Evil is real -- so is grace
Commentary
After having seen when he was a young lad the dissipation of the sons of Eli, Samuel must now witness the same unfolding tragedy in the lives of his own sons. How can it be that the sons of a man of the stature of Samuel could have turned out so badly that he must now endure the judgment of the elders that "your sons do not follow in your ways"? We tend to laud the achievements of parents when their children turn out well. We give them most of the credit. But what do we say to men like Eli and Samuel, and their wives, when children do not walk in the footsteps of their parents? We may give too much credit on the one side and level too much blame on the other.
Because there is no heir to his role from among his sons, Samuel must involve himself in the choice of a king. All of chapters 7 through 12 is occupied with this endeavor. And the story is a mixed one, as well we might expect. In one setting -- as with our text for today -- Samuel appears to resist the idea that Israel needs a king. He paints the worst possible scenario for what life will be like for them when they surrender their fortunes to a king. In other places he appears to approve the prospect of having a king, believing that it is time for Israel to be united under a monarchy. His ideal is a theocracy, a nation where God is regarded as head of state and persons like himself convey the mind and will of God to the people. But he is also realistic, thus the implication in 8:7-9 that God approves of the appointment of a king, though as the second-best alternative.
I am writing these words during the last week of October, a few days before national elections. The airwaves are jammed with political announcements, each party seeking to convince the populace that its candidate is the best for high office. It strikes me as interesting that one of the themes from our text is played out in every election: namely, the role of government. Along with the call for more freedom from government control and its infringement on personal liberty is the realization that we cannot do without the regulating function of government that makes common life possible. Samuel's warning about what happens when leaders take too much authority unto themselves rings as true today as then. Yet, like Samuel, we live in hope that those who lead and govern will have a sense of call from God.
2 Corinthians 4:13--5:1
This lesson follows immediately on the reading from a week ago. As we recall, Paul spoke about his unworthiness to be an apostle. He was only a clay jar, though he carried a precious treasure. Now he applies that same thought to his own being, speaking about the "outer" and "inner" natures. This presents somewhat of a problem. Hebrew thought saw persons as one. There was no division between flesh and spirit. It would have been unnatural for a devout Jew to speak in terms of an "outer" and an "inner" person. Has Paul adopted a Greek idea and applied it to his understanding of the Christian life? It is hard to say. Certainly 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 and Romans 12:1 affirm the goodness of the body and the importance of giving oneself completely -- body and soul -- to God. Paul does not despise his life and his body.
It may be that Paul is simply trying to underscore what is obvious. Much as we treasure our bodies and care for them in an appropriate and responsible way, they will eventually fail us. And for those who live under the constant threat of persecution and death, as was the case with Paul, it may be even more important to remind oneself that life is transitory, a "mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes" (James 4:14). Paul recognizes the limitations of the body and the futility of life without ultimate hope. We might be more in tune with his sentiments if we lived in a premedical age and suffered as he did.
How is life sustained in the midst of a world of uncertainty? First, Paul points to the bedrock promises of God. Like the psalmist, he leans on the word -- "I believe and so I spoke." That word, for the apostolic church, gives something more than the psalmist had -- the promise of the resurrection. The God who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will sustain us in every circumstance. "We know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus." But there is also the connection with the believers in Corinth and the encouragement they give Paul. In spite of their faults, he calls them "the church of God that is in Corinth, including all the saints throughout Achaia" (2 Corinthians 1:1). His love and concern for them keeps him going. As with his word to the Philippian church, he can say that my "desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better; but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you" (Philippians 1:23-24). And when he hears of the increase of converts among them, when grace "extends to more and more people," Paul takes heart and is ready to endure whatever it takes to keep going.
Mark 3:20-35
As a younger pastor I was frequently asked about the meaning of Jesus' words about sin against the Holy Spirit. But times have changed. I can't recall the last time someone asked about it. In some ways, that is a relief, since I was never able to come up with what I thought was a satisfactory reply. And though I am still at a loss to know what Jesus meant, each passing year makes me think that the idea behind the text is really quite clear -- that certain sins have awesome consequences and that the accumulation of unconfessed sins has a degenerative effect on the human personality, to say nothing about one's relationship with God.
When King David lived with the guilt of unconfessed sin, he said that his "body wasted away through (his) groaning all day long" (Psalm 32:3). We would describe him as "psychosomatically ill." But whether we use the language of psychology or the Bible, the point is the same -- sin bears consequences.
The thrust of the text is that Jesus alone has the power to do battle with sin that invades the house and divides it, that binds and that destroys. Though we may not understand the nature of evil, we are foolish to ignore it, both within our hearts as well as in the world around us. While it may be wrong to dwell too much on our sinful nature, it is equally wrong and misleading to live in that fool's paradise which sees the world only through rose-tinted glasses. If we preach and teach only about sin and its consequences, we mislead our hearers and distort the Gospel. But how will they come to appreciate the liberating power of the Good News unless they have looked into the face of evil? If a child grows up thinking he can do no wrong, he will be warped. If he grows up thinking he can do no right, he will be warped. But if he grows up understanding that he often does wrong, and can be forgiven, then he will have a healthy outlook on life. If he is taught that Jesus forgives and empowers us to do right, he will have the perspective to become a wholesome person.
As for the narrative about Jesus' family, we know that it is common for Mark to switch from a public to a private scene. Does he intend to link the two stories, suggesting that just as Jesus had intense conflict with the scribes who accused him having a demon, so he speaks harshly to his family because they have rejected him? That would be stretching the text too much. What we see at most in this account is that Jesus has begun to move away from his immediate family and is becoming more and more identified as a brother with those who join him in a difficult mission. Many of Mark's readers will understand and appreciate this word. As converts to the faith, they have had to separate themselves from flesh and blood family in order to claim that larger and more important community of faith.
Suggestions For Preaching
Coming to terms with the temporal versus the eternal lies at the heart of each of the lessons for this Sunday. Samuel's hopes for a nation that is bound together under God must be tempered by realism about the world of the human family. A visit to a Shaker village a few months ago reminded me of all the attempts over the years to re-create Eden. It never works. While Paul had no such thoughts about the congregation at Corinth, he must have at least hoped that it would turn out better than it did. In the anguish of his disappointment he reminded himself and his readers that there is something more enduring to which we must cling. And Jesus, wrestling more than any with the powers of evil, knew that he alone could free us from bondage.
This is a day to be forthright and plainspoken about the power of evil in the world. It is a day to break through the naive notions some have about the potential of human efforts to save the world and create a more perfect society. But it is not a day to despair. Christ has the power to give new life and to make it possible for us to endure and to triumph in an often unkind and hostile world.
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By James A. Nestingen
1 Samuel 8:4-20
Something in the human heart loves a monarch, whether in the trappings of royalty or the blow-dried, public relations agentry of a contemporary president. Working with sinners, God accommodates, but not without a realistic word from the lips of a wise old head like Samuel.
Perhaps Samuel wasn't much better with his kids than old Eli. But watching families, there is something mysterious about what happens between the generations. No matter how great the love or how substantial the gift, passing qualities to the children can get tricky. Whatever, the people of Israel knew that Samuel's boys were no match for him.
So as Samuel aged, the people worried. When they had been in trouble before, God had provided judges, endowing men and women with the gifts necessary to deal with the circumstances. But things had gotten cyclical, trouble arising following deliverance requiring another redemption to be followed by more difficulties. Samuel had lived long as a great judge. But the scrutiny of Samuel's sons indicates Israel's anxiety. The people wanted to even out the cycle, to regularize the leadership by arranging succession. Looking at the nations around them, they wanted a king, a royal family, with passage of power guaranteed.
The good Lord is not necessarily an anarchist. The biggest majority of the world's Christians have assumed, with 1 Peter 2 or Romans 13, that God has ordained human institutions such as government to maintain order and seek justice.
But there's another side of the story evident in this text and the book of Revelation. God accommodates the present necessity; among sinners, there must be protection. But sinners also run for office. As long as that is true, kingdoms -- governments -- will always be the "great robberies" Augustine called them.
So Samuel, speaking in God's name, exposes the darker side of government. Thousands of years old, his critique is as current as tomorrow: when sinners get power, whether as kings, queens, or the image-conscious officeholders of mass media democracies, their sins simply become larger scale. Their pretenses evoke conflict, national and international, bringing warfare with its technology, whether chariots or missiles, concomitant expenses and risks to family (11-12). Men in power require women in submission, whether perfuming the bedroom or sweating in the kitchen (13). There are avaricious bureaucrats (14) and taxes, not only on produce but also on employees and equipment as well as the production (13-17). Until the new day, governments are necessary. But the habits of the governing don't change, and neither does the address on the bill.
Because there is no heir to his role from among his sons, Samuel must involve himself in the choice of a king. All of chapters 7 through 12 is occupied with this endeavor. And the story is a mixed one, as well we might expect. In one setting -- as with our text for today -- Samuel appears to resist the idea that Israel needs a king. He paints the worst possible scenario for what life will be like for them when they surrender their fortunes to a king. In other places he appears to approve the prospect of having a king, believing that it is time for Israel to be united under a monarchy. His ideal is a theocracy, a nation where God is regarded as head of state and persons like himself convey the mind and will of God to the people. But he is also realistic, thus the implication in 8:7-9 that God approves of the appointment of a king, though as the second-best alternative.
I am writing these words during the last week of October, a few days before national elections. The airwaves are jammed with political announcements, each party seeking to convince the populace that its candidate is the best for high office. It strikes me as interesting that one of the themes from our text is played out in every election: namely, the role of government. Along with the call for more freedom from government control and its infringement on personal liberty is the realization that we cannot do without the regulating function of government that makes common life possible. Samuel's warning about what happens when leaders take too much authority unto themselves rings as true today as then. Yet, like Samuel, we live in hope that those who lead and govern will have a sense of call from God.
2 Corinthians 4:13--5:1
This lesson follows immediately on the reading from a week ago. As we recall, Paul spoke about his unworthiness to be an apostle. He was only a clay jar, though he carried a precious treasure. Now he applies that same thought to his own being, speaking about the "outer" and "inner" natures. This presents somewhat of a problem. Hebrew thought saw persons as one. There was no division between flesh and spirit. It would have been unnatural for a devout Jew to speak in terms of an "outer" and an "inner" person. Has Paul adopted a Greek idea and applied it to his understanding of the Christian life? It is hard to say. Certainly 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 and Romans 12:1 affirm the goodness of the body and the importance of giving oneself completely -- body and soul -- to God. Paul does not despise his life and his body.
It may be that Paul is simply trying to underscore what is obvious. Much as we treasure our bodies and care for them in an appropriate and responsible way, they will eventually fail us. And for those who live under the constant threat of persecution and death, as was the case with Paul, it may be even more important to remind oneself that life is transitory, a "mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes" (James 4:14). Paul recognizes the limitations of the body and the futility of life without ultimate hope. We might be more in tune with his sentiments if we lived in a premedical age and suffered as he did.
How is life sustained in the midst of a world of uncertainty? First, Paul points to the bedrock promises of God. Like the psalmist, he leans on the word -- "I believe and so I spoke." That word, for the apostolic church, gives something more than the psalmist had -- the promise of the resurrection. The God who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will sustain us in every circumstance. "We know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus." But there is also the connection with the believers in Corinth and the encouragement they give Paul. In spite of their faults, he calls them "the church of God that is in Corinth, including all the saints throughout Achaia" (2 Corinthians 1:1). His love and concern for them keeps him going. As with his word to the Philippian church, he can say that my "desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better; but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you" (Philippians 1:23-24). And when he hears of the increase of converts among them, when grace "extends to more and more people," Paul takes heart and is ready to endure whatever it takes to keep going.
Mark 3:20-35
As a younger pastor I was frequently asked about the meaning of Jesus' words about sin against the Holy Spirit. But times have changed. I can't recall the last time someone asked about it. In some ways, that is a relief, since I was never able to come up with what I thought was a satisfactory reply. And though I am still at a loss to know what Jesus meant, each passing year makes me think that the idea behind the text is really quite clear -- that certain sins have awesome consequences and that the accumulation of unconfessed sins has a degenerative effect on the human personality, to say nothing about one's relationship with God.
When King David lived with the guilt of unconfessed sin, he said that his "body wasted away through (his) groaning all day long" (Psalm 32:3). We would describe him as "psychosomatically ill." But whether we use the language of psychology or the Bible, the point is the same -- sin bears consequences.
The thrust of the text is that Jesus alone has the power to do battle with sin that invades the house and divides it, that binds and that destroys. Though we may not understand the nature of evil, we are foolish to ignore it, both within our hearts as well as in the world around us. While it may be wrong to dwell too much on our sinful nature, it is equally wrong and misleading to live in that fool's paradise which sees the world only through rose-tinted glasses. If we preach and teach only about sin and its consequences, we mislead our hearers and distort the Gospel. But how will they come to appreciate the liberating power of the Good News unless they have looked into the face of evil? If a child grows up thinking he can do no wrong, he will be warped. If he grows up thinking he can do no right, he will be warped. But if he grows up understanding that he often does wrong, and can be forgiven, then he will have a healthy outlook on life. If he is taught that Jesus forgives and empowers us to do right, he will have the perspective to become a wholesome person.
As for the narrative about Jesus' family, we know that it is common for Mark to switch from a public to a private scene. Does he intend to link the two stories, suggesting that just as Jesus had intense conflict with the scribes who accused him having a demon, so he speaks harshly to his family because they have rejected him? That would be stretching the text too much. What we see at most in this account is that Jesus has begun to move away from his immediate family and is becoming more and more identified as a brother with those who join him in a difficult mission. Many of Mark's readers will understand and appreciate this word. As converts to the faith, they have had to separate themselves from flesh and blood family in order to claim that larger and more important community of faith.
Suggestions For Preaching
Coming to terms with the temporal versus the eternal lies at the heart of each of the lessons for this Sunday. Samuel's hopes for a nation that is bound together under God must be tempered by realism about the world of the human family. A visit to a Shaker village a few months ago reminded me of all the attempts over the years to re-create Eden. It never works. While Paul had no such thoughts about the congregation at Corinth, he must have at least hoped that it would turn out better than it did. In the anguish of his disappointment he reminded himself and his readers that there is something more enduring to which we must cling. And Jesus, wrestling more than any with the powers of evil, knew that he alone could free us from bondage.
This is a day to be forthright and plainspoken about the power of evil in the world. It is a day to break through the naive notions some have about the potential of human efforts to save the world and create a more perfect society. But it is not a day to despair. Christ has the power to give new life and to make it possible for us to endure and to triumph in an often unkind and hostile world.
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By James A. Nestingen
1 Samuel 8:4-20
Something in the human heart loves a monarch, whether in the trappings of royalty or the blow-dried, public relations agentry of a contemporary president. Working with sinners, God accommodates, but not without a realistic word from the lips of a wise old head like Samuel.
Perhaps Samuel wasn't much better with his kids than old Eli. But watching families, there is something mysterious about what happens between the generations. No matter how great the love or how substantial the gift, passing qualities to the children can get tricky. Whatever, the people of Israel knew that Samuel's boys were no match for him.
So as Samuel aged, the people worried. When they had been in trouble before, God had provided judges, endowing men and women with the gifts necessary to deal with the circumstances. But things had gotten cyclical, trouble arising following deliverance requiring another redemption to be followed by more difficulties. Samuel had lived long as a great judge. But the scrutiny of Samuel's sons indicates Israel's anxiety. The people wanted to even out the cycle, to regularize the leadership by arranging succession. Looking at the nations around them, they wanted a king, a royal family, with passage of power guaranteed.
The good Lord is not necessarily an anarchist. The biggest majority of the world's Christians have assumed, with 1 Peter 2 or Romans 13, that God has ordained human institutions such as government to maintain order and seek justice.
But there's another side of the story evident in this text and the book of Revelation. God accommodates the present necessity; among sinners, there must be protection. But sinners also run for office. As long as that is true, kingdoms -- governments -- will always be the "great robberies" Augustine called them.
So Samuel, speaking in God's name, exposes the darker side of government. Thousands of years old, his critique is as current as tomorrow: when sinners get power, whether as kings, queens, or the image-conscious officeholders of mass media democracies, their sins simply become larger scale. Their pretenses evoke conflict, national and international, bringing warfare with its technology, whether chariots or missiles, concomitant expenses and risks to family (11-12). Men in power require women in submission, whether perfuming the bedroom or sweating in the kitchen (13). There are avaricious bureaucrats (14) and taxes, not only on produce but also on employees and equipment as well as the production (13-17). Until the new day, governments are necessary. But the habits of the governing don't change, and neither does the address on the bill.
