service. Those labeled criminals
can even be denied the right to vote.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref37"><sup>[37]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Two-thirds of people detained in jails report annual
incomes under $12,000 prior to arrest. Predictably, most ex-offenders find
themselves unable to pay many fees, costs, and fines associated with their
imprisonment, as well as their child-support debts (which continue to
accumulate while a person is incarcerated). As a result, many ex-offenders have
their paychecks garnished. Federal law provides that a child-support
enforcement officer can garnish up to 65 percent of an individual’s wages for
child support. On top of that, probation officers in most states can require
that an individual dedicate 35 percent of his or her income toward the payment
of fines, fees, surcharges, and restitution charged by numerous agencies.
Accordingly, a former inmate living at or below the poverty level can be
charged by four or five departments at once and can be required to surrender
100 percent of his or her earnings.” <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref38"><sup>[38]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“No other country in the world disenfranchises people who
are released from prison in a manner even remotely resembling the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region>.
In fact, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has charged that <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>
disenfranchisement policies are discriminatory and violate international law.
In those few European countries that permit limited post-prison
disqualification, the sanction is very narrowly tailored and the number of
people disenfranchised is probably in the dozens or hundreds. In the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region>,
by contrast, voting disqualification upon release from prison is automatic,
with no legitimate purpose, and affects millions.” <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref39"><sup>[39]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>The War on Drugs</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Convictions for drug offenses are the single most important
cause for the explosion in incarceration rates in the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region>.
Drug offenses alone account for two-thirds of the rise of the federal inmate
population and more than half of the rise in state prisoners between 1985 and
2000. Approximately a half-million people are in prison or jail for a drug
offense today, compared to an estimated 41,100 in 1980 - an increase of 1,100
percent. Drug arrests have tripled since 1980. As a result, more than 31
million people have been arrested for drug offenses since the drug war began.
To put the matter in perspective, consider this: there are more people in
prisons and jails today just for drug offenses than were incarcerated for all
reasons in 1980. Nothing has contributed more to the systemic mass
incarceration of people of color in the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region> than the War on
Drugs.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref40"><sup>[40]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“...arrests for marijuana possession -a drug less harmful
than tobacco or alcohol - accounted for nearly 80 percent of the growth in drug
arrests in the 1990’s,”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref41"><sup>[41]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“In two short decades, between 1980 and 2000, the number of
people incarcerated in our nation’s prisons and jails soared from roughly
300,000 to more than 2 million. by the end of 2007, more than 7 million - were
behind bars, on probation, or on parole.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref42"><sup>[42]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 1984, Congress passed a law allowing federal law
enforcement agencies to keep all the proceeds from drug related asset
forfeitures and to allow state and local police to retain 80 percent of such
forfeitures. ”Between 1988 and 1992, law enforcement seized over $1 billion
dollars in such assets. These forfeiture laws have in turn allowed big time
drug dealers to essentially “buy” reductions in sentences. “In Massachusetts,
for example, an investigation by journalists found that on average a “payment of
$50,000 in drug profits won a 6.3 years reduction in a sentence for dealers,”
while agreements of $10,000 or more bought elimination or reduction of
trafficking charges in almost three-fourths of such cases.” This results in the
reality that most people serving time for drug charges are doing so for
relatively minor offenses. <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref43"><sup>[43]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In many cases, individuals charged with these minor offenses
are too poor to afford quality legal representation, or in some cases any legal
representation at all. “In <st1:state w:st="on">Virginia</st1:state>,
for example, fees paid to court-appointed attorneys for representing someone
charged with a felony that carries a sentence of less than twenty years are
capped at $482. And in <st1:state w:st="on">Wisconsin</st1:state>,
more than 11,000 poor people go to court without representation every year
because anyone who earns more than $3,000 per year is considered able to afford
a lawyer.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref44"><sup>[44]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“In 1986, Congress passed The Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which
established extremely long mandatory minimum prison terms for low-level drug
dealing and possession of crack cocaine. The typical mandatory sentence for a
first-time drug offense in federal court is five or ten years. By contrast, in
other developed countries around the world, a first-time drug offense would
merit not more than six months in jail, if jail time is imposed at all.” Prior
to this act, “the longest sentence Congress had ever imposed for possession of
any drug in any amount was one year.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref45"><sup>[45]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“A conviction for the sale of five hundred grams of powder
cocaine triggers a five-year mandatory sentence, while only five grams of crack
triggers the same sentence.” 93 percent of convicted crack offenders are black,
5 percent are white. Powder cocaine users are predominantly white.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref46"><sup>[46]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Contrast this with alcohol use. “...drunk drivers were responsible
for approximately 22,000 deaths annually, while overall alcohol related deaths
were close to 100,000 a year. By contrast, during the same time period, there
were no prevalence of statistics at all on crack, much less crack-related
deaths…. The total of all drug-related deaths due to AIDS, drug overdose, or
the violence associated with the illegal drug trade, was estimated at 21,000
annually - less than the number of deaths directly caused by drunk drivers, and
a small fraction of the number of alcohol-related deaths that occur every
year…” In spite of this, the state level mandatory sentences (there are no
federal ones) for alcohol related offenses are “typically two days in jail for
a first offense and two to ten days for a second offense.” “Drunk drivers are
predominantly white and male. White men comprise 78 percent of the arrests for
this offense in 1990 when new mandatory minimums governing drunk driving were
being adopted. They are generally charged with misdemeanors and typically
receive sentences involving fines, license suspension, and community service.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref47"><sup>[47]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“...in 1980, only 1 percent of all prison admissions
were parole violators. Twenty years later, more than one third (35 percent) of
prison admissions resulted from parole violation. To put the matter more
starkly: About as many people were returned to prison for parole violations in
2000 as were admitted to prison in 1980 for all reasons. Of all parole
violators returned to prison in 2000, only one-third were returned for a new
conviction; two-thirds were returned for a technical violation such as missing
appointments with a parole officer, failing to maintain employment, or failing
a drug test.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref48"><sup>[48]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“People of all races use and sell illegal drugs at
remarkably similar rates. If there are significant differences in the surveys
to be found, they frequently suggest that whites, particularly white youth, are
more likely to engage in illegal drug dealing than people of color. One study,
for example published in 2000 by the National Institute on Drug Abuse reported
that white students use cocaine at seven times the rate of black students, use
crack cocaine at eight times the rate of black students, and use heroin at
seven times the rate of black students. That same survey revealed that nearly
identical percentages of white and black high school seniors use marijuana. The
National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported in 2000 that white youth aged
12-17 are more than a third more likely to have sold illegal drugs than African
American youth. Thus the very same year Human Rights Watch was reporting that
African American were being arrested and imprisoned at unprecedented rates,
government data revealed that blacks were no more likely to be guilty of drug
crimes than whites and that white youth were actually the most likely of any
racial or ethnic group to be guilty of illegal drug possession and sales. Any
notion that drug use among blacks is more severe or dangerous is belied by the
data; white youth have about three times the number of drug-related emergency
room visits as their African American counterparts.” <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref49"><sup>[49]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Self-report data suggests about 14 percent of <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region> illegal
drug users are black; however, blacks constitute 35 percent of those arrested,
55 percent of those convicted, and 74 percent of those incarcerated for drug
possession.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref50"><sup>[50]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“More than 353,000 people were arrested and jailed by the
NYPD between 1997 and 2006 for simple possession of small amounts of marijuana,
with blacks five times more likely to be arrested than whites.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftnref51"><sup>[51]</sup></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn1"><sup>[1]</sup></a> Eduardo
Bonilla-Silva, <i>Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the
Persistence of Racial Inequality in America</i>, Fourth Edition edition
(Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2013), Kindle loc 935-44.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn2"><sup>[2]</sup></a> Margery A. Turner, Stephen
L. Ross, George C. Glaster, and John Yinger, <i>Discrimination in
Metropolitan Housing Markets: National Results from Phase 1 HDS </i>(<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Washington</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">D.C.</st1:state></st1:place>;
The Urban Institute, 2002).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn3"><sup>[3]</sup></a>Bonilla -Silva, loc
906-16. For more info see Douglas S. Massey and Nancy A. Denton, <i>American
Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass</i> (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn4"><sup>[4]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc 923-29.
For more info see Patrick Sharkey et al., “The Intergenerational Transmission
of Context 1,” <i>American Journal of Sociology</i>, n.d., 113–931.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn5"><sup>[5]</sup></a> Bonilla-Silva, loc
4832-38.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn6"><sup>[6]</sup></a>Cathy Cloud and George
Galster, “What Do We Know about Racial Discrimination in Mortgage Markets?,” <i>The
Review of Black Political Economy</i> 22, no. 1 (1993): 101–20.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn7"><sup>[7]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc 950-54.
Robert C. Smith, <i>Racism in the Post Civil Rights Era: Now You See It,
Now You Don’t</i> (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn8"><sup>[8]</sup></a>“Harvard Civil Rights
Project Reports Rise In School Segregation,” <i>The Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights</i>, accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.civilrights.org/monitor/fall1999/art6p1.html">http://www.civilrights.org/monitor/fall1999/art6p1.html</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn9"><sup>[9]</sup></a>Joy Resmovits, “American
Schools Are STILL Racist, Government Report Finds,” <i>Huffington Post</i>,
March 21, 2014, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/21/schools-discrimination_n_5002954.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/21/schools-discrimination_n_5002954.html</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn10"><sup>[10]</sup></a>“The US Senate Will Now
Have More Black Members Than Ever in Its History: 2,” <i>Mother Jones</i>,
accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/us-senate-will-now-have-more-black-members-ever-history-two">http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/us-senate-will-now-have-more-black-members-ever-history-two</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn11"><sup>[11]</sup></a> Bonilla-Silva,
1085-6.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn12"><sup>[12]</sup></a>Suevon Lee ProPublica et
al., “Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws,” <i>ProPublica</i>,
accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/everything-youve-ever-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws">http://www.propublica.org/article/everything-youve-ever-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws</a> “There
have been only a small number of fraud cases resulting in a conviction. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=all">A
New York Times analysis from 2007</a> identified 120 cases filed by the
Justice Department over five years. These cases, many of which stemmed from
mistakenly filled registration forms or misunderstanding over voter
eligibility, resulted in 86 convictions.There are "very few
documented cases," said UC-Irvine professor and election law specialist
Rick Hasen. "When you do see election fraud, it invariably involves
election officials taking steps to change election results or it involves
absentee ballots which voter ID laws can't prevent," he said. An analysis
by News21, a national investigative reporting project, <a href="http://votingrights.news21.com/article/election-fraud/">identified</a>
10 voter impersonation cases out of 2,068 alleged election fraud cases since
2000 – or one out of every 15 million prospective voters.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn13"><sup>[13]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1072-76. Jamelle Bouie, “Pennsylvania Admits It: No Voter Fraud Problem,” <i>The
Washington Post - Blogs</i>, July 24, 2012, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/pennsylvania-admits-it-no-voter-fraud-problem/2012/07/24/gJQAHNVt6W_blog.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/pennsylvania-admits-it-no-voter-fraud-problem/2012/07/24/gJQAHNVt6W_blog.html</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn14"><sup>[14]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1457-62. Reynolds Farley and Walter Recharde Allen, <i>The Color Line and
the Quality of Life in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region></i> (Oxford
University Press, 1989).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn15"><sup>[15]</sup></a>Jennifer Cheeseman Day
and <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region>, <i>The
Big Payoff Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings</i>,
Current Population Reports. Special Studies P23-210 (<st1:state w:st="on">Washington</st1:state>, D.C: U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau, 2002), <a href="http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-210.pdf">http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-210.pdf</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn16"><sup>[16]</sup></a>Michele Norris, “Race in
<st1:country-region w:st="on">America</st1:country-region>,
50 Years after the Dream,” <i>Time</i>, accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2149604,00.html">http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2149604,00.html</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn17"><sup>[17]</sup></a>Eric Grodsky and Devah
Pager, “The Structure of Disadvantage: Individual and Occupational Determinants
of the Black-White Wage Gap,” <i>American Sociological Review</i> 66,
no. 4 (2001): 542–67.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.millersville.edu/~schaffer/courses/s2004/soc319/grodsky-pager.pdf">http://www.millersville.edu/~schaffer/courses/s2004/soc319/grodsky-pager.pdf</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn18"><sup>[18]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1508-10. Devah Pager, “The Mark of a Criminal Record,” <i>American Journal
of Sociology</i> 108, no. 5 (2003): 937–75.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn19"><sup>[19]</sup></a> Bonilla-Silva, loc
1529-32.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn20"><sup>[20]</sup></a>Michelle Alexander, and
Cornel West, <i>The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of
Colorblindness</i> (The New Press, 2012), 106. Betty Watson-Jones, Dionne
Burston, “Drug Use and African Americans: Myth versus Reality,” <i>Journal
of Alcohol & Drug Education</i> 40, no. 2 (Winter 1995): 19.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn21"><sup>[21]</sup></a>Franklin D. Gilliam Jr.
and Shanto Iyengar, “Prime Suspects: The Influence of Local Television News on
the Viewing Public,” <i>American Journal of Political Science</i> 44,
no. 3 (July 1, 2000): 560–73.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn22"><sup>[22]</sup></a>Joshua Correll et al.,
“The Police Officer’s Dilemma: Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially
Threatening Individuals,” <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</i> 83,
no. 6 (December 2002): 1314–29.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn23"><sup>[23]</sup></a> Bonilla-Silva, loc
1160-66.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn24"><sup>[24]</sup></a>Derrick Bell, <i>Faces
At The Bottom Of The Well: The Permanence Of Racism</i>, Reprint edition (New
York, NY: Basic Books, 1993).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn25"><sup>[25]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1232-36. Reese, <i>Prison Race by Reese,Renford. [2006] Paperback</i> (CaroIina,
2006). See also
“Compare
Arrest Rates,” accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.gannett-cdn.com/experiments/usatoday/2014/11/arrests-interactive/">http://www.gannett-cdn.com/experiments/usatoday/2014/11/arrests-interactive/</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn26"><sup>[26]</sup></a>Farai Chideya, <i>Don’t
Believe the Hype: Fighting Cultural Misinformation About African Americans</i> (New
York: Plume, 1995).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn27"><sup>[27]</sup></a><st1:city w:st="on">Lawrence</st1:city>
W. <st1:city w:st="on">Sherman</st1:city>,
“Execution Without Trial: Police Homicide and the Constitution,” <i>Vanderbilt
Law Review</i> 33 (1980): 71. Reliable data for the number of people
killed by police, whether black or otherwise, is woefully inadequate. See
Reuben Fischer-Baum, “Nobody Knows How Many Americans The Police Kill Each
Year,” <i>FiveThirtyEight</i>, accessed January 7, 2015,
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-many-americans-the-police-kill-each-year/.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn28"><sup>[28]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1284-92. Sarah Childress, “Is There Racial Bias in ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws? –
Criminal Justice,” <i>FRONTLINE</i>, accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/is-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/is-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn29"><sup>[29]</sup></a>Cora Currier ProPublica
et al., “The 24 States That Have Sweeping Self-Defense Laws Just Like
Florida’s,” <i>ProPublica</i>, accessed January 7, 2015, <a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/the-23-states-that-have-sweeping-self-defense-laws-just-like-floridas">http://www.propublica.org/article/the-23-states-that-have-sweeping-self-defense-laws-just-like-floridas</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn30"><sup>[30]</sup></a>Bonilla-Silva, loc
1359-62. Douglas Smith, Christy Visher, and Laura Davidson, “Equity and
Discretionary Justice: The Influence of Race on Police Arrest Decisions,” <i>Journal
of Criminal Law and Criminology</i> 75, no. 1 (January 1, 1984): 234.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn31"><sup>[31]</sup></a> Alexander, 109.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn32"><sup>[32]</sup></a> Alexander, 114.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn33"><sup>[33]</sup></a> Alexander, 117.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn34"><sup>[34]</sup></a> Alexander, 118.
Eileen Poe Yamagata and Michael A Jobes, <i>And Justice for Some:
Differential Treatment of Youth of Color in the Justice System</i>) <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Washington</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">DC</st1:state></st1:place>:
Building Blocks for Youth, 2000). http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/justice-for-some.pdf</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn35"><sup>[35]</sup></a>Alexander, 133-134. <i>State
v Soto </i><a href="http://www.leagle.com/decision/19961084734A2d350_11076.xml"><i>http://www.leagle.com/decision/19961084734A2d350_11076.xml</i></a><i>.
David A. Harris, Profiles in Injustice : Why Racial Profiling Cannot Work (New
York: New Press, 2002).</i> “In Volusia County, Florida, a reporter
obtained 148 hours of video footage documenting more than 1000 highway stops
conducted by state troopers. Only 5 percent of the drivers on the road were
African American or Latino, but more than 80 percent of the people stopped and
searched were minorities.” “Color Of Driver Is Key To Stops In I-95 Videos,” <i>Orlando
Sentinel</i>, accessed January 12, 2015, <a href="http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1992-08-23/news/9208230541_1_stop-and-search-sentinel-drivers-stopped">http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1992-08-23/news/9208230541_1_stop-and-search-sentinel-drivers-stopped</a>.
“In Illinois, 30 percent of state police stops were of Latinos even though they
comprised only 8 percent of the state population, only 3 percent of personal
vehicle trips, and were less likely to have illegal contraband than whites.”
“Driving While Black: Racial Profiling On Our Nation’s Highways,” <i>American
Civil Liberties Union</i>, accessed January 12, 2015, <a href="https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/driving-while-black-racial-profiling-our-nations-highways">https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/driving-while-black-racial-profiling-our-nations-highways</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“In 2001 study in Oakland, blacks were found to be stopped by police twice as
often and searched three times as often as whites.”
“Oakland Police
Department Announces Results of Racial Profiling Data Collection Program,” <i>American
Civil Liberties Union</i>, accessed January 12, 2015, <a href="https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/oakland-police-department-announces-results-racial-profiling-data-collection-program">https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/oakland-police-department-announces-results-racial-profiling-data-collection-program</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn36"><sup>[36]</sup></a> Alexander, 134. Al
Baker and Emily Vasquez, “Number of People Stopped by New York Police Soars,” <i>The
New York Times</i>, February 3, 2007, sec. New York Region, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/nyregion/03frisk.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/nyregion/03frisk.html</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn37"><sup>[37]</sup></a> “A task force of
the American Bar Association described the bleak reality facing a petty drug
offender this way; [The] offender may be sentenced to a term of probation
community service, and court costs. Unbeknownst to this offender, and perhaps
any other actor in the sentencing process, as a result of his conviction he may
be ineligible for many federally-funded health and welfare benefits, food stamps,
public house, and federal educational assistance. His driver’s license may be
automatically suspended, and he may no longer qualify for certain employment
and professional licenses. If he is convicted of another crime he may be
subject to imprisonment as a repeat offender. He will not be permitted to
enlist in the military, or possess a firearm, or obtain a federal security
clearance. if a citizen, he may lose the right to vote; if not, he becomes
immediately deportable.” Alexander, 141-142. Meda Chesney-Lind and Marc Mauer,
eds., <i>Invisible Punishment: The Collateral Consequences of Mass
Imprisonment</i>, First Edition edition (New York: New Press, The, 2003).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn38"><sup>[38]</sup></a>Alexander, 155.
“Repaying-Debts-Cvr – CSG Justice Center,” accessed January 12, 2015, <a href="http://csgjusticecenter.org/?attachment_id=20826">http://csgjusticecenter.org/?attachment_id=20826</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn39"><sup>[39]</sup></a>Alexander, 158. “Out of
Step With the World,” <i>American Civil Liberties Union</i>, accessed
January 12, 2015, <a href="https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/out-step-world">https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/out-step-world</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn40"><sup>[40]</sup></a>Alexander, 60. Marc
Mauer, <i>Race to Incarcerate</i> (The New Press, 2006). Marc Mauer
and Ryan King, <i>A 25-Year Quagmire: The “War on Drugs” and Its Impact on
American Society</i> (Washington, D.C. : Sentencing Project, 2007), 2.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn41"><sup>[41]</sup></a>Alexander, 60. Ryan S.
King and Marc Mauer, “The War on Marijuana: The Transformation of the War on
Drugs in the 1990s,” <i>Harm Reduction Journal</i> 3, no. 1 (February
9, 2006): 6.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn42"><sup>[42]</sup></a> Alexander, 60.
Jessica Hallstrom The Pew Charitable Trusts Officer, “One in 31: The Long Reach
of American Corrections,” accessed January 13, 2015, <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2009/03/02/one-in-31-the-long-reach-of-american-corrections">http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2009/03/02/one-in-31-the-long-reach-of-american-corrections</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn43"><sup>[43]</sup></a>Alexander, 78-79. Eric
D. Blumenson and Eva S. Nilsen, <i>Policing for Profit: The Drug War’s
Hidden Economic Agenda</i>, SSRN Scholarly Paper (Rochester, NY: Social Science
Research Network, January 29, 2007), <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=959869">http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=959869</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn44"><sup>[44]</sup></a> Alexander, 85.
Laura Parker, “8 Years in a Louisiana Jail But He Never Went to Trial,” USA
Today, Aug 29, 2005. <a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-08-29-cover-indigents_x.htm">http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-08-29-cover-indigents_x.htm</a> “In
2004, the American Bar Association released a report on the status of indigent
defense, concluding that, ‘All too often, defendants plead guilty, even if that
are innocent, without really understanding their legal rights or what is occurring.
Sometimes the proceedings reflect little or no recognition that the accused is
mentally ill or does not adequately understand English. The fundamental right
to a lawyer that Americans assume applies to everyone accuses of criminal
conduct effectively does not exist in practice for countless people across the
United States.” American Bar Association, Standing Committee on Legal Aid and
Indigent Defendants, <i>Gideon’s Broken Promise: America’s Continuing
Quest for Equal Justice</i> (Washington, D.C.: American Bar Association,
Dec. 2004).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn45"><sup>[45]</sup></a> Alexander, 87, 90.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn46"><sup>[46]</sup></a> Alexander, 112.
After standing for two decades, the sentencing disparity between crack and
powder cocaine has been reduced from 100-1 to 18-1 under Obama.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn47"><sup>[47]</sup></a>Alexander, 206. C
Reinarman and H G Levine, <i>Crack Attack: Politics and Media in America’s
Latest Drug Scare (From Images of Issues: Typifying Contemporary Social
Problems, P 115-137, 1989, Joel Best, Ed. -- See NCJ-124897)</i> (United
States, 1989).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn48"><sup>[48]</sup></a>Alexander, 95. Travis, <i>BUT
THEY ALL COME BACK</i> (Washington, D.C: Urban Institute Press, 2005).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn49"><sup>[49]</sup></a>Alexander, 99. United
States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration. Office of Applied Studies, <i>National
Household Survey on Drug Abuse, 2000: Version 5</i>, October 11, 2002, <a href="http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/SAMHDA/studies/3262">http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/SAMHDA/studies/3262</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn50"><sup>[50]</sup></a> Bonilla-Silva, loc
1239-42. Reese, <i>Prison Race. </i>The racial disparity in drug use,
arrest, and conviction has been widely documented. See also Salaki Knafo, “When
It Comes To Illegal Drug Use, White America Does The Crime, Black America Gets
The Time,” <i>Huffington Post</i>, September 17, 2013, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/racial-disparity-drug-use_n_3941346.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/racial-disparity-drug-use_n_3941346.html</a>.
and thesentencingproject.org </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_ftn51"><sup>[51]</sup></a> Alexander,
136.Harry G. Levine and Deborah Peterson Small, <i>Marijuana Arrest
Crusade: Racial Bias and Police Policy in New York City, 1997-2007 </i>(<st1:state w:st="on">New York</st1:state>: <st1:state w:st="on">New York</st1:state> Civil
Liberties <st1:place w:st="on">Union</st1:place>, 2008), 4.</div>
</div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-45264334856709168862014-11-25T07:56:00.000-06:002014-11-25T07:56:46.461-06:00ProofIs this the proof you were looking for?<br />
Evidence that things aren't as bad as they said<br />
<br />
Is this the proof you were looking for?<br />
One man innocent, another still dead.<br />
<br />
Was it one man who was being tried here<br />
Or your ideas about all the others?<br />
<br />
With this question now settled<br />
We can ignore the voices of all his brothers<br />
<br />
All is well, no need for change<br />
Let's have peace and be on our way<br />
<br />
It's always worked before<br />
It can still work today.<br />
<br />
We knew it was a myth<br />
A mere ghost from the past<br />
<br />
That stuff doesn't happen now<br />
Such evil could never last<br />
<br />
Not in this country<br />
We're the land of the free<br />
<br />
All you need is hard work<br />
Everyone an equal opportunity<br />
<br />
Is that the proof you were looking for?<br />
Proof that everything is just as it should be.<br />
<br />
Is that the proof you were looking for?<br />
To go on seeing the world as you already see.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-6172777208497763072014-09-15T08:02:00.000-05:002014-09-15T08:02:05.073-05:00Recordings of Revelation As I mentioned in my previous post, I'm teaching a Sunday School class on Revelation. The class is being recorded for the sake of those who can't join us every Sunday. I don't know if anyone else is interested in listening in but I thought I would put the first couple recordings on here just in case.<br />
<br />
You can find the recording to our first week <a href="http://allthingsnew.podomatic.com/entry/2014-09-11T05_54_42-07_00">here</a>.<br />
<br />
You can find the recording from yesterday <a href="http://allthingsnew.podomatic.com/entry/2014-09-15T05_47_13-07_00">here</a>. <br />
<br />
You can also find a document with my notes on Revelation 1 <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C8ERbHJE1_f15KQ6vP5ZgLE8Jht9UANfPF9CagH92wM/edit?usp=sharing">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-21320204302809105082014-06-27T20:44:00.002-05:002014-06-27T20:44:39.874-05:00Reading Revelation The folks in the Sunday School class I teach have asked to study the book of Revelation starting in the fall. I doubt I'll be posting as regularly as I did with Romans but I at least wanted to jot down a few of my basic assumption in how I approach this very unusual piece of Scripture.<br />
<br />
So here are a few things I find helpful to keep in mind as you read the last book of the Bible.<br />
<br />
1. <i>Revelation is a <b>prophetic</b> book but that doesn't mean its primary purpose is to make predictions about the future.</i><b> </b>Think about the prophetic books in the Old Testament. They have predictive elements to them. But those elements are more like the "If...then..." predictions I make with my children when they are misbehaving. As in "If you can't listen and follow directions, then there will be consequences." While there is a kind of prediction and future-telling in that statement, we certainly wouldn't see that as being the emphasis of such a statement. Instead, the clear purpose of a statement like that one is to reveal to or remind my children of a certain aspect of my character as their father and the nature of our household.<br />
<br />
Most of the prophecies in the Old Testament follow this same pattern. "If you don't stop worshiping other gods and practicing injustice, Babylon will come to destroy you." Again, there is a predictive element involved but the real emphasis of these statements is to reveal something about God, the nature of God's relationship with Israel, and how God is working in the world.<br />
<br />
John very much stands in this prophetic tradition. In fact, he eats, sleeps, and breathes it. It seems John can hardly write a line of Revelation without echoing the Old Testament in one way or another. So we should expect then that his prophecy will be very much like the prophecy we find in the Old Testament; that's its purpose would be the same.<br />
<br />
John tells us as much with the opening phrase of his work: "the revelation of Jesus Christ." That is, <b><i>the purpose of this book is to reveal Jesus.</i></b> The primary purpose of prophecy is to reveal God so it makes sense that the only piece of explicitly Christian prophecy we have in our Scriptures would have as its goal to reveal Jesus; who he is, the nature of our relationship with him, and how he is at work in our world. You can read Revelation as a blueprint for the future, a cataloging of church history since Christ, or a prediction of the end-times if you like. Many Christians have read the book in those ways over the centuries. But to do so is to ignore the nature of Biblical prophecy and what John himself tells us about his writing. Like the rest of Scripture, the purpose of Revelation is to reveal Jesus to us.<br />
<br />
2. <i>Revelation is a<b> letter</b> addressed to seven churches in Asia Minor at the end of the first century. </i>It is not a letter written to 21st century American Christians. Yes, it was written <i>for us</i>. At least, that is the faith claim we make when we regard it as Scripture. But it was not written <i>to us. </i>And that should make a difference in how we read it. It was written to people who lived under Roman rule and proclaimed that a Jew crucified by the Romans was the one true ruler of the world. It was written to real people who lived in the real cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. As such, it had to make sense to them in some way. It had to speak to <i>their </i>situation. It had to reveal Christ <i>to them</i>, in their world, in their going to the market, in their decision making, in their family life and the life of their city. If we want this book to make sense to us, we must first learn all that we can about their world and how it made sense to them. If we want it to reveal Jesus to us, then we must first make every effort to understand how it revealed Jesus to them.<br />
<br />
3. <i>Revelation is an </i><b style="font-style: italic;">apocalypse. </b>In fact, the Greek word translated as "revelation" is apokalupsis (<span style="font-family: Gentium;">Ἀποκάλυψις). </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">In our culture today, when we here the word "apocalypse" or "apocalyptic", we probably begin to envision the latest science fiction blockbuster movie. For us, apocalypse usually means robots or a killer virus or nuclear war wiping out most of humanity. Individuals trying to survive in a "post-apocalyptic" scenario has become a whole movie genre unto itself. The very name of the book of Revelation has become synonymous with the kind of terrible, end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenarios it portrays. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">As I mentioned above, the actual meaning of the word "apokalupsis" has little to do with these scenarios. It means an uncovering, a revealing, a disclosure, making fully known. John's purpose in writing Revelation is to pull back the curtain and show us that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than we might normally observe in our everyday reality. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
However, <i>the way </i>in which John goes about pulling back that curtain is what is known as <b><i>apocalyptic literature</i></b>. That is, John has chosen a particular way of communicating this disclosure of truth to us and it is not one that he simply created. He is borrowing one of the literary techniques of his time. John's writing seems strange and unique to us because there is nothing like it in the New Testament and for the most part only Daniel and parts of Ezekiel resemble it in the Old Testament. But there were many other apocalypses written in the centuries immediately before and after Christ and as a rule they are highly symbolic writings full of other worldly images like those we find in Revelation.<br />
<br />
This is significant because understanding <i>how</i> someone intends to communicate to us deeply impacts how we understand <i>what </i>they are communicating to us. Think of how you might read poetry as compared to a legal document or fiction as compared to a science text book or satire as compared to a newspaper article. Each of these categories of writing can communicate truth but they are each suited to deliver a certain kind of truth. There are different rules for the ways we read and write each of these forms of literature. Most of the time we pick up on those rules intuitively without thinking about them. But when we encounter a form of literature with which we are unfamiliar, say for example the apocalyptic literature like we find in the book of Revelation, it is easy to make a category mistake. As a result, it is important to recognize that extreme, other worldly, life or death images packed with symbolic meaning are the usual tools of the apocalyptic writer in the same way that irony and a dead-pan delivery are the tools of a satirical writer.<br />
<br />
Revelation is prophecy. Revelation is a letter. Revelation is apocalyptic literature. Three important things to keep in mind as you read Revelation.<br />
<br />
Oh, and one more thing. You'll notice there is no <i style="font-weight: bold;">s</i> at the end of that word. And that is not theologically insignificant. John does not see his Revelation of Jesus Christ as one among many possible revelation<i style="font-weight: bold;">s</i>. It is <i>the</i> definitive revelation - no <i style="font-weight: bold;">s</i> - of who Jesus is and how he is at work in our world.<br />
<br />
May the Spirit reveal Christ to us as we read the prophecy, the letter, the apocalypse that is Revelation.<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-55503547657191167882014-02-27T08:31:00.000-06:002014-02-27T08:32:34.329-06:00God Has Been Faithful<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul begins Romans 11 with this question: “I ask, then, has
God rejected his people?” It sure seems that way. Paul finished chapter 9
talking about how Israel has stumbled because they pursued the law incorrectly.
He expanded on that idea further in chapter 10 and concluded by echoing
Isaiah’s words that they are a disobedient and contrary people. So surely
Israel’s time has come to an end, right? They will be replaced by God’s new
people, a mostly Gentile people, since his old people have failed to respond to
his Messiah, won’t they? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul’s answer is a resounding “No!”. We’ve noted many times
throughout Romans how central Paul’s own experience - the experience of
persecuting the Church out of obedience to the law only to have Christ directly
intervene and call him to true obedience and faithfulness - has been to his
understanding of all that God is doing through Christ with both Jews and
Gentiles. We find he is doing the same thing here as he puts himself on display
as exhibit A in his own people’s defense. He is himself an Israelite and God
has not rejected him even though God had every reason to do so. Paul had not
only rejected Christ but was actively persecuting his followers, entirely
“ignorant of the righteousness of God” (10:3). But God in Christ intervened on
the road to Damascus to show Paul the way. This is what Paul means when he says
it is by grace and not by works. It had nothing to do with what Paul was doing.
It had everything to do with Christ stepping in. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And Paul says that the same thing has happened for many
other Jews just like him. Perhaps their stories were not all as dramatic as his
but it could be no less a matter of God revealing God’s own righteousness to
them through Christ. Just as God had reserved 7000 in Israel who had not bowed
to Baal in the days of Elijah, likewise God was now preserving a remnant in
Paul’s own day even when it looked like all of Israel was rejecting God’s work
in Christ. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But neither is this remnant the end of God’s work with
Israel. In v. 25, Paul finally spells out for us what he has been hinting at
and building up to for a couple chapters now. He says “ Lest you be wise in
your own sight, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial
hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
And in this way <i>all Israel will be saved.</i>” Despite all that Paul has
said in these chapters about his fellows Jews and their failure to perceive
God’s purpose or to pursue the law properly, he still believes that God is not
done with them. God has only hardened his countrymen to give the Gentiles a
chance to respond. This response by the Gentiles along with the remnant of
Israel that is responding to God’s Messiah will in turn provoke his fellow Jews
to jealousy. This, Paul believes, will ultimately cause them to come to Christ
as well. <b><i>God has not abandoned his people. </i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Somewhere along the way, however, we begin to realize that
this is not merely about Israel, as vastly important as that is to Paul. This
runs much deeper than just a concern for Israel. It is a concern about the very
character of God. It is a concern with whether or not God has kept his
promises. So many hundreds of years before, God had made a promise to Abraham.
God renewed that promise with Isaac and with Jacob and with the slaves freed
from Egypt. Generation after generation of people, of families, of a whole
nation depended upon those promises. Their faithfulness was founded on the idea
that God would be faithful to them and the promises God had made to their fathers.
Paul has told us repeatedly in Romans, from the first echo of Habakkuk but
especially in chapters 9-11, that even though God has done something radically,
cosmically new and unexpected in Christ, that newness has not negated the old
promises. It has fulfilled them. God kept his promises to Israel and that is a
point that bears repeating because it means that God will keep his promises to
us. <i>It means that God is faithful</i>. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That single idea, <i>the faithfulness of God, </i>is like a
character who has been hovering in the background almost unnoticeable through
all of act one only to be revealed as the main character here in act two.
Without having realized it at first, now that our character has come front and
center we realize that he is the one who has been driving the plot all along.
Paul hinted at it in his reference to Habakkuk in 1:17. He highlighted the need
for faithfulness in light of human unfaithfulness. He told us a new
righteousness had been revealed through the faithfulness of Christ. He told us that
God had been faithful to deliver from us our exile in sin. Paul told us God had
been faithful to deliver him in spite of all he had done. He told us that
nothing could separate us from the faithfulness of Christ. Now that Paul has
specifically brought to the forefront of our minds that God is faithful to keep
his promises, we realize that is exactly what Paul has been saying one way or
another throughout Romans. <i>Despite the strangeness of the almighty God
working through a crucified Messiah, despite the distressing lack of response
by Paul’s fellow Jews,</i> despite it being in a way no one would have ever
expected, <b><i>God has been faithful to keep his promises through Messiah
Jesus. </i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is fitting then that this unit of Romans 9-11 and the
intense theological reflection of chapters 1-11 conclude with a poetic
reflection on the mysterious ways of God. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Oh, the depth of the
riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgements and
how inscrutable his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has
been his counselor? Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid? For
from him and through him and to him are all things.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
God promises a nation of descendants to an elderly and
childless couple. Then when they finally have a child, God asks for the child’s
life. God promises to cleanse his people but decides to do it by a pagan and
godless horde of vicious Babylonians. God promises deliverance through a
Messiah only to see that Messiah executed like a shameful criminal. God chooses
a people only to have those people reject God while others find God. Over and
over again, it seems there can be no way forward with the promises of God.
Surely this is the moment when the present circumstances will force God’s
promise to bend to the breaking point. Then impossible conception happens. Then
resurrection happens. Then revelation on the road to Damascus happens. And
God’s promises move forward in ways that we never could have imagined were
possible. Unsearchable and inscrutable, indeed. But it is out of <i>this</i>
faithfulness that the righteous will live. <o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-26375551271505676292014-02-14T07:01:00.001-06:002014-02-14T07:01:25.824-06:00Kindergarten Student Claims School System Is Failing HerAfter having to cancel six days of school because of snow already this winter, some New England school districts are considering the implementation of what they are calling the Alternate Transportation Plan. The ATP involves retrofitting current school buses with certain modifications that will allow them to travel safely in any weather conditions. These modifications include upgrading the vehicles' tires to 8 feet in size and fixing flame throwers to the front of every bus so that the drivers can melt any snow in their path. Due to the appearance of the retrofitted buses, some residents are referring to them as the "Monster-truck buses." Commenting on the plan, one school district superintendent says "Of course, we are concerned for the safety of our students but even more so we are concerned with maintaining our snow superiority over the rest of the country. We have a reputation to uphold."<br />
<br />
Local residents agree with the superintendent's assessment of the situation. While they recognize the bus modifications will be paid for by their tax dollars, they believe it is the proper price tag for continuing to practice their snow snobbery. One mother with school age children stated: "We've all posted that meme on our facebook walls about Southerns closing everything down for 1/4 inch of snow while Northerners go to work with three feet of snow on top of their cars. I can't keep posting stuff like that if we are canceling school along with the rest of the country! Something has to be done!"<br />
<br />
A Taxachussetts resident commented "My sister in Atlanta is already calling to say that her kids have missed fewer school days for snow than my kids. I've already started a petition showing support for a raise in taxes if that is what it takes to pay for these new buses."<br />
<br />
When kindergarten student Hannah Young was asked what she thought about missing another day of school because of snow, she said "But we were supposed to have our Valentine's party today!" fighting back tears. Clearly, this school system is failing its students.<br />
<br />
Other New England news outlets are reporting that the whole idea of "school buses" may have been a long term conspiracy by certain groups in the South to humiliate the North after the War of Northern Aggression (sometimes referred to as the Civil War). This comes as the most recent piece of evidence that the deepest divides in our country truly have centuries of history behind them. <i>All Things New</i> will <i>not</i> keep you posted on developments in this story as this is not an actual news website.<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-65175422862639371812014-02-12T06:56:00.002-06:002014-02-12T06:56:55.976-06:00The Word Is Near You<div class="MsoNormal">
In my last post, I argued that Paul was not setting up
“faith” as an alternative to keeping the law. Neither is “faith” the opposite
of works in the sense of trying to earn one’s own salvation, since no first
century Jew had in mind to attempt that. Instead, Paul was arguing that
faith(fulness) was actually the way to maintain and uphold the law all along because
the law’s goal was always the faithfulness of Christ as opposed to the law
being an end in itself. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul continues this train of thought throughout the rest of
Romans 10. We see it almost immediately in v.6 when he writes “the
righteousness based <i>on faith</i> says….” and <i>he goes on to quote the law.</i>
It wouldn’t really make much sense to be quoting from Deuteronomy, itself a
part of the law, if everything written in it were contrary to the faith Paul
has been talking about. But since Paul has been arguing that faith(fulness) is
actually the right way to pursue the law, it is perfectly logical to think that
we might be able to find that idea somewhere in the Torah itself. So Paul
quotes words from Deuteronomy that speak to the nearness of this law. It is so near
in fact that “It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“That is the word of faith” - the one that is so near that
it is actually in your mouth and heart rather than something that is external
to you - “that we proclaim.” For so many chapters Paul has been talking about
this righteousness that comes out of faithfulness and often he has only hinted
at what that means, what that looks like in everyday life. It is submitting
ourselves to righteousness, in chapter 6, walking by the Spirit in chapter 8.
He will give us many more details in that regard starting in chapter 12. But
here is another important hint - this “law of faith” is not something external
to us but rooted deeply within our very being. Although Paul does not quote it here,
one easily thinks of the words of Jeremiah 31 which are so often quoted in the
New Testament where God promises to put his law within his people and write it
on their hearts. This, I think, is why Paul can say “if you confess with your
mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the
dead, you will be saved.” It is not because a few words passing through your
lips once is all God wants. It is because the law of faithfulness is not
something outside of us. It is something that is imprinted on our innermost
being leading us to confess our allegiance to Jesus as Lord. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
All this, however, only seems to make <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s rejection of Jesus all the
more troubling for Paul. He acknowledges that perhaps not all have heard the
message about the Messiah preached specifically to them but he says it is not
as though haven’t heard at all. Psalm 19, which Paul quotes in v. 18, says that
all of creation declares the glory of God. In Romans 1, Paul said this was the
same reason that Gentiles were without excuse. Surely, his fellow Jews can not
get off any easier. Neither is the problem that they haven’t understood. Isaiah
describes his very own people as “disobedient and contrary”. As a result, God
is using others who do not know God and have not sought God to incite his own
people to jealousy. It is this idea on which Paul will expand in Romans 11.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-13262397140022917762014-02-05T10:03:00.002-06:002014-02-05T10:03:53.505-06:00The End of the Law<div class="MsoNormal">
In the preceding verses, Paul has retold <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s story so as to show that God has always
been making and remaking <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>,
forming a remnant from Abraham descendants with the result that “not all who
are descended from <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
belong to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>.”
Now in 9:30 Paul pauses as he often does to ask a rhetorical question. <br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“What shall
we say then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it;
that is, a righteousness that is by faith(fulness); but that <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> who
pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that
law?”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The implied answer here is “Yes, that is exactly what we
should say!”. In fact, it is what Paul has been saying through most of Romans
1-8. And it is that argument in Romans 1-8 we must remember if we are to
understand what Paul is saying here. He is not merely advocating for faith over
works as those of us raised in the Protestant tradition might expect at first
glance. Instead, he is saying that <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> has done the same thing that
Paul described himself as having done in Romans 7. Even as Paul “followed” the
law by persecuting the Church, that pursuing of the law actually led Paul away
from where God really wanted him to be. Likewise, Paul is saying here,
Israel sought righteousness through the law but even in keeping the law
Israel did not succeed in really reaching the law’s goal (more on that in a
moment). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the next verse (32), Paul says that the reason <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> failed
to reach the law’s goal is because they didn’t pursue it by faith(fulness) but
as if it were by works. Once again, it is important to remember how Paul has
used this language throughout his letter and not simply impose our own meaning
on these words. When Paul has talked about “works” in Romans, he has had in
mind specifically the works of the Jewish law; things like circumcision, food
laws, and Sabbath observance, things that marked <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
off as <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>.
So when he says that <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
pursued the law by works he is not admonishing his fellow Jews for trying to
earn their salvation. Instead, he is saying they’ve missed what it means
to really fulfill the law; that truly reaching God’s law is not about ethnic
identity markers. Similarly, when Paul has talked about faith(fulness) in
Romans he has been referring to God’s faithfulness through Christ (often
followed closely by faithful human response). <i>Likewise, here Paul would be
saying the law’s real goal is found not in maintaining Jewish ethnicity but in
the faithfulness of God</i>. And it is no coincidence that this is the same
thing Paul has just been saying in the preceding verses (whereas arguing that
righteousness comes by faith as trust or belief rather than works would have
very little to do with anything Paul said in 9:1-29). Paul has just spent the
whole chapter claiming that being <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> is not about ethnicity but
about God’s faithfulness to his promises. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By pursuing the law as if its goal was maintaining the
purity of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> has
stumbled over the stumbling block of God’s faithfulness in Christ. They failed
to see that Christ was actually the law’s goal. That is what Paul means in 10:4
when he says “Christ is the end of the law.” Like its English counterpart, the
Greek word <i>telos</i> does not always refer to the termination or cessation
of something. It can also mean “end” in the sense of a goal or purpose and that
is Paul’s meaning here. Christ is the point to which the law has been leading
all along. Jesus is the summit of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s story that Paul has been
telling for the last 37 verses. Faith in Christ and the faithfulness of Christ
are not the antithesis of the law. Paul is not arguing that <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> should
give up the law and just “have faith” instead. He is saying that the way to
really fulfill the law is through faith in and the faithfulness of the Messiah.
He said as much all the way back in 3:31: “Do we then overthrow the law by this
faith(fulness)? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law!”. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Once again, we hear the echoes of that old friend who has always been close by
as we’ve journeyed through the pages of Romans; the prophet Habakkuk. We are
reminded of his assessment of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
in his own day to which Paul alludes at the opening of his epistle. “The law is
paralyzed; justice goes forth perverted” Habakkuk claims but “the righteous out
of faith(fulness) will live.” In these verses of Romans 9 and 10, Paul has
claimed that the law has essentially been paralyzed for <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> because
they haven’t pursued it properly. The law was always meant to be fulfilled by
living out of faith(fulness). In the remaining verses of Romans 10, Paul will
enlist some of the passages of Scripture most central to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
identity in the first century in order to argue further for this very point.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-57891587309157232014-01-22T09:00:00.002-06:002014-01-22T09:02:27.927-06:00Anguish for Israel<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Romans 8 closed with the exalted themes of new creation and
the inability of this world’s suffering to separate us from Christ. Immediately
in the opening verses of Romans 9 we get the sense that we have left those
exalted heights behind for a much more somber matter. Paul does not indicate to
us at first what the topic of these next chapters will be but he does indicate
to us immediately that the topic will be serious. He begins with not one, not
two, but three assertions of the truthfulness of what he is about to say - “(1)
I am speaking the truth in Christ, (2) I am not lying, (3) my conscience bears
witness in the Holy Spirit.” And the thing about which Paul asserts in
triplicate that he is telling the truth is that he has “great sorrow and
unceasing anguish”. It is only in v.3 that we even begin to get an idea of what
Paul is so upset about and even there he doesn’t spell it out exactly. We only
know that Paul is concerned about <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>, his kinsmen. We learn over
the next three chapters that Paul is deeply and personally troubled by the fact
that so few of his own countrymen have come to see Jesus as their Messiah. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite much of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s rejection of Jesus, Paul
claims “It is not as though the word of God has failed.” After 2000 years of
mostly Gentile Christianity, one might wonder what <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s rejection of Jesus has to
do with the failure or success of God’s word. But if we are to understand
Paul’s argument in Romans 9-11, we must see that they have everything to do
with each other. That is because the word of God to which Paul is referring is
the promises God made to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
- promises that they would be God’s people and the heirs of God’s kingdom. If
those very same people who are now rejecting the Messiah who came to fulfill
those promises while Gentiles are simultaneously accepting that same Messiah
and thereby inheriting the promises originally meant for Israel, we might ask
“Has God abandoned Israel? Has God simply taken what he promised to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> and
arbitrarily given it to others?” Paul’s emphatic answer throughout these three
chapters will be “Absolutely not!” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That answer begins in the second half of verse six and the
first half of verse seven. God’s word has not failed because “not all who are
descended from <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> belong
to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring.” It is that
idea for which Paul will argue over the next 22 verses and he will do it by
recounting the story of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you are going to recount the story of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>, Abraham
would be a natural place to begin and that is what Paul does. Paul quotes
Genesis 21:12 which God spoke to Abraham; “through Isaac shall your offspring
be named.” In other words, Isaac wasn’t Abraham’s only son. Ishmael was just as
much the flesh and blood of Abraham as Isaac so if bloodlines were what
mattered then Ishmael’s descendants would have been Israel as much as Isaac’s.
Paul is arguing that “<st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>”
was never defined by physical descendancy. It was always about those to whom
God made his promises. The same is true, Paul declares, with Isaac and
Rebekah’s sons, Esau and Jacob. Esau was just as much Isaac’s son as Jacob. In
fact, Esau was the firstborn with every right to his father’s inheritance and
blessing. Additionally, Jacob was no saint but a liar and deceiver. In spite of
all that, God chose to enact his promises through Jacob who would later be
renamed <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>.
Once again, being <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
was never about simply being of the lineage of Abraham. It was about God
fulfilling his promises to Abraham through whomever he chose. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This emphasis on God’s choice leads to a natural question.
Is God unjust? If it is all about God’s choice apart from any human standard of
worthiness, does that make God arbitrary and unfair? Not surprisingly, Pauls
says no, and he turns to the next scene in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
story, also God’s greatest act of justice in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s story, to make the point.
Paul claims along with Exodus 9:16 that God actively hardened Pharaoh’s heart
so that he would not repent. But God did this for the express purpose of
showing mercy to the Israelite slaves. To be sure, God made a choice but it was
a choice for the salvation of a people. It was the choice that made <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul says the same is true in the final movement of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
history prior to the Messiah: the exile. When Paul starts talking about some
vessels prepared for destruction and others for glory in v.22-23, many assume
that those “vessels” are a metaphor for individuals, some of whom are
predestined for hell while others are predestined for heaven from before birth.
While I won’t deny that Paul had a very strong sense of the sovereignty of God
- I would guess nearly every first century Jew did and that even most Gentiles
took for granted some notion of fate or divine providence - I don’t think a
Calvinist doctrine of double individual predestination is exactly what he has
in mind here. This is because, once again, Paul is not telling the story of
individuals. He is telling the story of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
and when he uses the language of a potter and clay anyone who knows <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s story
will know that he is echoing the prophet Jeremiah. In Jeremiah 18, God tells
Jeremiah that <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> is like
clay in God’s hands and that God can make or remake <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> as God pleases. This is
precisely what Paul has been arguing all along: God is (and really has always
been) remaking <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>,
even to the point of calling those who were not God’s people “my people” as
Hosea says. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More specifically, God is remaking <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> into a remnant of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>. Paul
believes that much as Isaiah claimed that God reduced <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> to just a remnant of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> in the time of exile so also was God
currently reducing <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
to a remnant in Paul’s day. But we will see later in chapter 11, that Paul does
not expect this to be <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
permanent condition. Instead, this remnant of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
will eventually lead to the full salvation of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>. Much like the hardening of
Pharaoh’s heart led to the redemption of an entire people, so the current
hardening of <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
is meant for salvific purposes as well. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul’s claim in this chapter has been that “not all who are
descended from <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> belong
to <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>.”
Paul demonstrated this through <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
story. Starting with Abraham, then Isaac, Jacob and on through the Exodus and
the Exile, God has always been making and remaking <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>. <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region> has never really been <i>all</i>
the physical descendants of Abraham because from the moment God chose Isaac
rather than Ishmael, a remnant within Abraham’s descendants was being formed.
Paul believes that this is what is happening is his own day; a remnant is being
formed around Jesus out of Jews <i>and</i> Gentiles that will eventually be the
salvation of his kinsmen, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>. </div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-51929072399488894522013-12-26T14:48:00.000-06:002013-12-27T15:34:03.679-06:00Suffering New Creation Into Existence<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The final verses of Romans 8
decidedly bring to a close a large section of Paul’s argument in Romans.
Throughout these 8 chapters, Paul has been laying out rather systematically his
understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. He identified the problem of the
human condition; that no one is righteous because we are all, Jew and Gentile
alike, powerless before the overwhelming force of sin. But God has acted
decisively in the person of Jesus Christ, revealing a righteousness apart from
the Law. This righteousness is possible because the resurrection of Christ and
the gift of the Holy Spirit have inaugurated a new age, an entirely new epoch
in history. We are able to participate in this new reality by means of baptism
and our own willingness to walk according to the Spirit. Due to the presence of
the Spirit in this completely new age, we are able to fulfill the righteous
requirements of the law in a way that was not a possibility prior to Christ. Furthermore,
this possibility of holiness is a sign of what God intends to do for all of
creation; remaking it and setting things right so that all of creation is
transformed and God’s righteousness and peace reign in the world. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Of course, Paul knows that
remaking has not been completed yet. It has only just begun in the communities
of Christ followers springing up around the <st1:place w:st="on">Roman Empire</st1:place>;
little colonies of new creation taking root in the midst of the old. But that
old creation with all of its ways of destruction and sin, injustice and
unrighteousness is still quite prevalent. It is so prevalent, in fact, that
more often than not, one might find it difficult to see the presence of the new
creation at all. It might be easy to begin to wonder if such a hope for things
to be made new is only a fool’s dream. In the midst of so much tragedy, so much
hunger, pain, grief, and injustice, can we really say that God is doing a work
of new creation among us? Paul’s answer is not only a resounding yes but also
an assurance that the very things we might imagine are signs of our separation
from Christ are actually opportunities to be conformed to his image. This, I
think, is the heart of what Paul intends to communicate in the final verses of
Romans 8. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Most telling in this regard
is the quotation in v. 36. It follows the central question of this passage in
v. 35.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">“Who shall separate us from
the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine,
or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, ‘for your sake we are
being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.’” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Surely, this list of dangers
combined with the image of helpless sheep is not a comforting thought. Paul
first cites all the marks of the old creation in our world, all the things that
might cause us to wonder if the Spirit of Christ is really doing this work of
new creation among us or not. Paul follows this question with a quotation from
Psalm 44 which lists some of the very same concerns before God. The Psalmist
says that God has forgotten and rejected his people, leaving them to the
affliction of their enemies and selling them for a low price. In fact, in the
verses immediately after what Paul has quoted, the Psalmist calls upon God to
wake up! In times of suffering, it is easy for the faithful to wonder if God
has gone off and taken a nap. Otherwise, why wouldn’t God be here doing
something about our plight? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">But Paul understands
suffering differently. Rather than seeing suffering as something that
represents our separation from Christ, he claims it is actually something that
brings us closer to and makes us more like the Christ who suffered himself.
Contrary to Psalm 44, Paul says “No, in all these things we are more than
conquerors through him who loved us!” Paul ironically claims that it is by our
suffering that we actually conquer because it is in those losses that we become
more like the Christ who conquered sin and death by his suffering. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Once again, context is
exceedingly important at this point. Without it, we may very well misunderstand
and dismiss Paul in a number of ways: as a naive optimist who utters platitudes
about a suffering he has never himself experienced, as a determinist who thinks
everything comes pre-planned with no choice left for us, or as a masochist who
sees suffering as inherently good. But what we know of Paul won’t bear out any
of those caricatures. Paul was a man who knew suffering in all its ugliness but
came to see it differently in light of Christ. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">We must also remember that
Paul was speaking into a culture in which all these things... tribulation,
persecution, famine, etc... are sure signs of abandonment by one’s god(s).
Almost certainly, Jesus’ own suffering was one of the reasons why Paul
initially rejected Jesus as the Messiah. If Jesus had really been the Messiah,
he would not have succumbed to such a humiliating death.<i> But when Paul accepted the one who suffered as the Christ, he
recognized that meant also accepting that the way of the Christ was the way of
suffering.</i> Contrary to the popular belief of Paul’s day, Paul had come to
see in Christ that suffering was not an obstacle somehow contrary to God’s
nature but that it was essential to truly knowing the heart of God. In repeated
and various ways, Paul reminds us throughout his writings that if we are to
know Christ we must share in the fellowship of his sufferings. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">So when Paul says that “for
those who love God all things work together for good,” he isn’t saying
everything will be always be peachy or your suffering isn’t really that bad or
that you should look a little harder for the silver lining that explains how
this seemingly bad thing is really a good thing. He is saying that your
suffering isn’t for nothing. He’s saying that your suffering isn’t a sign that
you are doing life wrong. He’s saying that if the one faithful Jew, the one who
got it right it, the one who was the very presence of God in the world suffered
too then maybe when you suffer you are closer to the heart of God than you
realize. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And when Paul says that
“those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of His
Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers,” I don’t
think he is saying that God chose a few individuals from before the foundation
of the world that would be saved while the rest of us are damned. I think he is
saying that the God who has known you from before you were born is the same God
that has called you to this fellowship with Christ and that same God will see
that fellowship through to its completion. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">It is fitting that Paul ends
the first half of this magnificent epistle in this way; re-imagining suffering
in light of God’s love. In 1:16 Paul said “I am not ashamed of the gospel...”;
a bold claim for a message with something as shameful as a crucified Messiah as
its protagonist. But for the last 8 chapters Paul has been explaining to us why
it is not a shameful message; namely, because in it the righteousness and love
of God are revealed. <i>The love of God revealed
in the cross of Christ has turned the meaning of shame and suffering upside
down. Shame and suffering have been filled with new meaning as they have been
filled with God’s own self, becoming God’s own instruments of righteousness and
restoration in our world. </i>The cross, once a symbol of torture and God
abandonment, has become the very sign of God’s presence for those who call
Jesus “Lord.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">And in that same act of re-purposing shame and suffering, God in Christ has also reworked what it means
to be holy and righteous. To put it another way, these verses about suffering
are not a mere addendum tacked on to the preceding verses about holiness and
new creation. Christ’s suffering gives shape to what Paul means by holiness and
new creation. To be holy is to lower one’s own status for the sake of another
as Christ did for us. To lean into the new creation is to subvert the power
structures of the old creation by seeking the well being of those “below” us rather
than the favor of those “above” us. Reaching back earlier in Paul's letter, this is what it means for the righteous to live out if faith(fullness). This is the righteousness apart from the law for which Paul has been arguing.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial;">To live life in such a way,
will surely be costly to us but, Paul argues, if all these things.... the cross,
death, sin.... have not kept us from the love of Christ then indeed “Who will
separate us from the love of Christ?” If this is the length to which God goes
to be with us then indeed “Who can bring any charge against God’s elect?” In
our suffering, our weakness, our vulnerabilities, even in death, we are not
defeated, abandoned, or put to shame. We are more than conquerors because the
Messiah, the Son of God has suffered these things for us and suffers them with
us still. When we suffer for and with others, we are ushering God's new creation into existence. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-75663665107327640952013-12-05T08:20:00.000-06:002013-12-05T08:20:07.333-06:00The Spirit of Holiness<div class="MsoNormal">
In Romans 7, Paul outlined for us by means of his own
autobiography just how grave our situation is without Christ. Our circumstance
is so pitiable not because we are terrible creatures bent on doing evil. We
might say the situation is actually much worse than that. Paul claims that even
when we are well intended and seek to do God’s will sin is so powerful that it
perverts our attempts to follow God’s law. The result is that rather than
adherence to the law producing righteousness and life, it actually produces
injustice, sin, and death. In the language of the prophet Habakkuk, “the law is
paralyzed and justice goes forth perverted.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But that is without Christ. That is the realm of Adam’s
existence. And Paul has made it clear in chapters 5 and 6 that what God has
done in Jesus Christ has transferred us to a new reality in which there are new
possibilities for life and righteousness. Paul reiterates this point at the
very beginning of chapter 8 when he says “Therefore, there is now no
condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus <i>because the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus set you free from
the law of sin and death.” </i>That is, we are no longer enslaved by the law of
Adam’s disobedience with the production of sin as our only option. We have now
been set free for a new option; that of life, holiness, and righteousness. We
have this option because God did in Jesus Christ what the law was never able to
do. The law was never able to defeat sin since it did nothing to empower weak
human flesh against it. God, on the other hand, sent his son in this same flesh
so as to condemn sin. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Paul says that the purpose of God’s actions in all this was
“in order that we might fulfill the righteous requirements of the law.” This is
the very thing that Paul has been saying was so impossible without Christ! Even
in following the law to the last letter, we couldn’t actually produce righteousness.
But now, because of God’s actions in Jesus, we can actually fulfill the
righteous requirements of the law. I don’t think it would be unfair to say that
this is a poignant and concise summary of Paul’s gospel. The reason Jesus is
such good news is because he provides the first real possibility of genuine
righteousness in this world. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Again, much as in chapter 6, Paul reiterates that this is
not all automatic. We must walk according to the Spirit if we are to truly
fulfill the law. We can still decide to walk according to the flesh and, by
doing so, fail to produce righteousness. But once again the emphasis in on what
God has already done. Paul says in v. 9 “But you are not in the flesh but in
the Spirit since the Spirit of God dwells in you.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is the real crux of the matter for Paul. <i>If the Spirit that raised Jesus from the
dead dwells in you (which he says it does), then that Spirit which overcame
death can also overcome the power of sin. </i>Everything hinges on this
dwelling of God’s own Spirit among us. The pouring out of this resurrecting
Spirit is what makes the difference between the realm of Adam and the realm of
Christ. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It may be helpful here to think back to Romans 1:18-32 and
remember all the nasty things that Paul said about Gentiles. Like most of his
fellow Jews, Paul viewed Gentiles as hopelessly blind, entirely ignorant of the
ways of God and God’s law, clueless in their perverting the ways of God that should have
been evident to them in creation. If Paul’s fellow Jews were enlightened and
well-intentioned despite their inability to produce righteousness, the Gentiles
couldn’t even claim that. They walked entirely in darkness without the
slightest understanding of God’s law or any aim to fulfill it. It is these same
clueless, hopeless, lawless Gentiles (along with his own fellows Jews) that
Paul now claims can fulfill the righteous requirements of the law merely because
of the Spirit’s presence in their lives! This is testament to just what a transforming power Paul understood the Holy Spirit to be in the life of 1st century Christian congregations. Anyone, even Gentiles, could fulfill the righteous requirements of the law if they walked according to the Spirit.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Holiness and righteousness are real
possibilities in this life, for Jews <i>and </i> Gentiles, because God’s own Spirit has
made its dwelling among us. Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-18607102637560790352013-12-02T13:42:00.000-06:002013-12-02T13:42:03.942-06:00Waiting<div class="MsoNormal">
You can get so confused<br />
that you'll start in to race<br />
down long wiggled roads at a break-necking pace<br />
and grind on for miles cross weirdish wild space,<br />
headed, I fear, toward a most useless place.<br />
The <st1:street w:st="on">Waiting Place</st1:street>...<br />
<br />
...for people just waiting.<br />
Waiting for a train to go<br />
or a bus to come, or a plane to go<br />
or the mail to come, or the rain to go<br />
or the phone to ring, or the snow to snow<br />
or the waiting around for a Yes or No<br />
or waiting for their hair to grow.<br />
Everyone is just waiting.<br />
<br />
Waiting for the fish to bite<br />
or waiting for the wind to fly a kite<br />
or waiting around for Friday night<br />
or waiting, perhaps, for their Uncle Jake<br />
or a pot to boil, or a Better Break<br />
or a string of pearls, or a pair of pants<br />
or a wig with curls, or Another Chance.<br />
Everyone is just waiting.<br />
<br />
NO!<br />
That's not for you!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
-
Oh, the Places You’ll Go</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dr.
Suess</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Oh, the Places You’ll Go</u> is probably my favorite of all
the books I read with my children. I love it because it is exciting to think
about all the places my children will go in their lives; the decisions they’ll
make, the things they’ll do, the ways that their lives will become uniquely
their own apart from me. I also like that the book points out that things don’t
always go so smoothly. While it celebrates all the great things we can do with
our lives, it also acknowledges that there are always set backs and
difficulties along the way. “Bangups and hangups can happen to you” it says. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But there is a particular part of the book that has been
prominent in my mind over this last year of our lives: the lines that I’ve
quoted above. Our family has found itself in this “waiting place” for much of
this past year. It started last October as we waited for Esther to be born 11
days past her due date. In November, I submitted my applications to doctoral
programs and began waiting for an answer. Hints of an answer would come in
February as I was accepted to one school and on the waiting list at another but
the final answer would not come until April. I wish I could say that I was calm
and collected during this nearly half a year, trusting that God would provide
no matter the circumstance but that simply wasn’t the case. I was wracked with
anxiety like few other times in my life, not only wondering whether I would get
in anywhere but wondering where we might be moving our family if we moved at
all. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But that waiting already seems a distant memory because of
what has happened since. It is difficult to even remember just how stressful
that time was because the months that followed were a whole new level of stress
and anxiety. On May 26, my dad suffered a stroke. The next three weeks were
filled with waiting and wondering; waiting to see how long it would take my dad
to recover, how much he might recover, or if he would recover at all. One day
would bring reports of improvement, the next day reports of concern. Every day
there was nothing to do but wait; wait to see if the swelling in his brain
would go down, wait to see if his cognition improved, wait to see if he could
swallow food. On June 14, the waiting ended as my dad entered his eternal rest.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The day after my dad’s funeral, my mom called to tell me
that my grandmother, my only living grandparent and the only one I had known
into my adult life, had been taken to the hospital. So now we would wait for
the results of her tests. A week later we found out that she had stage 4 cancer
in several organs and that she had a couple weeks to a couple of months to
live. So we waited. We let her know that we loved her in all the ways we could
and we waited for the inevitable. On August 4, my grandmother’s waiting ended. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the time between my dad’s and grandmother’s deaths, we
relocated our family from <st1:state w:st="on">Illinois</st1:state> to <st1:state w:st="on">Massachusetts</st1:state> so that I
could begin my ThD program at BU. This brought its own forms of waiting;
waiting to settle into a routine after uprooting our children from the only
home they have ever known, waiting to get over the continuous string of
illnesses that has come from being in a new place, waiting for the grief from
too many losses too close together to become anything other than numbness and
exhaustion. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And the waiting continues even now over a year since it all
began. We are still waiting on our house in <st1:state w:st="on">Illinois</st1:state> to sell. We are still waiting to
get into our own home here. We are waiting to see if Jess will eventually have
a full time teaching job. We are waiting for some order to emerge from the
chaos. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All of this waiting has made me keenly aware of just how
little waiting I’ve done in my life. We live in a culture that does its best to
eliminate waiting from our lives. The
fast food drive thru, every searchable fact available at lightning speed in the
palm of our hand, and stores open on Thanksgiving Day already decorated for
Christmas have conditioned us to expect that anything worth having ought to be
available simultaneous with the moment our desire arises. Generally speaking,
we are not a people accustomed to waiting. Given the opportunity, we will
eliminate all the waiting we possibly can from our lives because, as Dr. Seuss
says, the waiting place is “a most useless place.” Time spent waiting, we often
think, is time wasted. Time we could have spent doing something more enjoyable
or more important. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think we often carry this same view over into our thoughts
about God and God’s work in our lives. God has a plan for each one of us, we
proclaim, and our task is to get in line with that plan as quickly and smoothly
as possible. We have an “Oh, the Places You’ll Go with God” theology. God wants
to do great and exciting things in your life. And sure, there will be set backs
along the way. That happens to all of us. But don’t get stuck too long because
time spent waiting is time wasted; time you could have spent getting on with
God’s plan for your life. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is no wonder then that we have great difficulty with
Advent; a season defined by waiting. For four weeks leading up to Christmas,
the Church says “Wait”. Right at the time when our culture is working itself
into its annual holiday frenzy of shopping, scheduling, and socializing, the
Church asks us to remember what it means to wait. We remember <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>’s
centuries long waiting for its Messiah. We remember that we are waiting for the
world to be set right. For one month every year, our task is not to do or
accomplish or follow a plan but only to wait. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, the Church’s year begins here. Advent is the first
season of the Christian calendar. Waiting is not one stance among others for
us. It is our first stance. It is where our worship begins. Before Christ is
born at Christmas, before his kingdom is proclaimed in Epiphany, before the
journey to the cross in Lent, before the new life of Easter and the gift of the
Spirit at Pentecost, before all of it, the very first movement of the Church’s
life every year is to take up a posture of waiting. It may well be that
centuries of Christian wisdom found that this posture was the one in which we
could most readily come to know the savior celebrated in all the other seasons.
The Church calendar, patterned as it is after the life of Christ, easily could
have started with Jesus’ birth at Christmas. Instead, we confess that in order
for the story of Christ to be properly told and lived it must begin with a
season of waiting. <i>Rather than counting
time spent waiting as time wasted, the Church confesses that time spent waiting
is essential to truly seeing and knowing Jesus. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is what I wish to confess as well. This year of waiting
for various things has caused me to see Jesus more clearly. And that clearer
vision is of a Jesus who waits with us; whose priority isn’t as much plans and
proper decisions, as it is presence. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve been reminded in all these times of waiting that we wait
for those we love. The times when we have a choice in the matter, we choose to
wait for those about whom we care. We wait in a hospital room with those who
are dying because simply being with them is more important than anything else
we could be doing. We wait to start a meal until everyone is present because
eating with those we love is as important as eating. We wait for marriage
because the health of our relationship with this one person is more important
than gratifying our sexual desires. When we wait for someone, we are saying
that their presence is more important than whatever else we might be doing at
that moment or whatever else we might get from them. In relationships of love,
presence takes precedence over plans. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I imagine that it is not so different in our relationship
with God. Karl Barth wrote that “The will of God is Jesus Christ.” I’m not
certain about everything that Barth meant by that sentence but it at least
might suggest that God’s will for our lives isn’t so much a plan as a person.
What God wills more than anything else is not that we accomplish certain things
or go certain places in life or make exactly the right decisions. God’s will
for us is Jesus; that in Jesus we will know the presence of God in our very own
flesh. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think of all the people I know who are waiting or have
waited for something for so long. Friends who have waited to have children. Who
are waiting for a job. Waiting for an opportunity. Who are waiting for healing.
Who are waiting for an inevitable death. Who are waiting for that special
someone. Some who are waiting for purpose or direction. Some who are waiting
for justice. Some who are waiting for some wholeness and peace. Just waiting
for some order to emerge from the chaos. It seems like everyone close to me is
waiting for something. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’d be the last person to say that all our waiting will work
out just fine in the end. It doesn’t always. I won’t say that the waiting isn’t
painful, sometimes agonizing. We may very well plead with God to bring our
waiting to an end. Jess and I have done just that many times over. Given the
chance, we would have happily traded in all of our waiting many months ago
before the worst of it had even began. But I will say that all our waiting and
pleading is not in vain. It is not time wasted, whatever the outcome, if in our
waiting we aim to encounter Jesus. For, as Pope Francis recently said, “The
Lord does not disappoint those who take this risk; whenever we take a step
towards Jesus, we come to realize that he is already there, waiting for us with
open arms." </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
May your season of waiting, whether it be these four weeks
of Advent or a much longer time than that, be one in which you encounter a
savior who is with us in all our waiting and who waits for you with open arms. </div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-37272059631650143062013-11-20T12:58:00.000-06:002013-11-20T12:58:19.614-06:00Sin: The Overwhelming ForceIn Romans 7, Paul once again returns to the subject of the law, a topic that has already figured prominently in his argument since he has been trying to show that righteousness apart from the law is possible. In Romans 6, Paul has continued to argue that we are not under law but under grace. This is because we have participated in Christ's death and resurrection through baptism and as a result have been transferred from the realm of Adam, with its reign of sin and death, to the realm of Christ where life and righteousness are a new possibility.<br />
<br />
Paul continues that same argument by way of illustration in the opening verses of chapter 7. He likens our situation to that of a woman who is married. If a married woman marries another man, she commits adultery because she is bound by law to her husband. But, Paul says, if the husband dies, she is free to marry another without committing adultery. Paul says we are in a similar position if we have died to the law with Christ. We are free from the obligations of the law because of our death in Christ, just as the married woman is freed from the obligation of her husband because of his death.<br />
<br />
But now Paul must take a step back and answer another possible objection. Throughout his letter, Paul has been arguing that the law didn't really make anyone righteous and that it is now possible to be made righteous apart from the law. In fact, Paul really hasn't said much positive about the law at all. That may not seem like a big deal to a predominantly Gentile 21st century Church but we must remember that Paul and his fellow Jews regarded the law as God's good and gracious gift to Israel (and notice Paul says at the beginning of this chapter that he is speaking to those who know the law, his fellow Jews). So in all the ways that Paul has pointed out the shortcomings of the law, one might begin to wonder if Paul actually regards the law, not as a good and gracious gift from God, but as evil. As he asks in v. 7 "What then shall we say? That the law is sin?"<br />
<br />
Paul once again answers with his very strong "May it never be!". Instead, the law was what allowed Paul (and all Jews) to know what was sinful and what wasn't. This was supposed to be an advantage of the law, separating the sacred from the profane. At least Jews had the law to let them know what God expected as opposed to Gentiles who simply walked in darkness. But Paul says that knowing what sin was actually produced an opportunity for sin to go to work (notice that Paul is once again personifying sin, talking about it as a kind of force). Much like commanding a child not to do something will almost guarantee that they will obsess about doing the one thing they've been told not to do, Paul says that the law, rather than preventing sinful desires, was actually used by sin to produce them.*<br />
<br />
But just because sin used the law to produce sin doesn't mean that the law itself was sinful. In fact, Paul's conclusion is that "the law is holy and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good." <i>The root problem isn't the law. The root problem is the power of sin. </i>Just because the parent's command that the child not eat cookies before dinner incites the child's desire for cookies doesn't make the parent's command a bad one. It just means that the child's desire needs to be disciplined. Likewise, Paul concludes that the law is not sinful because sin used it to produce sinful desires. It is the sinful desires themselves which need to be addressed.<br />
<br />
<i>The problem with the law is that it can't address those sinful desires</i>. The law can point out sin for what it is but it is powerless to prevent it. This is what the tongue twister of v. 13-20 is all about.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> It was sin, producing death in me through what is
good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might
become sinful beyond measure.<b><sup> </sup></b>For we know that
the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For
I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do
the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not
want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So
now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells
within me. <b><sup> </sup></b>For I know that nothing good dwells in
me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not
the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the
good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.<b> </b>Now
if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that
dwells within me.</span></div>
</blockquote>
In other words, Paul knows what is good because the law has shown him as much. And Paul desperately wants to do that good but he finds that he can not because the power of sin at work within him is too overwhelming. Finally, in these verses we have the full picture of the problematic human condition which Paul has been painting since the beginning of his epistle. <i><b>The law is not evil. Human beings are not evil. But both are weak. Sin is the real problem and it is a powerful force that overwhelms both God's good law and God's good creation. </b></i><br />
<i><b><br /></b></i>
I'm convinced that these are not mere abstractions for Paul. He is not trying to solve a theological riddle of no practical consequence here. Nor do I think that Paul is making a case for how all Christians will continue to struggle with sin throughout their earthly life. Instead, I am convinced that these verses are autobiographical for Paul. These seemingly obtruse verses take on life when we consider them in light of Paul's own story.<br />
<br />
These verses, I believe, are Paul's attempt to make sense of his own experience prior to meeting Christ on the road to Damascus. Paul was on that road, Acts 9 tells us, because he was on his way to Damascus to arrest "any belonging to the Way." Paul wanted to arrest them because he saw them as blasphemers and false prophets; that is, they were spreading lies about the God of Israel by claiming that God had been embodied in a human named Jesus. The law made it clear that Israel could not tolerate such people. So when Paul traveled to Damascus to arrest Christians, we must understand that he wasn't just a mean or vindictive guy. He wasn't doing this because he hadn't read his Bible closely enough. Quite to the contrary, he was persecuting Christians precisely because that was what the scriptures told him to do. As a Pharisee, Paul's number one goal was to follow the will of God. Paul persecuted Christians because he thought that was what God willed. But once Paul encounters Christ, he realizes that he was actually doing the very opposite of what God wanted. In his attempts to work for God, Paul was actually working against God. In other words, <i>Paul didn't do what he wanted to do but did the very thing he hated. He had the desire to do what was right but not the ability to carry it out. He didn't do the good he wanted but the evil he didn't want is what he kept on doing. </i>Sound familiar?<br />
<br />
This is why Paul believes that we are so terribly lost without Christ and the gift of the Spirit. It is not because we human beings are just really awful creatures filled with all kinds of evil intentions or because God can't forgive us of all our evil acts without Christ's blood. <i style="font-weight: bold;">We are so terribly lost because as long as we live in Adam's realm of existence the overwhelming power of sin will turn even our best efforts to serve God into the worst kinds of evil. </i>Sin is just that powerful a force. That is why Paul cries out "Who will deliver me from this body of death?"<br />
<br />
But we can say with Paul "Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord." For we are not left in Adam's realm of existence. Paul has already argued in Romans 5 that what Christ did has overwhelmed what Adam did. In Romans 6, he argued that we have been transferred from Adam's realm to a new existence in Jesus Christ by baptism and that, although baptism does not make it happen automatically, we can be dead to sin if we submit ourselves as slaves to righteousness. And in Romans 8, Paul will claim that the righteous requirements of the law are fulfilled by those who walk in the Spirit. Although Paul sketches a grave outline of sin's terrible force in Romans 7, the surrounding chapters make clear that because of what Christ has done, the struggle with sin does not have to be the identifying mark of Christian existence. The once overwhelming force of sin has lost its power to enslave because of what God has done in Jesus Christ.<br />
<br />
*<span style="font-size: x-small;">It may also be helpful to know that many scholars believe that Paul has Adam in mind once again here. That is, that when Paul says "I" did this or that, he isn't just talking about himself. He is thinking of Adam's disobedience as a type for all humanity (just as he did in ch. 5) and including himself in that. A number of things point to this possibility. First, Paul chooses the particular sin of coveting as his example, a term that describes well Adam and Eve's attitude toward the tree of knowledge. Secondly, it would certainly have been more true of Adam and Eve than most to say "I would not have known what it was to covet if the law had not said "Do not covet"." Adam and Eve had all they needed. There would have not been anything for them to desire if the tree of knowledge had not been restricted from them. Third, we can see how sin, personified in the serpent, used God's good command to produce Adam's disobedience. Fourth, thinking of Adam in this way is still fresh in our minds from just two chapters ago. If Paul doesn't have Adam in mind here, it at least serves as an excellent illustration of what Paul is saying. Just as God's command to Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge did not prevent them from doing so but actually incited their lust for it, so also the law could not prevent sin but was actually used by sin (the power) to produce sinful desires. </span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-77477597029846997532013-11-14T12:47:00.000-06:002013-11-14T12:47:57.492-06:00Working with GraceIn the previous section of his letter, Paul argued that Christ, like Adam, did something that impacted all of humanity. More specifically, what Christ did reversed what Adam had done. Whereas Adam's disobedience had allowed the corrupting forces of sin and death into the world, Christ's faithfulness brought righteousness and life into the world. In fact, one way of understanding Romans 5:12-21 is to organize it into two very neat but opposing columns.<br />
<br />
Adam Christ<br />
Disobedience Faithfulness<br />
Sin Righteousness<br />
Death Life<br />
Law Grace<br />
<br />
In this chapter, Paul is emphasizing the objective reality of what Christ has done and stressing that it has overcome what Adam did, even going so far as to say in v. 20 that "where sin abounded, grace abounded all the more." If Paul had left off here, it would be easy to think that this was all very formulaic and automatic; Adam messed up the world, Christ fixed it. End of story. We might as well go on living our merry lives and, in fact, go on sinning while we are at it since our sin is what led to God's grace anyway. This is why Paul begins as he does in Romans 6.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"What shall we say then? Shall we remain in sin so that grace may increase? </blockquote>
Paul answers emphatically "May it never be! How can we who died to sin live in it any longer?" The change that Christ has brought about in the world is not something external to us that doesn't involve us. The movement from that left column to the right one is not merely something Christ is doing in the world around us. It is something Christ wishes to accomplish in us. Paul believes that this is what happens in baptism. Just as Christ's faithful death and resurrection made the movement toward that right column a reality in our world, so also in baptism we die and are raised with Christ allowing us to move from the left column of sin and death to the right column of righteousness and life.<i> For Paul, baptism is nothing less than a transfer of our being from one reality to another, an induction into a completely new way of being human. </i>Paul's whole argument in this chapter rests on that premise. It is essentially "Given that we've been caught up in this entirely new reality in Christ, how can we possibly go back to the old one?"<br />
<br />
Of course, the fact that Paul has to make this argument at all is the first indication that life, even in life in Christ, can never be as neat and tidy as two columns. Even though Paul believes that baptism is nothing less than the portal into this new way of being, he also knows that baptism does not guarantee a sinless life. It is not automatic. If it were, there would be no need anywhere in Paul's letters to correct his congregations or to say as he says here:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Therefore, do not let sin reign in your mortal bodies...Do not present your members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness." </blockquote>
Paul is emphatic that the victory has been won in Jesus Christ and that the way to participate in that victory is through baptism but he is just as emphatic that for all Christ has done he has not left us with nothing to do. The Church is called to "present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life and your members to God as instruments of righteousness." Like soldiers presenting arms before a commanding officer, we are to present ourselves before God as those who are ready to carry out his mission of righteousness in the world.<br />
<br />
I think any person with military experience would attest to the reality that simply signing papers to join the military isn't the same thing as being a trained soldier. To be sure, when you sign those papers your status has changed in a very real way. In that single act you have been transferred from the life of a civilian to that of a soldier and you are no longer your own master. But despite the very real change that has taken place, you do not suddenly become a combat ready warrior by signing your name. There has been a change of status that has tremendous consequences but it will take enormous amounts of discipline and training for that change in status to be fully realized.<br />
<br />
I think that is something like what Paul is saying here. When we are baptized, our status really has changed but it would be foolish to think that all the consequences of that change will immediately and automatically take effect. Instead, we must continually choose to engage in discipline and training that will shape us into people who can be agents of God's redemptive movements in our world. We need worship, prayer, scripture, communion, fasting, service to others, Christian fellowship and all the other things we call "means of grace" and "spiritual disciplines" because these are our training, our boot camp. Baptism alone will not turn us into a people who imitate the faithfulness of Christ. We need the work of the Holy Spirit through these disciplines to be the people of holiness, mercy, compassion, and justice that we are called to be. Salvation is by grace but there is work to be done if that salvation is to be fully realized in our lives and the lives of those around us.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-75475272839909942452013-11-06T10:08:00.001-06:002013-11-06T10:22:11.424-06:00The Power of One<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin and so death spread to all humanity because all sinned..."*</blockquote>
So Paul begins his thought in Romans 5:12 but it is a thought he doesn't seem to finish. That "just as" of Paul's sentence causes us to expect another half to this statement; a "so also". We might expect something like "just as sin came into the world through one man so also righteousness came into the world through one man." But we don't see that right away. Instead, it seems that right in the middle of his thought Paul realized that he needed to make some clarifications before even completing his analogy as if the analogy might have been too badly misunderstood and could not be recovered if he does not first clear up some things.<br />
<br />
We'll get to those clarifications in a moment but it maybe helpful to first see the main comparison Paul is making. That is, Christ is like Adam in that both have done something that impacts all of humanity. Adam was the one who allowed sin to enter the world through his own disobedience to God. Notice the kind of picture that Paul's language portrays here, as if sin were this personified force that had been locked out of the creation but by Adam's disobedience the door was left open for sin to enter and bring death with it. Once sin and death entered the creation, they ran rampant and unrestrained. As Paul says, they reigned like kings over God's creation. We've already seen in previous sections of Romans that God gave the law to help combat this hellish reign on earth but the law proved ineffective in that all humanity continued to sin anyway. Now that sin has made its way into the world, its power was too great to be resisted.<br />
<br />
We have to skip down to v. 18-21 to get the other half of the equation, the "so also." If sin can be allowed to enter the world through one man's disobedience, then it stands to reason that the reign of sin might also be defeated by one man's faithfulness. This is what Paul believes Jesus has done. The unique faithfulness of Jesus Christ has allowed a new power of righteousness to enter the world in order that humanity might be made righteous and that new righteousness has brought new life along with it. Just as one man brought sin and death to all so also can one man bring righteousness and life to all.<br />
<br />
But it is not as if these were two equal powers, sin and righteousness, now warring within the creation. Paul says that what Christ did is already overtaking what Adam did. That is the clarification Paul makes in v. 15-17. If many died by Adam's sin, <i>much more</i> will many live because of Christ. If Adam's <i>one</i> sin brought condemnation, Christ's one life of faithfulness overcomes <i>many </i>sins. If death reigned through one man, <i>much more</i> will those who receive grace and righteousness reign in life. Adam is a type of Christ but what Christ has done is far greater. Jesus has not merely leveled the playing field between sin and righteousness. He has won the decisive battle against sin and death and they are now retreating before the powers of righteousness and life advancing in our world.<br />
<br />
Of course, that retreat of sin and death before the powers of life and righteousness doesn't always seem so obvious in our world. Often it may appear things are moving in the other direction, even in our own lives. Although the decisive blow has been struck, these wannabe kings of sin and death do not easily give up the territory they have held for so long. This, Paul will say in the next chapter, is why we must continually submit ourselves as instruments to the cause of righteousness. But it is because of what Paul has proclaimed in this chapter that we know we are submitting ourselves to a winning cause; the faithfulness of Jesus has overcome the transgression of Adam.<br />
<br />
*<span style="font-size: x-small;">You may notice that in some translations of Romans 5:12, the
final phrase reads “in whom all sinned.” That final phrase in Romans 5:12 reads
"eph ho all sinned", that "eph ho" being the Greek phrase
that is in question. These are fairly simple words in Greek; "eph"
being a shortened version of a common Greek preposition typically meaning
"in" or "on" and "ho" being a relative
pronoun meaning "whom". So a very literal translation of this phrase
would read "in whom all sinned." If this is the proper translation,
then Paul would be saying that when Adam sinned everyone sinned. That is, the
entire human race is implicated in Adam's sin and found guilty because of what
he did. St. Augustine, a Bishop in the North African city of Hippo in the late
300's and probably the single most influential theologian in the history of the
Church, understood the phrase this way and it was in his understanding of this
verse that he saw the doctrine of original sin; the idea that because Adam
sinned all of humanity is guilty. Indeed, if "in whom" is the proper
translation of this verse then it would be difficult to understand it any other
way. Prominent as Augustine was, his teaching of original sin has impacted
generation after generation of the Church, even those who have never heard the
name of Augustine. </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">However, there is debate about the meaning of this verse
because "eph ho" can also be a conjunction meaning
"because". This would change substantially how we would understand
what Paul is saying here. If Paul meant to say "death came to all humanity
because all sinned" then Paul is not saying everyone is guilty because of
Adam's sin, as Augustine thought, but that all human beings are guilty because
all human beings have, in fact, sinned. Either way, we are all guilty. The
question is this: Are we guilty because of what Adam did or because what we
have done? As I have hinted at in this post, I think the idea that is most
consistent with the rest of Paul’s thought is to understand Paul as saying that
Adam opened the door for the power of sin to enter the world and that humanity
has been powerless to stand before this force with the result that we have all
sinned. So all have sinned as a result of Adam’s sin because it allowed the
power of sin to enter the world, not because everyone is guilty due to Adam’s
single transgression. </span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-80709978411607525572013-10-23T11:02:00.001-05:002013-10-23T13:12:29.985-05:00Abraham: Father of Righteousness Apart from the LawPaul has been arguing that a new righteousness is possible apart from the law. This is a bold claim on Paul's part. In <a href="http://allthingsnew21.blogspot.com/2013/10/circumcision-of-heart.html">an earlier post</a>, I noted the objection that Paul's fellow first century Jews likely would have offered to what Paul says in Romans 2:26:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law...."</blockquote>
We don't even need to finish the sentence. Paul's contemporaries surely would have found the premise itself to be contradictory. They likely would have asked "How can one be uncircumcised and keep the law when circumcision itself is a key component of the law?" In order to answer that question, Paul returns to the very origins of circumcision.<br />
<br />
In Romans 4, Paul supports and illustrates his claim that righteousness apart from the law is possible by recounting the story of Abraham. Abraham was the father of Israel. God promised Abraham that if he followed God then he would be made the father of many nations and that all the people of the earth would be blessed by his offspring. As such an important figure, Abraham serves as a sort of paradigm for all of Israel. There is a sense in which what is true for Abraham is true for God's people. He is not merely one example among many Paul could have utilized. Abraham, more so than any other individual figure, is really <i>the </i>example when it comes to the identity of Israel. And it was with Abraham that circumcision became an identifying mark of Israel. God commanded Abraham to be circumcised as a sign of the covenant that God had made with Abraham. God commanded that all of Abraham's descendants be circumcised as well as a sign of their participation in this same covenant.<br />
<br />
Here we begin to get a sense of why circumcision, which probably seems an arbitrary and inconsequential thing to us, was of such great importance to the Jewish people. It was commanded by God and it was a sign of God's call to Abraham, the very beginnings of Israel. It was a sign of God's promises to Abraham and his descendants. It was a sign of Israel's continued participation in that very same covenant. It was nothing less than a symbol of God's faithfulness to Israel and Israel's faithful response. <i>It is probably not an overstatement to say that circumcision was synonymous with what it mean to be Israel, to be God's people. </i>Abraham is precisely the figure that Paul's opponents would have cited (and did, if Galatians is any indication) as the reason why one must be circumcised in order to keep the law and participate in God's covenant. It is because of Abraham, they would have argued, that one can not keep the law <i>and </i>remain uncircumcised.<br />
<br />
It is a demonstration of Paul's keen mind at work re-reading the scriptures in light of Christ that he managed to use the very figure who formed the crux of his opponents argument to make his own point which was precisely the opposite of theirs. The critical turn in Paul's argument is found in 4:9-11:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Is this blessing then only for the circumcised or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith(fulness) was counted to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after but before he was circumcised."</blockquote>
God counted Abraham as righteous in Genesis 15. God did not require Abraham to be circumcised until Genesis 17. God counted Abraham as righteous <i>before</i> he was circumcised. That is, Abraham actually serves as the perfect example for Paul's argument because <i>Abraham was considered righteous apart from circumcision, apart from the law. The scriptures themselves claim that God considered Abraham righteous because of his faith(fulness). </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
It is faith(fulness), Paul radically claims, not circumcision or adherence to the law which has always been the true mark of God's people. Abraham demonstrated this same faith(fulness) by trusting God even when he was old and had no heir, even when God demanded the sacrifice of his heir. Abraham was righteous not because of circumcision but because he lived faithfully before God and what is true for Abraham is true for all God's people. When there is not yet a God-given law, when that God-given law fails to produce righteousness, when God is doing crazy things like promising a fatherhood of nations to an old and childless couple or raising God's messiah from the dead, "<i>the righteous out of faithfulness will live." </i>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-49182319575698109212013-10-16T20:29:00.000-05:002013-10-16T20:29:15.700-05:00New Righteousness, New LawPaul finished the previous section of his letter having articulated the problematic predicament of humanity. We are a people too weak to stand up to the power of sin. Likewise, God's good and gracious provision of the law was too weak to help us make that stand. All it could do was point to the reality of sin. It couldn't help to defend against it. How do we know this? Because Israel's own story, its own scriptures attest to the fact. Despite hundreds of years of following the law still "there is no one righteous, not even one."<br />
<br />
"But now..." v. 21 begins. But now something new has happened. But now there is a new possibility for righteousness. But now an entirely new epoch in history has dawned because of what God has done in Jesus Christ. But now a new strength has come to rescue our weak flesh. "But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed to by the law and the prophets - the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe."* This new righteousness, Paul claims, is for Jew and Gentile alike since there is no real difference between them since both have sinned. It is a gift freely given out of the redemption and atonement accomplished in Christ Jesus. As a result, there can be no boasting of Jewish Christians over Gentile Christians (or the other way around) since both are made righteous by the same God on account of the same faithfulness.<br />
<br />
But just because God's righteousness has now been revealed apart from the law doesn't mean that God has now done away with law entirely. Rather this new righteousness revealed in Jesus requires a new kind of law. Paul says it is a law of faithfulness instead of the law of works. That is, rather than righteousness being determined by works of the Jewish law (things like circumcision, Sabbath observance, and food laws) the source of righteousness is now the faithfulness of Jesus Christ and living faithfully out of and in imitation of that faithfulness is the law which followers of Jesus are called to obey. <i>Jesus is both the new righteousness revealed apart from the law and the new law of faithfulness. </i><br />
<br />
But even to call this righteousness and this law "new" is a fairly serious misnomer if by that we mean that it has no connection to what is "old". To be sure, Paul's claim that Jesus is God's righteousness and God's law is radically new in some very substantial ways. It is no small thing that Paul claimed that circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath observance were not necessary for Gentiles to be considered righteous. These were central pieces of Jewish identity and themselves crucial parts of the law that God had given Israel. But, in other ways, Paul wants us to see that this new law and new righteousness in Jesus really aren't so new - at least not so new as to be entirely alien to God's history with Israel. After all, Paul says that this righteousness is witnessed to by the law and the prophets.<br />
<br />
One of those prophets was Habakkuk whom Paul has already quoted in 1:17. Paul's language in these latter verses of chapter 3 echoes and expands on much of the language Paul use in 1:17 and by that connections helps us to see yet again why that quotation from Habakkuk is so critical to Paul's understanding of what God has done in Jesus Christ. In Habakkuk's opening verses we hear that the law is paralyzed and that justice goes forth perverted. This is precisely the same thing that Paul has been arguing in the opening chapters of Romans; that the law is paralyzed, weak, and powerless to produce true righteousness. In Habakkuk chapter 2, the prophet declares that "the righteous will live out of faithfulness." In other words, in a time when when the law is failing to serve its purpose and God is doing strange and unexpected things like using the Babylonians as his instrument to make Israel righteous, those who wish to be counted as righteous will still live faithfully before God trusting in God's faithfulness even its strange, new forms. Paul sees a parallel here as well; since the law has failed to produce righteousness a new righteousness must come through a life of faithfulness, even if it is the strange and unexpected faithfulness of a crucified messiah. Paul sees Habakkuk as a precedent for arguing that this is not the first time that God has called the righteous to live by a law of faithfulness as an alternative to a law of works. What <i>is </i>new is that this faithfulness has been embodied in the person of Jesus, the crucified messiah. He is the new law and Paul believes that the law of Christ can produce true righteousness in a way the law of works never could.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*You may have noticed that I translated this phrase in v.22 as "the faithfulness of Jesus Christ" rather than "faith in Jesus Christ." There are two issues that allow this phrase to be translated
in these two ways. The first is that the
word "pistis" in Greek can be translated either as "faith"
or "faithfulness". It really means both intertwined together but one
aspect of the word can be emphasized more than the other in certain
contexts. </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">The second is an issue of Greek grammar. The words
"of" or "in" are not actually in the Greek text of Romans
3:22. Instead, this phrase is in what is known as the genitive case. (In
English, word order is an important part of determining the meaning of a
sentence. So, for example, in the sentence "Dave teaches his class lots of
crazy Greek stuff." we know that "Dave" is the subject of the
sentence because it comes before the verb. Greek, on the other hand, uses a
case system to indicate how a word functions in the sentence. A change in case
is indicated by a slight change in the spelling of a word. So, for example,
"Jesus Christ" which is "Iesous Christos" in the nominative
case becomes "Iesou Christou" in the genitive case.) The most typical
use of the genitive case is to indicate possession but it can have a whole
range of meanings throughout the New Testament. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Two of those possibilities are known as the subjective
genitive and objective genitive. You can see something similar to this in
English in a phrase like the "the love of God." Does that phrase
refer to God's love for us or our love for God? Is God doing the loving (so God
is the subject, a subjective genitive) or is God receiving the love (so God is
the object of the love, an objective genitive)? It can mean either or maybe
even both at the same time but the only way you would be able to decide would
be context. What makes the most sense with what is around it? If Paul said
"Christ's death demonstrates the love of God" it would be clear that
he was referring to God's love for us. If he said "Our love for others
demonstrates the love of God" it might be more difficult to decide whose
love Paul was talking about. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Something similar is at stake in our phrase in Romans 3:22.
Is Jesus Christ the object of the faith(fulness)? That is, is Paul talking
about Jesus receiving our faith? Or is Jesus the subject of the faith(fulness)?
That is, is Jesus the one who has himself been faithful? <i>Of course,
both are true in the big picture! The issue here is not choosing one to the
exclusion of the other. The question is a matter of emphasis. <u>Is
Paul's <b>emphasis</b> in Romans on <b>our belief</b> or on <b>God's
faithfulness through Jesus Christ</b>?</u></i> </span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-2279059168755818192013-10-09T13:05:00.001-05:002013-10-09T13:05:44.291-05:00The Insufficiency of the Law<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Then what advantage has the Jew?"</blockquote>
It's a logical question given the kind of claims that Paul has made in Romans 2. In the verses leading up to this question in 3:1, Paul has talked about the possibility of Gentiles being a law to themselves and keeping the law without being circumcised. He has even said that such Gentiles are better off than Jews who have the law but fail to follow it. So its worth asking "Is there any advantage to being a Jew?" One could have easily misunderstood Paul as saying that Jews and Gentiles were just alike with absolutely no difference between them. Paul makes clear here at the beginning of chapter 3 that this is not the idea he intended to communicate. The Jews are still God's chosen people to whom were entrusted "the oracles of God".<br />
<br />
But there <i>is</i> some sense in which Paul wants to communicate that Jews and Gentiles stand on equal footing. Even though Israel is God's chosen people and hold certain advantages by virtue of their election, they are still basically in the same boat as Gentiles when it comes to being counted as righteous before God. That is what Paul has been saying for most of these three opening chapters and it is the point he is driving home in these verses. As he says in V.9:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks are under sin."</blockquote>
Greeks, that is, Gentiles being "under sin" would have been a given in the mind of any first century Jew (as we saw in Romans 1:18-32). Paul spent all of chapter 2 arguing that the same is true for Jews as well, despite having the law. Just in case there is any doubt left on the matter, Paul adds a litany of quotations to his argument; quotations from Israel's very own Scriptures pointing out Israel's very own sinfulness. <i>Paul is at great pains to demonstrate that however good and perfect a gift God's law might have been to Israel, Israel's own Scriptures testify to the reality that the law alone was not capable of assuring the righteousness of Israel. </i>Page after page of Israel's own story speaks to the reality of Israel's idolatry, sinfulness, and injustice despite the presence of God's law to guide them. That is why Paul can say that even though there is an advantage to being a Jew, "both Jews and Greeks are under sin."<br />
<br />
It is also why Paul closes this section by saying<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"For by works of the law no human being will be made righteous in his sight for through the law comes the knowledge of sin." </blockquote>
I suspect that this statement and much of this chapter are often read as a kind of eternal decree from God as if Paul were saying "No one will be saved by works because God said so (and God said so because God also said we are sinful thus our works are sinful)." In other words, we could read this chapter as a very blunt statement of the doctrine of original sin; that every human being is corrupted from birth and as a result even our best works will not justify us in God's sight. Without debating the merits of such a doctrine, I would argue that isn't exactly what Paul is saying here. Rather than repeating an eternal maxim from God, I think Paul is making an inference from human experience. He is essentially saying "Look, we know no one is going to be made righteous by works of the law <i>because for hundreds of years of Israelite history the law has failed to make us truly righteous. In fact, the law's only real accomplishment has been to point out sin in all its sinfulness </i>(something on which Paul will elaborate in chapter 7). <i> </i><br />
<br />
In short, we are in need of something more than law. Even the law given by the creator of the universe was not enough to make us righteous. It couldn't prevent sin or produce justice. It couldn't make us whole. So if we are to be righteous before God, if we are to be made new and whole, we will need God to do something new, something in contrast to what has gone before, something more powerful than law. We need this:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"But now..."</blockquote>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-49460037632396596172013-10-02T14:45:00.000-05:002013-10-02T14:45:22.110-05:00Circumcision of the HeartIn the last half of Romans 1, we saw what was probably a typical first century Jewish view of Gentiles. That is, they are a people to whom God has not been revealed in the same way that God was revealed to Israel. Paul says that the Gentiles still should have been able to observe the attributes of the creator by way of his creation. However, they have not received God's good and perfect law. As a result of their ignorance of God and God's law, their lives have become ones that pervert justice and produce unrighteousness. In contrast to the Gentiles, Jews understood themselves as the chosen people of God who had been given God's law. As a result, Israel's life together was to be one where righteousness prevailed. Jews presumed that they were to be a light to the Gentiles.<br />
<br />
Paul, a Jew himself, agreed with these presumptions. He understood (even after his encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus) God's law to be a good and perfect gift and he continued to believe that Israel was a people chosen by God to be a light to the rest of the world. Paul's point in Romans 2 is not to denigrate either of those realities. His point is to argue that neither of those intertwined realities - the gift of the law to Israel and Israel's election - automatically make Israel righteous. Righteousness is not a matter of being ethnically Jewish or even knowing the law but of faithfulness to God.<br />
<br />
Paul begins by arguing that God does not show partiality. Even though God has chosen Israel that election is not a matter of favoritism. It is an election to live faithfully before God. As such, Paul says that God will judge Jew and Gentile alike according to their works. V.12-13 sum up Paul's point well when he says that those who don't have the law (Gentiles) will perish because they don't have it to lead them to righteousness but that those who have the law (Jews) and still commit sin aren't any better off because they will be judged by the law they have broken. It is not merely hearing the law that makes one righteous but doing it.<br />
<br />
This is a place where <a href="http://allthingsnew21.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-source-of-faithfulness.html">the narrative of Habakkuk</a>, which Paul quoted in 1:17, proves illustrative once again. In the days of the prophets, many in Israel thought that destruction could never come their way simply because they were God's chosen people. Habakkuk is shocked when he hears that God will use the Babylonians to clean up Israel. Likewise, we hear in Jeremiah the refrain "the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord" reflecting the belief that no harm would come to Israel so long as God's temple stood among them. But God warns through Jeremiah, Habakkuk, and the other prophets that this is not the case; that God's people must turn back to God or destruction will be brought upon them even though they are God's people and even though they have the law and the temple. As Habakkuk says, it is out of faithfulness that the righteous will live. Paul is arguing a similar point in Romans 2; that merely being Jewish or having the law will not save or make righteous. One must put God's law into practice through faithful living.<br />
<br />
So far, so good. I don't think Paul has said much there that is terribly different from what any first century Jew would have said. Faithful Jews would have been very happy for Jews and Gentiles alike to live faithfully by putting God's law into practice. But Paul also goes on to say something that Habakkuk and Jeremiah do not say. In v.14-15 Paul states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
"For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature
do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not
have the law.<b><sup> </sup></b>They show that the work of the law
is written on their hearts..".</div>
</blockquote>
And in v.25-29<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
"For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the
law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. So,
if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not
his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then
he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you
who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no
one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and
physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision
is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is
not from man but from God."</div>
</blockquote>
This is surprising because circumcision is itself a part of the law that Paul is talking about. When Paul says "if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law," I imagine that most of his fellows Jews would immediately object saying "How can one be uncircumcised and keep the law when circumcision is itself a central part of the law?" This is a question we will hear Paul begin to answer in more detail in Romans 4 where he writes about the faith/fulness of Abraham. For now, it is enough to notice the consequences of what Paul is arguing here: Gentiles can live just as faithfully in God's righteousness as Jews even without fulfilling certain parts of the law such as circumcision. Indeed, Paul go so far as to say that an uncircumcised Gentile who lives faithfully to God is more righteous than a circumcised Jew who breaks other parts of the law. We Gentile Christians may take this for granted but it was an enormous and controversial claim on Paul's part; one that puts him at odds with his fellow Jews, even at times with his fellow apostles (see Peter in Galatians), and one that will take him the rest of Romans to fully unravel.<br />
<br />
As Gentile Christians it would be foolish of us if we did not see that Paul's admonition, which is here directed to his Jewish brothers and sisters, also applies to us. We might hear the Spirit speaking through Paul's words to us saying "You who call yourselves Christians and rely on the Spirit and boast in God and know his will and approve of what is excellent because you are instructed by the Scriptures, you who consider yourself a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in Jesus the embodiment of knowledge and truth, - you then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?" Merely bearing the title "Christian" or knowing the Bible or being baptized is not enough. The righteous will live out of faithfulness to God.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-24613836910633414262013-09-27T14:04:00.000-05:002013-09-27T14:04:26.940-05:00The Mercy of Unwashed HandsHow do you envision the wrath of God?<br />
<br />
In Romans 1:18, Paul says that the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against the idolatry and injustice of humanity. For several verses, Paul rails against the ungodliness and unrighteousness of human beings who skew and obstruct knowledge of God even though Paul says that they themselves should have been able to come to this knowledge by observing what has been made. In all likelihood, Paul's words here are probably representative of Jewish caricatures of Gentiles in the first century. At the root of all of this caricature is the failure of Gentiles to worship the one true God of Israel. Everything else Paul describes here is mere symptom. Idolatry is the disease.<br />
<br />
Given that Paul sees us Gentiles as so terribly godless and idolatrous, when Paul starts to talk about wrath being revealed from heaven one might expect the lightning bolts to start flying any minute. Quite to the contrary, we hear Paul say three times in the next several verses "God gave them over...". In v. 24, God gave them over to the lusts of their hearts...". In v. 26, "God gave them over to dishonorable passions...". In v. 28, "God gave them over to a debased mind...". The wrath of God being revealed from heaven is simply a matter of the Creator letting the created pursue their own idolatrous tendencies without interference. It seems the worst wrath that Paul can imagine from God is not lightning bolts and plague but apathy. The worst possible scenario for us is a God who washes his hands of us.<br />
<br />
This is perhaps not that surprising when we consider that the wrath of God is depicted in much the same way in the fundamental story of idolatry in the Old Testament. In Exodus 33, after Aaron and the people of Israel construct a golden calf to worship, God says to Moses:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
"Depart; go up from here, you and the people whom you
have brought up out of the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">land</st1:placetype>
of <st1:placename w:st="on">Egypt</st1:placename></st1:place>, to the land of
which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, saying, ‘To your offspring I
will give it.’ I will send an angel before you, and I will drive
out the Canaanites, the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Hivites,
and the Jebusites. Go up to a land flowing with milk and honey; but I
will not go up among you, lest I consume you on the way, for you are a stiff-necked
people.”</div>
</blockquote>
Despite the people's sin, Yahweh still intends to keep his promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by giving the promised land to their descendants. But God will send an angel to do this work rather than God's own presence dwelling with the people of Israel. On the surface, this might seem like a pretty good deal - Israel still get God's blessing if not God's presence - but Moses will have none of it. He says:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
"If your presence will not go with me, do not bring us up
from here. <b><sup>16 </sup></b>For how shall it be known that I have
found favor in your sight, I and your people? Is it not in your going with
us, so that we are distinct, I and your people, from every other people on
the face of the earth?”</div>
</blockquote>
Moses knows that the worst conceivable fate for the people of Israel is that the presence of the God who delivered them from slavery would be withdrawn from among them. In similar fashion, Paul characterizes the wrath of God being revealed against Gentile idolatry as God handing them over to their own devices. This action on God's part is in stark contrast to the actions of God that Paul has just described in the previous verses using some of the very same vocabulary. Whereas in v 18-32 Paul says that God's wrath is <b>revealed</b> against <b>unrighteousness </b>that is manifested in <b>shameful</b> acts, in v. 16-17 Paul has just said that he is not <b>ashamed</b> of the gospel in part because the <b>righteousness</b> of God is <b>revealed</b> in it.<br />
<br />
It is especially important here to keep in mind what Paul means by some of those words. The gospel is the story of Jesus Christ who "was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead." That is, this good news is centered around the Son of God who stepped into human flesh and died our human death. This is the story of a God who got involved, who intervened. This is a God who, far from washing his hands of us, got his hands dirty in the most profound of all possible ways, plunging those hands into the mess of our own flesh, taking on the very kinds of hands that had themselves committed unrighteousness and idolatry so many times over and having nails put through them. Furthermore, the righteousness of God that is being revealed in this gospel is not only what God has already done in Jesus Christ but also the transforming work that God continues to do to bring about righteousness in our own lives, even the lives of unrighteous and idolatrous Gentiles like us.<br />
<br />
I imagine that this is contrary to the way we usually think about things. It is easy to think that God's mercy surrounds us so long as things are going well. We tend to ask questions about God's wrath when tragedy strikes. But Paul makes me wonder if the worst possible thing that God could do for us would be to simply let everything go according to our plans and our desires all the time. Perhaps the wrath of God in American culture isn't manifested in disasters and economic downturns but just the opposite; in God's allowing us to run unfettered into our never ending pursuit of happiness, security, and prosperity; when God hands us over from being his beloved possession to being possessed by the very things we so desperately seek to obtain.<br />
<br />
Its not that happiness or even our own passions and desires are inherently evil. Its that they are malleable and if left unattended they effortlessly take on the shape and pattern of the broken world that surrounds them. Fortunately, a critical piece of the gospel that Paul proclaims is that leaving our desires and passions unattended is the very last thing that God wants to do. God so badly wants to shape us into the marvelous creatures we were created to be that God plunged the two hands of Son and Spirit into our humanity for that very purpose. The mercy of God isn't when God washes his hands of us and lets us be. The mercy and righteousness of God are revealed in the divine hands that are covered in dirt and clay from the work of shaping the dust of the earth into creatures that begin to resemble the very divinity that has shaped and formed them.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-33124968868168049412013-09-17T21:34:00.003-05:002013-09-17T21:34:49.314-05:00The Source of Faithfulness<i>For I am not ashamed of the gospel for it is the power of God leading to salvation for all who believe, to the Jew first and to the Greek. For the righteousness of God is revealed in it from faith to faith, just as it is written "The righteous out of faithfulness will live." Romans 1:16-17*</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
These are widely recognized as the theme verses of Paul's letter to the church at Rome. They are the thesis of what turns out to be one very long, sustained argument. As a result, there is a lot to unpack here. (After all, Paul will spend the rest of the letter doing just that.) But it is those final words, the quotation from Habakkuk 2:4 which I find most interesting and most enlightening for understanding these verses and the whole of Romans.<br />
<br />
Habakkuk is a little prophetic book that begins with a familiar question:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"O Lord, how long shall I cry for help and you will not hear? Or cry to you "Violence!" and you will not save?"</blockquote>
The first four verses of Habakkuk paint a bleak picture of Israel as a violent and unjust place. Habakkuk says that the law is "paralyzed" and "justice goes forth perverted." This is an especially poignant depiction of corruption given that the law to which Habakkuk refers is the good and perfect law given by God. The corruption and injustice in Israel are so severe that even God's perfect law is powerless to correct it. The overwhelming sin of Israel perverts the instrument of God's own justice so badly that it only serves to produce more injustice. It is this dismal circumstance which causes the prophet to cry out to God asking "How long?".<br />
<br />
To say that God's response to Habakkuk in 1:5-11 would have been "surprising" or "unexpected" would be an understatement overwhelming in its imprecision. "Jaw-dropping, difficult to wrap your brain around, alternative reality" would come closer to an apt description. God proclaims that his answer to the problem of violence in Israel will be Babylon: the pagan, know-nothing about Yahweh, worshipping other gods, soul-crushingingly-powerful nation of Babylon. This is the evil empire of the Bible; a nation so infamously etched in the memory of God's people that the writer of Revelation would still use them as a code name centuries later for the pagan, know-nothing about Yahweh, soul crushingly-powerful empire of his own day (Rome). In spite of this, God intends to use Babylon to clean up Israel.<br />
<br />
This is a hard pill for Habakkuk to swallow to say the least. Habakkuk questions it, wondering how a holy God can use such an unholy instrument to correct the people God called to be holy. It is in the midst of this exceedingly strange circumstance, this frighteningly new and uncertain action by God that we hear the words "The righteous will live by his faithfulness." The call of God through Habakkuk is for the righteous to live out of faithfulness (whether their own or God's is, perhaps purposely, ambiguous)** even in these violent and terribly uncertain times.<br />
<i><br /></i>
In the context of Romans 1:17, the quote from Habakkuk is often seen as a call to a righteousness by faith rather than by works. Correspondingly, the whole of Romans is thought to be Paul's detailed exposition of the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus rather than good deeds. There may be a shade of truth to such a reading of Romans but I think that truth has more to do with Martin Luther's guilt-laden conscience and his reading of Paul than it has to do with Paul's own writing.*** Instead, if we allow the narrative of Habakkuk to set the tone for Romans as Paul himself seems to do, we will find that there are remarkable similarities between the two.<br />
<br />
Similar to what we have seen in Habakkuk, much of Paul's writings are about the strange, completely unexpected, frighteningly new thing that God has done in Jesus Christ. No one, <i>no one, </i>expected a crucified messiah. "Crucified" and "messiah" are themselves mutually exclusive terms. If you were one, you couldn't be the other. As if that weren't odd enough, Paul's experience was that <i>Gentiles</i>, <i>not Jews, </i>were the ones responding most readily to God's, <i>that is, Yahweh's, the Jewish God's </i>crucified messiah. These were strange, new actions on God's part, indeed. So strange that Paul referred to them as a new era, a totally new epoch in the history of the world, the beginning of <i>a new creation. </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
With this in mind, we can see why Paul would feel the need to say that he was "not ashamed of the gospel" (a religion with a crucified leader would have been a very shameful thing) but we can also see why he would call it the "power of God" (powerful enough to cause non-Jews to proclaim Israel's failed messiah as "Lord"). We can see just how it is that "the righteousness of God is revealed in it" as it makes sinful people (Romans 1-3) into righteous, just, and faithful people (Romans 6 and 8); something God's own perfect law had been powerless to accomplish (Romans 7). Likewise, we can see that just as the prophet Habakkuk has some questions about God's righteousness, Paul wonders aloud how it is that God will remain faithful to the promises God made to the people of Israel (Romans 9-11) even as this new righteousness/faithfulness is revealed in Christ (Romans 3-5). But in the midst of all this newness and uncertainty, the call upon those who proclaim Jesus as Lord is to live out of the faithfulness of Christ into a faithful imitation of Christ (1:17; chapters 12-15).<br />
<br />
After 2000 years of Christian history and tradition, we too easily forget what an odd thing it is that we, who are nearly all Gentile, worship a crucified Jew. By doing so, we also forget what a strange, new thing God did in Jesus. If we read it carefully, Romans will help to remind us just how unbelievably good this good news really is for us. It will remind us that God keeps his promises even when it looks like they are most certainly being abandoned, whether it be as Abraham raises the knife over Isaac or as Jesus lays in the tomb or as Paul's kin reject their own savior. It is especially in these most uncertain of times that God calls the righteous to find in God's own faithfulness the source of their endurance to live faithfully.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
*<span style="font-size: x-small;">This is my own translation. Readers familiar with most English translations may be surprised by my use of the word "faithfulness" rather than "faith." The Greek word Paul uses here can be translated either way and really means both. Separating faith as a kind of mere cognitive belief from faithful action would have likely been a foreign idea to Paul. The single word faith/fulness encompassed both and bound them together. Furthermore, the Hebrew word Habakkuk uses has a much stronger leaning toward the idea of faithfulness than mere belief. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">**It is ambiguous for a couple reasons. First, the "his" in Hebrew probably refers to "the righteous one" but it is possible that it refers to God. Second, the Greek version of the Old Testament known as the the Septuagint, reads "my faithfulness" and portrays the verse as being spoken by God thus making it God's faithfulness. To make things even more interesting, Paul leaves out the pronoun entirely in his quotation of the verse so rather than "his faithfulness" or "my faithfulness" we have simply "The righteous will live out of faithfulness." This serves Paul's purposes well because he wishes to talk about both God's faithfulness in Christ and and faithful human response. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*** There are a plethora of books that make this argument. A few are: </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Krister Stendahl's <u>Paul Among Jews and Gentiles.</u> </span><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Among-Gentiles-Krister-Stendahl/dp/0800612248/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379470781&sr=8-1&keywords=paul+among+jews+and+gentiles">http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Among-Gentiles-Krister-Stendahl/dp/0800612248/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379470781&sr=8-1&keywords=paul+among+jews+and+gentiles</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">E.P. Sanders <u>Paul: A Very Short Introduction.</u> </span><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Paul-A-Very-Short-Introduction/dp/0192854518/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1379470965&sr=8-2&keywords=e.p+sanders">http://www.amazon.com/Paul-A-Very-Short-Introduction/dp/0192854518/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1379470965&sr=8-2&keywords=e.p+sanders</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Justification-And-The-Perspectives-Paul/dp/0875526497/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1379471201&sr=8-6&keywords=New+Perspective+on+Paul">http://www.amazon.com/Justification-And-The-Perspectives-Paul/dp/0875526497/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1379471201&sr=8-6&keywords=New+Perspective+on+Paul</a></span><br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Perspectives-Old-New-Paul-Lutheran/dp/0802848095/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1379471201&sr=8-5&keywords=New+Perspective+on+Paul"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">http://www.amazon.com/Perspectives-Old-New-Paul-Lutheran/dp/0802848095/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1379471201&sr=8-5&keywords=New+Perspective+on+Paul</span></a>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-83181528938672104132013-08-26T18:39:00.001-05:002013-08-26T18:39:49.666-05:00My Dad<i>Tomorrow I'll be headed to South Carolina to wrap up things with my dad's possessions there. As a result, I've been thinking about my dad a lot once again. Its actually been difficult to do that with everything else that has happened since his death - leaving our home, leaving our church, my grandmother's death. These are all things that need to be grieved in their own right. As a result, they have made it difficult to grieve the loss of my father the way I need to. As difficult as I know this trip will be, there is part of me that welcomes it as an entry point back into the grieving process that has been stunted but remains just as necessary. The words below are what I shared at my dad's funeral back in June. </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve thought a lot about what I wanted to say about my dad
here today. I’ve pondered how to put into words who he was. What was his
defining quality? What am I most thankful for about him? What will I remember
most? I’m sure that many of you would think of his warmth and friendliness, his
ability to strike up a conversation with absolutely anyone about anything, his
free and joyous laughter. These are things I will remember as well. <br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But as I thought about what it was I would remember the most
about him, I realized it was one very simple but profound thing: his love for
me. My dad loved me with a tremendous and unconditional love. Whatever I did,
he was proud of it and he made sure he told me he was proud of it. And not just
as a kid either. Even as an adult, my dad was always telling me how much he
loved me and how proud he was of me as a husband, a father, and a pastor. He
was always there for me, always rooting for me, always hoping for the best for
me even if it wasn’t what was best for him. <br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In some ways, that may seem a small thing and I confess that
at times I may have even taken it for granted. After all, these are the kinds
of things that good fathers are supposed to do. But then I remember that we
live in a world where good fathers are in short supply. In this world where
fathers are often absent or distant, mine was always present. In this world
where children often strive for their father’s love and approval, mine lavished
his willingly and graciously. In this world where a man might choose to do all
kinds of other things, where he might choose to pour his energies and passions
into a million other “more important” tasks, my father willfully and joyfully
chose the humble task of loving his one and only son, of pouring everything he
had into me. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By doing that, he gave me what may be the greatest gift of
all. He gave me an earthly image of our heavenly Father: a Father who is always
present with us and one who is always lavishing his love upon us. In his love
for me, my dad embodied the love of a God who could have quite literally poured
his energy and his passion into a million other things but who willfully and
joyfully chooses the humble task of loving his sons and daughters. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
If that is who God is, if we are right to call God “Father” as we Christians
do, then I am tempted to believe that perhaps the way my dad spent his life was
no small thing at all. Perhaps it was a far greater accomplishment than our
world usually acknowledges. Mother Theresa is often quoted as saying something
along the lines of “Don’t aspire to do great things. Only aspire to do small
things with great love.” My dad isn’t one who will be remembered for any great
accomplishments. He’s just another guy who loved his son and brought joy to the
people around him but I believe it is in those very things that he has given us
a glimpse into the very heart of God. I, for one, will be forever grateful that
my dad did small things with great love.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352479132302430149.post-74922270947565549762013-08-09T13:23:00.001-05:002013-08-09T13:31:51.106-05:00My Grandmother<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 1.15;">I imagine that most people who knew my grandmother knew of
the immense time and care she put into her garden. I eventually came to learn
that if I was arriving for a visit and the weather was nice, there was little
point in ringing the doorbell or knocking on the front door. I knew I might as
well head toward the backyard where I would almost certainly find my
grandmother bent over her garden, removing what didn’t belong and caring for
what did. The love she poured into these plants even extended to our own home
in </span><st1:place style="line-height: 1.15;" w:st="on">Illinois</st1:place><span style="line-height: 1.15;">
where we planted what she had shared with us from her own garden.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It seems to me that my grandmother’s gardening was more than
a mere hobby. In many ways, it was representative of who she was. It is
remarkable to think that even the most beautiful plants have the simplest of
beginnings as small and unremarkable, plain and ordinary seeds. But when those
seeds are sown and properly cared for, they can blossom into extraordinary
expressions of life. Gathered together and ordered into a garden, they can
become a place of peace and tranquility; a small reminder of the creative power
that God has sown into the fabric of our world. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Such was my grandmother’s life. By the standards of many, my
grandmother’s life could be seen as quite plain and unremarkable. She spent
much of her days doing small and ordinary things like gardening, cooking, and
talking with friends and family; hardly anything that would cause the world to
take notice. But in these small and unremarkable acts, my grandmother sowed
seeds of grace and peace and hospitality, the very kinds of seeds that
blossomed into extraordinary expressions of life in so many of us who knew her.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xFRDNySc3qI/UgU07Tqdv7I/AAAAAAAAM6U/x3P4lfHwIWA/s1600/2013-07-02_17-30-38_315.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xFRDNySc3qI/UgU07Tqdv7I/AAAAAAAAM6U/x3P4lfHwIWA/s320/2013-07-02_17-30-38_315.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think especially of the few times in my adult life when my
grandmother and I had the opportunity to sit down and talk together, just her
and I, and how those conversations were grace filled occasions. I think of how
she was always welcoming people into her home, including me and my friends from
seminary, or even the youth group from our church. Teenagers from the church
where I pastored still speak to this day of what a kind and gracious person my
grandmother was and how glad they were to have had the opportunity to meet her.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-x6SrAspQbdk/UgU1HkvdhQI/AAAAAAAAM6c/8FfHEos4vpI/s1600/2013-07-02_12-18-06_652.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-x6SrAspQbdk/UgU1HkvdhQI/AAAAAAAAM6c/8FfHEos4vpI/s320/2013-07-02_12-18-06_652.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I also think of the seeds of faith my grandmother sowed in
my own life. She handed down a legacy of faith that came through my mom to me
and now continues on in my own three children. As the only grandparent I had
the opportunity to know beyond my childhood years, she also continued to be a
formative example of faith and holiness for me even into my own adulthood. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2QSNstWr4Pg/UgU1O8gqAKI/AAAAAAAAM6k/FcDNJo_dwSM/s1600/2013-07-02_17-38-49_470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2QSNstWr4Pg/UgU1O8gqAKI/AAAAAAAAM6k/FcDNJo_dwSM/s320/2013-07-02_17-38-49_470.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
My grandmother’s life was like a well ordered and cared for
garden. Her presence became a place of peace of and tranquility for so many who
came to know her. Her grace and hospitality were small reminders of the
creative power that God has sown into the fabric of our world and our humanity.
Her life was not unlike the garden described in Genesis as the original act of
God’s creation; a place where one might walk with God in the cool of the day.
We mourn because the body of that first creation has failed her but we look
forward to the day when God’s new creation will fully take root in our world. I
imagine that when it does we will once again find her sowing seeds of grace and
peace and hospitality for the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">kingdom</st1:placetype>
of <st1:placename w:st="on">God</st1:placename></st1:place>. </div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16362575507895945799noreply@blogger.com0