DARING TO QUESTION THE ALMIGHTY
Genesis 18:23-32; Luke 9:51-56
Rev. Paul Wrightman 6/4/23
BEFORE EASTER WE SAW HOW ABRAHAM STANDS OUT AS THE FIRST PERSON IN THE RECORDED HISTORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION
TO BREAK AWAY FROM THE
IMPERIAL AND IMPERSONAL VIEW OF GOD
EMBODIED IN THE EMPIRES
OF MESPOPOTAMIA AND EGYPT,
AND TO BREAK THROUGH
TO A PERSONAL, DIALOGICAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD.
WE SAW HOW GOD
CONDESCENDED TO MEET ABRAHAM
IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SACRIFICIAL CUSTOMS
OF ABRAHAM'S DAY -- APROXIMATELY 1800 B.C.E. --
AND MADE A SOLEMN COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM.
WE SAW HOW GOD REVERSED THE ROLES
COMMON TO COVENANT-MAKING AT THE TIME,
AND HOW GOD RATHER THAN ABRAHAM
SYMBOLICALLY PASSED BETWEEN TWO ROWS
OF CUT-UP SACRIFICIAL ANIMALS,
SIGNIFYING THAT GOD WOULD RATHER DIE,
AS IT WERE,
THAN BREAK GOD'S PROMISES.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT ARCHAELOGY
HAS GIVEN US LITERALLY THOUSANDS
OF EXAMPLES OF COVENANTS
FROM THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST,
AND THAT NONE OF THEM,
EITHER FROM NEIGHBORING CULTURES,
OR FROM THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES THEMSELVES,
DEPICTS THE SUPERIOR PARTY
AS PASSING THROUGH THE SEVERED HALVES
OF ANIMALS,
WE NOTED HOW SHOCKINGLY RADICAL
GOD'S COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM IS.
IT IS SO RADICAL, IN FACT,
THAT NO ONE BUT GOD WOULD
OR EVEN COULD HAVE AUTHORED A COVENANT
IN THIS UNCONDITIONAL WAY.
WE ALSO NOTED HOW ALL THE REST
OF THE COVENANTS THAT WE FIND
IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
ARE EXPRESSED IN THE COMMON "IF…THEN" FORM,
WHERE GOD IS DEPICTED AS SAYING:
"IF YOU OBEY MY LAWS, THEN I WILL BLESS YOU;
IF YOU DON'T OBEY MY LAWS,
THEN I WILL CURSE YOU."
IT'S VERY MUCH AS IF THE HUMAN AUTHORS
OF THE BIBLE COULD NOT ABIDE THE RADICALITY
OF GOD'S UNCONDITIONAL LOVE,
AND HAD TO "CORRECT" GOD,
MAKING ALL THE REST OF GOD'S COVENANTS
CONTINGENT ON OUR GOOD BEHAVIOR.
WHILE THERE ARE HINTS
OF GOD'S UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
IN THE SUFFERING SERVANTS SONGS
IN THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH,
WRITTEN SOME THIRTEEN HUNDRED YEARS AFTER
GOD'S COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM,
IT ISN'T UNTIL JESUS,
SOME EIGHTEEN HUNDRED YEARS AFTER ABRAHAM,
THAT WE FIND GOD'S UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
EXPRESSED IN AN EVEN MORE RADICAL WAY
THAN THE PROMISE GOD MADE TO ABRAHAM.
I SAY EVEN MORE RADICAL,
BECAUSE WITH ABRAHAM GOD PASSED THROUGH
THE SPLIT HALVES OF ANIMALS
IN THE SYMBOLIC FORM OF FIRE,
WHILE WITH JESUS,
GOD'S UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
IS EMBODIED IN A PERSON.
THIS SUNDAY WE FACE
ANOTHER EXTREMELY CHALLENGING TEXT.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE SEE ABRAHAM SO AT-HOME
IN HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD
THAT HE IS EMBOLDENED
TO ACTUALLY ARGUE WITH GOD
ABOUT THE MEANING OF JUSTICE!
MANY CONSIDER THE DIALOGUE
BETWEEN ABRAHAM AND GOD
THAT WE HEARD THIS MORNING
TO BE ONE OF THE MOST AMAZING ENCOUNTERS
BETWEEN GOD AND A HUMAN BEING
IN ALL OF RECORDED HISTORY.
WHEN WE THINK ABOUT IT,
WHAT AN INCREDIBLE LEAP IT IS
FROM THE RIGID, IMPERSONAL, LITURGIES
OF THE SURROUNDING COUNTRIES
TO ABRAHAM'S FEARLESSLY TAKING ON
THE ALMIGHTY IN ARGUMENT.
ON THE OTHER HAND, HOWEVER,
THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THIS ARGUMENT
TAKES PLACE --
GOD'S SUPPOSED DECISION TO WIPE OUT
THE CITIES OF SODOM AND GEMORRAH
IF TEN GOOD MEN CANNOT BE FOUND IN THEM
IS, FOR MANY OF US, INTOLERABLE.
THE QUESTION, OF COURSE, IS
CAN WE HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER?
CAN WE KEEP ABRAHAM'S ARGUMENT WITH GOD
AND LET GO OF THE VIOLENT WAY
IN WHICH GOD IS PORTRAYED?
CAN WE HANG ONTO THE EARTH-SHAKING,
MIND-BLOWING NATURE OF ABRAHAM'S
RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD
AND AT THE SAME TIME CLAIM
THAT THE BIBLICAL TEXT WAS SIMPLY MISTAKEN
WHEN IT STATES THAT TEN RIGHTEOUS PERSONS
WERE NOT TO BE FOUND
AND THAT GOD WENT AHEAD
AND BLASTED THESE CITIES OFF THE MAP?
I THINK THAT WE CAN.
HOWEVER, GIVEN THE FACT
THAT NOT EVERYONE THINKS THIS WAY,
THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO REAFFIRM
THE VISION OF THIS CHURCH
WHICH ENCOURAGES
INDIVIDUAL SPIRITUAL EXPLORATION,
WHICH WELCOMES INDEPENDENT-MINDED PEOPLE,
AND WHICH SEEKS TO BUILD
A DIVERSE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY.
A VISION OF CHURCH, I MIGHT ADD,
WHICH NOT ONLY ENCOURAGES ITS PASTOR
TO ARGUE WITH THE BIBLE,
BUT ALSO AFFIRMS THE RIGHT OF
ITS MEMEBRS AND FRIENDS TO DISAGREE WITH,
AND, IF NEED BE, TO ARGUE WITH THE PASTOR!
FOR ME THE KEY WORD
IN OUR COMBINED MISSION AND VISION STATEMENT
IS THE WORD DIVERSE.
UNLIKE MANY CHRISTIAN CHURCHES,
IN WHICH GROUP-THINK IS ENCOURAGED,
IF NOT REQUIRED,
COMMUNITY CHURCH ACTUALLY BELIEVES
THAT DIALOGUE, DISCUSSION, AND DISAGREEMENT
ARE BETTER WAYS TO GET TO THE TRUTH
THAN BEING TOLD WHAT WE HAVE TO BELIEVE
BY PASTOR, SESSION OR BOARD OF GOVERNORS,
DENOMINATION, OR DOCTRINE.
SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CHALLENGE ME
IF YOU THINK THAT I'M PUSHING THINGS TOO FAR.
JUST BECAUSE I'M UP HERE IN THE PULPIT
DOESN'T MEAN THAT I HAVE THE FINAL WORD.
ONLY GOD HAS THE FINAL WORD,
AND IT IS GOD'S WORD
THAT WE ARE STRUGGLING TO DISCERN TOGETHER.
SO I WANT TO SAY
THAT GOD DID NOT VIOLENTLY DESTROY
THE CITIES OF SODOM AND GEMORRAH.
AND WHILE WE'RE AT IT,
I ALSO WANT TO SAY
THAT GOD DID NOT CAUSE THE GREAT FLOOD
DESCRIBED IN
THE SEVENTH AND EIGHTH CHAPTERS OF GENESIS,
THAT GOD DID NOT ORDER
THE VIOLENT CONQUEST OF CANAAN
BY THE ISRAELITES,
AND THAT GOD DID NOT PERFORM
ANY OF THE MULTIPLE ACTS OF VIOLENCE
FOR WHICH THE BIBLE GIVES GOD CREDIT.
THE PRINCIPLE OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION
I USE TO MAINTAIN THIS POSITION
IS KNOWN AS THE PRINCIPLE
OF GOD'S ACCOMMODATION OR CONDESCENSION.
SIMPLY PUT, IT MEANS THAT
GOD HUMBLES GODSELF
IN ORDER TO MEET US HUMAN BEINGS
WHERE WE ARE.
IF WE THINK ABOUT IT,
GOD COULD NOT POSSIBLY COMMUNICATE WITH US
IN A WAY THAT WE COULD UNDERSTAND,
UNLESS GOD ACCEPTED AND WORKED THROUGH
OUR LIMITATIONS
IN TERMS OF THE TIME IN WHICH WE LIVE,
THE CULTURE OF WHICH WE ARE A PART,
AND THE UNIQUE PERSONALITY WHICH IS OURS.
IF GOD DID NOT LIMIT GODSELF
TO MEET US WHERE WE ARE,
GOD'S COMMUNICATION
WOULD BE SO FAR BEYOND US
THAT WE WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW
WE WERE BEING SPOKEN TO.
AS WE HAVE SEN,
GOD WANTED TO COMMUNICATE TO ABRAHAM
THAT GOD'S PROMISES
ARE ABSOLUTELY TRUSTWORTHY.
HOW TO DO THAT IN A WAY
THAT ABRAHAM CAN UNDERSTAND?
GOD KNOWS THAT ABRAHAM
HAS "CUT" A COVENANT OR TWO HIMSELF,
SO GOD CONDESCENDS TO MEET ABRAHAM
IN WHAT TO US --
LIVING ALMOST 4000 YEARS LATER --
IS THE BARBARIC RITUAL OF SACRIFICING ANIMALS,
SPLITTING THEM IN TWO,
AND THEN MAKING THE INFERIOR PARTY
WALK THROUGH THE PIECES.
GOD MANAGES TO SAY SOMETHING
RADICALLY NEW TO ABRAHAM
WITHIN THIS CULTURE-BOUND RITUAL
BY SURPRISINGLY SWITCHING ROLES --
GOD, THE SUPERIOR PARTY,
MOVES THROUGH THE PIECES,
INSTEAD OF ABRAHAM, THE INFERIOR PARTY.
WHAT ABOUT THE FLOOD?
IT'S A WELL-ESTABLISHED GEOLOGICAL FACT
THAT THERE WAS AN ANCIENT FLOOD
OF VAST PROPORTIONS.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE ANCIENTS
VIEWED GOD AS THE DIRECT CAUSE
OF EVERYTHING,
WHO COULD HAVE AUTHORED THE FLOOD
EXCEPT GOD?
MOVING ON,
GIVEN THE FACT THAT VIOLENT CONQUEST
WAS THE NORM AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME,
HOW COULD GOD NOT GET CREDIT
FOR ORDERING IT?
THAT'S WHAT THE PEOPLE THOUGHT THEY HEARD
BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY THING
THAT THEY WERE CAPABLE OF HEARING
AT THAT TIME.
ALONG WITH THE THEOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE
OF GOD'S ACCOMMODATION OR CONDESCENSION,
WE CAN USE THE PRINCIPLE OF GOD'S CONSISTENCY
TO GIVE OURSELVES PERMISSION
NOT TO HAVE TO BELIEVE ALL THE VIOLENCE
ATTRIBUTED TO GOD IN SCRIPTURE.
JAMES, THE BROTHER OF JESUS,
TELLS US IN HIS NEW TESTAMENT LETTER THAT
"EVERY GOOD AND PERFECT GIFT IS FROM ABOVE,
COMING DOWN FROM THE FATHER
OF THE HEAVENLY LIGHTS,
WHO DOES NOT CHANGE LIKE SHIFTING SHADOWS."
(JAMES 1:17)
GOD'S NATURE DOES NOT CHANGE!
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GOD'S NATURE
IS WHAT CHANGES!
THE LETTER TO THE HEBREWS,
ALSO IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, AFFIRMS THAT
"JESUS CHRIST IS THE SAME YESTERDAY,
AND TODAY AND FOREVER."
(HEBREWS 13:8)
WHAT CAN THIS MEAN EXCEPT THAT
THE INSISTENCE ON JUSTICE, THE COMPASSION,
THE FORGIVENESS, THE UNCONDITIONAL LOVE,
AND THE EMPHASIS ON NONVIOLENCE
OF THE JESUS OF THE GOSPELS
WAS IN THE HEART OF GOD
FROM THE VERY BEGINNING
AND WILL NOT GO AWAY. EVER.
GOD'S NATURE DOES NOT CHANGE!
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GOD'S NATURE
IS WHAT CHANGES!
SIGNIFICANTLY, OUR SECOND SCRIPTURE TEXT,
FROM THE GOSPEL OF LUKE,
DESCRIBES AN INCIDENT IN WHICH
JESUS' DISCIPLES JAMES AND JOHN,
ANGRY AT THE INHOSPITALITY
OF A SAMARITAN VILLAGE,
WANT TO CALL DOWN FIRE FROM HEAVEN
TO INCINERATE THE VILLAGE.
INTERESTINGLY, JAMES AND JOHN WANT GOD
TO DESTROY THIS VILLAGE
IN PRECISELY THE SAME WAY
THAT GOD IS REPORTED TO HAVE DESTROYED
SODOM AND GOMORRAH.
WHAT IS JESUS' RESPONSE TO JAMES AND JOHN?
HE REBUKES THEM,
MAKING IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR
THAT VIOLENCE IS NOT GOD'S WAY.
THE LAST INTERPRETIVE PRINCIPLE
THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY
IS THE PRINCIPLE OF BIBLICAL DEVELOPMENT,
OR BIBLICAL EVOLUTION,
WHICH HOLDS THAT
THE BIBLE'S UNDERSTANDING OF GOD
DEVELOPS, GROWS, BECOMES MORE PROFOUND,
OVER TIME.
IN OTHER WORDS,
ALL SCRIPTURE TEXTS ARE NOT EQUAL.
SOME ARE DEFINITELY MORE TRUE THAN OTHERS.
AND WE CRITIQUE THE LESSER TEXTS
WITH THE GREATER.
FOR EXAMPLE, MANY JEWISH BIBLICAL SCHOLARS
AGREE THAT THE MOST PROFOUND EXPRESSION
OF GOD'S TRUE NATURE
OCCURS IN THE SUFFERING SERVANT SONGS
IN THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ISAIAH.
THERE GOD'S SERVANT --
GOD'S DIRECT REPRESENTATIVE --
IS DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF JUSTICE, COMPASSION,
FORGIVENESS, UNCONDITIONAL LOVE,
AND NONVIOLENCE.
NOT SURPRISINGLY,
IT TURNS OUT THAT THE HIGH POINT
OF THE OLD TESTAMENT --
THE SUFFERENT SERVANT --
IS THE SAME AS THE HIGH POINT
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT -- JESUS.
GOD'S NATURE DOES NOT CHANGE!
OUR DEVELOPING UNDERSTANDING
OF GOD'S NATURE IS WHAT CHANGES!
THUS, GIVEN
THESE THREE PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION:
1. ACCOMMODATION,
2. CONSISTENCY,
AND 3. DEVELOPMENT --
PRINCIPLES WHICH ARE AFFIRMED
BY NON-FUNDAMENTALISTS
IN BOTH THE JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS,
AND WHICH ARE TO BE FOUND
WITHIN SCRIPTURE ITSELF,
I THINK WE CAN SAY
WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF PROBABILITY
THAT GOD WOULD ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE US
TO REJECT DESCRIPTIONS OF GOD
THAT PRESENT GOD AS VIOLENT AND UNFORGIVING.
THUS, OUT WITH GOD'S VIOLENT DESTRUCTION
OF SODOM AND GEMORRAH.
WHAT HAPPENED IF GOD DID NOT DESTORY THEM?
IT WAS A NATURAL DISASTER --
GEOLOGISTS TELL US PROBABLY
SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES
OF THE DESTRUCTION OF
THE ROMAN CITY OF POMPEII.
BUT WHAT ABOUT ABRAHAM'S ARGUING WITH GOD?
DO WE HAVE TO THROW THAT OUT AS WELL?
I WOULD ARGUE -- DEFINITELY NOT!
WHY NOT?
BECAUSE NOTHING REMOTELY LIKE IT
HAS COME DOWN TO US
FROM THE IMPERIAL AND IMPERSONAL
RELIGIONS OF THE NEIGHBORING EMPIRES --
AND WE HAVE A HUGE AMOUNT
OF WRITTEN MATERIAL
FROM THAT TIME AND PLACE.
WHERE COULD IT POSSIBLY HAVE COME FROM
EXCEPT FROM AN ACTUAL ENCOUNTER
BETWEEN GOD AND ABRAHAM?
WHAT ABOUT A LATER ISRAELITE AUTHOR
INVENTING IT AND USING ABRAHAM
AS HIS MOUTHPIECE?
--HIGHLY UNLIKELY BECAUSE THE ABRAHAM SAGA
PRESENTS A STRIKING UNITY OF CUSTOMS
AND SPEECH PATTERNS
FROM EXACTLY THE TIME WHEN ABRAHAM
IS BELIEVED TO HAVE LIVED.
TRUE TO THE INCREDIBLE ACCURACY
OF TRANSMISSION WHICH ORAL CULTURES ENJOY,
CUSTOMS AND SPEECH PATTERNS FROM 1800 B.C.E.
THAT HAVE LONG SINCE CHANGED
HAVE BEEN HANDED DOWN UNCHANGED
TO THE FINAL EDITING OF THE BIBLE
AROUND 500 B.C.E.
SO LET'S SAY THAT WE CAN KEEP
THIS DIALOGUE BETWEEN ABRAHAM AND GOD.
WE CAN KEEP IT WITH THE PROVISO
THAT ABRAHAM,
IN LINE WITH HIS LIMITED UNDERSTANDING
OF GOD -- AN UNDERSTANDING WHICH ASSUMED
THAT GOD COULD BE EVEN MORE VIOLENT
THAN THE MOST VIOLENT HUMAN BEINGS –
WAS SIMPLY WRONG ABOUT VIOLENCE BEING
BEING PART OF GOD’S NATURE.
IN SPITE OF ABRAHAM’S BEING WRONG
ABOUT SUCH AN IMPORTANT ASPECT
OF GOD’S NATURE,
WHAT CAN THIS AMAZING DIALOGUE BETWEEN
ABRAHAM AND GOD TEACH US?
IT TEACHES US THAT GOD
LIKES A GOOD ARGUMENT!
IT TEACHES US NOT TO BE AFRAID
TO BE BOLD WITH GOD!
IT TEACHES US THAT GOD DESIRES
TO ENGAGE -- AND TO BE ENGAGED.
IT TEACHES US THAT
A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD
IS JUST THAT -- A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP.
UNLIKE THE GODS OF EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA,
WHOM NO ONE BUT A PRIEST OR KING
WOULD DARE TO ADDRESS --
AND THEN ONLY IN HIGHLY IMPERSONAL
AND GUSHINGLY FLATTERING
LITURGICAL LANGUAGE --
THE GOD OF ABRAHAM DESIRES
TO BE SPOKEN TO AS A PERSON,
A PERSON WHO WANTS TO HEAR OUR FEARS,
OUR JOYS, OUR SORROWS… EVEN OUR ARGUMENTS!
IT TEACHES US THAT
A GOOD CONVERSATION WITH GOD
IS THE VERY HEART AND CENTER
OF WHAT WE CALL THE BIBLE.
IT TEACHES US THAT
ONE OF THE GREATEST TEACHINGS
THE BIBLE HAS TO GIVE US
IS THAT WE CAN TALK TO GOD
JUST LIKE ABRAHAM DID.
AMEN.