I planned to preach from Psalm 118 this Sunday and probably will still refer to it one way or another. Since this is the Psalm the lectionary provides for every Palm Sunday and because it is quoted in the New Testament, I've already interacted with this Psalm a number of times before. Some conglomeration of what I've written here, here, and here will probably all end up in my sermon this Sunday. But for now I want to focus on one particular irony of the way this Psalm shows up in the Gospel of Mark.
It is especially striking to me the way quotations from Psalm 118 form bookends to a group of stories in Mark 11 and 12. The (sort of) short version, without rehearsing too much of what I've said in those other posts, is that Jesus rides into Jerusalem during the week of Passover and the crowds welcome him with shouts of "Hossana!" and "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." That is to say, the people are welcoming Jesus as their deliverer by using the words of Psalm 118, a psalm used at Passover as a celebration of the Lord's deliverance. Jesus' procession stops at the Temple, much as the Passover procession in which Psalm 118 was recited climaxed as the temple, but Jesus' procession is sort of anti-climatic in that after arriving at the Temple he simply leaves.
On the following day, he is on his way back to the Temple when he spots a fig tree. Upon closer examination, Jesus finds that the tree is not bearing fruit and curses it. This seems a little unfair for the poor fig tree since Mark notes that it was not even the season for figs. Apparently still grumpy about missing out on his fig-breakfast, Jesus then enters the Temple and does his whole righteous anger thing, kicking out all those buying and selling. Upon leaving the Temple, the disciples notice that the fig tree Jesus cursed has withered. It is here that we see a piece of Mark's masterful story telling on display: the fig tree is a symbol for the Temple in that it too has failed to bear fruit and is now out of season. As a result, Jesus cursed it just as he did the fig tree.
Naturally, the religious leaders want to know where Jesus gets his authority for all this cursing and carrying on. So they ask him. And naturally, Jesus answers with an enigmatic question of his own and a story. The story is about some tenants who refuse to give the landowner his share of the harvest. The tenants beat and reject the owner's servants and even kill his son. At this point even the religious leaders agree that those tenants are in trouble. Jesus then responds with more words from Psalm 118; "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing and it is marvelous in our eyes." Mark notes upon the conclusion of this story and quotation that the religious leaders wanted to arrest Jesus but were afraid to do so because of the people.
So we have this pattern:
Quote from Psalm 118
A tree that fails to produce its fruit
A temple that fails to produce its fruit
Tenants that fail to produce their fruit
Quote from Psalm 118
It would seem Mark wants us to read these stories about failures of fruit bearing within the framework of deliverance celebrated in Psalm 118. When we do so, these stories become thick with irony. In Psalm 118, it was Israel which was the stone the builders (the other nations) rejected but that God made the chief cornerstone of his plan. The religious leaders saw themselves as protecting Israel's place in that plan. However, Jesus has declared their efforts fruitless and proclaimed that he is now God's chosen cornerstone; that it is through himself that the deliverance of Psalm 118 will come. The words of the very same Psalm can be used in the people's celebration of Jesus' deliverance and the religious leaders rejection of him. And in doing that rejecting, the religious leaders show themselves to be exactly the fruitless tenants who reject God's chosen one that Jesus has said they are. They fulfill his prophecy about them in their rejection of him as a prophet.
Despite the literary intricacy and skill involved in Mark's telling of these stories, I suppose the question for us is still a relatively simple one. Do our lives bear the fruit of God's deliverance? However, if the question is simple, Mark's telling of the story cautions us against a simplistic answer. For we must remember that the religious leaders would have readily answered this question with a clear and resolute "Yes! Of course, we are bearing the fruit of God's deliverance. We are God's chosen, after all!" It might be just as tempting for us to say "Yes! Of course, we are bearing the fruit of God's deliverance. We are Christians, after all!". Perhaps we too have confused certain labels and institutions with real fruit bearing. May these final weeks of Lent be a time when we re-examine our assumptions about what kind of fruit it is that God desires.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Love Means Holding Your Nose
Several weeks ago, as we began the season of Lent, we heard Psalm 25 as a pattern for prayer. It served as one example of what it means to respond to this life with God. And good pattern though it is, it is just one example since there are 149 other Psalms, 149 other prayers ready to be offered. In fact, we heard a very different prayer the very next week. One that traded the reverence and diffidence of Psalm 25 for anger and accusation. But somewhat remarkably we confessed that the words of Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" was just as much an appropriate part of our God-speak as were the pious words of Psalm 25. Two weeks ago we heard a Psalm of praise for the God who is revealed both in creation and in the Law. This week we have a prayer of yet another variety; one of confession and a request for cleansing from sin.
"Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy, blot out my transgressions." The Psalmist is quite literally asking God to "plaster over, to whitewash" his sin. The Psalmist is looking for forgiveness so thorough that all record of the wrong is erased; asking God to act out of God's mercy and faithfulness rather than according to what the Psalmist deserves. In fact, God is asked to "Hide your face from my sins" even as God is doing the blotting out. The image is something akin to someone painting over an image they find so abhorrent that they can't even look at what they are painting over; like a parent trying to avoid the smell of dirty diaper even as they clean up their child.
This Psalm reminds me of the few times my daughter ate too much too close to bedtime when she was younger. One time in particular I remember waking up to the sound of her crying and walking down the hall to her room wondering what was wrong but the moment I walked into her room, even in the darkness of night, any question about what was wrong immediately left me. The smell of vomit was undeniable and overwhelming; enough to force me to concentrate very hard on not making my own contribution to the problem. The introduction at the beginning of Psalm 51 says that the Psalm was written by David as a response to Nathan's uncovering of David's rape of Bathsheba and murder of Uriah. Perhaps when we read that story we should see God doing his best not to puke over what David has done.
The words of this Psalm show that David recognizes the repugnant nature of his sin. It is so foul that it threatens to drive God away. In spite of that the Psalmist also recognizes that it is only God who can clean him up. So he asks God not only to blot out the outward marks of his sin but also to "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." The Psalmist is in need of not only forgiveness but a cleansing so deep that it goes to the very core of his being.
The smell of Hannah's vomit was nearly enough to drive me away as well. But here was this little girl that I adore, who was sick and confused, and who only wanted her daddy to hold her and clean her up. So I did my best to hold my nose and my gag reflex and did what she couldn't do for herself. Obviously, this doesn't make me extraordinary. It only makes me her father.
Growing up, I often heard the idea that God the Father turned his back on his Son while he hung on the cross. The reasoning went that Jesus had taken upon himself the sin of the whole world and that God in all his holiness could not possibly look upon all that sin so he had to turn from his Son. Why else, it was said, would Jesus have uttered those words of Psalm 22 "My God, why have you forsaken me?". This strikes me as, at best, only getting half the story right. Yes, of course, God finds our sin repulsive, so much so that God wishes to avert both eyes and nostrils from its sight and smell. There is a very real sense in which sin threatens to drive God away from us.
But the other half of the story is that of the Father who, even while nearly gagging on the stench we have created, still reaches into our vomitaceous mess with his two hands of Son and Spirit in order to do for us what we can not do for ourselves; a Father whose love is greater than his gag reflex. Perhaps, when we think of Jesus on the cross, rather than the Father turning his back on the Son, we should imagine the Father holding close his beloved Son, even as he wreaks of the sin of the world. Perhaps this is the real glory of proclaiming that God is love; that even when the profane horror of crucifixion and the weight of all the world's sin threatened to break the bond of love between Father and Son that bond held fast. That even when sin itself entered the very life of the Triune God by Jesus taking it upon himself it did not dissolve the loving relationships between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but instead that love swallowed up the sin of the world and overwhelmed it. Perhaps this, most of all times, was when Jesus knew his Father as his Abba.
Psalm 51 speaks out of the conviction that God is willing to hold his nose for us. Indeed, our Father is even willing to get some of our own filth and stench all over him if that is what it takes to hold us in his arms and clean us up. Because his love for us is greater than his repulsion at our sin. Because this kind of love is who God is. Because this is what it means for us to call him our Abba.
"Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy, blot out my transgressions." The Psalmist is quite literally asking God to "plaster over, to whitewash" his sin. The Psalmist is looking for forgiveness so thorough that all record of the wrong is erased; asking God to act out of God's mercy and faithfulness rather than according to what the Psalmist deserves. In fact, God is asked to "Hide your face from my sins" even as God is doing the blotting out. The image is something akin to someone painting over an image they find so abhorrent that they can't even look at what they are painting over; like a parent trying to avoid the smell of dirty diaper even as they clean up their child.
This Psalm reminds me of the few times my daughter ate too much too close to bedtime when she was younger. One time in particular I remember waking up to the sound of her crying and walking down the hall to her room wondering what was wrong but the moment I walked into her room, even in the darkness of night, any question about what was wrong immediately left me. The smell of vomit was undeniable and overwhelming; enough to force me to concentrate very hard on not making my own contribution to the problem. The introduction at the beginning of Psalm 51 says that the Psalm was written by David as a response to Nathan's uncovering of David's rape of Bathsheba and murder of Uriah. Perhaps when we read that story we should see God doing his best not to puke over what David has done.
The words of this Psalm show that David recognizes the repugnant nature of his sin. It is so foul that it threatens to drive God away. In spite of that the Psalmist also recognizes that it is only God who can clean him up. So he asks God not only to blot out the outward marks of his sin but also to "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." The Psalmist is in need of not only forgiveness but a cleansing so deep that it goes to the very core of his being.
The smell of Hannah's vomit was nearly enough to drive me away as well. But here was this little girl that I adore, who was sick and confused, and who only wanted her daddy to hold her and clean her up. So I did my best to hold my nose and my gag reflex and did what she couldn't do for herself. Obviously, this doesn't make me extraordinary. It only makes me her father.
Growing up, I often heard the idea that God the Father turned his back on his Son while he hung on the cross. The reasoning went that Jesus had taken upon himself the sin of the whole world and that God in all his holiness could not possibly look upon all that sin so he had to turn from his Son. Why else, it was said, would Jesus have uttered those words of Psalm 22 "My God, why have you forsaken me?". This strikes me as, at best, only getting half the story right. Yes, of course, God finds our sin repulsive, so much so that God wishes to avert both eyes and nostrils from its sight and smell. There is a very real sense in which sin threatens to drive God away from us.
But the other half of the story is that of the Father who, even while nearly gagging on the stench we have created, still reaches into our vomitaceous mess with his two hands of Son and Spirit in order to do for us what we can not do for ourselves; a Father whose love is greater than his gag reflex. Perhaps, when we think of Jesus on the cross, rather than the Father turning his back on the Son, we should imagine the Father holding close his beloved Son, even as he wreaks of the sin of the world. Perhaps this is the real glory of proclaiming that God is love; that even when the profane horror of crucifixion and the weight of all the world's sin threatened to break the bond of love between Father and Son that bond held fast. That even when sin itself entered the very life of the Triune God by Jesus taking it upon himself it did not dissolve the loving relationships between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but instead that love swallowed up the sin of the world and overwhelmed it. Perhaps this, most of all times, was when Jesus knew his Father as his Abba.
Psalm 51 speaks out of the conviction that God is willing to hold his nose for us. Indeed, our Father is even willing to get some of our own filth and stench all over him if that is what it takes to hold us in his arms and clean us up. Because his love for us is greater than his repulsion at our sin. Because this kind of love is who God is. Because this is what it means for us to call him our Abba.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Holy, Righteous, and Good Law
"The heavens declare the glory of God" begins Psalm 19. The Psalmist goes on to speak of God's creation as God's own words to us. Every new day is a new speech from God, every new night a new revelation. This word from God goes forth throughout all of creation since creation itself is the word that God is speaking. In v. 5-6, the Psalmist focuses specifically on the daily movement of the sun across the sky as one of God's greatest works. Wherever its light touches, the glory of God is revealed.
However, the Psalmist also acknowledges that while creation might be a word from God to us, it is not the whole conversation. We are not left to make every inference about God from creation alone. Indeed, though the Psalmist doesn't explicitly state it here, any faithful Israelite would certainly see that as a quick path to idolatry. We need something more.
So after praising God for God's revelation in nature the Psalmist gives thanks for God's revelation in God's law. This law the Psalmist describes as perfect - that is, it is complete, blameless. It brings wholeness and clarity to what would be an otherwise fuzzy and potentially misleading picture of God's character. It tells us what we could never surmise about God from creation alone. We are told that this law revives the soul, makes the simple wise, gladdens the heart, brightens the eyes, endures forever, and is altogether righteous. Therefore, it is to be desired more than the finest gold and the sweetest honey. The law is not a burden or a list of rules. It is something to be cherished and enjoyed because it reveals God to us. Without it, we would be left worshiping dumb idols of our own making.
The final verses of the Psalm turn from words of praise to words of request. The Psalmist recognizes that he, even with the law as a guide, can not discern his own faults (v.12) so the Psalmist prayer is for forgiveness for when he does sin and for safe keeping from the ways of sin. In v. 13:
As Christians, we confess that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are that act of God on our behalf. It is precisely this idea for which the apostle Paul argues in Romans 5-8. By his death and resurrection, Jesus has inaugurated a new age in which we are not only forgiven but in which the power of sin has been broken so that it no longer has dominion over us. We are now empowered by the Spirit to fulfill the law of Christ so that the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts are indeed acceptable to the Lord who is our rock and redeemer.
However, the Psalmist also acknowledges that while creation might be a word from God to us, it is not the whole conversation. We are not left to make every inference about God from creation alone. Indeed, though the Psalmist doesn't explicitly state it here, any faithful Israelite would certainly see that as a quick path to idolatry. We need something more.
So after praising God for God's revelation in nature the Psalmist gives thanks for God's revelation in God's law. This law the Psalmist describes as perfect - that is, it is complete, blameless. It brings wholeness and clarity to what would be an otherwise fuzzy and potentially misleading picture of God's character. It tells us what we could never surmise about God from creation alone. We are told that this law revives the soul, makes the simple wise, gladdens the heart, brightens the eyes, endures forever, and is altogether righteous. Therefore, it is to be desired more than the finest gold and the sweetest honey. The law is not a burden or a list of rules. It is something to be cherished and enjoyed because it reveals God to us. Without it, we would be left worshiping dumb idols of our own making.
The final verses of the Psalm turn from words of praise to words of request. The Psalmist recognizes that he, even with the law as a guide, can not discern his own faults (v.12) so the Psalmist prayer is for forgiveness for when he does sin and for safe keeping from the ways of sin. In v. 13:
"Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me! Then I shall be blameless, and innocent of great transgression."This is a telling request for in it is a recognition, that even the law, for all of its perfection and revelation of the character of God, is not itself able to prevent the Psalmist from sinning. The Psalmist not only needs God's law to know what is right but also needs God's power to do what is right. As the Psalmist says "let them (sins) not have dominion over me!". There is a recognition that even with the law before us and even as we confess that it is a good and perfect law, the law itself is still powerless to defend us against sin. We need God himself to act on our behalf in order to keep us blameless.
As Christians, we confess that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are that act of God on our behalf. It is precisely this idea for which the apostle Paul argues in Romans 5-8. By his death and resurrection, Jesus has inaugurated a new age in which we are not only forgiven but in which the power of sin has been broken so that it no longer has dominion over us. We are now empowered by the Spirit to fulfill the law of Christ so that the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts are indeed acceptable to the Lord who is our rock and redeemer.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Gospel of the God-Abandoned
"The Psalms make it possible to say things that are otherwise unsayable. In church, they have the capacity to free us to talk about things that we cannot talk about anywhere else." - John Goldingay
"Most of Scripture speaks to us; the Psalms speak for us." - Athanasius
"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" - Psalm 22:1
If the Psalms are prayers to be prayed, then Psalm 22 is a prayer for those who like getting right to the point. The Psalmist doesn't mince words. Right from the beginning: "God? Where are you? Why have you given up on me?".
But is this really a prayer meant to be prayed? Are these really words we are meant to speak to God? It seems a little impious and disrespectful - accusing the benevolent and almighty deity of abandoning us - doesn't it? Perhaps the Psalmist is not expressing reality but simply how he felt. Surely this is the prayer of an immature faith. We would never pray this prayer because we know that God would never abandon us.
And yet, here are these words on the lips of the Psalmist. These are the words that all of Israel uses to describe its life with God. These are words that we find on the lips of Jesus as he hangs on the cross.
Perhaps this Psalm makes it possible for us to say what is otherwise unsayable - life with God includes abandonment by God.
But is this really a prayer meant to be prayed? Are these really words we are meant to speak to God? It seems a little impious and disrespectful - accusing the benevolent and almighty deity of abandoning us - doesn't it? Perhaps the Psalmist is not expressing reality but simply how he felt. Surely this is the prayer of an immature faith. We would never pray this prayer because we know that God would never abandon us.
And yet, here are these words on the lips of the Psalmist. These are the words that all of Israel uses to describe its life with God. These are words that we find on the lips of Jesus as he hangs on the cross.
Perhaps this Psalm makes it possible for us to say what is otherwise unsayable - life with God includes abandonment by God.
In the gospel reading for this Sunday, Jesus tells his disciples that he must suffer and be rejected. Upon hearing this, Peter takes Jesus aside and begins to rebuke him for these words. Why? Because just moments earlier Peter has confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, God's anointed sent to deliver Israel. For Peter, these categories - Messiah and suffering - are mutually exclusive. One can not be both. If Jesus is truly the Messiah, truly God's chosen as Peter has just confessed then he can not suffer. This is unthinkable, unsayable. In response to Peter's categories, Jesus does nothing less than to call Peter "Satan".
I imagine we have trouble making Psalm 22 our own prayer because at some level we still make Peter's same equation: chosen = not suffering. We are God's chosen people so we will not face any real suffering. Or if we do then there is some explanation for it: God has a plan, teaching us a lesson, greater good, etc. There may be some bumps along the road but God abandonment? Surely this is hyperbole. This is unthinkable, unsayable.
Yet the central image of our faith - the one that adorns our sanctuaries and our necks - is a symbol of God abandonment. We forget that because for us the cross has become a symbol of hope and eternal life, if not merely a religious trinket. So its easy for us to pass over its original significance - an instrument of torture and death, a reminder that the Romans, not Yahweh, were really in charge, a tool of oppression, a sure sign of God's having cursed and abandoned you.
A few verses later in that same passage in Mark, Jesus says these well known words:
"If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it."This is the tension/paradox/inherent contradiction of Psalm 22 (which ultimately ends in praise) and of any follower of Jesus. To know salvation is to know abandonment. To be a chosen follower of the chosen one is to know God-forsakeness. To journey with Jesus is to say "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?".
Monday, February 20, 2012
A Pattern of Prayer
Switching gears from preaching in Paul's letters to the church at Corinth to preaching the Psalms is a kind of intercanonical culture shock. These two disparate genres pretty well represent the varied literary landscape of Scripture. Paul's writings are letters which means they are highly contextual, written for a specific group of people at a specific place at a specific time. These letters often take the form of carefully reasoned rhetoric as Paul's tries to persuade his audience to a specific course of action. The Psalms, on the other hand, are anything but rhetoric and anything but contextual. While scholars have assigned a few of the Psalms to specific times or events within Israel's story, most resist such labeling. The very purpose of most of the Psalms is to transcend their context and have a universal quality to them; they are meant to be prayed and sung by anyone, anywhere, at anytime. These are ready-made words for God...a pattern for our own words...words for when we have no words.
This is especially true of Psalm 25. In Hebrew, this Psalm is an acrostic; each line beginning with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet (with the exception of two letters and one letter repeated). This Psalm is a pattern of prayer. To say it is a pattern, however, is not to say it teaches the right way to pray or that it is a pattern that must be followed in robotic fashion. After all, if this were so, there wouldn't be much point in having 150 different Psalms. The existence of the collection itself witnesses to the plurality and freedom of prayer. Perhaps the Psalm is not meant to be "taught" or "followed" at all. Perhaps it is simply to say here is a pattern that contains movements familiar to those who have made a habit of prayer, to say this is how we have repeatedly found ourselves responding to the God who has saved us.
That pattern of response goes like this:
The Psalmist begins (v. 1-3) by expressing trust in God to deliver, asking God that he not be put to shame by his enemies. Part of the Psalmist's expression of trust is to say that none who wait on the Lord will be put to shame. This leads to the next movement of the prayer (v.4-5) in which the Psalmist recognizes his own need to wait upon the Lord if he is not to be put to shame. So the Psalmist asks God to teach him God's ways. This is the Psalmist's waiting; not only waiting to be taught by God but also waiting and trusting that God's reaching will be proved true. This prayer to be taught by God reminds the Psalmist of all the ways he has failed to be taught by God. The next section of his prayer (v.6-7) asks God to remember his mercy and not the sins of the Psalmist. The Psalmist is confident that God will do this, not because the Psalmist deserves it but because God is good and upright (v.8-10). In fact, God's name, that is, God's reputation is honored when God provides for those who respect God as the Psalmist does (v.12-15). Finally, the Psalmist ends his prayer by returning to his original request that God would deliver him (v. 16-21). Then, just in case we missed that this prayer is not limited to one individual, the final verse "re-voices" the prayer as one for "Israel" - the man in whom all Israelites find their identity.
I trust you God.
Teach me to trust you God.
Forgive me for when I haven't trusted you God.
I know you'll forgive me God not because I deserve it but because you are just that good. You are love.
May you be glorified in my life.
I present my request to you again because I trust you.
I can't tell you how many times I've prayed this prayer - and not because I was trying to imitate this Psalm or any other. Anyone else find themselves praying basically this prayer over and over? Sometimes it feels like I hardly know anything else to pray. These are not the overly pious words of someone who has all the answers about God and prayer. These are just the words of anyone who has ever tried to live with God for any sustained period of time.
There is a substantial market out there for books on prayer and how to pray. Anyone who knows me knows I love books. In fact, love probably isn't strong enough of a word. Its more of an obsession. I even have a couple of books on prayer. But I've found that the only books I've ever encountered on prayer that were really worth anything weren't the ones that tried to explain what prayer is, how prayer works, how to go about praying, or how to make my prayer life more "effective" (whatever that means). They were the ones that simply offered different kids of prayer, the ones that included prayers to be prayed. They were the ones that simply got me praying. It could be that's the kind of book Psalms is to be for us - just the kind that gets us praying - because prayer is a hands-on activity. It is the real work of the Church. And over time, if we'll keep wrestling and being honest with ourselves and God, we'll find that our prayers sound an awful lot like the Psalms, not because we wanted them to but just because this is what life with God is like.
This is especially true of Psalm 25. In Hebrew, this Psalm is an acrostic; each line beginning with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet (with the exception of two letters and one letter repeated). This Psalm is a pattern of prayer. To say it is a pattern, however, is not to say it teaches the right way to pray or that it is a pattern that must be followed in robotic fashion. After all, if this were so, there wouldn't be much point in having 150 different Psalms. The existence of the collection itself witnesses to the plurality and freedom of prayer. Perhaps the Psalm is not meant to be "taught" or "followed" at all. Perhaps it is simply to say here is a pattern that contains movements familiar to those who have made a habit of prayer, to say this is how we have repeatedly found ourselves responding to the God who has saved us.
That pattern of response goes like this:
The Psalmist begins (v. 1-3) by expressing trust in God to deliver, asking God that he not be put to shame by his enemies. Part of the Psalmist's expression of trust is to say that none who wait on the Lord will be put to shame. This leads to the next movement of the prayer (v.4-5) in which the Psalmist recognizes his own need to wait upon the Lord if he is not to be put to shame. So the Psalmist asks God to teach him God's ways. This is the Psalmist's waiting; not only waiting to be taught by God but also waiting and trusting that God's reaching will be proved true. This prayer to be taught by God reminds the Psalmist of all the ways he has failed to be taught by God. The next section of his prayer (v.6-7) asks God to remember his mercy and not the sins of the Psalmist. The Psalmist is confident that God will do this, not because the Psalmist deserves it but because God is good and upright (v.8-10). In fact, God's name, that is, God's reputation is honored when God provides for those who respect God as the Psalmist does (v.12-15). Finally, the Psalmist ends his prayer by returning to his original request that God would deliver him (v. 16-21). Then, just in case we missed that this prayer is not limited to one individual, the final verse "re-voices" the prayer as one for "Israel" - the man in whom all Israelites find their identity.
I trust you God.
Teach me to trust you God.
Forgive me for when I haven't trusted you God.
I know you'll forgive me God not because I deserve it but because you are just that good. You are love.
May you be glorified in my life.
I present my request to you again because I trust you.
I can't tell you how many times I've prayed this prayer - and not because I was trying to imitate this Psalm or any other. Anyone else find themselves praying basically this prayer over and over? Sometimes it feels like I hardly know anything else to pray. These are not the overly pious words of someone who has all the answers about God and prayer. These are just the words of anyone who has ever tried to live with God for any sustained period of time.
There is a substantial market out there for books on prayer and how to pray. Anyone who knows me knows I love books. In fact, love probably isn't strong enough of a word. Its more of an obsession. I even have a couple of books on prayer. But I've found that the only books I've ever encountered on prayer that were really worth anything weren't the ones that tried to explain what prayer is, how prayer works, how to go about praying, or how to make my prayer life more "effective" (whatever that means). They were the ones that simply offered different kids of prayer, the ones that included prayers to be prayed. They were the ones that simply got me praying. It could be that's the kind of book Psalms is to be for us - just the kind that gets us praying - because prayer is a hands-on activity. It is the real work of the Church. And over time, if we'll keep wrestling and being honest with ourselves and God, we'll find that our prayers sound an awful lot like the Psalms, not because we wanted them to but just because this is what life with God is like.
Some Help with the Psalms
I've recently been reading the introduction to John Goldingay's commentary on the Psalms since I'll be preaching from the Psalms in Lent. I've heard a lot of people say how much they love the Psalms because of the range and depth of emotion they find there. They can relate to the Psalmist in a way they can not with other Biblical writers. This part of Scripture sometimes seems more "human" than other parts. I've preached from the Psalms a few times before and always found it difficult. I am much more comfortable in Paul's reasoned arguments than I am in the rhythm and meter of poetry. I confess that this says more about my personality and the way I approach Scripture than it does the Psalms themselves.
Nevertheless, I am in the Psalms again and I am doing my best to let them go to work on me. Goldingay's commentary has offered some insights that I believe might be helpful in that endeavor and I thought it might be worth sharing a few of those here. I hope to honor these gems of wisdom in my preaching over the next several weeks.
"The Psalms make it possible to say things that are otherwise unsayable. In church, they have the capacity to free us to talk about things that we canno4 talk about anywhere else." p. 22-23
Quoting Athanasius's Letter to Marcellinus, "Most of Scripture speaks to us; the Psalms speak for us." p.23
"Historically, I assume, the Psalms came into being as Israelites prayed and praised in these words. They do not document so much their seeking of God as their responding to God's seeking of them, though this response is a spluttering and awkward one." p. 23
After discussing how important historical background is for understanding many parts of the Bible, the prophets as one example, Goldingay says "With the Psalms, the opposite is the case. They do not contain the specific historical references that appear in the Prophets, and it is much more obvious that they stand independent of their original context and are designed for people to use as the vehicles for praise and prayer throughout the story of God's people." p. 25
Along the same lines as the previous quote: "They proceed and work by not making reference to the particularities of their origin, so that such information does not distract people who use them and make them more difficult for worshippers to identify with." p.30
"...psalms came to be accepted in the believing community because it knew they had the ring of truth, even if they were anonymous... Actually, the same is true of the prophecies of people whose names we do know; they came to be accepted because their hearers knew themselves convicted by God when they heard them, not because bearing the name of Jeremiah automatically gave them authority (his story shows this was not so). The community that recognized them then invites us to listen for God speaking to us through them - in the case of the Psalms, to make them our own prayers and praises." p.31
"Doxology and theology are closely related. Doxology requires theology; glorifying God involves making many a statement about God. Conversely, theology finds one of its natural forms in doxology. There is a role to be played by dispassionate analytical theological statements, though I cannot remember what it is, but the natural way to make statements that do justice to God's nature is to make them in the form of praise. Dispassionate analytical statement about God deconstruct." p. 69
Speaking about the use of the Psalms in the New Testament: "They (the NT writers) were not trying to do exegesis. They were using form of expression they found in the Psalms to help them understand themselves and formulate their beliefs. It will be important that their formulations do fit in with the inherent meaning of Scripture as a whole... But they do not need to fit the results of exegesis of a particular passage they quote. The Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture is inspiring the writers to see a new significance in the words that appear in Scripture." p. 77
John Goldingay. Psalms: Vol.1 Psalms 1-41. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms. Ed., Tremper Longman III (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic), 2006.
Nevertheless, I am in the Psalms again and I am doing my best to let them go to work on me. Goldingay's commentary has offered some insights that I believe might be helpful in that endeavor and I thought it might be worth sharing a few of those here. I hope to honor these gems of wisdom in my preaching over the next several weeks.
"The Psalms make it possible to say things that are otherwise unsayable. In church, they have the capacity to free us to talk about things that we canno4 talk about anywhere else." p. 22-23
Quoting Athanasius's Letter to Marcellinus, "Most of Scripture speaks to us; the Psalms speak for us." p.23
"Historically, I assume, the Psalms came into being as Israelites prayed and praised in these words. They do not document so much their seeking of God as their responding to God's seeking of them, though this response is a spluttering and awkward one." p. 23
After discussing how important historical background is for understanding many parts of the Bible, the prophets as one example, Goldingay says "With the Psalms, the opposite is the case. They do not contain the specific historical references that appear in the Prophets, and it is much more obvious that they stand independent of their original context and are designed for people to use as the vehicles for praise and prayer throughout the story of God's people." p. 25
Along the same lines as the previous quote: "They proceed and work by not making reference to the particularities of their origin, so that such information does not distract people who use them and make them more difficult for worshippers to identify with." p.30
"...psalms came to be accepted in the believing community because it knew they had the ring of truth, even if they were anonymous... Actually, the same is true of the prophecies of people whose names we do know; they came to be accepted because their hearers knew themselves convicted by God when they heard them, not because bearing the name of Jeremiah automatically gave them authority (his story shows this was not so). The community that recognized them then invites us to listen for God speaking to us through them - in the case of the Psalms, to make them our own prayers and praises." p.31
"Doxology and theology are closely related. Doxology requires theology; glorifying God involves making many a statement about God. Conversely, theology finds one of its natural forms in doxology. There is a role to be played by dispassionate analytical theological statements, though I cannot remember what it is, but the natural way to make statements that do justice to God's nature is to make them in the form of praise. Dispassionate analytical statement about God deconstruct." p. 69
Speaking about the use of the Psalms in the New Testament: "They (the NT writers) were not trying to do exegesis. They were using form of expression they found in the Psalms to help them understand themselves and formulate their beliefs. It will be important that their formulations do fit in with the inherent meaning of Scripture as a whole... But they do not need to fit the results of exegesis of a particular passage they quote. The Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture is inspiring the writers to see a new significance in the words that appear in Scripture." p. 77
John Goldingay. Psalms: Vol.1 Psalms 1-41. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms. Ed., Tremper Longman III (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic), 2006.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Truth Happens
The Corinthians have accused Paul of flattery - and not the "No, that looks really good on you" kind of flattery. This is a serious accusation - the "He's just a flip-flopper who panders to whoever is listening so you can't really trust what he says" kind of flattery we associate with politicians. The Corinthians are questioning whether Paul's word is trustworthy ...and with good reason.
As we read between the lines of the Corinthian letters, we can make a very educated guess about Paul's relationship with this Church and why they would make such an accusation. In 2 Corinthians, Paul mentions both a "painful visit" with the Corinthians as well as a "painful letter" he has written to them (now lost to us) indicating the rocky nature of his relationship with this church. Then in 1:16 Paul says "I wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia and to come back to you from Macedonia and have you send me on my way to Judea." We can gather from what Paul has written that neither of those visits to Corinth took place. Considering the poor state of Paul's relationship with this church, it is easy to see how his failure to follow through on two promised visits would only add insult to injury. We can imagine the Corinthians saying "He visits when he says he won't be here for a while and then doesn't visit when he says he's going to be here. How do we know if we can even trust this guy?".
Paul's response to this accusation is unexpected. If someone accused of me of not being trustworthy my response would likely be to defend myself by trying to demonstrate how I had been consistent even if it didn't appear that way. I would want to explain my rationale for why I did what I did. And for a moment it appears this is what Paul is going to do as well.
The fundamental question here is whether or not Paul's word can can be trusted. Paul's answer: "Just look at the impact my words have had among you and decide for yourself." A more literal rendering of v. 18 is especially helpful in seeing this: "God is faithful because our word to you has not been Yes and No." God's faithfulness has been exhibited in Paul's words and the Corinthians response to those words. They have come to believe in Jesus Christ in whom all the promises of God find their fulfillment, their "Yes". God has established the Corinthians in Christ and they have received the Holy Spirit because of Paul's preaching. Instead of pointing to his own ability to keep his promises, Paul has pointed to God's ability to keep God's promises through Paul's preaching. God has given Paul's word the ultimate stamp of trustworthiness, far greater than Paul could ever give himself, because of what God has done through that word among the Corinthians. Paul is essentially saying "What more validation do you want?".
In short, Paul is turning the question upside down. The Corinthians want to determine the truth of Paul's words by treating them as an object to be dissected, analyzed, and evaluated against their own standards of truth. But Paul says the real test of his words' truth is not what the Corinthians can do to his words but what his words have done to them ... and by the grace of God those words have saved them.
Perhaps this has profound consequences for the ways we think about Truth as well. Like the Corinthians, we often think of Truth as an object to be discovered and dissected. We evaluate statements,beliefs, and practices based on our understanding of what is true. Obviously, there is some need for this kind of interaction with Truth in our lives. But maybe the greatest truths aren't the ones we can hold at arm's length to be dissected and evaluated from a distance but the ones that get inside us and dissect and evaluate us. Maybe Truth is not primarily about what we know. Maybe Truth is something that happens to us like it happened to the Corinthians. Truth is whatever sets us free.
As we read between the lines of the Corinthian letters, we can make a very educated guess about Paul's relationship with this Church and why they would make such an accusation. In 2 Corinthians, Paul mentions both a "painful visit" with the Corinthians as well as a "painful letter" he has written to them (now lost to us) indicating the rocky nature of his relationship with this church. Then in 1:16 Paul says "I wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia and to come back to you from Macedonia and have you send me on my way to Judea." We can gather from what Paul has written that neither of those visits to Corinth took place. Considering the poor state of Paul's relationship with this church, it is easy to see how his failure to follow through on two promised visits would only add insult to injury. We can imagine the Corinthians saying "He visits when he says he won't be here for a while and then doesn't visit when he says he's going to be here. How do we know if we can even trust this guy?".
Paul's response to this accusation is unexpected. If someone accused of me of not being trustworthy my response would likely be to defend myself by trying to demonstrate how I had been consistent even if it didn't appear that way. I would want to explain my rationale for why I did what I did. And for a moment it appears this is what Paul is going to do as well.
"Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? Do I make my plans according to the flesh, ready to say “Yes, yes” and “No, no” at the same time?"But instead of continuing in that line of thought he begins to discuss the faithfulness of God in Jesus Christ.
"As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we proclaimed among you, Silvanus and Timothy and I, was not Yes and No, but in him it is always Yes. For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee."Where we would expect Paul to say "Trust me! I know what I am doing!" he essentially says "Trust God because you know what God has already done among you!". Where we expect Paul to talk about his faithfulness he instead talks about God's faithfulness. But this is not a mere distraction on Paul's part. He is not simply dodging a difficult question. He is asking the Corinthians to reconsider how they judge his trustworthiness.
The fundamental question here is whether or not Paul's word can can be trusted. Paul's answer: "Just look at the impact my words have had among you and decide for yourself." A more literal rendering of v. 18 is especially helpful in seeing this: "God is faithful because our word to you has not been Yes and No." God's faithfulness has been exhibited in Paul's words and the Corinthians response to those words. They have come to believe in Jesus Christ in whom all the promises of God find their fulfillment, their "Yes". God has established the Corinthians in Christ and they have received the Holy Spirit because of Paul's preaching. Instead of pointing to his own ability to keep his promises, Paul has pointed to God's ability to keep God's promises through Paul's preaching. God has given Paul's word the ultimate stamp of trustworthiness, far greater than Paul could ever give himself, because of what God has done through that word among the Corinthians. Paul is essentially saying "What more validation do you want?".
In short, Paul is turning the question upside down. The Corinthians want to determine the truth of Paul's words by treating them as an object to be dissected, analyzed, and evaluated against their own standards of truth. But Paul says the real test of his words' truth is not what the Corinthians can do to his words but what his words have done to them ... and by the grace of God those words have saved them.
Perhaps this has profound consequences for the ways we think about Truth as well. Like the Corinthians, we often think of Truth as an object to be discovered and dissected. We evaluate statements,beliefs, and practices based on our understanding of what is true. Obviously, there is some need for this kind of interaction with Truth in our lives. But maybe the greatest truths aren't the ones we can hold at arm's length to be dissected and evaluated from a distance but the ones that get inside us and dissect and evaluate us. Maybe Truth is not primarily about what we know. Maybe Truth is something that happens to us like it happened to the Corinthians. Truth is whatever sets us free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)