Common Ground Tour - Variety Show

I caught up with Common Ground, thanks to Chris and Bailey Freckmann who picked me up at the Seattle-Tacoma airport. After rush hour traffic and dinner with the group, preparations for the variety show were underway
- acts were practiced, lyrics were written down, and skit participants recruited.

MC'ed by Jonathan Meyerholtz and Josh Stolan (!) whose names seem to have become interchangeable during the tour, act followed after act in rapid succession, interlaced with jokes about group members and "revealing" nap photos stealthily taken on the Bethel bus.

I am adding some photos from the variety show, plus my own story that I told, loosely inspired by the poem "Two Dead Boys."





Oh, What a Thrilling Flight!
Ladies and gentlemen, skinny and stout,
I’ll tell you a tale I know nothing about.
The admission is free, so pay at the door,
Now pull up a chair and sit on the floor.

One bright day in the middle of the night,
I left home to go on a non-stop flight.
I boarded a plane from San Jose to Seattle,
together with a herd of rather mad, human cattle.

The cattle were noisy, the cattle were bored,
Some fell asleep, some gently snored.
Many stuck cords into outlets while waiting,
Talked on their phones -- oh-so-important work projects contemplating.

But we all woke up as we saw the approaching crew.
When we saw the six flight attendants and the captain, we immediately knew,
This was going to be,
No ordinary flight, THAT we could see.

For we saw that the captain was blind, and so was his crew.
I am telling the truth, I trust you know that it's true.
When they arrived at the gate, ready to board the plane,
Each one of them carried a red-and-white cane.

When that crew walked off into the cockpit,
They were preceded by a guide dog named Sprocket.
They asked us to take our seats without making a sound,
The stewardess, that is, helped by the hound.

Suddenly, though, a man with no legs came walking by,
and kicked the poor guide dog into his thigh.
A flight marshall came to cart him away,
But the man ran for his life, and is still gone today.

With the captain blind, and the poor hound out of commission,
Who would get us safely to Seattle? we passengers began to reason.
Until suddenly, a sound came out of the speakers into our ears,
The captain pleading with us, desperately looking for brave volunteers.

Is there anyone out there,
Who would dare,
To follow the guidance of my hand,
And fly this plane, bring it down unto land?

So I pondered whether to follow the motto
Of my mother's great-uncle Otto,
who used to proclaim "Out with the old,
And in with be bold."

Yes, I told myself and the crew,
I will do it, and so I flew,
Through the air safely steering this flying beast,
Landing it safely on the Seatac runway, last but not least.

The ride was a bit bumpy,
And even now my throat feels still lumpy.
But I learned from the best,
who assure me and the rest.
"Do not get fluttered,
Do not loose heart,
Be bold, creative, and sing it!"
"Keep calm," God says, "and bring it!"

You might want to check as much as you're able,
With the only eyewitness to the facts of my fable.
If you doubt whether my story is true,
Just ask the blind captain, he saw it too.

Location:First Lutheran Church, Bothell, WA

Where’s the Beef? - "The Bible" Miniseries - Episode 5

Little did I know that when I committed to writing these movie reviews some six weeks ago at the beginning of Lent that I would end up agreeing with a Huntington Beach LCMS pastor by the name of Sam Schuldheisz reviewing the last of the five episodes. But this is what ended up happening!

Almost from the beginning, I felt that this History Channel docudrama presents us with “theology light” or rather “theology too light.” While the five-part mini-series definitely has a narrative plot (“people of faith who trust in God”), I continue to feel that something is sorely amiss in this series.

As a Lutheran, I am accustomed to look for solid undergirding theological themes. Lutherans tend to read the Bible as the gradually unfolding story of God’s “prevenient grace” (which is a fancy theological term for divine grace that precedes all human attempts at embracing of that grace). Both the Old and New Testament, we Lutherans believe, witness to how God initiated relationships with human beings, how God saves us from our own sinfulness and inability to live lives of mercy, love, and justice. First, God gave the people of Israel the Law. When the people failed to obey God’s Law and continued to sin, God became incarnate in flesh to take upon Himself our sins and to reconcile us to Himself. The Law reveals to us our fallen nature; Jesus Christ saves us from our sinfulness and restores us to a right relationship with God.

According to Lutheran theology, this tension between human sin and God’s salvation always remains. Lutherans believe that Christians always remain justified sinners (“saints and at the same time sinners”), despite the salvation that Christ has won for them. No amount of faith and no amount of faithful living can change us completely from sinners into saints.

In my heart and mind, I have deeply embraced this theological tension between Law and Gospel. Any plot that simplifies the Biblical story or lacks theological substance tends to make me feel uneasy or leaves me dissatisfied.

Pastor Schuldheisz, to whose review I am indebted, alluded to an old Wendy’s advertising slogan: “Where’s the beef?” To him, that little question, “Where’s the beef?” not only works well for selling hamburgers, but points to a profound theological question: Where’s the substance and the solid food of doctrine? To Pastor Schuldheisz (and myself) the most glaring problem with the final episode of “The Bible” miniseries was not so much what was said, but what wasn’t said. The solid food of Scriptural doctrine was missing at key points and the main course of Christianity – Christ crucified and risen for the forgiveness of sins – wasn’t on the table after the movie account of Holy Week was over.

To be sure, episode five had some good appetizers: for example, when the camera showed the disciples saying the Lord’s Prayer just as Jesus had taught them. When it came to the main course, though, the overall meal amounted to little more than empty calories. The problem wasn’t so much what was on the plate as what was left in the kitchen. So, here are four courses Lutherans might find missing from the table on Sunday evening.

(1) Thomas’ Confession
When the risen Christ appeared to the apostles behind locked doors, the apostle Thomas – more or less – confesses that Jesus “is back.” We hear Thomas say, “It is you,” but not the words that he says in John’s Gospel: “My Lord and my God!” In other words, Christology was entirely missing from this event. So, where’s the beef?

(2) The Risen Christ and His Teaching
The next major scene zeroes in on the disciples gathered around Jesus at Bethany just prior to His ascension to the right hand of the Father. But does Jesus say anything about the preaching of repentance and forgiveness of sins to all nations? Do we hear anything about teaching Jesus’ doctrine and baptizing all nations in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit? Do the disciples receive a promise that Jesus will be with them always to the end of the age? No, none of these things are taught. Rather, we hear Jesus say, “Ask for the Holy Spirit and I will send it to you.” Not only are Jesus’ words and promises absent from His ascension sermon to the disciples, but the work of the Holy Spirit is reduced to some kind of bargain and deal between the disciples and God, “if you ask I will send it to you.” Again, where’s the beef?

(3) Peter’s Sermon at Pentecost
In one of the next scenes, the disciples are gathered inside a darkened locked room during the Jewish Festival of Pentecost and are praying the Lord’s Prayer. Suddenly, the Holy Spirit rushes in like a mighty wind, the disciples begin to speak in a number of languages known at the time, and all are left excited at what they just experienced. Again, the problem is not so much what is present, but what is missing from the story: Peter’s Pentecost proclamation of repentance and the forgiveness of sins is skipped over with laughter and excitement over the disciples’ new-found language skills. In other words, the entire substance and center of the Christian faith is lacking from Pentecost in “The Bible.” The mini-series presents us with the base facts of the story and the surrounding context but gives us no meat to chew on. To quote Chris Pastor Schuldheisz, “The big deal at Pentecost was not that the disciples could speak in foreign languages. The big deal at Pentecost was the Gospel being proclaimed to all nations.” Where’s the beef?

(4) The Apostle Paul and His Doctrine of Justification
Finally, the movie spends a significant amount of time on the Saul’s conversion, his work as an apostle, and the growth of the Christian church as a result of Paul’s ministry. Instead of focusing on Paul’s teaching, though, the producers of “The Bible” chose to focus on the person of Paul. Instead of focusing on the Gospel and the justification of sinners, we hear about Paul’s struggles to fit in with the early Christian community. Yes, some of his writings were quoted here and there, especially 1 Corinthians 13, the love chapter. But if all we preach is love and not Paul’s theology of the cross, we are missing the point of his ministry.

The Lutheran reformers rightly taught that the doctrine of justification is the doctrine upon which the church stands or falls. Justification by grace through faith is, indeed, the center of the Scriptures, the very purpose for Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. The fact that this teaching is lacking in "The Bible" by extension also means that the Gospel is lacking. Yes, there are “moments,” hints and implicit or brief accounts of the Gospel, but again, what was there wasn’t as problematic as what was missing. What’s missing? The central article of the Christian faith: justification by grace through faith. Where’s the beef?

Conclusion
In conclusion, let me simply quote Pastor Schuldheisz, who expressed very well what I would say, too: “Finally, the overall problem from my perspective, is that the real Gospel is absent from The Bible precisely because it isn’t nearly as palatable as what was broadcasted in The Bible. Leaving the Gospel off the menu makes Christianity marketable to a wider audience. But what kind of Christianity are we serving up if we take the solid meat of Christ, the Gospel and Justification, the work of the Holy Spirit and the means of grace, and the promises and Words of Jesus for His Church? We are left with a counterfeit and Christ-less Christianity. […] Although The Bible may be more like spiritual candy to be eaten sparingly and with caution, it is no substitute for the daily bread Christ dishes up for His people at the Lord’s Table and in His holy Word. Where’s the beef? Don’t look for it in The Bible, rather, search the Scriptures (the book is way better than the movie anyhow) and find a faithful church where the regular meal being served up is a feast of Christ’s body and blood, His Word and water, and His forgiveness of sins, life and salvation.” Amen!

"The Bible" Miniseries - Episode 4

I am supposed to write the fourth of five reviews on the History Channel’s “The Bible” docudrama, according to the goal that I set to myself, but it is getting harder and harder to write these reviews.  I am beginning to wonder what I have gotten myself into with this project. 

Part 4 of the miniseries covered highlights from the public life of the adult Jesus after he recruited the first of his disciples. It included the following:

The feeding of the multitude, walking on water, cleansing of the leper, healing or the lame, sermon on the mount, Jesus and the woman caught in adultery, raising of Lazarus, clashes with Pharisees, Jesus’ riding on a donkey into Jerusalem, cleansing of the temple, the Last Supper, Jesus’ betrayal by Judas, Jesus’ arrest, the healing of the ear of Malchus, and Peter’s denial of Jesus.  Again, a lot of stories are jam packed into less than two hours, and it is unlikely that anybody who’s not already familiar with the biblical storyline would be able to make sense of the life and ministry of Jesus based on watching this docudrama alone.  This hardly can be avoided, given the ambitious scope of the project.

Others have aptly pointed out that there are many places where this episode deviates from the account of the gospels:  words are placed into the mouth of the wrong people, Jesus enters the tomb of Lazarus instead of calling him to come out from the outside, Mary Magdalene pops up in many scenes that she was not part of in the New Testament, and so forth.  For my part, I don’t understand the motives of the producers in making these changes, either.  I don’t understand what may be gained from having the high priest Caiaphas ask “What good can come out of Galilee?” instead of Jesus’ disciple Nathanael. What’s wrong with sticking to the Biblical script?

In watching this episode, I found all the Jewish opposition to Jesus conflated into one.  Somehow, the differences between the Pharisees and the temple authorities (Sadducees, High priest, scribes, etc) got blurred.  To truly understand how Jesus fit into the landscape of first-century Judaism, however, it would have been very helpful to distinguish between the varied reasons that led different Jewish factions to oppose him. 

Instead of further critiquing this episode, though, I’d like to draw your attention to an important scene that the producers added:  While Jesus is praying in the Garden of Gethsemane (“My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me.”), the camera cuts away and first shows the High Priest Caiaphas and eventually Pontius Pilate and his wife.  The High Priest gives thanks to God for creating him as a Jew, whereas the Roman couple sacrifices to their ancestor, giving thanks for their lives and good fortune.  Eventually, the camera cuts back to Jesus, who now surrenders to God’s will (“Yet not as I will, but as you will”).

The difference between these prayers is important. In a way, Jesus models to us how we ought to approach God … in life and in prayer.  True faith – Jesus teaches us – implies that we surrender to God’s will, even when God’s will might conflict with our own desires and aspirations.  This attitude of surrender is what distinguishes Jesus from the priest and the Roman couple.  My hope for all who seek to follow in Christ’s footsteps is that we learn to surrender to God’s will as he did.

May Christ’s message of eternal life fill you with hope and peace!

Faith Is from God! - "The Bible" Miniseries - Episode 3

I continue to spend parts of Monday watching the latest episode of “The Bible” miniseries on the History Channel, recorded the night before. As I wrote last week, after watching the first two episodes my expectations by now are rather low, due, in part, to the dramatic dwelling on less import characters (e.g., Samson and Daniel) and the skipping of very important Biblical stories and character (e.g., Jacob, Joseph, Hannah, and King Solomon).

Given that the producers begin each episode with a disclaimer that this is a dramatic “adaptation” of the Biblical narrative, it seems futile to me to criticize the liberties they took in reshaping and inventing parts of the story. After all, each and every movie about the Bible, is an adaptation. One could even argue that the Bible in itself adapts Old Testament stories to make them fit the points that New Testament writers try to make.

Another widespread objection to the miniseries has been that it unclear who is the intended audience of the films. For newcomers to the faith, it would be difficult, indeed, to follow the script. Too many events are packed into the five episodes for anyone not very familiar with the Bible to understand the connections. Episode 3, for example, covered the following events:

· King Zedekiah
· King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, the conquest of Jerusalem, and the killing of King Hezekiah
· Daniel in Babylon (3 men in the fiery furnace)
· The Jews in exile in Babylon
· King Cyrus defeats the Babylonians and sets the captives free (Daniel in the lion’s den)
· The Jews return to Jerusalem
· The Roman occupation of Palestine (some five centuries after the return from exile)
· The Jewish uprising in Galilee and crucifixion of the rebel fighters
· The angel Gabriel announcing the birth of Jesus to Mary
· The birth of Jesus
· King Herod, the wise men, and the slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem
· The flight of the Holy Family to Egypt
· John the Baptist and his murder by King Herod
· Jesus' Baptism by John
· Jesus tempted by Satan
· Jesus calls Peter as a disciple

All this in 2 hours, interrupted by a great number of commercials! How can anyone not already familiar with the Bible follow the storyline?

Again, many of the scenes were ripe with violence, so much in fact, that did not let my own daughter watch the films. Is it really necessary to show how King Nebuchadnezzar gouges out the eyes of King Zedekiah before dragging him off into captivity? What does this scene contribute to the storyline?

Given that I already addressed some of those issues previously, I want to move on. Today, I wish to talk about are some of the theological underpinnings of this project that I find questionable from a Lutheran theological perspective.

Each retelling of the Biblical story, whether in preaching, in writing, or in film, begins with a plot. Each retelling begins not with stringing together as many stories as one can, but with a conscious or unconscious principle by which the narrator of the story organizes his or her material.

For the makers of the “Bible” miniseries this organizing principle is “faith.” Hero after hero, the miniseries tells of peoples’ faith in God in the face of adversity. Abraham is willing to sacrifice his son, just because he has faith in God. Moses is willing to challenge Pharaoh and lead his people to freedom, because he has faith in God. Samson, Joshua, and Daniel are successful, because they have faith in God. All these heroes succeed in their mission, in result of their publicly professed faith (even Samson who sacrifices himself for the sake of his people succeeds in his mission). On the other hand, all those individuals who do not have faith (Lot’s wife, King Zedekiah, King Nebuchadnezzar) end up either dead, prisoners of war, or insane. In short – faith in God, if it is professed publicly, leads to success in life. There it is! Period.

One really good scene that illustrates this emphasis on faith was part of episode 1, right before Moses and the Israelites crossed the sea. In that scene Moses kept on yelling, “Keep the faith, be faithful, keep the faith, etc…” However, in the book of Exodus we read,

“And Moses said to the people, “Fear not, stand firm, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will work for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall never see again. The Lord will fight for you, and you have only to be silent.” (Exodus 14:13-14)

This seems subtle, but it really is not. The kind of faith that is praised in the miniseries tends to be faith that is self-generated and a faith that at times does even not have a direct object. The Bible, on the contrary, shows us how God gives signs and promises which “grant” faith. According to the Bible, faith is from God; it is not generated by us.

One of the special features of the Lutheran faith is that we don’t believe that our story with God begins with us. We don’t believe that the most important aspect of our relationship with God is that we reach out to God, have faith in God, and then profess that faith publicly before others.

On the contrary – Lutheran theology begins with God. Lutherans confess that God is the One who loves His creatures so much that He himself reached out and initiated relationships – whether the relationship with Noah, with Abraham, or Moses, or with you and me today. God is the One who reveals Himself to humans. God is the One who initiates a covenant. God is the One who fights for us. God is the One who becomes incarnate in the person of Jesus. God is the One who lets Jesus die and raises him from death. Whatever we do as God’s creatures follows what God first has done for us, not the other way around.

I wish to thank the producers of this miniseries that – in watching three episodes – I was able to clarify for myself a little bit more where I stand. I now believe a bit more consciously in a God who, among many other gifts, also gave me the gift of faith, the ability to trust in Him and His guidance. Whatever the “Bible “miniseries might suggest to us viewers – I do not believe that publicly professed faith guarantees success. I better leave such ideas to the proponents of the “prosperity gospel” (i.e., the doctrine that financial blessing is the will of God for Christians, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to Christian ministries will always increase one's material wealth).

"The Bible" Miniseries - Episode 2

"The Bible is brought to you by Walmart. Save money. Live better.”

The second episode of the miniseries “The Bible” aired on Sunday, March 10, riding a wave of success after the show garnered over 13 million viewers the first week. This second episode covered the conquest of Jericho through the early childhood of the later King Solomon. In my opinion, the second installment strayed a little too far from actual biblical accounts. While a certain amount of creative license is expected, in some cases it changed the story.

For example, there are numerous details that were changed in telling us how Jericho was conquered, what kind of person Samson was, or how Saul and David were chosen as Israel’s kings. In other instances, important parts of the Biblical story were left out, for example, were hear nothing about Hannah, the mother of the prophet Samuel and her faith, nor about David’s brothers, nor about how David spent the seven years between Saul’s death and Jerusalem’s accepting him as their king.

Some biases continue from the first installment of the miniseries, for example the flawless portrayal of the men and the fearful, doubting, or deceitful portrayal of the women. Secondly, the main characters all seemed to be living in modern nuclear families with one husband and one wife, whereas the heroes of the Bible has sometimes as many as hundreds of wives, concubines, and children. Thirdly, there are questionable attempts to spice up the action, such as the splitting of rock in Jericho. And finally, there’s the fact that every major Biblical character in the show is white and has a British/Scottish accent. Even God himself, apparently, was a white Brit. Instead, the only true ethnic diversity was a couple of black-Jews and God’s Angels who were of African and Asian descent. Who made that casting choice?

Possibly the most annoying part of this miniseries continue to be the commercials. Talk about overkill. From Christian Mingle, to The Bible App, to Catholics Come Home, the commercials were so blatantly catered to evangelical Christians that I wonder whether the History Channel even expects any non-Christians at all to watch the miniseries. Do not get me wrong: I like everyday low prices as much as the next guy, but it is disconcerting to hear that “The Bible is brought to you in part by Walmart.”

Yet, apart from all these things, there is a bigger issue that comes to my mind. As I imagine people watching this show–maybe people unfamiliar with the Bible–I wonder if they are asking themselves, “What kind of God is this, and do I really want anything to do with him?” As a tool for evangelism this miniseries is a complete failure; it mostly caters to insiders who know the overall storyline of the Bible and are able to fill in the many gaps in the story on TV.

The kind of chopping of the Biblical stories is hard to understand. Why leave out some very important stories (e.g., Jacob, Joseph, and Hannah) and include others, less important stories at great length, freely elaborating on the witness of the Bible?

Take, for example, the story of Samson, the strong hero whose strength resided in his long hair and who got captured once the Philippines found a way to cut off his hair. The film spent way too much time on this relatively insignificant Biblical hero, but it became clear why: the producers are making him into a Christ figure. Samson gave himself up for his people in accordance with God’s will; he is chained to cross of wood; Delilah betrays Samson to the authorities for money and then feels guilty about it; his mother grieves for him at his death. None of this in the Old Testament. I think the choice of focusing on Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jacob, and now portraying Samson as a Christ figure–and leaving out Jacob and Joseph–suggests that the producers are emphasizing OT figures commonly thought to prefigure Christ.

On the other hand, the parts of the Biblical story that the show gets right are those parts that show the Israelites as tribal zealots whose God kills their enemies. Take, for example, the scene showing the Philistine general praying to his god that he would deliver the Israelites into his hand so he could wipe them out? The Philistines and the Israelites are both characterized as warring tribes who want to rule by violent means with the approval and support of their god. Why this? Are we supposed to believe that if only we pray fervently enough, success will come to us? Is our God a tribal God who seeks to pitch us against non-Christians and their gods? I sincerely hope that this is not the intention of the makers of the miniseries.

I do plan on watching the rest to see how they handle Jesus, but my bar is set rather low after watching the first two episodes.

"The Bible" Miniseries - Episode 1

I finally was able to watch my recorded first episode of the History Channel's "The Bible" mini-series late last night -- which made it easier to zap through the many annoying commercials that interrupted the story. Now I can begin to make good on my promise to comment on this docudrama and invite you to share our own thoughts.

This mini-series was not conceived as a literary or historical documentary, but as a docudrama. It attempts to do what the Bible in itself does not do, namely, it attempts to tell one single, interconnected grand story that includes transitions, dialog, emotions, and chronology. 

Unlike this mini-series, the stories of the Bible actually have a lot of holes. Sometimes the Biblical stories omit details such as the ages or names of major characters. Rarely ever do we learn about the motives or the thoughts and feelings of many of he Bible's most beloved individuals. At best, we get a few episodes from their lives, often not even that much. At other times, two or even three different versions of one-and-the-same story are told (for example, Abraham's pretending to be his wife's brother to protect himself from pharaoh).

Hence, writers and directors who want to adapt the stories of the Bible to the medium of film have to invent dialogue, whole scenes, and compress other scenes to keep the storyline going. The classical example of such a process was, of course, the granddaddy of all Bible movies, Cecil B. DeMille’s “The Ten Commandments.” Half the movie is either entirely imaginative or taken from later creative sources like Philo, Josephus, and later Jewish literature (look at the opening credits next time you watch it). That’s how DeMille dragged out Moses’ early years in Egypt for about two hours when the Bible’s interest in this period lasts a few verses.

Taking on the challenge to tell the story of the Bible in ten hours is, indeed, not an easy one. The first two hours of the mini-series that were broadcasted this Sunday covered - in broad strokes - the Old Testament narrative from the beginning of the Book of Genesis to the first chapter of Joshua (up to the eve of the battle of Jericho).

The producers of "The Bible" did what many film producers, in fact, what just about every Christmas pageant does had done before them -- smoothing out contradictions (e.g., between the two different creation stories); inventing conversations (as, for example, between Abraham and Sarah); and even inventing parts of the story (Moses' youth at Pharaoh's palace).

The film opened in the ark with Noah reciting the story of Genesis 1-4. Now, on the one hand, this is clearly a means of collapsing the story for time. On the other hand, connecting the stories of creation and the flood reflects precisely how these stories do in fact work together in the biblical narrative. Properly understood, the flood story was meant to be seen an echo of the creation story in Genesis 1. The threatening waters kept at bay above the dome-like heavens allowing dry land to appear (Genesis 1) are brought crashing down upon the earth to cover up all land (flood story). The flood is not just a bad turn in the weather but God’s returning of his creation to its pre-creation state of chaos. God “starts over” with Noah and his family as the new “first humans.”

"The Bible" film gets problematic, though, in the way it portrays men vs. women. On the one hand, we are being introduced to brave, faith-filled men like Noah, Abraham, Lot, Moses, Aaron, and Joshua. On the other hand, we see their fearful, doubting, jealous, plotting, or submissive wives, sisters, and maids -- Noah's wife and daughters, Sarah, Hagar, Lot's wife, and Moses' sister Miriam (whom Scripture calls a "prophetess" and leader of her people, but whose role the film downplays). In the film, the women provide the negative backdrop to the faith and heroism of the men, something Scripture does not do. Is this the story that I want my daughters to learn? Is this how I want them to view themselves? I don't think so!
However, my biggest problems with this mini-series are not gender stereotypes. My biggest problem is that this mini-series makes the Biblical people look, talk, behave, feel, and relate to one another too much like us. Abraham, for example, was not married in today's fashion monogamously to one single wife whom he loved and treated like 21st-century North American husbands treat their files. Like most Old Testament heroes, Abraham actually had many wives, concubines, and female slaves. Monogamous marriage is a concept that did not exist for most of Old Testament times. So, why then do Abraham and Sarah look, talk, and behave more like modern British folks than ancient nomads in this film?

Likewise, while Abraham's trust in one single creator of the universe surely is touching, true monotheism is a much later development and did not exist yet at his time. At the times of Abraham an Moses, the people of Israel believed in the existence of many gods, but they opted to worship just one of them, the One who revealed his name to Moses in the burning bush. So why then does Abraham sound more like a 21st-century evangelical Christian than a Middle Eastern patriarch who slaughtered animals and sacrificed their blood on the altar of "his" god?

One evangelical commentator, Old Testament scholar Peter Enns, points out a number of other absurdities in this first part of the "Bible" mini-series, absurdities that make the Biblical narratives look more like 21st century Hollywood entertainment, rather than the Middle East some 3,000+ years ago. Among others, Enns mentions the "Kung Fu style fight in Sodom, or Sarah running up Mt. Moriah to save Isaac, or Moses looking like a cross between Charles Manson and Mickey Rourke, or the so-called “angel of death” looking like the dementors from Harry Potter."

Absurdities such as these make us forget that over 3,000 years separate us from the times of Abraham and Moses. It would be good for us to never loose track of this fact ... so that we not read our own 21st-century faith, values, world view, morals, and relationships back into the Bible. Precisely the fact that the Bible was written so long ago and precisely that its heroes are so different from us moderns and post-moderns are part of what makes our sacred Scripture so powerful. In and through the words of this ancient witness, God radically breaks into our modern lives and seeks to transform these lives. The moment we blur the tremendous gap between the world of ancient Israel and our own world, the moment we seek to fashion the Bible into a modern book, we strip it of some of its power over us. 

I look forward to hearing what thoughts came to your mind when watching "The Bible". If you have not watched it yet, it is being shown at 9pm on the History Channel on Sunday nights.

Table of Remembrance

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God.” (Hebrews 12:1-2)

This Sunday, we will worship God by celebrating All Saints Sunday.  This Sunday reminds us that we are not alone in confessing our faith in God through Jesus Christ.  Rather, we stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us.  We stand on the shoulder of famous witnesses to the Christian faith who, in some cases, have paid with their own life for clinging to the gospel of love and mercy and forgiveness; and we stand on the shoulders of many ordinary people who have passed on their values and beliefs to us.  Without their witness to us, our faith in God’s grace, goodness, and love may have crumbled a long time ago. 

As in years past, we commemorate those in our midst who have passed away since All Saints Day 2010.  We will solemnly read their names out lout; and with gratitude we will remember the goodness they have brought into our lives. 

We will also remember this year, in a different way, countless other individuals who have died either recently or some time ago.  When you enter the Bethel sanctuary this Sunday via the narthex (church entry), you will encounter a beautiful display of candles, photos, flowers, and other objects.  I invite you to come to church and help us build this “table or remembrance” by bringing in photos or other objects that remind you of someone dear to you who has died.  We also will have paper available to you to write down names of individuals whom you wish to remember and to celebrate this Sunday.

The idea for this “table of remembrance” is borrowed from the “dia de los muertos” (Day of the Dead) which is celebrated in Mexico and other countries, but with a slight Lutheran twist.   Lutherans, as you may know, refrain from venerating saints in the Roman Catholic or Christian Orthodox manner.  We don’t believe that saints have attained a higher standing before God than other Christians, we don’t believe that they have earned God’s love in a special way, and we don’t pray to saints asking them to intercede for us with God.  

We do, however, believe that there is a strong bond between the church on earth and the church triumphant.  We believe that there is a strong bond between Christians who are confronted daily with negotiating the demands of the world and the demands of faith and Christians who now see god face-to-face in all of God’s heavenly glory.  We also believe that it can be very beneficial to us to listen to the stories of people who, in the midst of conflicting priorities, chose to be on the side of Jesus Christ.  Their stories can strengthen and embolden our own faith, no matter whether they were famous in their own day or not.

Thus – please bring photos or objects to church that remind you of deceased individuals who have been influential in your own life and add them to the “table of remembrance” in the narthex.