Unnoticed Miracles

Matthew 1:18-25

Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly. But just when he had resolved to do this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, for the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means, “God is with us.” When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus.

A sermon for the 4th Sunday in Advent, preached at St. James Lutheran Church in Fayetteville, North Carolina. 

It’s a miracle! This is it! The virgin conception! This is what we’ve been waiting for this whole season! We’ve been waiting for this big miracle— the miracle that the angels proclaim, the miracle that prophets had been writing about for centuries. It’s finally here! 

We like to get caught up in the big miracle stories of the Bible — and the virgin conception and birth is one of our favorites to tell and speculate about. How did God do it? Was it real? When did she find out? 

We love these big, important miracles in the Bible like the flood, the manna, plagues, parting of the Red Sea, the feeding of the thousands, the healing stories of Jesus' time. 

We get so caught up in waiting for the big miracles that we forget to look for the smaller, unnoticed miracles in the story. In this case, Joseph’s side of the story is full of little miracles if we look a little bit closer. 

Here we have Joseph who finds out about Mary’s pregnancy. And of course he would think that she has committed adultery. 

Doesn’t expose her to the authorities, so he decides to divorce her quietly. 

Which at first doesn’t seem like such a righteous thing as the text tell us it is. 

But we know from the law that any woman who commits adultery will be stoned to death. 

So Joseph essentially chose to spare Mary’s life by divorcing her quietly and possibly infringes on his own honor and status in society. Even before the angel shows up in his dream, he is already planning to do something unexpected. It just shows the kind of person Joseph was — he was kind, compassionate, and a little bit subversive. 

And God uses this man to further God’s mission. God sends an angel to his dream and the angel tells him not to be afraid. “Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife,” the angels says. The angels says, “she’ll have a son and you’ll name him Jesus.” 

And he did. He took Mary and married her — despite the ridicule that he would get. Despite the risk to his reputation and status in society. And what’s more — he takes the word of God and he raises Jesus as his own son, giving him a name, a home, and a trade. A miracle. 

That’s what a miracle is after all — when God, in all of God’s glory, opens our hearts to lean closer and listen more clearly and love more fully. But those kinds of miracles aren’t flashy. They aren’t always exciting. The in-breaking of the Kingdom of God is actually quit hard sometimes. 

Which is why we would rather wait for God to act, wait for God to do something explosive and amazing. 

We do the same thing with the stories in our lives, don’t we? We are always waiting for the big miracles, the ones we can turn into TV shows or movies or Facebook posts. 

We spend a lot of our lives waiting for miracles like this one. Searching for where God is breaking into the world to save a loved one from a disease or bring two estranged people back together. We are waiting for miracles all the time. 

But we want the big kind of miracle — we want the kinds that really knock our socks off with how amazing we are. And we sit and we wait for them, hoping and praying that they happen soon. 

But, I think, when we sit and wait passively for miracles to happen to us and for us, we forget that miracles -- the little ones, if there are such things as little miracles -- really are happening around us all the time. They might go unnoticed to most of the world, but that doesn’t make them any less significant. Because from what I have noticed, God tends to work through the small miracles. God tends to work through the everyday things and relationships we have with people. 

Just recently I heard a story about a young pastor and his wife: 

A man was locking up the church one evening when he finds two little boys - about 2 years old and the other 7 months old - almost naked in a pile of trash outside of the church - they were only wearing diapers. 

Unsure of what to do, he called the pastor of the church and the pastor and his wife rushed over immediately. As the pastor arrived and they talked about what to do, the parents of the little boys came out of the woods near the church and told the pastor and his wife that they were homeless and cannot take care of their children. 

The pastor asked if he might take the boys home to clean them up and keep them warm for the night. The boys were covered in bug bites, when they pulled the shoes off the older boy some of his skin came off with it. They were so filthy, the pastor and his wife bathed them once, drained the water, and bathed them again. 

The pastor and his wife came back to the woods the next day to talk to the homeless couple about their situation. After a few weeks of taking care of the boys, the homeless couple asked if they might sign custody over to the pastor and his wife. The pastor’s wife says they barely hesitated, “of course,” she said. The pastor and his wife already has three children, but without hesitation they invited two more little boys into their home, and eventually adopted them. 

This is the kind of every day miracles God works through. And if we had the courage to look around us, we would be able to see these things happening in our lives and the lives of other every single day. 

Just this past Thursday, we had one here in the church - A group of men from Grace Lutheran Church drove about five hours to deliver all of the hurricane relief supplies. Then a group of people from this church took time out of their days to come and receive donations those donations. It was an outpouring of love that was beautiful to behold. 

It’s these kinds of miracles that God works through. We like the big ones — the ones that they make into movies, like the ones where children die and meet God and come back and tell everyone about it. God works in those miracles, there’s no doubt about that. And those are the kinds of miracles we long for, aren’t they? The big kind — the kind we can post pictures and a Facebook status about. The kind that make it into the newspaper. 

But the most important and incredible miracles this world has ever seen came not in all the flashiness of Hollywood and not with thousands of pictures documenting the moment. It came in the birth of a baby we call Immanuel, God with us. The most significant miracle in all the world came into the world as a baby because God wants so badly to be in relationship with us that God actually became one of us. So that through him we might find salvation and become a part of God’s work in the world too. This miracle lives on as the body of Christ, and we are taken up into that miracle every Sunday as we eat and drink the body and blood of Christ together in the Eucharist. We become a part of this miracle. 

So that we might be a participants in and recipients of God’s incredible in-breaking of the Kingdom of God. So that we might point to the miracle that is Christ, our Lord and our Savior. Amen. 

The Expedition

A friend and colleague shared this poem as we considered how to leave our congregations and say goodbye "well." I don't know if there is a way to say goodbye well to the people who have captured my heart and lovingly pulled me into their family so quickly and fully, but I will try and try again until I have expended enough words on these loved ones. So tonight I share not my own words, but the words of another, more poetic writer... 


The Expedition 

by Anthony de Mello

My time here has come to an end, 

And I think of the days that I have spent in these surroundings.

I see an image of myself as I was when I came here

And I look at my self as I am today

At the close of this time.

I think of the persons and places that have been a part of my time here.

To each of them I speak in gratitude.

And to each I say goodbye. 

Other places, other persons call to me,

and I must go. 

I think of the experiences I have had,

The graces I have been granted

In this place.

For each of these too, I am grateful.

I think of the kind of life I have lived here,

The atmosphere, the daily schedule.

I say goodbye:

Another type of life awaits me,

Other graces, other experiences.

And I say goodbye to persons,

places, 

things, 

events,

experiences,

and graces, 

I do so under life's imperious biddings.

If I wish to be alive

I must learn to die at every moment.

That is, to say goodbye, let go, move on. 

When this is done, I turn to face the future

And I say, "Welcome."

I think of the work that waits for me,

The people I shall meet,

The type of life I shall be living, 

The events that will take place tomorrow.

And I extend my arms in welcome

To the summons of the future.

A Reflection, a Farewell

Every Tuesday night I have the privilege of leading a bible study at the house of some of my wonderful parishioners. We start around 9pm and end as close to 10pm as I can get us without going too far into the night. Then we gather in the kitchen to continue to chat and eat whatever delicious food and sweets are present that night. By the time we leave (often somewhere between 10:30 and 11pm), I am so sleepy and stuffed that I zone out as another couple drives me home.

A few nights ago, we had bible study, realized that we only have a few weeks left together, and scheduled our very last bible study (which will end up being us gathering for food and possibly talking about Jesus a little bit). That evening as we drove home, I noticed the odd sound of country music coming over the Malaysian radio station. Thomas Rhett's "Die a Happy Man" washed over my ears and I smiled. Oo how I miss country music and seeing the stars at night and bonfires. I felt ready and eager to be "home" in the United States.

Then as I kept listening to the lyrics, I felt sorrow and maybe even regret. It's hard to name exactly the emotions that flooded into my heart, but it wasn't the joy of leaving, it wasn't the excitement of seeing my family at home.

"If I never get to see the Northern lights
Or if I never get to see the Eiffel Tower at night
Oh, if all I got is your hand in my hand
Baby, I could die a happy man"

The premise of the song is that this man has some "bucket list" items, but he sings that even if he doesn't get to do all of those things, he would "die a happy man" just because he gets to spend his days with this woman. I know this feeling all too well. Daniel and I used to move the furniture and dance in the living room. Or we would turn his small apartment into a movie theater. We went on some pretty incredible dates, but my favorite times together have been when we didn't have to spend any money at all. We were just together and happy. We have dreams and plans, but even if they didn't work out, we are still so happy simply being together.

But as I heard this song, I realized that we did get to see our metaphorical Northern lights this year. We did get to see our metaphorical Eiffel Tower at night. And while it's true that our love would be just as incredible and we would be just as happy without these experiences, the truth of the matter is that we have done things this year and seen things that we never could have imagined in our wildest dreams.

And I don't think I've been as grateful as I should have been. I took a lot of it for granted. I think part of it is because I never could have imagined being here and seeing these things this year - or maybe everything happened so quickly that I haven't had a chance to digest it- but I won't use that as an excuse. Until I started to hear that song play over and over in my head, I don't think I fully realized how amazing our first year of marriage has been. Every once in a while we would turn to one another and say, "We are living in Malaysia. How odd the way life turns out," but I don't think it all sank in the way it did the other night.

We saw the famous tea fields of the Cameron Highlands in Malaysia.
We dipped our toes into oceans and seas that I never would have thought we'd visit in our lifetime.
We rode a 40 year old elephant and fed an eight year old elephant!
We watched the sun rise over Angkor Wat.
We watched the sun set on a beach in Bali.
We rode on a crazy cable car in Langkawi and walked on a long curved suspension bridge.
We spent part of Thaipusam at Batu Caves.
We saw the giant reclining Buddha at Wat Pho.
We ate authentic pad thai from a street cart in Bangkok.
We watched a storm roll into the city, sweeping over the Petronas Towers and KL Tower, on the helipad of a skyscraper.
I've preached in three countries and had my sermons translated into several languages.
We went to Universal Studios in Singapore.
We also went to the rooftop pool at Marina Bay Sands and rode the Singapore Flyer.
We had dinner on the rooftop of the #1 restaurant in Phuket.
We shared many of these memories with my parents and Daniel's brother.

And last, but certainly not least, we spent the entire year being welcomed and loved by people who knew nothing about us and committed to helping us grow in ministry, in life, and in love.

This past year has been more incredible, difficult, and surprising than we could have ever imagined. And I think I am just now realizing that this isn't normal. This life is a privilege and an honor. This year has been such an unfathomable blessing from God and I know that we will not soon forget the beautiful memories we have shared in this first year of marriage.

It also gets me excited about what God has in store for us next. We are ready- where will our next adventure lead us?

Self worth & the Church

One of the many incredible blessings I have been given here in Malaysia is the opportunity to engage in continuing education with pastors from very diverse backgrounds. Together we have learned (and reviewed) confessional texts, the sacraments, and ecclesiology. This week I had the opportunity to sit in a counseling/family systems seminar where we talked about different family system theories and what they look like in our contexts.

The first session explored the work of Adlerian and Satir who focused a lot on self-worth and a sense of inferiority respectively. They found in the families they observed, where there was most dysfunction was where there was a distorted or lower sense of self-worth (something that tends to compound with more dysfunction). But where people were encouraged to explore their potential, have genuine connection with people, and gain more self-awareness, they flourished and created more functional, nurturing families because of it.

And it got me thinking about a type of family system that deals directly with these two issues: the church.

Suspending the pitfalls that come with equating the church or a particular church community with a family, we can see some very obvious similarities (and dysfunctions). Even Jesus and Paul talk about the body of Christ in similar verbiage used to talk about the family unit (Hebrews 10, Romans 12, Matthew 12, Acts 2).

And realizing that the "goal" or "purpose" of the body of Christ is not to "make people feel good," but to bring about a wholeness and shalom, we can start to make connections between this seemingly secular social science and how we do ministry. 

How does the church inform people's self-worth? 
What do our sermons or our bible studies covey to members about their potential in this world? 
Do we, as a congregation, encourage people to gain more self-awareness? 
Are there genuine connections happening between people within our congregations? 

About a year ago, I studied a large, complex church organization called NewSpring in Columbia, South Carolina. Overall, the church has probably hundreds of thousands of members, but the campus we were studying only had a couple thousand people regularly attending. And their numbers were growing every year with no indication of slowing down. 

You might think (as we did) that a congregation like this could only keep growing because they were "selling" something that people wanted or felt they needed to "buy." While this might be true to some extent, we also found something else while studying the "strategies" of this church organization. 

They make people feel like they matter. 

From even before joining the worship service, we were greeted as if we were vital to the ministry there. We received special parking for being visitors, we were ushered into a green room and given swag, and we were given a tour of the whole facility afterwards. People who noticed we were visitors greeted us warmly with smiles and genuine "we are so glad you're here." Somehow, for some reason, we mattered to these people, we mattered to this church. It was a refreshing feeling, honestly. And they knew we weren't looking to change congregations. They knew were we attending for research and not for worship. And they still wanted us to know that we were worthy of their time and love.

Now I am not endorsing raffling off cars or even providing visitors with swag on their way into the church, but it is something to take note of.

I've been a visitor in way too many congregations where I have been ignored. Sometimes it's worse than being ignored - I was actively stared at for being a visitor. I remember "taking" a member's pew one Sunday and actually being asked to move back a row!

I can go on and into the true, deep life of the church and how it often lacks this sense of "worthiness" for the congregant, but I think talking about how we greet our visitors is a good enough place to start.

Do we usher them in with smiles and conversation or simply thrust a bulletin into their hands?
Could we pick them our in group after the service and remember their names?
Do we make the time to follow up with them afterwards? Invite them to dinner? Ask how we might be praying for them?
Do we learn about them first before trying to "sell" the congregation's programs to them?

How do we provide hospitality in a way that says, "we want you here, we think your gifts are a perfect match for our passions" instead of, "we need you here to pay our bills with your tithe - what's the minimum we have to do to keep you coming?"

While I don't think it's the whole story, I believe that thinking about the role of people's sense of self-worth is an important building block of how we do ministry together. Shalom, I believe, starts with a person's own identity and self-worth. How then, as bringers of shalom, can we nurture and ignite a more holy sense of self-worth for everyone who walks through the doors of our congregation?

Hospitality and Holy Communion

Please note: this paper was written for a specific context, within an academic class. The views of the article may or may not reflect my own arguments or the theology of the ELCA. This is simply one argument in the midst of many. Please feel free to let me know what your own opinions are! 

In an effort to be a more hospitable and missional Church, communion invitations (verbal and written) within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America should be changed from “all baptized people” to “all people.”  There are two ways this thesis will be approached: theologically and practically.  Although tradition has dictated that communicants be baptized, there is little theological and biblical evidence for the restriction.  Practically, opening the table to unbaptized members publicly can serve as an evangelical tool as well as create greater ease within the parish.  Although communion before baptism should not be the regular practice, changing the invitation would be more inclusive in terms of mission and hospitality.  

Here it should be reiterated that the main point of this essay is not to normalize the practice of unbaptized people receiving communion.  It simply argues that a more welcoming invitation will provide opportunities for hospitality and mission while not disregarding the sacristy of Holy Communion.  Tradition states that people should be baptized before receiving Holy Communion.  Lutherans understand that welcoming people into the Body of Christ involves welcoming them into the baptismal waters as well as the Lord’s Table.  The pastor should follow up with a communicant in the week following the service (as they are likely to be visitors, not long-time members) and ask if they are baptized or interested in being baptized.  If the pastor discovers that they are not baptized, they should be encouraged to come to educational opportunities in the church about both baptism and communion.  In this way, an open invitation to communion is actually a form of evangelism. 

The church recognizes that it is possible and, in some cases, common for people to take communion without being baptized.  The main defense for baptism being the prerequisite for communion is that baptism is the initial profession of faith (which occurs once) and communion is the ongoing, continual, and repeated renewal of faith.  In fact, the Use and Means of Grace states that “admission to the sacrament is by invitation of the Lord, presented through the Church to those who are baptized,” without further explanation as to why it is only presented to the baptized.  The section goes on to explain that 

when an unbaptized person comes to the table seeking Christ’s presence and is inadvertently communed, neither that person nor the ministers of Communion need be ashamed. Rather, Christ’s gift of love and mercy to all is praised. That person is invited to learn the faith of the Church, be baptized, and thereafter faithfully receive Holy Communion. 

Therefore, we understand that it is by no means a sin nor will someone be damned by taking or administering communion before being baptized. 

According to Use and Means of Grace, the only other recommendation for communion is that a person properly prepare to receive the body and blood of Christ.  This preparation comes in the form of individual or corporate confession and forgiveness.  This practice comes from Paul’s request to the Corinthians to “examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup.”  In general practice, anyone receiving communion will have been a part of the confession and forgiveness at the beginning of the service.  Therefore, unbaptized persons should not be withheld from receiving communion because they have actively participated in the recommendation to properly prepare to receive the body and blood of Christ. 

Theologically speaking, the Church is not who invites people to the communion table.  It is “by invitation of the Lord” that any of us are able to receive Holy Communion.  It is only through God’s incredible saving mercy and grace that we are welcomed to share this meal with Christ.  God desires everyone to be a part of the Body of Christ, so if participation in the eucharist leads to baptism, then it cannot be working against God’s will.  

The Large Catechism, from which we glean much of our tradition, states that it is not our worthiness or unworthiness that makes the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ Jesus.  Luther goes on to state that 

Christ does not say “if you believe or if you are worthy, you have my body and blood,” but rather, “Take, eat and drink, this is my body and blood.”  Likewise, when he says “Do this” (namely, what I do now do, what I institute, what I give you and bid you take), this is as much as to say, “No matter whether you are worthy or unworthy, you have here his body and blood by the power of these words that are connected to the bread and wine.”

Luther points out that Christ says, “This is my body and blood, given for you” (his emphasis).  This means that no matter the person, Christ is addressing all people who hear these words and believe them to be true.  Luther claims that “the treasure is opened and placed at everyone’s door.”  In this way, we simply cannot limit Holy Communion to baptized people.   

We see from the Large Catechism that despite what practices are carried out voluntarily or involuntarily, we hold that “this blessed sacrament remain unimpaired and inviolate even if we use and handle it unworthily.”  We can go forward into new frontiers assured that the sacristy of Holy Communion is not affected by our own actions or differing practices.  

To move to more practical reasons why the verbal and written invitation to the Lord’s table should be inclusive, we will reposition ourselves into a missional mindset.  Practically speaking, in any given congregation, there is no way of telling who is and is not baptized when they approach the table.  We will not stop people from coming forward if they hunger and thirst for Christ.  In fact, Luther says that it is their privilege to come forward if and when they thirst. A friend served communion at their wedding and invited everyone to come forward.  A couple near the front of the church were atheist and Jewish, but were invited to the table as well.  That is a sign of the Holy Spirit working in wonderful, graceful ways through the Lord’s meal.  As many invitations now stand (stating that all baptized people are invited to the table), they could cause visitors, de-churched people, and unchurched people to feel ostracized during the sharing of the meal.  It can close off people from hearing the gospel when they realize that they are not invited to this wonderful meal.  We are representatives of Christ, and to many people, not being welcomed by the church translates to not being welcomed by Christ.  Paul argues that we should be mindful not to “cause our neighbors to stumble” (Romans 14:13-23; 1 Corinthians 8:13).  If an exclusive invitation to the Lord’s table causes people to stumble in their faith or growing faith, then it should be changed for the sake of the Gospel.  

There are two main reasons a person may be opposed to a more open invitation to communion.  The first is that the pastor must follow up with visitors on a regular, intentional basis and ask about things such as baptism.  To this, it should be said that visits are a part of the pastor’s vocation.  The pastor should be constantly reaching out to visitors and having faithful conversations with them regarding their beliefs and religious backgrounds.  

The second piece of opposition may be more serious.  People could argue that allowing anyone to come for communion will devalue or misconstrue the sanctity of the meal.  As previously stated, we do not cause or detract from the sacristy of the Lord’s meal.  It is God’s graciousness and mercy that makes the meal an expression of, not a prerequisite for, God’s grace.  Where people might get the wrong idea about what the eucharist means, we will emphasize that education must follow and continue throughout the lives of all congregants.  Preparation of the heart and mind is necessary for the true reception of Holy Communion.

We see from these arguments that there is no biblically or theologically grounded opposition that should keep churches from changing their invitation language to be more inclusive.  In fact, keeping in mind the theological implications and emphasis on hospitality, churches should be encouraged to change their verbal and written invitation to communion to an inclusive statement about “all people” being invited to the Lord’s table.  This change should occur with prayerful consideration of the context as well as an understanding that communing non baptized people should not be a regular practice, but a gateway to starting a conversation with visitors about baptism and communion.  Education outside of Sunday morning worship is especially necessary as we open the table to all people.  

Sources: 

Use and Means of Grace: A Statement on the Practice of Word and Sacrament, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, (Augsburg Fortress: Minneapolis, MN, 1997).

Kolb, Robert, Timothy J. Wenger, and Charles P. Arand. The Book of Concord: the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church: Large Catechism. (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2000), V. 

The Trinity & Why It is Important

The Trinity is arguably the most important piece of theology that we talk about in the church.  The doctrine of the Trinity is the starting place for all other theology.  The doctrine of the Trinity is inherently biblical, was developed through many years of reflection and theological debate, and is relevant insofar as it is our salvation.    

The doctrine of the Trinity is biblically based.  The correct and only non-heretical way to speak about God is to say that God is “the sovereign Lord of all creation who has done a new and gracious work in Jesus Christ and who continues to be active in the world through the power of the Spirit.”  This truth is revealed throughout the bible.  We know through the creation story of Genesis, the Old Testament, and the first chapter of the gospel according to John that God is the the God of all [human]kind (Jer 32:27).  Throughout the Old Testament, we hear that the God of Abraham is one God, the almighty and all-powerful God (Deut 6:4).  As Christians, we profess our faith in the God of Abraham, a singular God.  

However, the language of God becomes confused with the New Testament writers.  Paul is first to help us truly understand that there is “a new meaning of the word ‘God.’”  With the revelation of Jesus Christ and the presence of the Spirit, we now understand the proper name of God to be “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”  We hear in much of the New Testament that Jesus and God are one (John 1, 10:30; Phil 2:5-8; Col 1:15-17).  Scripture also reveals that the Spirit is Lord (2 Cor 3:17).  Although there is talk about the “two-ness” (Father and Jesus) and even “three-ness” (Father, Jesus, and Spirit) of God in the New Testament, it remains that “there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6).  It is through this and other biblical evidence that God is revealed as the Triune (three-in-one) God.  The doctrine of exactly how God is able to be three-in-one has been disputed for many centuries in order to come to a profession of faith that is slightly more understandable and non-heretical.

It did not take much time after the writing of the New Testament for early theologians to recognize the complicated traits and relationship of God.  Tertullian was the first to use the language of “substance” and “person,” arguing that the Father, Jesus, and Spirit (the persons) are distinct from one another in terms of their relationship to one another but are of the same substance.  Tertullian also taught that Son is subordinate to the Father, a teaching later rejected by the church.  

Arius’ teaching emphasized monotheism and wanted to protect God’s “one-ness” by teaching subordinationism: Jesus is a demigod or an angel.  Arius rejected the idea that Jesus was present as the Word when God created the universe (John 1).  

The work of Athanasius is where we see the most distinct beginnings of the Nicene Creed, which we profess today.  Athanasius taught that Christ was “eternally begotten” and not created, being of one substance with the Father.  Unlike his predecessors, Athanasius argued that Father and Son are homoousias, or of one substance, and not of a “like” substance as other theologians thought.  The Council of Nicaea adopted Athanasius’ teachings, but still needed to solve the issue of the Spirit.  

Following the Council of Nicaea, the Cappadocians developed the doctrine of the divinity of the Spirit and taught that God is “one being, three persons.”  The Council of Constantinople affirmed and elaborated on the teachings of the Cappadocians and the result was the Nicene Creed.  We profess a version of the Nicene creed in many churches every Sunday without much thought.  

Knowing that it took hundreds of years to come to a decision about the nature of the Triune God, we must recognize that something is “at stake in affirming that God is triune, that God is communicated to us in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit.”  In essence, we acknowledge that we worship a Triune God, but what does this mean for our faith?  It means a great deal about our faith.  What we “claim about God impacts the way we think about our relationship to divine life and to each other.”  

It is only through belief in the Triune God that we have hope in salvation.  It is through the monotheistic God of the Old Testament that Judaism claims salvation.  We, too, share in that salvation because of God’s work in Christ Jesus and the continuing work of God through the power of the Spirit.  God made the promise to Abraham in Genesis 12 and 17 that God would bless all the nations of the earth through the offspring of Abraham.  We are told in Romans 11 that Gentiles, thus we, are grafted into this promise through Jesus Christ.  We know that in Christ Jesus there is no longer a distinction between the people to whom salvation belongs (Gal 3:28).  If God and Jesus are not one being, then this grafting of Gentiles into the promise makes no logical sense.  It is only “through our Lord Jesus Christ” that we are to “obtain salvation” (1 Thess 5:9).  

Moreover, it is the overflowing love that joins and unites the Trinity into one being that brings salvation to the world.  God, in God’s very nature as the Triune God, is communal and relational.  God is the perfect example of communion and mutual indwelling that is found nowhere in creation.  Each person of the Trinity is completely of the same substance and completely distinct from each other person.  

God created humanity and all of creation to be in communion with all the rest of creation and with God.  Because of the Fall, creation is no longer in complete communion with God.  It is God’s inherent desire, as a relational God, to be in communion with creation and thus demonstrated God’s self-giving love in the person of Christ Jesus on the cross.  Our salvation is the very essence of God’s triune and relational nature.  We find that in the Trinity there is “difference without division, self-giving without self-loss, and eternal life in ceaseless harmony and peace.”

Our only hope is in the Lord of all creation, the God that promised to Abraham blessing for the entire world.  It is through God’s fulfillment of God’s promise in Jesus Christ and the continuing work of God through the power of the Holy Spirit that we are able to witness the incredibly self-giving love that defines the Triune God.  It is only through our belief in this Triune God that any other doctrine or theology is grounded.        

                  

Sources: 

Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publihsing Co., 2004), 66. 

N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publihsing Co., 1997), 67. 

Dr. Daniel Bell, “Doctrine of God: The Trinity” lecture, Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary of Lenoir-Rhyne University, September 22, 2014.

Kathleen A. Cahalan, Introducing the Practice of Ministry (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2010), 156. 

Some thoughts on the new F-word

A lot of people will say "a lot has happened in the way of feminism in recent years." And I agree. From birth control to voting rights, it seems that we are moving the right direction. In truth, it seems that we are moving in a very Kingdom of God or "God-ordained" direction when in comes to issues of equality. 

My fear is that our "pats on the back" for "coming this far" will keep us from continuing to move forward in progress. And in some cases because some change has seemed so rapid to many folks, we are in danger of "back-sliding" in progress as some of my religious friends might say. 

And to be fair, the change- the progress- looks different everywhere and it would be ignorant for me to prescribe the "next steps" of equality to every nation or group of people (even if I really really want to). 

Progress in women's rights and equality in Malaysia looks vastly different from progress in women's rights in the United States. Because of different histories and contexts, this is true everywhere- it looks different. 

So when I talk about change, I'm talking about the United States. And honestly what I would like to see for my daughters and nieces and granddaughters is not even that radical. (I'd like to also see it for myself but I'm not that idealistic.) 

But I am afraid that because "feminism" has turned into "the new f-word" and talking about "equality or equity" has turned into "asking for handouts," we will neglect progressing further in terms of feminism. Women don't want to talk about it for fear of being labeled "one of those women" and men don't want to talk about it for fear of being called a "pussy" or worse. And I get it. It's not a pretty subject. But sometimes when I mirror is placed in front of us, we would rather just break the mirror because we don't like the reflection we see or it makes us uncomfortable. 

Even I sometimes struggle with expressing my feminist self in a way that is helpful. I don't want to hurt my husband. Or my dad. Or my pastor. Or you know, all those men who aren't "those kinds of men." But the conversation has to keep going. We can't stop talking about equality just because we have "gotten really far" in recent years. 

And here's why: For some reason there's (still) this notion in the United States, and likely elsewhere, that we shouldn't actively teach our sons and husbands and uncles and brothers to respect women and their rights as human beings (aka dismantle patriarchy). We must instead teach our daughters how to defend themselves, keep from being assaulted, how to not "piss off" their male colleagues, and even how to not get raped. (Seriously- Google "how to not get raped/assaulted" and you'll find all these ways for women to protect themselves.) For some reason the responsibility of protecting women falls only on the woman herself and not also on men. 

I'm not saying that I'm not thankful for inventions like nail polish that turns colors when your drink is drugged. I'm not saying I'm not thankful for gyms and colleges who offer self-defense classes especially for women. I'm not saying I'm not thankful for inventions like rape whistles or tracking apps for your friends. I am certainly thankful for these inventions, innovations, and priorities and I am confident they have helped women all over the world stay protected. 

My issue (my deep deep sorrow) is that we (still) NEED devices and classes such as these. My deep deep sorrow is that the world (aye, the United States) is still such a dangerous place for women. Not only physically, but mentally and emotionally as well. 

My deep want and vision for the future is not a complicated one. I would like to send my daughter to college without pepper spray, and with the confidence that if she is assaulted, her university will not somehow punish her for speaking out against her attacker. I would like my son to have the opportunity to express his emotions in healthy ways without being called a "pussy" or "bitch." I would like my niece to be able to walk down the street confidently without side stepping cat-callers. I would like people to sincerely believe that men are as capable nurturing children as women. I would love to hear about relationships in terms of "outdoing one another in love" instead of "who wears the pants." 

But because these conversations are halted, because we continue to place the responsibility of safety and equality on the women (what she was wearing, how much she drank, if she was alone, if she destroyed chivalry by being independent, etc.), instead of insisting that we teach our sons a better way of living... Progress won't happen. The situation won't get better for our daughters. And indeed, it is harmful to our sons as well. 

So by all means, let us teach our daughters how to be strong, independent, loving, responsible human beings. But let us also teach our sons, our husbands, our co-workers, and brothers to not just "not assault women" but to be an active part in the dismantling of patriarchy and all the lies it tells our children. 

Luther's Argument for Universal Salvation

Erasmus of Rotterdam was a Dutch Renaissance humanist, Catholic priest, theologian, and public critic of Martin Luther.  Thus, it is noted that Erasmus’ perspective on the freedom (or bondage) of the will comes from his humanist and enlightenment views.  While Erasmus began as a follower of Luther and wrote reform papers alongside him, he became distressed when the reforms were taken “too far.”  In order to distance himself from Luther, while still holding true to the reform efforts, Erasmus chose to write against some of Luther’s teachings on free will.  Erasmus considered his writing to be “thoroughly irenic [in] spirit, with no intention of attacking Luther personally.”   Luther’s general response to Erasmus’ claims are incendiary and ultimately assert that Erasmus himself is not a Christian if he believes what he wrote.  Luther (in his glorious wit) writes that he “felt profoundly sorry for [Erasmus], defiling as [he was his] very elegant and ingenious style with such trash.”  This conclusion is rightfully forceful, because Luther claims that the argument is a matter of salvation (as we will discuss further in this essay).  Luther’s ultimate goal is to help his opponent and all people better understand the truth.  

Luther begins his reply to Erasmus by stating the importance of doctrine.  Religion is not a mere matter of opinion: God has revealed God’s truth through scripture, thus scripture defines the parameters for that which we can believe.  Erasmus relies too much on human reason and not enough on what scripture so clearly states.  One of the mottos of the Reformation is sola scriptura, so it follows that Luther defends the relevance and ultimate authority of scripture.  Secondly, Luther focuses on Erasmus’ exegesis of scripture.  Erasmus is focused on man-centered exegesis (humanism), while Luther is focused on a theocentric interpretation of scripture.  Luther asserts that Erasmus lacks spirituality and the work of God, saying “Christianity as you describe it includes this among other things: that we should strive with all our might.... These words of yours, devoid of Christ, devoid of the Spirit, are colder than ice, so that they ever tarnish the beauty of your eloquence.”  Erasmus is too wishy-washy or accommodating according to Luther.  The doctrine of free will is not a matter to take lightly: “What I am after is to me something serious, necessary, and indeed eternal, something of such a kind and such importance that it ought to be asserted and defended to the death.”  What we say about free will and salvation also says much about God.  Salvation is at stake in this argument according to Luther.  

If the thread of Luther’s argument on free will (or against it) follows through, there is a fine argument for universal salvation.  If there is no human action required in the salvation of a human and it occurs only through God’s action, God who desires all of creation to be reconciled to Godself denies no one the Spirit and denies no one salvation.  This issue of salvation is one that is alive and well today.  If we consider the view of Erasmus, God is a God of picking and choosing arbitrarily and cruelly who is saved and who is “left out.”  We believe in a God of mercy, a God who gave God’s only son to die on the cross to save us from eternal death and damnation.  We believe in a theology of abundance: God has more and gives more than we could ever want or need.  Salvation is not limited to those who are given the Spirit or those we choose to do good works.  Salvation is given freely from God to all people.  As such, we, who have already come to realize and understand God’s salvation, are called to extend that saving message to our brothers and sisters.  

Free will, according to Luther, is not free will at all.  There is no such thing.  In the Fall, all of humanity fell under the power of satan.  People had no ability to choose between good and evil - we were in bondage to sin.  We could not be freed from this bondage by our own actions.  Paul is very clear in stating that even the commandments set forth by God are not capable of bringing us into right relationship with God.  Salvation comes not from anything we are able to do.  We are completely fallen and unable to be redeemed without God’s action.  God desires that all of creation be reconciled to Godself and according to Luther, that reconciliation is what happened in Christ’s death.  After the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus, God’s people were freed from sin’s bondage.   We are no longer bound to death and the devil.  Therefore, in the triumph over death, sin, and the devil, all are redeemed through Christ’s faithfulness.  All of creation is reconciled to God, justified and made in right relationship with God.  If we believe in God who is faithful and merciful, one who extends salvific grace freely, we must understand God to extend that grace to all, not just those who accept God’s grace.  

Luther argues, there is no choice between good and evil, but only the freedom to respond to God’s providence in all that we do.  Therefore it is not a matter of if we are saved by God’s grace (we are), but what we do in response to it.  There are people in this world that have not come to know God’s mercy and life-giving salvation yet.  These people maybe have not heard the saving message, felt the freedom of grace, or their hearts have been hardened for unknown reasons.  However, this does not contradict the fact that they (as all people) are already redeemed through the saving act of Christ Jesus.  They have simply not come to know or understand their salvation.  They will eventually (either in this life or in the next) come to know and understand God’s immense love for them.  On the other hand, there are people who have come to know the good news of Christ and are able to live into (and in response to) God’s mercy and salvation in this life.  People who know and believe in their salvation from Christ in this world are called to proclaim that salvation to all of creation.  We have the privilege of sharing God’s salvific love and mercy with people who have already received it but have not yet realized it.  We are enabled by the Holy Spirit to share the gospel and the Holy Spirit works in the hearts of people in order to bring them to realization.  

A biblical example of this witness is the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch.  Although the eunuch was reading scripture before Philip arrived, it was not until the Spirit worked through Philip and he began to teach and help the eunuch understand that he was called to be baptized and called into the ministry of the Kingdom of God to proclaim the good news to the rest of the world. The Holy Spirit worked through someone who already knew the story in order to help another realize the redeeming love of God.  It is in baptism that we are called into participation with the Holy Spirit and the Kingdom of God.  Baptism is the outward, explicit example of God’s goodness and abundant mercy.  It is a gift given by God so that we might come to know God’s work in our lives.  Because we (those of us who know the grace of God) are called to participate in the Kingdom of God by sharing the good news of Christ Jesus so that others might participate in the Kingdom of God through the Holy Spirit. 

This type of evangelism must keep in mind that people who know God’s goodness are no better or different than people who do not yet know God’s grace.  All people are saved through God’s grace in Christ Jesus.  All of creation is reconciled to Godself through God’s redeeming power.  This means that evangelism is not about “saving souls” or “winning people for God.”  God has already done the work of salvation.  As Luther argues, human beings can do nothing to gain salvation, it is the action of God.  Therefore, evangelism should be carried out only in order to invite people into participation with the Kingdom - without expectation and without condemnation.  If evangelism was carried out in this way, the Church today would look much closer to the Kingdom of God: a loving, reconciling community of people who believe and trust in the saving work of God through Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit. 

All of this is to say that if we follow Luther’s logic to the end (God’s grace and salvation come from God alone and not from any action on our part), we must recognize that all of creation is already redeemed through Christ Jesus.  With this knowledge, we go out as humbled servants of the Lord to proclaim Christ to the world so that others may come to realize their own salvation and participate (out of freedom) in the Kingdom of God. 

Sources: 

Philip S. Watson (ed.), Luther’s Works vol. 33, “Career of the Reformer III”, The Bondage of the Will, (Fortress Press: Philadelphia, PA).

Carl R Braaten, Principles of Lutheran Theology, (Fortress Press: Minneapolis, MN).

The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Edited by Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000. (Large Catechism). 

Eric W. Gritsch and Robert W. Jenson, Lutheranism: The Theological Movement and Its Confessional Writings, (Fortress Press: Philadelphia, PA).

Dr. Daniel Bell, “Lecture 5C: Providence,” Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary, 2014.  

Acts 8:26-40

Our Visit to the National Mosque

Last week we went to the National Mosque in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. And let me tell you, I learned a lot. I wanted to share some of the things I learned and how my heart has been changed this year, because I know not everyone has a chance to live in a beautiful country like this one and I understand some people don't feel comfortable asking potentially offensive questions about our Muslim sisters and brothers.

Wait back up- you voluntarily went to a mosque?

Islam has an incredibly obvious influence on Malaysia's culture, people, architecture, and basically every other part of Malaysia. We wanted to not only see this incredible landmark, but we hoped to learn a little more about what makes Malaysia so unique and beautiful. We also couldn't pass up this opportunity to learn more about our sisters and brothers. 

Did you have to wear one of those things on your head? 

People who enter mosques, whether they are Muslim or tourists, are expected to respect and observe the modesty enforced by the religion. Knowing this, I gladly ventured to the mosque in a long skirt and long sleeves, carrying a scarf to cover my head when we arrived. Daniel and his brother wore long pants and shirts with sleeves as is expected of them. We also took off our shoes, as we were instructed, before entering the main area of the mosque. 

Didn't you feel oppressed, having to cover your head like that? 

I have become fairly used to dressing modestly here in Malaysia. My experience as a pastor this year has also changed my view on modesty - especially as it pertains to my religious beliefs and piety. It is beautifully expressed in the pamphlet I picked up inside the mosque: 

"Women are not here to be displayed. Her body is not for public consumption. She will not be an advertisement tool. She has a soul, a mind, and she is the servant of Allah. Her worth is defined by the beauty of her soul, her heart, her moral character. With her headscarf she put her faith on display rather than her beauty. Her submission is not to fashion, nor to men, but to the Creator." (Read the rest of the pamphlet here.) 

It seems that Islam has a better view of women than many Christian churches I have encountered (sorry 'bout it).

Hijaab (modest dress) is not only to cover nudity, to protect, and to decorate, but it is the spiritual clothing of "piety," similar to the way a nun or monk might wear a habit or hood. It is a symbol of her identity as a Muslim, in the same way my collar identifies me as a pastor.

Right, but Daniel didn't have to cover his head. 

Men are also expected to observe a certain dress code within Islam. For both genders, clothes are to be modest and humble (loose, not transparent, nothing showy). Men are expected to be covered from their navel to their knees.

So people were nice to you? They didn't kick you out since you're Americans?

All the people we encountered were not only super welcoming, but they seemed genuinely interested in answering our questions. We weren't entirely sure what to expect, but they told us about the main prayer room and made sure we knew we could pick up informational pamphlets. They pamphlets (very obviously directed toward tourists) were written in several languages including English, Spanish, Mandarin, Portuguese, Italian, and German. I picked up the ones that seemed most interesting (read: things I knew nothing about) like "Hijaab" (mentioned above), "The Shariah," "How does a lady raised in Alabama become a Muslim?" and "Jihad."

So what else did you learn? 

Jihad is the duty of Muslims to struggle for peace, justice and truth. The pamphlet says "fighting tyranny, corruption, exploitation, occupation and oppression is jihad."

The forceful, defensive parts of the pamphlets made me sad that they even needed to include them. But it must be said more often that "to say Muslim terrorists represent Islam is like saying the Ku Klux Klan represents Christianity." The pamphlet that explains Shariah says that the majority (about 70%) deals with rituals of worship, about 25% deals with personal laws (like dietary regulations), and only 5% are penal laws for "crimes which are most destructive for society and the family, like murder, adultery and theft."

In truth, there was nothing to be afraid of or even nervous about, walking into that mosque. And there is nothing to be afraid of when it comes to Islam. We have a lot in common with our Muslim sisters and brothers - even if we aren't able to see it right away (there may be a crazy comparative theology blog post coming soon).

I certainly understand people's hesitation or fear (whichever it might be) when it comes to the public displays of devotion and piety of Islam. Before moving to Malaysia, I didn't see many people in hijaab in my daily life. I never walked into a mosque before last week. But I have come to understand that our fear is mostly caused by the unknown. When we begin to learn about those who are seemingly unlike us, we can start to see common ground and understand one another.

It's my prayer that my fear of the unknown will always be overshadowed by my love for God's children and my desire for understanding. It is my prayer for you, my friends and family, as well. I know it's not easy, but it starts with small steps - like taking off our shoes (sometimes covering our heads) and stepping into the holy unknown.

A Terrifyingly Beautiful Call

(Sermon at Luther House Chapel on April 10, 2016 - John 21:1-19)

Last year when I was working in a church, I was approached by a parishioner after preaching. He said, "Sarah, you should really stop starting your sermons with 'I love this story of Jesus.' Surely you don't love every story of Jesus. And anyway, you use the same beginning for every sermon."

At the time, I smiled sweetly and said, "Oh but I do love every story of Jesus. There is not a single story of Jesus and his disciples that does not bring me great joy. I love them. And I love telling them! But you're right - I should probably stop repeating myself."

And I do. I love every story of Jesus - but I understand his point. Sometimes saying I love every story of Jesus doesn't quite do every story justice. Take this story, for instance - I do love this story of Jesus and his disciples. The imagery is rich, Jesus nourished his friends - it is a beautiful scene. But I don't just love this story - this passage actually terrifies me.

Like the disciples, we really have no idea what we are getting ourselves into when we encounter God incarnate in Christ Jesus. We encounter God - or rather God comes crashing into our life - and suddenly things are turned upside down and inside out. It's terrifying.

My husband calls these "mountain-top experiences." And I would guess that many of you have had these experiences throughout your life. It could be while you are on a mission trip, it could be the moment you hold your newborn baby in your arms for the first time, it might be in the midst of great pain and sorrow... You can have these experiences throughout your entire life - in fact, for some of us, it is what brought us to church in the first place.

One of my mountain-top experiences happened in the Central American country of Honduras, literally on the side of a mountain in a small village.

It is the kind of experience that makes God feel so close. Suddenly and beautifully you know that you're walking on holy ground and the existence of God and the love of Christ are undeniable. And somehow, in some way, you know your whole life has changed. You know your identity has shifted and your goals and your mission in life are new and more important.

All of that happened to me on that side of the mountain in Honduras - everything change and all of a sudden I knew I wanted to do international mission work. I knew I wanted to travel the world and meet new people and fall in love with all of God's creation. I was so ready for the next adventure, I wanted to change my plans and change my life to go where God was leading me.

But ten days later, I was back in the United States and I decided not to quit seminary, I decided not to immediately become a missionary. I began classes again and I started work once more. And as I entered the usual drudgery of providing for myself and thinking of my own needs, I slowly forgot about all those powerful moments on the side of that mountain. The fire that had been blazing in Honduras started to diminish until it was just embers.

That's exactly where we meet the disciples in the passage this morning. They had been following Jesus for nearly three years - surely having mountain-top moments on a daily basis as Jesus healed people around him and taught them about scripture. Their lives had been changed, their hearts had been renewed and shifted in these moments. There was a fire lit in their hearts that was roaring for the mission that Christ had given them.

But then Jesus died, and the fire faded - they became scared and worried that maybe they couldn't live out this mission for Jesus. And then they witnessed him resurrected - another beautifully terrifying mountain-top experience.  But then he was gone again, and they were left with this mission that seemed too hard and too crazy.

And isn't that exactly where we are today? Two weeks ago, we came to church early (early early) and greeted one another with joy and thanksgiving that our redeemer lives! And we shouted "hallelujah!" And we sang songs and hymns with more energy than we should be able to muster at 6:30am.

And now, only a few weeks later we can barely drag ourselves out of bed to make it to church. We have forgotten that it is still Easter and we should still be shouting "hallelujah!" We have forgotten that Christ lives.

So the disciples are coming down off of all these mountain-top experiences and they know deep within their bones that everything has changed. They themselves have been changed but they are lost and they don't know where to go from here.

So they decided to go back to what they knew before Jesus had entered their lives and completely changed them. But if I know anything, it is that once Jesus enters your life, there is no going back to the way things used to be. You can try, but it will not be the same. So they went fishing. The disciples went back to the everyday drudgery of life. They did what they needed to do to provide for themselves and their families.

But I imagine that the reason they didn't catch any fish might be because they could feel that uneasiness, the restlessness, knowing everything had changed and that fishing was not what they were supposed to be doing. I imagine they felt something similar to what I felt when I came back from Honduras - I was restless and unsatisfied with life. Nothing seemed to be quite right because I tried so hard to go back to my old ways of living - before Jesus had come so close to me on that mountain.

And Jesus, as loving and persistent as he is, and wanting to make sure his disciples completely "get it" before he leaves them, he comes back and reminds them again. He reminds them who he is and what his mission is. He reminds them of whose they are and what their mission is.

And this is the terrifyingly beautiful part - Jesus doesn't just leave the disciples with a new job or a check list of things they need to get done as his disciples. He says, "feed my lambs, provide for my lambs, feed my sheep." He commands them to become shepherds. And if you know anything about being a shepherd, you know that "shepherd" is not a job title, it is an identity.

You can't take your "shepherd hat" on and off as you please. You cannot go out to the fields and throw food out to the sheep and lambs twice a day and call yourself a shepherd. Being a shepherd is 100% effort, 100% of the time. It is our new identity, it is our new mission and our new life. That is what it means to be a disciples of Christ.

Following Jesus is not easy and it is certainly not a list of things that we can check off our to do list every day. And that's why this passage is so terrifying to me. That is why mountain-top experiences are so terrifying and beautiful - because when God comes so close that we can no longer deny God,  we are in for real change. Our lives are no longer about taking care of ourselves. All of a sudden we are given all of these sheep in the form of our brothers and sisters in this world - our loved ones, our friends, our enemies, people in foreign lands we have never met - for whom we are called to lay down our lives. Just as Jesus laid down his life for all.

So this morning and throughout this season I pray that we take these mountain-top experiences, these moments when God comes so close that we suddenly feel changed and re-created, and we do not back away. When Jesus call us to feed his sheep and follow him, I pray that we understand the terrifyingly beautiful call to be his disciples and accept it - empowered by the Holy Spirit and renewed by the promise of our risen Christ and of the coming Kingdom. Amen.

Humanity, God, & Sin

There have been several conversations among the members of our church concerning humanity and sin.  While some sinful people are excused as “only human,” others are dismissed as “pure evil.”  These statements are theological in that they are very real statements about God’s creation, the purpose of humanity, and the nature of sin and salvation.  Our theology on these matters is important because it is related to how we understand salvation and ultimately related to our own salvation.    

We see from the very beginning of the creation story and creation stories throughout the scripture that God created all things (John 1:3) and everything that comes from God is good (Genesis 1).  Therefore, all of creation is created good.  God did not create evil, nor did God create humanity to be anything less than “ very good” (Genesis 1:31).  God is pure goodness and humanity is good in association and relationship with the Creator.  Because there is nothing in the world that God did not create (thus nothing in the world was created bad), there is nothing in the world that is pure evil.  If everything is good, nothingness is evil.  It is impossible for creatures to be so consumed by evil that they diminish into nothingness.   To say that something is “pure evil” is simply untrue.  This is not to say, however, that there is no evil in the world.  Sin causes evil, but sin was not created by God because God created all things - especially humanity - as good.  The goodness of creation and the goodness of humanity is innately related to the purpose of humanity.       

We see from the Genesis story that God created humanity to be in full communion with divinity.  Before the Fall, God was in such full communion that God walked in the garden with Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:8).  Creation was created by God as an act of outpouring love so that creation might be in relationship with one another and with God.  It is impossible to deny the fact that God created humanity to be relational with the divine.  The very Trinitarian nature of God is relational.  The truly human are the ones who are caught up in the Trinitarian relationship with the divine.  The theologian Augustine said that “our hearts are restless until they rest in God.”  It was through the Fall that relationships were corrupted and divided.  The Fall, original sin, and evil were not supposed to happen.  God did not create humanity to be separated and constantly longing for God.  Fundamentally social, we were created to be in communion with God, the rest of creation, and other human beings.  In fact, we see that the only thing “not good” about the creation story was that the first human being was without a companion (Genesis 2:8).  We know that through sin and death, there is separation from God that is not natural and not indicative of our created human nature.   

So the question remains: where does evil come from if it was not a part of creation?  Sin and the Fall are a complete surd.  There is no explanation for why the first human beings would turn away from God and toward themselves.  God created everything for humanity and offered everything, including full communion, to humanity, and humanity turned away.  The Fall put humanity in bondage to sin.  The entire world is enslaved by sin and we cannot change this enslavement by simply trying to become better.  We have fallen and it is impossible for us to be redeemed and turn back to God without God’s redeeming power.  But God, being so merciful and completely loving, longs for humanity to be in communion with God.  In the same way, creation continues “its groaning, and its longing to be renewed and perfected.”  Thus God became incarnate in the person of Christ Jesus in order to redeem creation to its original intent.

It is only through Christ that humanity and all of creation might become reconciled to God’s self once again.  Church doctrine claims that Jesus is the perfect human being.  If sin were a natural part of humanity, then Jesus would have to be a sinner in order to be the perfect human being.  On the contrary, Jesus does not sin.  Through this doctrinal statement, we realize that to be perfectly human is to be perfectly in communion with God.  To be perfectly human is to be without evil and without the sin that separates us from our Creator.  Jesus is “God’s proclamation, revealing who we are not and who God created us to be.”  What we think of creation and sin is directly related to how we understand salvation.      

Salvation is to “become partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4).  Our salvation is not the abandonment of our humanity, but the chance for us to become truly human by participating in communion with God through Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit.  Through the life, death, and resurrection of Christ Jesus, all of creation has been released from the bondage of sin.  Salvation is the chance for us to be exactly as God created us to be: in full communion with the divine.  Humanity is now completely free to turn toward God.  Theologians such as Athanasius described salvation as God becoming “human that humanity might become divine.”  It is our humanity that longs to be in communion with God.  As the Westminster Confession states, the “chief end of humanity is to worship and enjoy God forever.”  

Saying that a person is “just human” is to say that she or he is longing to be in communion with God.  To say that a person is “purely human” would mean that the person is in full communion with God, the way God intended she or he to be from the beginning of creation.  Statements such as these are indicative of our core beliefs about creation, humanity, and the nature of salvation.  Thus, it is important that we understand and portray such theology adequately.

Sources: 

Dr. Daniel Bell, “Creator, Creation, and Communion” lecture, Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary of Lenoir-Rhyne University, September 29, 2014.

Dr. Daniel Bell, “Sin, Death, and the Devil” lecture, Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary of Lenoir-Rhyne University, October 6, 2014.

Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publihsing Co., 2004). 

Jann E. Boyd Fullenwieder, “Proclamation: Mercy for the World,” in Inside Out: Worship in an Age of Mission, ed. Thomas H. Schattenauer (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999).