Or, it may only be that everyone in those old black and white westerns is dead!
G.Goslaw
Landers, CA
Friday, January 25, 2013
The Questions
In my spare moments, I enjoy watching those old black and white westerns. They are simple and predictable, so what is the attraction? Could it be that they are representative of a simpler America? Could it be that in their time America expected good to triumph over evil? Have we not exchanged good expectations for the predictably selfish? Have we not exchanged hard work for playing the lotto? Have we not redefined justice by ignoring the white collar thief who steals billions while sending the drug user to jail? Have we not redefined America as a place where might makes right? In our America, is not who you know more important than who you are? Is it not true that in this new America, because the personally rewarding can be done it, therefore, should be done regardless of the cost to others?
Or, it may only be that everyone in those old black and white westerns is dead!
G.Goslaw
Landers, CA
Or, it may only be that everyone in those old black and white westerns is dead!
G.Goslaw
Landers, CA
Hi Adam
I’m reading this book about a possible 21st century understanding of God. The following quote may help us as biblical interpreters.
“This approach (what he calls the constitutional method) if you haven’t realized it yet, defies both conservative and liberal categories. On the one hand, the conservative constitutional view claims to put us “under” Scripture’s authority, yet I’m sure I’m not the only one who has noticed that some of the most pompous and defensive people anywhere are found among those who stand and shout, “The Bible says!” Nor am I the only one to notice that before the Bible can serve as a constitution, it must be interpreted as one, which renders amazing authority to those interpreters. The Bible they want to put us “under” tends to be the Bible as they have interpreted it, which unsurprisingly means we are under their authority as they stand over us with the Bible in hand.
On the other hand, the liberal view reacts strongly against all this conservative slight of hand and largely resists using the language of authority at all when it speaks of the Bible. The liberal view ends up bequeathing a great deal of authority to liberal scholars who deconstruct the Bible, just as the conservative view does to the scholars of its tribe who constitutionalize it.”
Brian D. McLaren, “A New Kind of Christianity”, 2010, p. 96.
A middle ground is, indeed, rare air!
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca.
“This approach (what he calls the constitutional method) if you haven’t realized it yet, defies both conservative and liberal categories. On the one hand, the conservative constitutional view claims to put us “under” Scripture’s authority, yet I’m sure I’m not the only one who has noticed that some of the most pompous and defensive people anywhere are found among those who stand and shout, “The Bible says!” Nor am I the only one to notice that before the Bible can serve as a constitution, it must be interpreted as one, which renders amazing authority to those interpreters. The Bible they want to put us “under” tends to be the Bible as they have interpreted it, which unsurprisingly means we are under their authority as they stand over us with the Bible in hand.
On the other hand, the liberal view reacts strongly against all this conservative slight of hand and largely resists using the language of authority at all when it speaks of the Bible. The liberal view ends up bequeathing a great deal of authority to liberal scholars who deconstruct the Bible, just as the conservative view does to the scholars of its tribe who constitutionalize it.”
Brian D. McLaren, “A New Kind of Christianity”, 2010, p. 96.
A middle ground is, indeed, rare air!
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca.
Capsule Theology
There is a God of the galaxies who is in control of all things.
1. This God gives free will to all of mankind.
(Mythological Tree of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden)
2. This God gives “temporary” spiritual hardening to some of mankind, individuals or peoples.
(the ancients, Cain, Pharaoh, Jews, N.T. predestination, secularism, etc.)
3. This God gives unqualified eternal grace, destiny and unification with God to “all” mankind.
(the past, present and future Kingdom of God)
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca.
Friday, January 18, 2013
Message to Prez
If you cover up the truth, as in Benghazi, the truth will come around and bit you in the ass, as in Algeria!
This is a bloody lesson when it is not your blood, tough guy!
G.Goslaw
Landers, CA
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
A Book Report
The repetitious use of the “I” pronoun is offensive in others and to be avoided in any discourse. I shall take the risk. The following is my reaction and reflection upon the book by Richard H. Bell, entitled, “The Irrevocable Call of God”, 2005. I stumbled upon this book investigating the pro’s and con’s of Christian universalism which maintains that all of mankind, past present and future, is being gathered together by Christ to rest for all eternity in the arms of our father God. About four years ago I equated such a hypothesis with the pagan cults and was certain that the Bible would never support such an intellectual pipe dream.
I am an amateur biblical theologian and an amateur Christian who has embraced a life long romance with the Bible. Having read three or four more popular books about this subject, the title of Dr. Bell’s book intrigued me. If God had an eternal destiny in mind for the people of Israel, the people who have rejected the Messiah for over 2000 years, could not this same destiny await all peoples? Paying over $100 for a book gave me a few moments pause but I was curious enough to take the plunge.
The author was a complete unknown to me so I began reading as if in the dark. The Greek, Hebrew and German is way above my pay grade but it is sprinkled through the text so that it allowed frequent skipping without loosing the train of thought. There are footnotes galore, probably close to half the text, citing mostly current biblical scholars of the last fifty years. Dr. Bell contrasts the work of recent systemic theologians and biblical scholars with a sprinkling of theologians of historical note. The text is 422 pages with another 130 pages of reference material in the back of the book.
This man is a thinker with multiple degrees in science, theology and he teaches philosophy. One would think that scholarship at this level would make this book difficult to follow but this is not the case. I was hooked within the first few pages. Everything is an argument, everything is a collection of contrasting opinions from familiar minds that force the reader to think right along with the author. Most impressive is the way he handles scripture, his is a hermeneutic for the 21st century.
A case in point is the tension in the writings of St. Paul regarding the religion of Israel and the spiritual destiny of the Jew. The author uses the word “development” to describe the unavoidable change in Paul’s thinking between his early letters and the last letter to the Romans. How can one with a narrow static hermeneutic account for this obvious difference, one should ask, which Paul is correct? I would guess that the author would say they are both correct but that the more mature Roman perspective is the way forward. Possibly, all scripture is true but all scripture must be weighed as if on a scale. The Roman perspective on the future of Israel is a 10 while the Galatian perspective is an immature 3. Please don’t blame this methodology on the author.
This is a book that meticulously details the relevant scripture, particularly in St. Paul’s letter to the Romans. You may find an answer to the biblical question of our time, does “all” mean “all”? Did the apostle Paul mean "all"?
You may read this book and at least have an informed opinion.
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca.
I am an amateur biblical theologian and an amateur Christian who has embraced a life long romance with the Bible. Having read three or four more popular books about this subject, the title of Dr. Bell’s book intrigued me. If God had an eternal destiny in mind for the people of Israel, the people who have rejected the Messiah for over 2000 years, could not this same destiny await all peoples? Paying over $100 for a book gave me a few moments pause but I was curious enough to take the plunge.
The author was a complete unknown to me so I began reading as if in the dark. The Greek, Hebrew and German is way above my pay grade but it is sprinkled through the text so that it allowed frequent skipping without loosing the train of thought. There are footnotes galore, probably close to half the text, citing mostly current biblical scholars of the last fifty years. Dr. Bell contrasts the work of recent systemic theologians and biblical scholars with a sprinkling of theologians of historical note. The text is 422 pages with another 130 pages of reference material in the back of the book.
This man is a thinker with multiple degrees in science, theology and he teaches philosophy. One would think that scholarship at this level would make this book difficult to follow but this is not the case. I was hooked within the first few pages. Everything is an argument, everything is a collection of contrasting opinions from familiar minds that force the reader to think right along with the author. Most impressive is the way he handles scripture, his is a hermeneutic for the 21st century.
A case in point is the tension in the writings of St. Paul regarding the religion of Israel and the spiritual destiny of the Jew. The author uses the word “development” to describe the unavoidable change in Paul’s thinking between his early letters and the last letter to the Romans. How can one with a narrow static hermeneutic account for this obvious difference, one should ask, which Paul is correct? I would guess that the author would say they are both correct but that the more mature Roman perspective is the way forward. Possibly, all scripture is true but all scripture must be weighed as if on a scale. The Roman perspective on the future of Israel is a 10 while the Galatian perspective is an immature 3. Please don’t blame this methodology on the author.
This is a book that meticulously details the relevant scripture, particularly in St. Paul’s letter to the Romans. You may find an answer to the biblical question of our time, does “all” mean “all”? Did the apostle Paul mean "all"?
You may read this book and at least have an informed opinion.
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca.
Friday, January 11, 2013
The Chaff
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Acts 8: 14-17
When the Apostles in Jerusalem had heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.
Luke 3:15-17, 21-22
The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in there hearts if John might possibly be the Messiah. John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one who is more powerful than I will come, the thongs of his sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
His winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing floor and to gather his wheat into his barn, but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
The Chaff
The Holy Spirit is the arm of God in this world. His presence, power and priority is acknowledged as center stage in every worshiping congregation. The Holy Spirit is the soul of the church. The Holy Spirit gives the priesthood the power to forgive sin. The Holy Spirit is Christ with us. The Holy Spirit enables speaking in unknown languages. The Holy Spirit is an ethical life enabler. The Holy Spirit is a guide to making right life decisions. The Holy Spirit is the power that draws all men toward God. The Holy Spirit is the executioner in Christian conversion. The Holy Spirit blesses prayer as more than mere words. The Holy Spirit is the giver of Christian assurance. The Holy Spirit is the giver of biblical wisdom and truth. The Holy Spirit is an ally in times of trouble and heartache.
The job description of the Holy Spirit may be extended further and further but does it not seem that we, the church, have become immune or overly familiar with the rhetoric? Every believer in the Christ wants his or her life experience to be impacted by the actions of the Holy Spirit, in theory at least nothing is more important. These two passages this Sunday announce a change, the working pattern of the Holy Spirit is to be different with the arrival of Jesus upon the human horizon. It might help our understanding of the Holy Spirit if we explore these words of scripture.
At it’s best the faith of Israel had a reverence for God and for others to include the forgiveness of spiritual and ethical error but this faith at the time of Jesus had degraded to mere rule keeping. Most of the folk believed that they were incapable of doing these many rules and regulations. They also believed that their disenfranchisement mattered little to the leaders of the Temple. They were correct for the prevalent spiritual motif of the time was the self righteousness of the Pharisees. This sect of believers in the God of Israel were all about rule keeping and not about people. The people, however, flocked to hear the open invitation of John and were eager for a new beginning by being baptized in water. The preaching of John the Baptist was the best of the old way.
John saw into the future and believed that the long expected Jewish Messiah would bring a new way marked by the preeminence of the Holy Spirit. “But one who is more powerful than I will come, the thongs of his sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” This is not to say that the Holy Spirit was not an effective advocate for God in Old Testament times but his actions seemed to be available mostly for the few. The Spirit was directing and leading the people only as they followed those few who were in touch with the Spirit. According to John, the coming Messiah would now make the Holy Spirit available to all seeking believers, who wished to implement the ways and power of the Holy Spirit into their lives.
As the centuries passed in the history of the church this universal availability of the Holy Spirit was at times withdrawn into the hierarchy of the church to be properly dispensed. This withdrawal was always marked by an overwhelming lack of spiritual integrity among the people, some would characterize these times as the church in darkness. The Reformation of the 15th century again gave back to the people the Bible and an awakening sense of the availability of the Holy Spirit. This revival evolved into the understanding to be known as the priesthood of all believers. If each believer is gifted with the Spirit of God, then the priest or the preacher is not the lone spiritual authority in the church. Clearly, Peter and John could not envision the proper operation of the new church in Samaria without the blessing of the Holy Spirit gifted to the people.
Today’s church seems to be in turmoil and loosing credibility with the people beyond the church walls. The secular culture is making new converts everyday. What are we to do? The first step is repentance as in John’s baptism in water. Instead of blaming liberal theology, irreverence for the Bible as we understand it and sin parading through the culture, we should question the language we are sending out. Our impotence is not to be blamed on someone or something else, it rests upon the church to rephrase how the gospel message is communicated to the 21st century. This creeping change will happen but only as the pain becomes unbearable.
If the goodness of God is what the church represents, then that God must be so superficial. Much as was the religiousness at the time of Jesus, today’s Pharisaical church is seemingly content to construct it’s own Christian culture and then defend the walls. Defending the walls means condemning and consigning that sinful world, all those liars, thieves, murders and promiscuous persons to the fires of hell. Of course we tell them about Jesus but do we really care about such people? The bigger question is how does god feel about these people? That question will be answered according to how we understand the mission of the Holy Spirit.
Chaff is the unusable, worthless outer shell of the wheat grain. The old way to separate the chaff from the grain was to throw the whole grain into the air letting the wind carry the worthless chaff away. The grain would fall onto the threshing floor to be gathered for storage. John the Baptist goes on to say that the coming Messiah, who will bring the Holy Spirit, “he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire”. Does John equate people with chaff so that this is a warning or a threat of hell toward whomever may be considered a sinner? There is a segment of immature, yardstick Christians who think this way.
They are wrong! The chaff of our lives is the hard outer shell of selfishness and self indulgence that hides the man or woman God intended us to be from the beginning. This chaff, when separated from our lives by the winds of the Holy Spirit, will be burned, never again to cloud our God given dignity. That is what the life, death and resurrection of Jesus accomplished and this assurance of salvation is to be carried to us in our generation by the Holy Spirit. Since and because of our gifted faith in the Christ, the believer has been judged perfect, at least in the eyes of God. The unconditional love of God the father will accept us into eternity.
May those yardstick Christians be carried to hell, if there was such a place.
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca
Acts 8: 14-17
When the Apostles in Jerusalem had heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.
Luke 3:15-17, 21-22
The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in there hearts if John might possibly be the Messiah. John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one who is more powerful than I will come, the thongs of his sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
His winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing floor and to gather his wheat into his barn, but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
The Chaff
The Holy Spirit is the arm of God in this world. His presence, power and priority is acknowledged as center stage in every worshiping congregation. The Holy Spirit is the soul of the church. The Holy Spirit gives the priesthood the power to forgive sin. The Holy Spirit is Christ with us. The Holy Spirit enables speaking in unknown languages. The Holy Spirit is an ethical life enabler. The Holy Spirit is a guide to making right life decisions. The Holy Spirit is the power that draws all men toward God. The Holy Spirit is the executioner in Christian conversion. The Holy Spirit blesses prayer as more than mere words. The Holy Spirit is the giver of Christian assurance. The Holy Spirit is the giver of biblical wisdom and truth. The Holy Spirit is an ally in times of trouble and heartache.
The job description of the Holy Spirit may be extended further and further but does it not seem that we, the church, have become immune or overly familiar with the rhetoric? Every believer in the Christ wants his or her life experience to be impacted by the actions of the Holy Spirit, in theory at least nothing is more important. These two passages this Sunday announce a change, the working pattern of the Holy Spirit is to be different with the arrival of Jesus upon the human horizon. It might help our understanding of the Holy Spirit if we explore these words of scripture.
At it’s best the faith of Israel had a reverence for God and for others to include the forgiveness of spiritual and ethical error but this faith at the time of Jesus had degraded to mere rule keeping. Most of the folk believed that they were incapable of doing these many rules and regulations. They also believed that their disenfranchisement mattered little to the leaders of the Temple. They were correct for the prevalent spiritual motif of the time was the self righteousness of the Pharisees. This sect of believers in the God of Israel were all about rule keeping and not about people. The people, however, flocked to hear the open invitation of John and were eager for a new beginning by being baptized in water. The preaching of John the Baptist was the best of the old way.
John saw into the future and believed that the long expected Jewish Messiah would bring a new way marked by the preeminence of the Holy Spirit. “But one who is more powerful than I will come, the thongs of his sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” This is not to say that the Holy Spirit was not an effective advocate for God in Old Testament times but his actions seemed to be available mostly for the few. The Spirit was directing and leading the people only as they followed those few who were in touch with the Spirit. According to John, the coming Messiah would now make the Holy Spirit available to all seeking believers, who wished to implement the ways and power of the Holy Spirit into their lives.
As the centuries passed in the history of the church this universal availability of the Holy Spirit was at times withdrawn into the hierarchy of the church to be properly dispensed. This withdrawal was always marked by an overwhelming lack of spiritual integrity among the people, some would characterize these times as the church in darkness. The Reformation of the 15th century again gave back to the people the Bible and an awakening sense of the availability of the Holy Spirit. This revival evolved into the understanding to be known as the priesthood of all believers. If each believer is gifted with the Spirit of God, then the priest or the preacher is not the lone spiritual authority in the church. Clearly, Peter and John could not envision the proper operation of the new church in Samaria without the blessing of the Holy Spirit gifted to the people.
Today’s church seems to be in turmoil and loosing credibility with the people beyond the church walls. The secular culture is making new converts everyday. What are we to do? The first step is repentance as in John’s baptism in water. Instead of blaming liberal theology, irreverence for the Bible as we understand it and sin parading through the culture, we should question the language we are sending out. Our impotence is not to be blamed on someone or something else, it rests upon the church to rephrase how the gospel message is communicated to the 21st century. This creeping change will happen but only as the pain becomes unbearable.
If the goodness of God is what the church represents, then that God must be so superficial. Much as was the religiousness at the time of Jesus, today’s Pharisaical church is seemingly content to construct it’s own Christian culture and then defend the walls. Defending the walls means condemning and consigning that sinful world, all those liars, thieves, murders and promiscuous persons to the fires of hell. Of course we tell them about Jesus but do we really care about such people? The bigger question is how does god feel about these people? That question will be answered according to how we understand the mission of the Holy Spirit.
Chaff is the unusable, worthless outer shell of the wheat grain. The old way to separate the chaff from the grain was to throw the whole grain into the air letting the wind carry the worthless chaff away. The grain would fall onto the threshing floor to be gathered for storage. John the Baptist goes on to say that the coming Messiah, who will bring the Holy Spirit, “he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire”. Does John equate people with chaff so that this is a warning or a threat of hell toward whomever may be considered a sinner? There is a segment of immature, yardstick Christians who think this way.
They are wrong! The chaff of our lives is the hard outer shell of selfishness and self indulgence that hides the man or woman God intended us to be from the beginning. This chaff, when separated from our lives by the winds of the Holy Spirit, will be burned, never again to cloud our God given dignity. That is what the life, death and resurrection of Jesus accomplished and this assurance of salvation is to be carried to us in our generation by the Holy Spirit. Since and because of our gifted faith in the Christ, the believer has been judged perfect, at least in the eyes of God. The unconditional love of God the father will accept us into eternity.
May those yardstick Christians be carried to hell, if there was such a place.
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca
Friday, January 4, 2013
Hell?
St. Luke’s Gospel, Chapter 16: 19- 31 (the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus)
These are the words of Jesus as he tells this story.
“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table.
Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In Hades (Hell), where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham very far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
But Abraham replied, ‘Son remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you is a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
He (Rich Man) answered, ’Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
Abraham replied, ’They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
‘No, father Abraham’, he (Rich Man) replied, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
He (Abraham) said to him, ’If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
All of us have listened to sermons based upon a parable. The parable is ripe fodder for much theologizing about the described life circumstances and God’s intentions for his creation. The resulting sermon is an expansion of the intended point that Jesus was making and the trip around the barn is what the church has excused with the term of allegory. This interpretive method maintains that the parable has many layers of meaning to be exposed and that the biblical soothsayer will bless the hearer who is much less informed and able to understand. There were times in church history when this was a much greater problem than it is today but it still happens.
Today’s reader is looking for one obvious message from each parable. In an article entitled “Parable” by Ronald S. Wallace in the Baker’s Dictionary of Theology, he states, “A parable, however, is constructed so as to present to the hearer a real, familiar life situation in which he can make a judgment often about one main point, and by this judgment on the total impression made by the parable he can be led to understand the one main message which the parable was designed to convey to him.” Archibald Hunter in his little book, “Interpreting the Parables” says, “in the parable there is one chief point of likeness between the story and the meaning, and the details simply help to make the story realistic and so serve the central thrust of the parable---like the feathers which wing the arrow.” (p.10) This opinion is shared by most modern scholarship.
Let us give the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus a go. What one main message does Jesus want to convey to those of us who hear? What in this story is window dressing? Through this story was Jesus saying that earthly riches are evil to be punished beyond death? Did Jesus send the message that earthly poverty is a blessed state to be rewarded in paradise with God? Did Jesus say to us that selfishness that blinds one to the needs of others will be punished by God? Did Jesus warn that earthly death is man’s last chance? Did Jesus mean to say that God will only allow the perfect to inhabit paradise? Was Jesus warning us of the God designed destination for the selfish, a forever flaming place of torment?
We may be able to classify some of these questions as nonsensical by asking another question. What message did the Rich Man want Lazarus to give to his brothers, if that were possible? Considering his spiritual acuity the rich man’s message may well have been, avoid the flames, feed the poor, don’t die, build a clinic, there really is a God, give all away, fear the judgment of God. All of these messages miss the point of the parable and prove that the rich man is brain and heart dead, wanting only to escape the pain of his selfish decisions. The rich man amongst the flames remains self involved.
Again, what is the one message of this parable? You can duck and cover through life, avoiding your God given inheritance but your self indulgent decision making will be challenged on the other side of death by difficult circumstances. All other theological conclusions, including the stereotypical picture of hell, are beyond the scope of this parable. The chasm that separated the rich man and Lazarus was not necessarily the end of the story. It should be noted that there remained sight and communication across the divide. There may be opportunities beyond the curtain of death to heed the words of Moses and the Prophets, to surrender to the will of the Father.
It is instructive that Abraham addresses Lazarus as "son", it is my hope that that little word was dripping with empathy for Lazarus. An empathy that would give hope to each of us who are in the throws of self indulgence because it reveals the heart of God. Other parables like the Good Shepherd and the Prodigal Son indicate the heart of the Father that will not give up on anyone, at any time. Amen!
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca
These are the words of Jesus as he tells this story.
“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table.
Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In Hades (Hell), where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham very far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
But Abraham replied, ‘Son remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you is a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
He (Rich Man) answered, ’Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
Abraham replied, ’They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
‘No, father Abraham’, he (Rich Man) replied, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
He (Abraham) said to him, ’If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
All of us have listened to sermons based upon a parable. The parable is ripe fodder for much theologizing about the described life circumstances and God’s intentions for his creation. The resulting sermon is an expansion of the intended point that Jesus was making and the trip around the barn is what the church has excused with the term of allegory. This interpretive method maintains that the parable has many layers of meaning to be exposed and that the biblical soothsayer will bless the hearer who is much less informed and able to understand. There were times in church history when this was a much greater problem than it is today but it still happens.
Today’s reader is looking for one obvious message from each parable. In an article entitled “Parable” by Ronald S. Wallace in the Baker’s Dictionary of Theology, he states, “A parable, however, is constructed so as to present to the hearer a real, familiar life situation in which he can make a judgment often about one main point, and by this judgment on the total impression made by the parable he can be led to understand the one main message which the parable was designed to convey to him.” Archibald Hunter in his little book, “Interpreting the Parables” says, “in the parable there is one chief point of likeness between the story and the meaning, and the details simply help to make the story realistic and so serve the central thrust of the parable---like the feathers which wing the arrow.” (p.10) This opinion is shared by most modern scholarship.
Let us give the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus a go. What one main message does Jesus want to convey to those of us who hear? What in this story is window dressing? Through this story was Jesus saying that earthly riches are evil to be punished beyond death? Did Jesus send the message that earthly poverty is a blessed state to be rewarded in paradise with God? Did Jesus say to us that selfishness that blinds one to the needs of others will be punished by God? Did Jesus warn that earthly death is man’s last chance? Did Jesus mean to say that God will only allow the perfect to inhabit paradise? Was Jesus warning us of the God designed destination for the selfish, a forever flaming place of torment?
We may be able to classify some of these questions as nonsensical by asking another question. What message did the Rich Man want Lazarus to give to his brothers, if that were possible? Considering his spiritual acuity the rich man’s message may well have been, avoid the flames, feed the poor, don’t die, build a clinic, there really is a God, give all away, fear the judgment of God. All of these messages miss the point of the parable and prove that the rich man is brain and heart dead, wanting only to escape the pain of his selfish decisions. The rich man amongst the flames remains self involved.
Again, what is the one message of this parable? You can duck and cover through life, avoiding your God given inheritance but your self indulgent decision making will be challenged on the other side of death by difficult circumstances. All other theological conclusions, including the stereotypical picture of hell, are beyond the scope of this parable. The chasm that separated the rich man and Lazarus was not necessarily the end of the story. It should be noted that there remained sight and communication across the divide. There may be opportunities beyond the curtain of death to heed the words of Moses and the Prophets, to surrender to the will of the Father.
It is instructive that Abraham addresses Lazarus as "son", it is my hope that that little word was dripping with empathy for Lazarus. An empathy that would give hope to each of us who are in the throws of self indulgence because it reveals the heart of God. Other parables like the Good Shepherd and the Prodigal Son indicate the heart of the Father that will not give up on anyone, at any time. Amen!
G.Goslaw
Landers, Ca
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)