This Sunday is Gideon Sunday at First Presbyterian Church in Berryville. We will be hearing the report of the local and global Gideon Society so I will not be in the pulpit. This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Chruch in Berryville, Arkansas on the 30th Sunday of Ordinary Time in 2005.
Deuteronomy 34:1-12
Psalm 90:1-6, 13-17
1 Thessalonians 2:1-8
Matthew 22:34-46
Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of our heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
I love watching “This Old House” on PBS. When I was younger, the show was much more about home improvement tips, how-to advice, and new technology for the home. Now it is more about characters and stories involved in home remodeling. Some of the more memorable recent episodes deal with the hosts meeting with the homeowners and the historical commission of whatever city they are in that season. Don’t get me wrong, I loved the Salem series and how they attempted to put a parking area in the backyard. They eventually lost that one to the city Historical Commission. And I liked last season’s “wooden mantle piece” episode in the Carlisle home. It had all of the drama that could be mustered by fire codes, Underwriter’s Laboratories, and a wild computer set up. But I do long for the good old days of “This Old House.” The days when they would teach you how to put up wallpaper, put in new windows, and hang doors.
Hanging doors is mysteriously difficult. When mounting a door, you have to make sure the frame is square. If it is not, the door will not hang properly, and then opening and closing it becomes very difficult. The door knob and lock set are pretty easy to get right, assuming you use the proper jig, but the hinges are a different matter. Setting the hinges seems to be a source of high drama. For a door to be put in hinges properly, if both sides are not lined up perfectly, putting the hinge pins in is impossible. Yes, jigs exist, but with at least four hinge plates on each door, and usually six, there is a lot of room for error. And with that many opportunities for error, just one misplaced hinge plate and the door will not hang well, causing all sorts of problems. Depending on which door, it can make heating and cooling more expensive or even become a security issue.
When asked which commandment in the law is the greatest, Jesus told an expert in the law, “This is the greatest and first commandment: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” He followed this saying the second is like it: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang the law and the prophets.”
This is it, these are the big lessons Jesus wants us to learn. It’s not surprising. These commands from Deuteronomy and Leviticus answer this lawyer’s questions very well. In Mark’s account of this encounter, the lawyer even praises Jesus for his fine response. It is not uncommon for Rabbis and Prophets to summarize the law in one way or another. Moses started with 613 commandments spread throughout the Torah. David was able to reduce the number to eleven, and then Isaiah to six. Micah whittled the number to three; Amos to two and Habakkuk finally got the number down to just one.[1] So Jesus’ answers are good for the man who is schooled in the law; faithful to the law and to the traditions of the prophets.
Over the past several weeks we have followed the cross examination of Jesus on important issues and trivial matters in Matthew’s gospel. He is asked about paying taxes and he is asked about the resurrection. He teaches in parables and shows wisdom far beyond the cunning of those serving as his prosecutors. Before this exchange, Jesus silences the Scribes and Pharisees like a snapping dog is muzzled. And now they are dumbfounded by his wisdom, unable to ask any more questions.
Since they are unable to ask any more questions, Jesus is left to ask the next one. If David calls the Messiah “Lord,” and the Messiah is the son of David, then how can the Lord be David’s Son? Now, I don’t mind telling you (well, maybe a little bit); I do not have the answer to every question. I have faith and trust the Holy Spirit that when I am asked questions I will either receive an answer from the Lord or have the good sense to say, “I don’t know.” This is one of those “I don’t know” moments. I find Jesus’ question very confusing. Back in the day, I would have been as dumbfounded as the Scribes.
Among my spiritual disciplines, I read one chapter of Proverbs every day. With 31 Proverbs, It’s pretty easy to read one every day, and start again at the beginning of every month. I recommend it; it helps me become more familiar with the wisdom of Solomon. But the Proverbs have a lot of interesting little twists in them, especially about dealing with fools. And it infuriates me! The one that comes to mind is Proverbs 26, verses 4 and 5: “Do not answer fools according to their folly, or you will be a fool yourself. Answer fools according to their folly, or they will be wise in their own eyes.”
Don’t answer fools according to their folly? Answer fools according to their folly? I don’t get this one at all. One of these proverbs follows the other, and they completely contradict one another. I understand them individually, the wisdom is flawless. But the logic of one directly following the other is beyond my understanding. So today I pray. One day I will consult the commentaries and hopefully I will find some sort of explanation. Until that day, I rest in the wisdom, and ponder the logic.
One of the ways I deal with this is with a piece of advice I received in seminary. One of the supplementary textbooks for “Introduction to the Old Testament” was Michael Joseph Brown’s, "What They Didn’t Tell You, A Survivor’s Guide to Biblical Studies." This book offers twenty-eight “rules of thumb” for seminarians. Some of the information was useful, some wasn’t. But one of the rules has stuck with me like a stone in my shoe. Rule number ten says, “The Bible means what it says, and says what it means. Except when it doesn’t.”
Some days I am wound pretty tight, but when I remember this rule, it helps remind me that I am not going to understand every nuance of scripture, and it sets me free to consider what is going on in the text beyond my human logic. It helps me with this Proverb, and it also helps me with this portion of our gospel reading.
You see… locked into our earthly time and place, locked into our human knowledge, Jesus’ question to the Scribes and Pharisees is puzzling. But the question cannot be answered with our terms. When we consider it as prophetic insight from our Lord instead of a genealogy question, this piece of scripture challenges the leaders—it challenges us—to recognize Jesus as the Messiah commissioned by God to manifest God’s saving presence and eternal empire as attested by David.[2] From a riddle about a Lord to a prophetic voice, Jesus challenges all who have ears to hear the Word of the Lord, not only as it is written but as it is in person.
And here, Jesus rides a camel through the eye of a needle. He dares to answer the fools their foolish arguments. He answers them in wisdom beyond their perception and with a question beyond their understanding. This isn’t the last time Jesus will be asked questions. And it won’t be the last time he shares wisdom in the temple. But the lack of response to this riddle speaks volumes. It is difficult to answer this divine question using human thoughts and genealogy. It can only be answered with faith and trust.
Hebrews calls faith “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”[3] Calvin says faith is, “a firm and certain knowledge of God’s benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy Spirit.”[4] And when we do not this conviction of things not seen; this firm and certain knowledge of God’s benevolence, then answering Jesus’ question is impossible.
Just a moment ago, I said that I would have been dumbfounded by Jesus’ question. And that is true. Does it mean my faith is not strong enough? I pray not. But I will admit, there are many times when I try to build on the foundation of education and logic. Working in Higher Education for over ten years, spending ten years more working on degrees, becoming a man of letters, I am trained to think that way. When I am confronted by questions like this one Jesus asked the Scribes and Pharisees, I am forced to take a step back, and consider what I know. I am forced to consider what I don’t know. And I am forced to consider how I came to know it. I am forced to remember that I am a child of God, saved by grace through faith. And I am forced to remind myself that sometimes I act like a Pharisee.
This is where I return to the hinge again. Hinges have three main parts, two halves and the pin. These are our two halves:
“Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your soul and all your mind.” We are not told by Jesus to leave any of our faculties at home. God wants us to love with all that we are, and all that we can be.
“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” God too wants us to love one another with all our heart and soul and mind. We are called to bring every God given talent with us to the church as the body of Christ and the rest of the community. We are called to love one another fully, completely, and without reservation. On this hinge hang the law and the prophets.
We confess that moral law is found and realized in the Ten Commandments, delivered by the voice of God upon Mount Sinai, and written on two tables of stone. The first four commandments contain our duty to God. Jesus summarizes these when he tells us “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your soul and all your mind.” The other six summarize our duty to one another. This is in the statement, “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
The amazing thing is if either one of these elements is missing, the law and the prophets will not be fulfilled. But with the hinge, without the pin, the hinge is useless. In this illustration, Christ is our hinge pin, holding in place these two commandments.
If love of God or neighbor is missing, the value of Jesus is diminished because he came as the living incarnation of the love of God and humanity. Fully human and fully divine, Jesus bridges the gap between the two and holds them together in a way that allows the law and the prophets to be fulfilled.
One of the many things Jesus is called is the law, the Torah, personified. Jesus not only fulfills the law, he is the law. The God of Abraham and Isaac writes the law on stone tablets and gives them to Moses. Jesus lives the law for our lives and gives himself to us, a life given in Jesus the Christ. We are called to live this moral life, a life given in the Ten Commandments. We are given them in the simplest of directions, you shall love the Lord your God, and your neighbor as yourself. Let us accept the commandment. Let us answer Jesus’ question to the Scribes and Pharisees this way—the Messiah can be the son of David because you, the son of David, are the Christ, and my Lord. May we respond by doing your will. Amen.
[1] David, Psalm 15:2-5; Isaiah 33:15; Micah 6:8; Amos 5:4; Habakkuk 2:4.
[2] New Interpreter’s Study Bible, comment on Matthew 22:41-45
[3] Hebrews 14:1
[4] Institutes, Vol. III, Part 2, Paragraph vii.
Showing posts with label Mathew 22. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mathew 22. Show all posts
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Where Truth Lies
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday October 12, 2008, the 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 32:1-14
Psalm 106:1-6, 19-23
Philippians 4:1-9
Matthew 22:1-14
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
Parables are wonderful stories with one big problem. As the parables are read, people who know scripture tend to respond saying, “Ah yes, this is a wonderful story” and with that, tune into past experiences with the parable instead of paying attention to it as it is being shared anew.
This is one of many truths about the parables of Jesus Christ; we listen to them through the ears of our experience, not the ears of the Holy Spirit. Believe me, when I say “we” I mean “we” because I have to fight this temptation as much as anybody else.
Within this parable, there are many different kinds of truth. There is historical and cultural truth as the parable has references that we may not catch because we are not familiar with the history and culture. There is literary truth, because the parable as a form of literature contains truth in that context. There is also the truth of interpretation since there is nearly 2,000 years of analysis behind Matthew’s gospel.
So, let’s begin with the king who gave a wedding banquet for his son sending his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet. One of the first historical things we need to know is that long before the celebration, the people would have received invitations. While they did not know the precise time or day of the wedding feast, because of the hustle and bustle of preparing for the celebration, they would not be surprised when the slaves came with the “day of event” summons.[1]
Another bit of history we need to know is that at this time weddings, while grand feasts, are not the timed to the minute thing they are today. For the king’s slaves to prepare a great banquet, the oxen and the fat calves had to be slaughtered and prepared. This is nothing like my macaroni and cheese with summer sausage casserole in the oven for today’s potluck.
Preaching another scripture passage about cooking a full team of oxen, the Reverend Doctor David W. Johnson said:
“I’ve never actually boiled an ox. Or wanted to. I do a brisket now and again. That takes all afternoon. I have no idea how long it took to boil the oxen, but it wasn’t done in an afternoon. How long would it take to butcher and dress twenty-four oxen, cook them all up, and prepare beef stew for a bazillion? Maybe a week. Maybe a year. Maybe three years plus two summers.”[2]
Our parable doesn’t say how many oxen and fatted calves were slaughtered and prepared, but as it was the king who gave the banquet, we can imagine the number was substantial. The language tells us it was absolutely plural, so took preparations took quite a while. Many were involved in other preparations for the wedding feast, not just the slaves but other citizens of the kingdom too. The banquet master would get in touch with the priest to butcher the animals. He would have needed the people who provided bread, spices, and other foods. And don’t forget the wine merchant. Since many were involved in its preparation, the people knew the feast was coming.
Another important historical element to this piece is that when the people say, “we’re busy” to the king’s servants; it means more than “we’re busy.” To reject the king’s invitation, or more properly the king’s command, is an act of rebellion. To do it en masse is a sign of conspiracy.[3] Historically, no king would stand for this.
Parables are great, but these nuances are lost until we learn them. There are elements of truth in the history and culture of this story, but there is truth beyond history and culture.
Another part of the truth comes from the literary qualities of the parable. One of the key concepts of the parable is that it is not a true story. Even though as we have just heard, there is historical truth mixed in, this story does not reflect an actual event.
So in our story, after the slaves return to the king mistreated and worse, the king wages war on those who reject him and his invitation. This part of the story should be a red flag that this is not a true story. I ask what king would let supper get cold to go and wage war on a city? This is wonderfully epic, filled with dramatic exaggeration, and highly unlikely.
Further, as a nation we have recent experience about the success of a campaign of “shock and awe.” There is literally no way to wage war and be home for dinner in this or any age. So in the realm of factual events, the war events described in this story would not have happened. But in the parable, we see that those who betrayed the king got what they deserved.
As literature, this parable brings us a broad epic sense of scope which the story misses without its literary elements. It’s not that all pieces of the parable add up, but as a story, there is truth within the exaggeration.
As for truth found in interpretation, there is much. This is the third of three parables Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders in the temple. Scholars say the first parable, the one of the two sons, focuses on John the Baptist and the people’s response to his ministry. The second, the parable of the vineyard, uses allegory to interpret Jerusalem’s fall as punishment for the leaders’ unfaithfulness. This third parable is a final warning to the church of Jesus Christ to remain faithful and not follow the footsteps of the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders.[4]
The history of interpretation gives us a chronological progression of stories warning first those who rejected John; then the Pharisees, chief priests and elders who rejected the prophets and then the Son; and a final warning that the church might never reject Jesus and the vocation he has lain upon it.
Often, we speak of faith in terms of putting on new clothes. We talk of the church as being the bride of Christ. So a part of the history of interpretation leads us to be called to put on Christ as we join together with Christ as the bride of Christ.
The truth found in the history of interpretation is that while all are called, those who do not respond to this call are dealt with harshly. I am not saying that we are saved by works because we are saved by grace through faith. I am saying that there are dire consequences if we accept the Lord’s invitation and all we do is show up expecting to be fed.[5] This judgment was true in the days of the prophets, in the days of Jesus, in the days of Matthew’s gospel; and it is true for us today.
As these words are the words of Jesus, there is more truth in them than we will find in our interpretation of them. Two thousand years of interpretation alone cannot give us the truth of God’s word.
A way to consider the differences between historical truth and mythical truth comes from the voice of the Rev. William Sloane Coffin. On February 5, 1978 he spoke these words in a sermon about the miracle of turning water to wine from John’s gospel:
“Several years ago, driving south through Virginia, I crossed the mighty Rappahannock River. Amazed at its width, I couldn’t help concluding that George Washington’s throwing arm must have been comparable to Reggie Jackson’s if he hurled, as he reputedly did, the silver dollar from one bank clear across to the other. Suppose one day modern scholarship should establish that the silver dollar splashed. Would George Washington no longer be father of his country? Obviously not, because George Washington is father of his country not because he hurled a dollar clear across the Rappahannock or because he could not tell a lie about that fallen cherry tree—what choice did he have?—but because he was commander of the Revolutionary forces and the first president of the United States.”[6]
Let us consider this question for ourselves, was George Washington the father of our country because of the cherry tree incident or because of his service in the American Revolution? Was he father of our country because he could throw a coin across a river or because he was our nation’s first President? I think we can agree he is the father of our country because of the important work he did in securing our freedom and leading the nation.
In a way, sometimes the facts can get in the way of the truth. The debate over whether these stories actually happened or not gets in the way of the truth that they embody. These stories may not be true in the sense that they actually happened, but this does not dilute the truth behind them. The myth helps inform the truth that makes us better able to understand who Washington is to the people of this nation.
This brings us to the question we must ask ourselves about Jesus. Is he our Lord and Savior because of all of the cool stuff he did? Is he Lord of our life because he could turn water to wine? Is he Lord because he could best the highly educated leaders of the temple as they tried to trick him into speaking heresy against the temple or rebellion against Rome? Is he Lord because he could turn a phrase and tell a wonderful story? Or is he our Lord because he is who he says he is; the Son of God and the Son of Man?
The truth we find beyond history, beyond literature, beyond interpretation, beyond anything our minds can fully conceive; the truth we find is that Jesus is Lord because he is God. He is God since before the beginning. He is God when he walked the earth. He is God when he was crucified and on the third day rose again from the dead. He is God who sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. The parables help us understand who Jesus is; but they do not define who Jesus is.
The wonder and the glory of the truth is that all are invited to the wedding banquet. All are welcome to a place at the Messiah’s table. The wonder and the glory of the truth is that all are sought by the king’s slaves.
This leads us to one more truth, the truth beyond being called to the table. The truth of our call and our vocation as the church of Jesus Christ is that we are all called to be God’s faithful servants; calling the people, both good and bad, to join the messianic feast of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In this truth we are called to respond to the Lord our God as faithful servants, putting on Jesus as we enter into the banquet and into the world.
And as the servants of the Lord Almighty, we are called to invite others to the banquet. As we are called by the Lord to come, we are called by the Lord to bring others. By grace, our faith is to be an active expression of God’s love for all creation. This is one of the ways we wear the wedding robe. This is how we put on the garment of Jesus Christ.
There is much this parable offers us to find where truth lies, and its eternal truth is this: We are called to come to the table. We are called to bring others to the table. And it is the King of Glory who calls us first.
[1] The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. VIII. Leander Keck, General Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, page 417.
[2] Johnson, David W. from personal correspondence. The “three years and two summers” is a reference to the usual amount of time it takes to earn a Master’s of Divinity from Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid. pages 412-419
[5] Ibid, New Interpreter’s Bible, page 419
[6] Coffin, William Sloane, “The Collected Sermons of William Sloane Coffin.” Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1987, page 40.
Exodus 32:1-14
Psalm 106:1-6, 19-23
Philippians 4:1-9
Matthew 22:1-14
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
Parables are wonderful stories with one big problem. As the parables are read, people who know scripture tend to respond saying, “Ah yes, this is a wonderful story” and with that, tune into past experiences with the parable instead of paying attention to it as it is being shared anew.
This is one of many truths about the parables of Jesus Christ; we listen to them through the ears of our experience, not the ears of the Holy Spirit. Believe me, when I say “we” I mean “we” because I have to fight this temptation as much as anybody else.
Within this parable, there are many different kinds of truth. There is historical and cultural truth as the parable has references that we may not catch because we are not familiar with the history and culture. There is literary truth, because the parable as a form of literature contains truth in that context. There is also the truth of interpretation since there is nearly 2,000 years of analysis behind Matthew’s gospel.
So, let’s begin with the king who gave a wedding banquet for his son sending his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet. One of the first historical things we need to know is that long before the celebration, the people would have received invitations. While they did not know the precise time or day of the wedding feast, because of the hustle and bustle of preparing for the celebration, they would not be surprised when the slaves came with the “day of event” summons.[1]
Another bit of history we need to know is that at this time weddings, while grand feasts, are not the timed to the minute thing they are today. For the king’s slaves to prepare a great banquet, the oxen and the fat calves had to be slaughtered and prepared. This is nothing like my macaroni and cheese with summer sausage casserole in the oven for today’s potluck.
Preaching another scripture passage about cooking a full team of oxen, the Reverend Doctor David W. Johnson said:
“I’ve never actually boiled an ox. Or wanted to. I do a brisket now and again. That takes all afternoon. I have no idea how long it took to boil the oxen, but it wasn’t done in an afternoon. How long would it take to butcher and dress twenty-four oxen, cook them all up, and prepare beef stew for a bazillion? Maybe a week. Maybe a year. Maybe three years plus two summers.”[2]
Our parable doesn’t say how many oxen and fatted calves were slaughtered and prepared, but as it was the king who gave the banquet, we can imagine the number was substantial. The language tells us it was absolutely plural, so took preparations took quite a while. Many were involved in other preparations for the wedding feast, not just the slaves but other citizens of the kingdom too. The banquet master would get in touch with the priest to butcher the animals. He would have needed the people who provided bread, spices, and other foods. And don’t forget the wine merchant. Since many were involved in its preparation, the people knew the feast was coming.
Another important historical element to this piece is that when the people say, “we’re busy” to the king’s servants; it means more than “we’re busy.” To reject the king’s invitation, or more properly the king’s command, is an act of rebellion. To do it en masse is a sign of conspiracy.[3] Historically, no king would stand for this.
Parables are great, but these nuances are lost until we learn them. There are elements of truth in the history and culture of this story, but there is truth beyond history and culture.
Another part of the truth comes from the literary qualities of the parable. One of the key concepts of the parable is that it is not a true story. Even though as we have just heard, there is historical truth mixed in, this story does not reflect an actual event.
So in our story, after the slaves return to the king mistreated and worse, the king wages war on those who reject him and his invitation. This part of the story should be a red flag that this is not a true story. I ask what king would let supper get cold to go and wage war on a city? This is wonderfully epic, filled with dramatic exaggeration, and highly unlikely.
Further, as a nation we have recent experience about the success of a campaign of “shock and awe.” There is literally no way to wage war and be home for dinner in this or any age. So in the realm of factual events, the war events described in this story would not have happened. But in the parable, we see that those who betrayed the king got what they deserved.
As literature, this parable brings us a broad epic sense of scope which the story misses without its literary elements. It’s not that all pieces of the parable add up, but as a story, there is truth within the exaggeration.
As for truth found in interpretation, there is much. This is the third of three parables Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders in the temple. Scholars say the first parable, the one of the two sons, focuses on John the Baptist and the people’s response to his ministry. The second, the parable of the vineyard, uses allegory to interpret Jerusalem’s fall as punishment for the leaders’ unfaithfulness. This third parable is a final warning to the church of Jesus Christ to remain faithful and not follow the footsteps of the Pharisees, chief priests, and elders.[4]
The history of interpretation gives us a chronological progression of stories warning first those who rejected John; then the Pharisees, chief priests and elders who rejected the prophets and then the Son; and a final warning that the church might never reject Jesus and the vocation he has lain upon it.
Often, we speak of faith in terms of putting on new clothes. We talk of the church as being the bride of Christ. So a part of the history of interpretation leads us to be called to put on Christ as we join together with Christ as the bride of Christ.
The truth found in the history of interpretation is that while all are called, those who do not respond to this call are dealt with harshly. I am not saying that we are saved by works because we are saved by grace through faith. I am saying that there are dire consequences if we accept the Lord’s invitation and all we do is show up expecting to be fed.[5] This judgment was true in the days of the prophets, in the days of Jesus, in the days of Matthew’s gospel; and it is true for us today.
As these words are the words of Jesus, there is more truth in them than we will find in our interpretation of them. Two thousand years of interpretation alone cannot give us the truth of God’s word.
A way to consider the differences between historical truth and mythical truth comes from the voice of the Rev. William Sloane Coffin. On February 5, 1978 he spoke these words in a sermon about the miracle of turning water to wine from John’s gospel:
“Several years ago, driving south through Virginia, I crossed the mighty Rappahannock River. Amazed at its width, I couldn’t help concluding that George Washington’s throwing arm must have been comparable to Reggie Jackson’s if he hurled, as he reputedly did, the silver dollar from one bank clear across to the other. Suppose one day modern scholarship should establish that the silver dollar splashed. Would George Washington no longer be father of his country? Obviously not, because George Washington is father of his country not because he hurled a dollar clear across the Rappahannock or because he could not tell a lie about that fallen cherry tree—what choice did he have?—but because he was commander of the Revolutionary forces and the first president of the United States.”[6]
Let us consider this question for ourselves, was George Washington the father of our country because of the cherry tree incident or because of his service in the American Revolution? Was he father of our country because he could throw a coin across a river or because he was our nation’s first President? I think we can agree he is the father of our country because of the important work he did in securing our freedom and leading the nation.
In a way, sometimes the facts can get in the way of the truth. The debate over whether these stories actually happened or not gets in the way of the truth that they embody. These stories may not be true in the sense that they actually happened, but this does not dilute the truth behind them. The myth helps inform the truth that makes us better able to understand who Washington is to the people of this nation.
This brings us to the question we must ask ourselves about Jesus. Is he our Lord and Savior because of all of the cool stuff he did? Is he Lord of our life because he could turn water to wine? Is he Lord because he could best the highly educated leaders of the temple as they tried to trick him into speaking heresy against the temple or rebellion against Rome? Is he Lord because he could turn a phrase and tell a wonderful story? Or is he our Lord because he is who he says he is; the Son of God and the Son of Man?
The truth we find beyond history, beyond literature, beyond interpretation, beyond anything our minds can fully conceive; the truth we find is that Jesus is Lord because he is God. He is God since before the beginning. He is God when he walked the earth. He is God when he was crucified and on the third day rose again from the dead. He is God who sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. The parables help us understand who Jesus is; but they do not define who Jesus is.
The wonder and the glory of the truth is that all are invited to the wedding banquet. All are welcome to a place at the Messiah’s table. The wonder and the glory of the truth is that all are sought by the king’s slaves.
This leads us to one more truth, the truth beyond being called to the table. The truth of our call and our vocation as the church of Jesus Christ is that we are all called to be God’s faithful servants; calling the people, both good and bad, to join the messianic feast of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In this truth we are called to respond to the Lord our God as faithful servants, putting on Jesus as we enter into the banquet and into the world.
And as the servants of the Lord Almighty, we are called to invite others to the banquet. As we are called by the Lord to come, we are called by the Lord to bring others. By grace, our faith is to be an active expression of God’s love for all creation. This is one of the ways we wear the wedding robe. This is how we put on the garment of Jesus Christ.
There is much this parable offers us to find where truth lies, and its eternal truth is this: We are called to come to the table. We are called to bring others to the table. And it is the King of Glory who calls us first.
[1] The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. VIII. Leander Keck, General Editor. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, page 417.
[2] Johnson, David W. from personal correspondence. The “three years and two summers” is a reference to the usual amount of time it takes to earn a Master’s of Divinity from Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid. pages 412-419
[5] Ibid, New Interpreter’s Bible, page 419
[6] Coffin, William Sloane, “The Collected Sermons of William Sloane Coffin.” Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1987, page 40.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)