NOVEMBER 9, 2003
Ruth 3:1-5; 4:13-17; Hebrews 9:24-28; Mark 12:38-44
Those among us who have been "brought up" on a theology which recognizes The Bible as the ultimate authority on matters related to life need to remind ourselves that those whose writings are included in the Bible did the best they could with the knowledge and experience they had in the world they knew at the time they lived. In many ways what they shared was remarkable in that some of what they shared as ultimate truth has stood the test of time and is still the best we have in our world in our time. Some of what they shared, however, falls far short of what ought to be considered as truth in our world in our day and we are charged with the responsibility of doing the best with what we have in terms of knowledge, experience, and building on what has been taught in the past. It is here that the meaning of "process" impacts our thinking. That is to say that with contemporary knowledge and the background of recorded history, it is clear that God is not continually intervening either in our individual lives or in the course of the world, causing events to happen that are harmonious with the creational purposes of God. In relation to some areas of concern we are no more enlightened than were our spiritual ancestors and we fall short in both understanding and performance. Much work remains to be done in the journey to spiritual perfection and surely it is clear by now that God is not going to intervene and instantaneous thrust perfection upon us.
Having said that, we can be thankful for the manner in which God has worked in the past. From this we can learn, and be complimented. We can also be hopeful that God speaks and works through us, i.e. through our minds and behavior in a ways similar to that experienced by our spiritual ancestors. The work of God is best known and human relationships are best understood as being evident through a long process rather than through instantaneous and often miraculous happenings. When studied and analyzed closely, it can be determined that every event is preceeded and in some ways formulated by many smaller but related events.
The Old Testament idea, on which the message of Ruth is based, that the Hebrews were "chosen" by God as a special people to make the ways and message of God known to the world is a thread of belief which runs throughout the Bible. Although a "new truth" is revealed in the story of Ruth, namely that a few good persons who were not from the pure blood lines of the Hebrews could also fit into the scheme of things and be used by God. Ruth, a Moabite, was one of these good people who became part of the lineage of very important people in the Judeo tradition, and unknown to them at that time, also in the Christian tradition. She married Boaz, a Hebrew and they produced a child whom they named Obed who became the father of Jesse who became the father of David, the greatest king Israel ever had, and from whose line of ancestry Jesus of Nazareth was born. It is not a "stretch" for one to assume when embracing the "old way of looking at things", that the importance of Gentiles in the work of carrying on the work of God both during and after the time of Jesus is based on the evolving belief that God loved and could use persons who were not of Hebrew descent. After all, most Christian churches today are composed primarily of Gentiles who believe that "the Church is of God and will endure to the end of time". Christianity is thus viewed by most Christians, as related to Judaism in a very important way inasmuch as Jesus was a Jew and the Church carries on the same general theme of "specialness" which was carried by Old Testament Jews, by Jesus, and by early Christians whose ideas came to make up the bulk of the New Testament.
Some erroneous personal beliefs do no particular damage. Others do! There are some points of danger in the Judeo-Christian traditional teaching that need to be pointed out and avoided. One of those dangerous points of belief is included in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Another is addressed in the reported teachings of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. The idea espoused by the early church and emphasized so clearly in Hebrews that Jesus fulfilled the need of God for a life to be given/taken to atone for what persons perceived to be sin against God is dangerous to persons and to the present and future of the world. In relation to what most of us believe about life today, the idea of God requiring bloody sacrifice is both primitive and false. We understand how primitive people with a primitive theology could believe this but we believe it is the product of the human mind, not an edict from God. There is no evidence, for example, that Jesus practiced animal sacrifice. The early church emphasized the sacrificial atonement idea out of frustration over the death of Jesus and out of the evident need for human beings, when confronted with the unknown and/or confusion, to return to the security of that which has given them comfort in the past. In the process of an evolving theology in the Christian movement, the sacrificial theory of atonement by the bloody death of Jesus is a step backward rather than forward. The Gospel stories, representing the best information we have about the ministry and teachings of Jesus, do not have Jesus emphasizing the idea that he would die as a sacrificial atonement for their sins. Instead, the Gospel stories emphasize the teachings of Jesus regarding love, relationships, and an ethical expression of life. It is likely that even the few passages which may be interpreted to teach such were inserts by the early church rather than quotes from Jesus. The story of Jesus is a story of one who was disciplined, hopeful, loving, perceived himself to be in a meaningful and wonderful relationship with God and who felt personally responsible for his attitudes and behavior. In and out of the church, the idea of Jesus as a sacrificial atonement has encouraged a "cover up" while emphasizing hope and love as a substitute for personal discipline and responsibility in the attitude and expression of personal and corporate life. Such "cover ups" result in negative consequences to human beings on both the individual and corporate level that are unnecessary and typically painful.
If one pays attention to the tendencies of contemporary culture it is clear that personal discipline and responsibility are not virtues that inform and direct all human expressions of life. The same can be said for the corporate lack of ethical expressions in own society.
Another danger is clear in the story of what Jesus taught concerning much religion contemporary to him. It has to do with religious symbolism. The symbolism of religion can be very helpful in terms of nurturing understanding, experience, and being a means of communicating important matters related to spirituality. Jesus cautioned his disciples to beware of religions leaders in their day who found their religious meaning in the wearing of long robes, using a religious vocabulary that sounded pious, and demanded recognition through positions of prestige and power in public religious gatherings. (Does any of this sound familiar?) He warned that some of these are the same persons who devour widows houses and for a pretense make long prayers but in the end will receive the greater condemnation.
Healthy religion/spirituality required meaningful symbols with which to participate in communication. There is a danger that the symbols become the "end" goal rather than that which they were originally intended to symbolize. Healthy religion/spiritual impacts human life in a manner which nurtures love, behavior that intends to help but never hurt anyone, and encourages growth in personal discipline and responsibility.
Finally, in this discourse from the Gospel of Mark, Jesus provides a partial definition of successful living which we need to hear. It is good to give/share. Success in life is not known by how much we give/share, but by the spirit with which we give/share, and the amount related to our ability. In our world, money is very necessary. Having said that, it must also be said that some of the greatest gifts we can give/share are not related to money. Gifts which exceed the value of money include such as growth in understanding, ethical/moral living, loving expressions and a whole host of similar spiritual gifts related to attitude and behavior.
From this kind of consideration, it becomes clear that religion is often part of the problem rather than part of the solution to major problems. In a day when religious extremism is to evident, it is good to remind ourselves of the need for personal moderation, a personal theology of thought, and expressions of life which represent the acting out of the highest and most noble thoughts of which we are capable.