00:00:03.920 - 00:00:25.120

Welcome back to our second session. And before we get started, will we all stand and sing the doxology that we ended with, and we'll begin with a nice transition. And with that, we'll introduce our speaker, and Dr. Eugene March will come out and give us a talk with the doxology first.

00:00:33.040 - 00:01:30.160

Praise God. Please be seated. As you heard this morning, here and hopefully you will understand, prominent dates were given, dates like 735 and 701 and And keeping with that historical context, I wanted to throw out a little bit more dates here for you.

00:01:33.360 - 00:02:06.560

February 15, or 215, as we would say. Yes, it's the day after Valentine, but I want to trace this day across history and across time and bring you up to speed on what 2006, February 15, is all about. So I want to take you across time. First, BC 399, February 15th, Socrates is sentenced to death for giving an alternative view.

00:02:07.920 - 00:02:27.760

The same date, 1564, Galileo is born in Pisa. 1637, Fernando III becomes Holy Roman Emperor. 1764, the city of St. Louis, Missouri, is established.

00:02:29.160 - 00:02:38.320

1820, Susan B. Anthony is born. 1862, American Civil War. General Ulysses S.

00:02:38.320 - 00:02:58.240

Grant attacks Fort Donaldson. And there's a real Donaldson in our seminary in our Miss, and I wonder if that Donaldson belongs to him as well, too. 1879, President Hayes signs a bill towards allowing female attorneys to argue cases before the Supreme Court.

00:02:59.600 - 00:03:32.480

1902, Rose and Morris Mictim, 2 struggling Jewish immigrants living in Brooklyn, introduce the first teddy bear. 1906, the British Labour Party is organized, and in 2006, At Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, it is the Gene March day. That's pretty cool.

00:03:34.080 - 00:03:56.880

He's the only Old Testament scholar that I know that has a whole day for himself. Gene March is the A.B. Rose Professor Emeritus of Old Testament at Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. He has degrees from Alston College, from Alston Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and Union Theological Seminary in New York City.

00:03:57.440 - 00:04:28.160

Just as a footnote, he studied with Milenberg and finished with Samuel Terrin, and also with the great Abraham Joshua Heschel. Now, if you know anything about Heschel's work, you can actually hear a lot of Heschel in Jean, hence the Jewish concern. Romans 9 to 11, it's right there in his talk, that prophetic voice. I see him as a doctor of the church, serving the academy and the church for the past 40 years.

00:04:28.960 - 00:04:40.240

That is no simple feat. That is an accomplishment. In 2001, I have a quote for you that he interestingly put together. This is what he said.

00:04:41.280 - 00:05:17.920

The question folk should ask is not whether humans have more than one way to God. It is rather, does God have more than one way to humans? Good reformed Christians can only answer the latter question by saying, the sovereign God may do whatever the sovereign God desires. Earlier this morning, January 30th, 2007, loosely paraphrasing it, perhaps I'm taking it out of context, religious pluralism

00:05:18.480 - 00:05:32.080

is not an enemy. This afternoon's lecture is entitled Difficult Texts in Difficult Times. Would you all Welcome the Reverend Dr.

00:05:32.800 - 00:06:12.690

Gene March, Professor Emeritus. I wasn't sure where he was going with that February 15. I don't want to go with Socrates on that one. This afternoon, I am going to address the issue of difficult texts in difficult times.

00:06:13.520 - 00:07:01.600

And I'm going to try to consider 3 passages that pose problems for anyone who's trying to articulate the good news of a God whom we believe has demonstrated himself in the incarnation of love in Jesus of Nazareth. In my first lecture, I tried to establish that for many reasons, but particularly because of the tremendous increase in the diversity of the religious climate, that the context in which we work is changed. A new approach is in order, a new sensitivity, and a reconsideration of fundamental documents is called for.

00:07:04.080 - 00:07:49.920

In his award-winning book, The Dignity of Difference, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks wrote, Every great faith has within it harsh texts, which read literally, can be taken to endorse narrow particularism, suspicion of strangers, and intolerance toward those who believe differently than we do. Every great faith also has within it Sources that emphasize kinship with the stranger, empathy with the outsider, the courage that leads people to extend a hand across boundaries of estrangement or hostility.

00:07:51.520 - 00:08:08.560

The choice is ours. Will the generous texts of our traditions serve as interpretive keys to the rest? Or will the abrasive passages determine our ideas of what we are and what we're called to do.

00:08:11.840 - 00:08:45.200

For those of us who are in the business of interpreting the sacred text of our traditions, it seems to me it becomes imperative to choose generous texts, generous texts to inform our constituency in this particular moment in history. That does not mean that we should or even can adequately deny our particularity. And that's what was some of what was at stake in the last lecture before lunch.

00:08:46.000 - 00:08:58.800

Particularity is not bad. My very first effort at ever being doing interfaith dialogue at the national level A Jewish philosopher stopped me in mid-sentence. He didn't know me yet.

00:08:58.800 - 00:09:11.040

We became good friends, but he didn't know me at that point, Michael Wishagrod. He stopped me. We had name tags out here, so we knew names. He stopped me in the middle and said, Gene, are you trying to tell me that Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior?

00:09:13.760 - 00:09:22.480

Yeah, I guess I am. He said, just say it. I can handle it. we don't avoid our particularity.

00:09:22.480 - 00:09:42.680

We mustn't avoid our particularity. But how we articulate our particularity is another issue. And that's part of what we're going to be talking about. At times, the harsh particularities of our faith, as that of others, has to be acknowledged.

00:09:43.360 - 00:10:13.520

We just have to admit it, yes. But Having said that, we also must look, I believe, for that other message that is embedded below even the harshest of our texts, a message of divine love that extends throughout the world. As leaders informed by a great deal more knowledge of our sacred texts than many in our congregations, though not all,

00:10:14.400 - 00:10:28.800

We owe more to our people than the somewhat simplistic answers that have far too long been advanced in the name of religious authority. You believe this? Because I said so. None of you get away with that.

00:10:30.720 - 00:10:57.920

Our contexts challenge us to lead the way into a deeper appreciation of the implicit and often explicit inclusiveness of God's way perceived in the biblical traditions. I've made an effort at starting that, as far as I'm concerned, in my little book called The Wide, Wide Circle of Divine Love. I hope you'll read it if you haven't. It's just the beginning.

00:10:59.200 - 00:11:38.880

In this lecture, I intend to explore a few of those biblical passages that may be reckoned among the harsh texts of the Bible, to see how contextual interpretation may lead to a reconsideration of the intention of these passages. I do so with the deep conviction that Jesus Christ is in Himself the most generous of all texts. and that His desire is that we find His truth, an inclusive, not exclusive truth, as we ponder the riches of our tradition.

00:11:39.320 - 00:12:25.440

Let's begin by looking at another text from Isaiah as remembered in Mark and attributed to Jesus. In response to a question that is from His disciples concerning His use of parables, Jesus says, according to Mark, to you it has been given the secret of the kingdom, but for those outside, everything comes in parables in order that they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand, so that they may not turn and be forgiven. The other two synoptic gospels make similar use of these words from Isaiah.

00:12:26.240 - 00:12:59.680

The primary aim seems to have been to assure Jesus's small band of followers that they were right to believe in him. Other Jews might not respond, after all, so it had been in Isaiah's day, but Jesus' disciples were on target. In Acts, Luke goes a bit farther in interpreting Jesus' words, Jesus' use of Isaiah's words, by quoting them in support of a dramatic declaration right at the end of the book.

00:13:00.480 - 00:13:26.800

Let it be known to you, then, that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles. They will listen. And John, in his gospel, concludes his review of Jesus' public ministry. using Isaiah's words to explain why the majority of the people had not responded to all the many signs Jesus had done in their midst.

00:13:27.920 - 00:14:07.760

But then he adds, many, many, even of the authorities, believed in Him. But because of the Pharisees, they did not confess it for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue. for they loved human glory more than the glory that comes from God. While both Acts and John reflect the growing tension within the Jewish community of the 1st century between Jews who did follow Jesus and Jews who did not, neither explicitly says that all Jews are rejected by God.

00:14:09.040 - 00:14:59.040

Paul had earlier vigorously denied such a conclusion in Romans, but in subsequent Christian interpretation, several centuries later, such a conclusion was reached and defended repeatedly for nearly 2,000 years. The rejection of Jews as a people became an unquestioned premise for millions of Christians The language of Christ killer, deicide race, the teaching of contempt, all became accepted ways to talk about Jews. In light of this current context,

00:15:00.000 - 00:15:25.280

Diversity and pluralism are pressing issues. How shall I interpret, then, this tradition associated with Isaiah and Jesus? I think it's critical for me and us to remember the historical events, the historical context in which these texts were first written. Jewish Christians, Christian Jews, Gentile Christians, perhaps some Gentile Jews, God-fearers,

00:15:26.240 - 00:15:55.840

were all actively engaged in seeking to live out God's way, but all constituted very small minorities, as I said earlier. They were more concerned about their own relationship with God rather than the relationship others might enjoy. The question was, does God love us? The question was not, has God rejected them?

00:15:57.920 - 00:16:20.080

In the Gospels, even in John, it is clear that the issue was that some Jews, particularly some of the leaders, had rejected Jesus. Their eyes and hearts were not open to His call. John is the most explicit on this point, but John does not suggest that God had rejected all Jews. After all, of Jesus' disciples were Jews.

00:16:20.720 - 00:16:58.640

Even when Luke announced that God's salvation was being sent to Gentile to those not originally understood as God's as part of God's people by the Jews. Though the stories of Noah and Abraham suggest otherwise, Luke did not declare that God's love was thereby removed from the Jews. God's salvation is large enough, at least in the biblical story, to extend to the whole human family, to Jews and Gentiles. Reflecting upon our human history, it seems that people

00:16:59.920 - 00:17:29.680

need or at least like to have enemies. The early Christians were not an exception to this rule. These passages were used early on in our movement against some particular Jewish leaders and some particular synagogues. Some Christian leaders from as early as the middle of the 2nd century produced some virulent anti-Jewish pronouncements and sermons based in part on Isaiah's words.

00:17:31.040 - 00:18:02.000

But it was after Constantine, as I noted this morning, that the doctrine of Christian supersessionism really began to take hold. And with it, the whole apparatus of government was used to support the required orthodoxy. But the use of these words to defame and attack others was not confined to Christian diatribes against Jews, not across our history were more creative than that.

00:18:02.000 - 00:18:29.360

In the 16th century, a new twist took place. Calvin and others turned Isaiah 29, 13 against the Roman Church. It was the Pope and the Roman hierarchy who only honored God with their lips while their hearts were far away. And those who worship God in human commandment learned by rote.

00:18:30.480 - 00:18:58.880

It should be noted, by the way, that Calvin was doing a form of contextual criticism or interpretation. And while I don't think his conclusions were correct, I do have to allow that he was making an interesting effort. He still does have a lot to teach us, some of it negative, but If you haven't ever read much of Calvin's exegetical work and his sermons, you ought to.

00:18:59.120 - 00:19:32.720

There's much there to be learned. For us in our present context, the question we need to ask, it seems to me, is are we people whose eyes are shut and whose hearts are rendered as deaf? Do we prefer to use these words to bolster our need for enemies, for a them that we may address over against us.

00:19:35.120 - 00:20:00.800

It is tempting, it's tempting, very tempting on times to consider these words as addressed to the people in wider context outside of my group. I can think of a number of political groups that I think are them, and which I happily would redress. But before we do that, we need to consider the beams in our own eyes.

00:20:02.320 - 00:20:26.080

What prejudices do we nurse behind the claims of being God's people? How do we let sin abound as we proclaim the good news of divine grace? It is so easy to point the finger at them, Dare we stand before a mirror and consider that them may be us.

00:20:30.080 - 00:20:53.440

Let's go a different direction. There's another text that gives insight into a different kind of anti-Jewish prejudice widespread among Jesus, among Christians. This view parades behind the Enlightenment, progressive evolution of religion motif. Psalm 137 is a good example.

00:20:54.600 - 00:21:18.320

It's a touching song of lament for a land, for a lost land, a song reflective of an experience of an oppressive exile. I'm sure you remember the dramatic opening. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down and there we wept when we remembered Zion. On the willows there we hung our harps,

00:21:18.800 - 00:21:46.400

for there our captors ask us for songs, and our tormentors ask for mirth, saying, sing us the songs of Zion. Hearing these words evokes sympathy, perhaps even empathy. To be torn from one's homeland is an awful experience that no one desires. The conclusion is equally dramatic.

00:21:48.000 - 00:21:59.920

For many years, it never showed up in our responsive readings. It was considered un-Christian. How does it end? Oh,

00:22:00.120 - 00:22:22.160

daughter, Babylon, you devastator, happy shall be they who pay you back what you've done to us. Happy, and it's the same word we sometimes translate, blessed. Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock. Such harsh words.

00:22:23.600 - 00:22:46.480

Suffered, a suffering justified by suffering, But nonetheless, harsh words that offend the ears and the hearts of many Christians. Where is the recognition, we say, that the sins of elders should not be visited upon the children? Where is the forgiveness, we say, forgiveness for one's enemies?

00:22:47.840 - 00:23:10.160

Where is common human decency and a regard for human rights? If nothing else, where's good taste? Psalm 137, along with the passages and with other passages in the First Testament, such as the Joshua 6.21. That's a good one.

00:23:10.720 - 00:23:50.560

Then they, Joshua's troops, devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword, all in the city of Jericho, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep and donkeys. That text has been marshaled forth as a demonstration of the inferior character of the Old Testament and also of the God of the Old Testament. Marcion was an early advocate of such a rejection of the First Testament, but he was hardly the last. The argument's a rather spacious one in my view, but I have heard it for years.

00:23:52.440 - 00:24:17.040

And for many people who I think ought to know better, for many people, the Old Testament's a burden. They view the God of the Old Testament as vindictive and harsh, not like the God of the New Testament. The evidence? The violence voiced in such passages as that in Psalm 137 and in Joshua.

00:24:18.320 - 00:25:01.440

The argument goes that any people, in this instance, the Israelites, who would suggest that God could in any way condone or even worse, command such actions, simply must be wrong. And if they are wrong about one thing, they could be wrong about everything. And thus the Old Testament, the God of the Old Testament, should be rejected as primitive, inferior and useless to those who have seen the light, who have evolved into a progressive religion, namely Christianity.

00:25:03.480 - 00:25:59.360

Christianity, though certainly not perfect, is more advanced, more humane, simply more modern. Religion is evolving in the Old Testament, and the understanding of God expressed there is simply outdated according to this view, obsolete. And of course, if you reject the God of the First Testament, the people who claim to be chosen by that God can easily be dismissed, even exterminated at no great loss. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, has recently, as you all have heard in the news, denied the historicity of the Holocaust, the slaughter of millions of European Jews.

00:25:59.920 - 00:26:24.400

At the same time, he's calling for another slaughter, this time of millions of Middle Eastern Jews, by urging the destruction of modern Israel. all in the name of justice and religion. Oh, I know, he doesn't really want to kill them all. He just wants to relocate them in New Jersey or someplace like that.

00:26:25.120 - 00:26:38.400

But his rhetoric is inflammatory, to say the least. His history is wacky. His motives are transparently self-serving. But his intentions are serious.

00:26:38.760 - 00:27:06.080

and should not be taken lightly. He is not just a nut, he's a dangerous nut. And what's more, and this is the real tragedy, he voices the feelings of many, many Middle Easterners, Christians and Muslims alike. Many, many Middle Easterners, openly or secretly,

00:27:06.640 - 00:27:37.120

would applaud the annihilation of Israel. And there are many in the West, unfortunately, who would also like to see some large measure of -- they would take some large measure of satisfaction in such a disaster. Now, let me suggest, if we lived as a minority within a culture that held such hate-filled attitudes toward us, we too might sometimes feel just a little such hatred toward our enemies.

00:27:38.480 - 00:28:03.600

The Jews in Israel number about 7 million. The Muslims in the surrounding countries number around 350 million. Think about it. The relative number of Jewish exiles who sang and remembered Psalm 137 was equally small in comparison with the Babylonian populations into which they were thrust.

00:28:03.960 - 00:28:30.400

What is remarkable about Psalm 137 is not that there's an expression of hostility toward the enemy. What's noteworthy in my view is the candid honesty that is articulated before God. No one can applaud as virtuous the notion of slaughtering little children. And that brings us to our own context.

00:28:31.600 - 00:29:12.720

What do we do with Psalm 137? First, I hope we've learned that simply because something is said negatively in Scripture, that doesn't mean that God endorses it, particularly not if it's a human prayer such as a psalm. Further, if the God of the First Testament is indeed, as I believe, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, then difficult texts like the Psalm in Joshua 6, that of Joshua 6, must be read in that light. Whatever the passages may say, they must be heard within the gracious love revealed in our Lord Jesus.

00:29:14.240 - 00:29:51.680

and I might add in many other passages of the Old Testament as well, such as Exodus 34 and Hosea 11. Second, while honesty requires an admission that sometimes, just sometimes, we wouldn't mind seeing some of our enemies get it in the neck, we also are reminded that such judgment is not ours to administer. The Judean exiles in Babylon had neither the power nor the authority to retaliate against their enemies. They were not even thinking such thoughts.

00:29:52.560 - 00:30:22.080

That was not even a temptation. But Psalm 137 provided them strong words with which to express their negative feelings and to do so before God. They had the feelings. God knew they had the feelings, and they needed to express them and confidently leave the desired judgment to the hands of the divine.

00:30:24.560 - 00:30:49.200

We also need such words on occasion, or at least I do. I may not want the utter destruction of my enemies, but a badly sprained ankle wouldn't be too much for some people. or a significant drop in some of their stocks, just maybe short-term. More seriously, what do we learn from 137 about our context?

00:30:50.960 - 00:31:12.400

There was a time when a Christian majority could dictate civil policy in this country. It did not even require an actual plurality of votes. only a concentration of power. And some in our midst think this is still possible.

00:31:13.200 - 00:31:46.600

I read recently that somewhere that around 47% of American voters want to see the government impose Christian values on the nation. That's scary in my view, partly because such folk, I think, are totally out of touch with the constitutional realities. partly because they think there's an agreement, something that could be imposed, that there's a set of Christian values that we would all accept. We couldn't dictate such policies even if we wanted to.

00:31:49.120 - 00:32:40.960

Diana Eck, Harvard theologian and professor of comparative religion, has amassed an enormous amount of data that has led her to say that the United States is the most religiously pluralistic nation in the world. The number and variety of Buddhist denominations, if I can use a term that doesn't really apply to them, to be that, the number of Buddhist denominations to be found in Southern California alone, for instance, is greater than that to be found in any other part of the world. Other studies of the most recent census indicate that there are almost 2 million more Mormons now living in the United States than there are members of the Presbyterian Church, just in case you hadn't found that out.

00:32:40.960 - 00:33:22.880

There are almost three times as many atheists and agnostics in the United States as there are Presbyterians. And the agnostic and atheists in terms of percentage of growth are only second to the Roman Catholic. The point of such statistics is that even if we could, if we wanted to, and certainly there are some communities in our domain that do want to, encourage one group to impose its values on another would be very unwise if at least we want to live together.

00:33:24.520 - 00:34:02.960

What is this to do with one Psalm 137? perhaps the concern we should have if we turn this and look in our social context amongst those of us who are here, does this psalm express some of our un-Christian feelings? What are the feelings that we have evoked in others? by the misuse of our political advantage, for instance, during the years of colonialism.

00:34:04.960 - 00:34:35.520

Who would like to see us and our little ones bashed against a wall? I think we need to think about that and then decide what we might do about it. Psalm 137 didn't instruct the ancient exiles to carry out their feelings of hatred, and it doesn't tell us to do so either. Admit them, yes, but neither harbor them, nourish them, or act on them.

00:34:36.960 - 00:35:03.840

Minorities, of which we are one, can't afford such action. And majorities shouldn't want to. Let us turn to one other harsh text, one that most Presbyterians that I know ignore with the hope that it'll go away, namely Acts 5, 1-11. I don't know when I've heard a sermon on this, maybe you have.

00:35:05.360 - 00:35:27.920

The story of Ananias and Sapphira. Now this is a story that's harsh, and it can promote a culture in the church that is legalistic, and it can support an attitude toward outsiders It discounts them as of no worth in the eyes of God. I'm sure that you remember the story.

00:35:28.800 - 00:35:59.160

Ananias and his wife Sapphirus sold a piece of property. Then they come before the church, and the text says, by Satan's deception, they presented only a portion of the text to the diaconate, I guess. Peter, by the power of the Holy Spirit, recognized that Ananias was not telling the truth and gave Ananias the opportunity to set things right.

00:35:59.160 - 00:36:56.720

But when Ananias again lied about the Mount of Sale and the worth of the guilt, he fell down dead, presumably by the power of the Holy Spirit, though the text does not actually say so. He was immediately taken out and buried, and three hours later his wife Sapphira came in, and not knowing that Ananias had died for their deception, when she was questioned about the matter, she continued the lie, and then likewise immediately fell dead. The passage concludes, and great fear seized the whole church, and all who heard these things. Now, I can imagine there are times, particularly during the budget crunch of the local church, that some might like to have that kind of a power over their congregation.

00:36:56.960 - 00:37:12.000

How many pledges are made but never completed? How sanctimonious can some big givers behave? Oh, that they might simply drop dead. If, of course, they've willed their property to the church.

00:37:13.840 - 00:37:42.480

Most of us, though, don't like this passage. We don't like it for the same reason we don't like the story of Achan back at the time of Jericho and Joshua 7, with the punishment that was visited upon him for holding out on the Lord. For one thing, I suspect that a lot of contemporary Presbyterians and Methodists and others really don't think it's fair. You know, it's just not fair.

00:37:42.800 - 00:38:04.000

evoke a confession, get the guy to own up to it, take the amount that's been withheld, and get on with it. People shouldn't have to die for a little thing like cheating. Don't we all cheat just a little now and then? Besides, does God really operate that way?

00:38:04.320 - 00:38:15.280

We certainly hope not. I certainly hope not. A passage like this suggests a view of God that few of us share, I believe. It becomes an embarrassment.

00:38:16.040 - 00:38:48.160

A passage we hope our folk don't find. It can promote a kind of legalism that can stifle a congregation if we start looking over the shoulders of one another trying to guess whom whom the next Ananias of Sapphira might be, we will be in trouble. A sense of fear might well seize us all, and at least for Presbyterians, the only safe action I've observed in such circumstances is no action at all.

00:38:49.400 - 00:39:19.360

And goodness knows we've had enough of that already. Let's consider the context of this story. First of all, it was intended to promote loyalty and dedication among a small group of Christians in difficult, threatening circumstances. The underlying message is, if you want to sign up with this group, you'd better be serious.

00:39:20.400 - 00:39:38.000

That's not a bad message, even for us today. But for the early church, It was a necessity. Lack of loyalty and dedication in the face of the opposition of the empire could be deadly for all associated with the group.

00:39:39.920 - 00:40:11.360

This passage is situated in the midst of a very interesting section at the beginning of Acts. The section begins in 3.1, right after the Pentecost story, and continues through chapter 5, verse 42. And these chapters describe the early ministry of healing and teaching carried on by Peter and some of the other apostles. All the activity is among and directed to Jews, so far as this part of Acts is concerned.

00:40:11.520 - 00:40:42.240

It takes place at Solomon's portico at the temple. One particular beggar was healed. and provided the occasion for Peter to explain the power by which he was able to heal the man, namely the name of Jesus. There was opposition from some of the priests, the captain of the temple, the Sadducees, and subsequently as well the rulers, elders, presbyterists, if you like,

00:40:44.080 - 00:41:18.000

Ananias, the high priest, Hyphas, John, and Alexander, all who were the high priestly family. Indeed, a family affair. Now, the problem for the authorities apparently was not the theological witness that Peter made, rather the concern centered on the fact that Peter had healed a lame beggar. They wanted to know by what power or by what name did you do this.

00:41:18.600 - 00:42:05.520

And Peter responded by saying, rulers of the people and elders, if we're questioned today because of a good deed that's done to someone who was sick and are asked how this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you, all the people of Israel, that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead. After this testimony by Peter, the summary statement of the unit follows. There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which you must be saved. Two things, at least, are very important to note about this summary declaration.

00:42:06.400 - 00:42:39.600

First, the words translated, salvation, and saved in verse 412 are variants from the same Hebrew word that is in 49 translated healed. To heal was to rescue, to save from ill health, to preserve from grave difficulty. Salvation, the English words

00:42:40.320 - 00:43:15.520

lead us astray a little bit. In Greek, the terms that stand behind salvation and healing are the same word and mean practically the same thing. It's only when 4.12 is lifted out of context and so teria becomes a theological category that the text becomes exclusive. In the literary context of Acts, the simplest understanding of this verse is that Peter healed a man by the power of Jesus' name, the only name that Peter knew.

00:43:17.520 - 00:43:50.160

Cynthia Campbell, drawing upon the work of New Testament scholar Beverly Goventa, makes this statement, The phrase by which we must be saved is an attempt to render the Greek deia. It is necessary. Luke in particular uses this word for things that happen in accordance with God's will. The force of Peter's claim is that through God's will, that it is through God's will that the name of Jesus brings healing or salvation.

00:43:50.480 - 00:44:22.000

Thus, in context, the emphasis falls on God's gift of salvation rather than on a negation of other religious practices. This text does not, excuse me, this text does make a powerful claim about the healing, saving power of the name of Jesus. It does not necessarily mean that God could not or would not work in the lives of human beings by other means.

00:44:32.000 - 00:45:00.080

This latter point brings us to the second important matter. In Peter's day, there were many healers and many so-called mysteries that competed for the attention of the people. One healing in itself was not all that noteworthy. Only among the Jewish authorities who were concerned lest God's name might somehow be blasphemed, or even more, that Roman authority might somehow be challenged, was there any great consternation.

00:45:00.800 - 00:45:43.120

The notable sign could not be denied, so the Jewish leaders dismissed Peter and John with a warning not to speak anymore in Jesus' name, a warning that Peter and John, of course, refused to heed. This long digression intends to demonstrate that the issue for the early church, from Peter's declaration to the deception and death of Ananias and Sapphirus, that the issue was loyalty to the movement. They were a small and vulnerable community that needed encouragement and assurance.

00:45:44.600 - 00:46:08.560

Jesus was the source of their healing, their preservation, their salvation. Others questioned what had happened to them. and some of them were cast out of their families and synagogues. But their struggles were all internal to their own community.

00:46:09.520 - 00:46:27.840

The early Christians, to say it again, were not concerned to invalidate the convictions of others. The main concern was to validate and testify to their own experience. What can we learn from this testimony? First, who are we?

00:46:28.840 - 00:46:58.240

And how strong is our own commitment to the Church of Jesus Christ? We are people who have been to some measure healed, but are we concerned to share the healing with others? What's more, to share my story of healing does not require that I deny the healing that someone else has experienced. We can all marvel when any of us

00:46:58.640 - 00:47:21.040

is restored to good health. Second, the change in our circumstance from that of the early church is critical. We now have a long history of dealing with people of other faiths from a position of power. Unfortunately, that history has not always been noble.

00:47:22.640 - 00:47:50.720

Passages like These that we've considered in this lecture, in particular the words from Acts 4, have been used often to destructive ends. A colleague of mine at Louisville Seminary, Dr. Chris Elwood, a theologian, preaching a sermon there not long ago on Acts 4:12, used these words, which struck me as very appropriate.

00:47:51.600 - 00:48:34.100

He said, obviously, a simple declaration can have very different meanings and consequences when you change the context. That's true for Peter's statement as well. no other name can be a genuine response to the encounter with Christ, or it can be something else. It can be a vital expression of the liberating experience of faith, or it can become a means of setting up a game with special rules that only we can play, a language game that denies the authenticity of the experiences that don't conform to our rules and our experience.

00:48:34.740 - 00:49:24.340

No other name, when spoken from power to powerlessness, seeks to corrupt the good news. No other name, when spoken from the center to the margins, is no longer an echo of Peter's meaning in Acts. No other name, when spoken to boost our flagging spirits when we are wearied by the multitude of witnesses to faith, or when it is used to beat down others so that they can see how much better things are over here, that concepts, corrupts, rather than expresses faith. He then went on to conclude, I don't think faith in Christ needs to be an experience of anxiety, born out of a sense of the rarity of redemption.

00:49:24.500 - 00:49:45.300

I love that. We get anxious thinking God has got only a little bit of redemption to offer. A scarcity of spiritual goods. The experiences that God is in Jesus need not close us off from learning about other dimensions of God's self to closure in the world.

00:49:45.700 - 00:50:15.940

Above all, faith in Christ expresses itself in generous love, a love that opens us up in a world and to our friends, as different as they may be. I don't believe Christian love demands that we translate the particular way God has spoken to us into a denial of the religious expression of those who aren't Christian. I agree.

00:50:17.860 - 00:50:46.140

Rather than beating others over the head with harsh texts, let's look for allies. For any and all who demonstrate the love of God in their lives are allies. In the words of Jesus remembered by both Mark and Luke, whoever's not against us is for us. Oh yeah, I know Matthew turned it around.

00:50:46.140 - 00:51:03.460

It made it negative. But I'm going to go with Mark and Luke right now. We need to find and cultivate those who will love others as God has loved them. In my concluding lecture, I will suggest

00:51:03.940 - 00:51:41.460

some strategies that might work, that we might employ to accomplish this important work. Open eyes and generous hearts may help. Thank you. At 3.30, you're all invited to sit in and hear a wonderful panel of discussion that's going to go on.

00:51:42.420 - 00:51:51.940

I need to know the room assignment for that. Is it going to be held in Macmillan? Oh, Stotz Hall. Okay, it's going to be held in Stotz.

00:51:52.540 - 00:52:01.780

Okay, so you're all welcome to that. And this will conclude our session here today, and we look forward to seeing you in Stotz Hall. Thank you.