SERMON ~11/15/2015 ~ “The Nature of Prophecy”

November 15, 2015 ~ Proper 28 ~ 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time ~ Twenty-Fifth Sunday after Pentecost ~ 1 Samuel 1:4-20 ~ 1 Samuel 2:1-10 (In Place of a Psalm); Daniel 12:1-3; Psalm 16; Hebrews 10:11-14, (15-18), 19-25; Mark 13:1-8.

The Nature of Prophecy

“Jesus replied, ‘Do you see these great buildings?  Not one stone will be left here upon another; everything will be thrown down.’” — Mark 13:2.

I have a friend who once said to me youngsters should see the Cecil B. DeMille movie The Ten Commandments so they could learn about the Bible.  I told him there was only one thing that movie was capable of teaching.  The film is, effectively, a post-graduate course on the how star system and the major studios worked in the 1950s, nothing more.

The film got too way much wrong about the Bible to teach us anything about the Bible.  Let me give you just one example of its shortcomings.

It’s probable, for instance, many people think the Hebrews, when enslaved in Egypt, helped build the pyramids.  That’s a Hollywood myth, a fantasy.

Here’s why.  Dating things in the Bible and in ancient times can be tricky but archeologists, historians and Biblical scholars all agree the escape of the Hebrews from Egypt happened in the 13th or 14th Century Before the Common Era.

The last of the Great Pyramids was finished in the 18th Century Before the Common era.  In short, building the Great Pyramids and the Exodus are hundreds of years apart.  The Hebrews simply were not in Egypt when the Pyramids were being built.

“Oh, Joe!” some might say (especially my friend who thinks The Ten Commandments can teach us about the Bible), “you really know how to ruin a good story.”  I say, “I’m ruining nothing.  The movie is still a good story and fun to watch.”

But it’s not a story about what happened in Biblical times.  So let’s not get a movie— any movie— and Scripture confused with one another.  Indeed, we need to make an effort to not let any part of popular culture and Scripture be confused with one another.

This is also to say, “The Ten Commandments may be a good story but I’ve got a better story.”  That better story is what’s actually in Scripture.  And that better story is called faith and faith should not be overwhelmed or overshadowed by the culture.  (Slight pause.)

Please consider this premise: there is a difference between mere religion and faith.  In order to illustrate the difference let me redefine those terms for you.  My redefinition is borrowed from Biblical Scholar John Dominic Crossan.  Crossan relegates religion to something which is simply a cultural practice.

As a cultural practice religion picks up many signals, ideas, signs and social norms from the society in which it exists.  Religion reflects the normalcy of civilization.  Religion is a part of accepted culture and as such it is static and not at all challenging.

Faith, on the other hand— faith is not a cultural practice.  Faith is an exercise and is exercised.  Faith is not static.  Faith understands God defies the norms of society, the standards of the culture in which we live.  Hence and by definition, faith is challenging.

To reiterate: religion is simply a reflection of the culture.  Faith is much more challenging.  It’s an active and even a personal endeavor.

I need to be clear: the culture is neither inherently bad nor inherently wrong but cannot inform faith.  We cannot allow for that.  Faith, to be effective, needs to think about the culture without interference from the culture.  Now that’s challenging.

Further and unfortunately, we get the culture and faith mixed up and intertwined way, way, way too much.  An obvious example of getting the two mixed up?  Going to the movies, any movies— and probably you can name every last one of them— going o any movie thinking it will teach us something about Scripture— just not an idea that should be on your radar scope.  (Slight pause.)

We find these words in the work known as Mark.  “Jesus replied, ‘Do you see these great buildings?  Not one stone will be left here upon another; everything will be thrown down.’”  (Slight pause.)

So, are the words of the Thirteenth Chapter of Mark a prediction of how things will be at the apocalypse, at the end of time?  Or is that interpretation simply a reading of the culture, a meaning the culture likes to impose on these words?  (Slight pause.)

One of the commentaries I read concerning the reading in Mark says this (quote:) “The modern church knows aplenty about voices that talk a good game, use... the right formulas,....  There are those who offer a... Christianity without tears, others who wed Christianity to the nation and demand a patriotic ideology, others who advocate for the utilitarian functions of religion— arguing... [Christianity is] ...an effective means of attaining something— pray for this and it will happen.”

The text is clear.  (Quote— quoting that commentary again:) “...instead of becoming frantically alarmist, the church is to take the long view... be patient....  [In addition] the church should not possess a Pollyanna-like denial of reality or pain....  the church is invited to be hopeful despite the wars,... threats of which our community today hears and the community of Mark heard.” [1]  (Slight pause.)

For a moment, let me elaborate about wars and threats now and in the time of Mark.  I’ll start by noting what happened in France.

I have a Facebook friend, William Field.  He teaches Religion and Politics at Rutgers.  This was his take.

Yes, acknowledge the attack was awful.  But just this last week a similar number of people were killed by terrorist actions in Baghdad, in Beirut and in the Sinai.  So it’s not just what happened in France.  We need to be aware of all that transpires.  (Slight pause.)

And there is a parallel concerning tumultuous times, in Mark.  Mark was written no earlier than the year 70 of the Common Era, a claim made by most scholars.  In the year 70 Rome destroyed Jerusalem and forced most Jews to flee from the Western Mediterranean.

So there was war— war then and perhaps war now.  (Slight pause.)  That takes the long view doesn’t it?  Well, is the long view 2,000 years?  Or is it even longer?  And is that long view challenging?  Does it challenge the current assumptions of the culture? (Slight pause.)

I am also Facebook friends with sociologist, church historian and author Diana Butler Bass.  She asked this question on her Facebook page this week before Friday.  (Quote:) “Are we living in a time when people are afraid to wrestle with deep ideas in society, in religion, in politics?”  There were a number of responses to that post I found interesting.  These are a couple.  (Slight pause.)

“Afraid?  Or are we ill-equipped to wrestle with deep ideas in our society, in our religion, in our politics?”  (Slight pause.)

“It seems there just isn’t anything to gain for deep thinking.  Criticism and pushback, sometimes at great expense, creates a culture of superficiality.”  (Slight pause.)

“Expressing deep thoughts is considered rude.  Well, isn’t that anti-intellectualism?”  (Slight pause.)

“Research has shown humans are cognitive misers.  Our default solution to problems is to tap the least tiring cognitive process.  Psychologists call this ‘type one’ thinking.  It was described by Nobel Prize–winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman as automatic, intuitive and not particularly strenuous.”  (Slight pause.)

“People don’t wrestle with much of anything anymore.  Bumper sticker faith is the result.” [2]  (Slight pause.)

I have said this here before.  Prophecy in the Bible is not a prediction about the future.  Prophecy in the Bible means the Word— and that’s Word with a capital ‘W’— prophecy means the Word of God is being spoken.

And the Word of God when spoken in Scripture is not about prediction.  Prediction is a construct of the culture imposed on Scripture.  The Word of God in Scripture always has to do with the basic premises of Scripture: loving God and loving neighbor.

So, if it’s true that (quote:) “not one stone will be left here upon another;...” it would seem to me the culture which raised those stones or today’s culture is not a place to look for any ultimate need.  That’s because our ultimate need is relationship with God and relationship with one another.  (Slight pause.)

That question, “Are we living in a time when people are afraid to wrestle with deep ideas in society, in religion and in politics?” posed by Diana Butler Bass needs to be taken seriously.  And yes, I think many people are afraid of deep ideas.

But given the words from the Gospel reading, I think it’s likely the same was true for the community to whom Mark was addressed.  I therefore suspect the Word of real prophecy offered in Mark is a Word of solace in the tumultuous world which surrounded that community then... and the tumultuous world which surrounds us today too.

That Word of solace tells us we need to seek to be in relationship with God and one another.  And relationship is hard work.  Relationship is work which demands we wrestle with deep ideas.  Relationship is challenging work.

Why is it challenging?  You see, I think relationship work is not a product of the culture.  And the culture in Mark’s time and the culture today most often produces only tumult.

The challenging work of relationship, on the other hand, produces all kinds of gifts.  The work of relationship produces love.  The work of relationship produces respect.  The work of relationship produces joy.  The work of relationship produces hope.  The work of relationship produces peace.  The work of relationship produces freedom.  Indeed, I think there’s only one thing the work of relationship would fail to produce: violence.  Amen

11/15/2015
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, New York.

ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction.  This is a précis of what was said: “I have two quotes I’d like you to hear this morning.  One is from the 20th Century Philosopher and Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. (Quote:) ‘In the shadow of death may we not look back to the past, but seek in utter darkness the dawn of God.’  The other is from St. Bernard of Clairvaux who lived from 1090 to 1153 of the Common Era.  (Quote:) ‘There are those who seek knowledge for the sake of knowledge.  That is curiosity.  There are those who seek knowledge to be known by others.  That is vanity.  There are those who seek knowledge in order to serve.  That is love.’  It seems to me in the world today we are lacking in the knowledge which seeks service and therefore is familiar with love.”

BENEDICTION: Go forth in faith.  Go forth trusting that God will provide.  Go forth and reach out to everyone you meet in the name of Christ.  And may the face of God shine upon us; may the peace of Christ rule among us; may the fire of the Spirit burn within us this day and forevermore.  Amen.

[1]   The entry for this Sunday in Texts for Preaching: A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV, Vol. 2, Year B - (The CD Version) by Walter Brueggemann (Editor), Charles B Cousar (Editor), Beverly Roberts Gaventa (Editor), James D Newsome (Editor).

[2]   Needless to say, to see these entries by Field and by Bass on Facebook you would need to be their friends.