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.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Possession
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday October 5, 2008, the 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Exodus 20:1-4, 7-9, 19-23
Psalm 19
Philippians 3:4b-14
Matthew 21:33-46
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
There’s an old expression, possession is nine-tenths of the law. We’ve all heard it. This passage shows one example of how this works. In the parable, Jesus says, “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance.’” This sounds off to us, squatter’s rights doesn’t seem appropriate. But in this time, if the landowner dies without an heir, the tenant farmers would have a claim to become the new owners of the land.[1] Doesn’t seem right to us, but in the day it was the law.
Since possession was nine-tenths of the law, these wicked tenants were ready to cash in the final tenth.
And just to add one more proverbial log to the proverbial fire, the landowner provided a great vineyard for the tenants. There were vines in it, a fence around it, and a watchtower over it. There was even a press dug to accept the grapes to begin making wine. This is the Cadillac of vineyards. This is the place in Napa or Bordeaux that you find on the Travel Channel and on the Bloomberg Business Network. It was gorgeous and it was open for business.
No wonder they wanted it. It was fruitful; no wonder they were willing to take it. At the point of a sword, they were willing to take it.
Some would say they deserved it. After the hard work is done, the landowner sends his slaves and then his son to collect his produce. Matthew’s version doesn’t say “collect his share of the produce,” it says “collect his produce.” Considering the tenant’s perspective and the popularity of absentee landlords, some would say the tenants did earn it.
Let’s switch gears. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul shows who he was, and who he is now.
Paul had everything a Jewish man could want. He was everything a Jewish man ascribed to become. He was circumcised on the eighth day, showing that he was an Israelite by race, by birth. He was not a convert to the faith. He was not a newcomer to the faith. He was born into the tribe of Benjamin, a virtuous position because Benjamin was one of Jacob’s favorite sons. A virtuous position because the tribe of Benjamin remained faithful to the house of David.[2] He received these gifts of status for no other reason than by virtue of birth.
And if this were not enough, he earned more on his own. When known as Saul, he was a zealous persecutor of the church of Christ. In Acts we learn he was present at the stoning of Stephen, and that he approved of it.[3]
He was righteous under the law. He was a Pharisee, a sect renowned for adherence to the law and every regulation that pertained to it. They were faithful and sincere Jews who earned their righteousness according to their good actions. And this is where Paul tells the church at Philippi what his earned righteousness was worth.
“Whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ. More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Jesus Christ as my Lord.” Paul goes on to say that all of the righteousness that came from his birth or the law he now regarded as rubbish.
Oh, and rubbish is the gentle term. Dung[4] is a better, if more graphic, translation.
Paul came to know that all he was given by his parents, status, education, even Roman citizenship which isn’t even mentioned in this passage, is for naught in the light of knowing Jesus Christ as the risen Lord. Paul tells the church at Philippi that he has no righteousness of his own that comes from the law, but he is given righteousness in Christ that comes through faith, the righteousness from God based on faith.
Just to say this one more time, Paul has nothing of worth, nothing of value, and nothing of righteousness except what comes through faith in Christ. Righteousness is from God based on faith alone.
So back to the parable, historically, this parable is interpreted as an allegory. We plug in God the Father as the landowner and Jesus as his son. The slaves the landowner sends are the prophets of Israel. The tenant farmers are the leaders of the temple, the chief priests, the elders, and the Pharisees. The vineyard and the fruit are the kingdom of heaven.
All of the vineyard imagery ties back to the prophet Isaiah talking about the Lord planting a vineyard.
Jesus’ question to the Pharisees and their reply to Jesus harken back to Nathan’s accusations against King David’s adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah—as well as David’s response.[5]
The parable is a window into the temple at the time of the Christ and the people who run it. They are seen as taking what they will in their own righteousness to lift up themselves as much as they lift the Lord. The temple leaders, the chief priests, the elders, the Pharisees take what they think they earned; they take what they think they deserved. They take what they do for the righteousness of the law, the righteousness they understand.
But Paul tells us there is a better way than to take dung from the heap. People take; the Lord gives. Saved by grace through faith, the Lord our God, God in Three Persons gives us righteousness. Paul shows us that what we receive in Christ is far greater than all we can ever take for ourselves. Christ’s righteousness is greater than all we can ever take or earn for ourselves.
The wicked tenants know what they want, they know what they think they deserve. But when challenged by Jesus, the allegorical tenants of the vineyard, the Pharisees, know that these wretches will be put to a miserable death. They even begin to know that taken righteousness is no righteousness at all.
In 1983, a rock band called The Police recorded the quintessential love song of the early 1980’s. “Every Breath You Take” was number one on the Billboard charts for eight weeks in North America and four in England.[6] This song was the theme for proms all over America. Couples danced to this at their weddings. It’s haunting melody and wonderful vocal made couples everywhere say, “That’s our song.”
Every breath you take
And every move you make
Every bond you break
Every step you take
I'll be watching you
Every single day
And every word you say
Every game you play
Every night you stay
I'll be watching you
All right, it’s lovely. It misses something without the melody, but there’s a reason Kenny sings and I don’t. But if you think the last line of each stanza is a little foreboding, that’s nothing compared to the next two verses.
Oh, can't you see
You belong to me
Now my poor heartaches
With every step you take
Every move you make
Every vow you break
Every smile you fake
Every claim you stake
I'll be watching you
This isn’t a love song; it’s a song about possession. This isn’t romantic; it’s a theme song for stalkers. Grotesque obsession, not love, oozes from this song. This obsessive behavior is the fate of those who seek the righteousness this earth gives. Taking is not about righteousness, it’s about possession.
About ten years ago, a woman who used stolen credit card numbers to feed her habit was given six months in jail and five years' probation with the condition she did not touch her drug of choice: Beanie Babies. Tamara Dee Maldonado of Marina, California was sentenced by Judge Jonathan Price after pleading guilty to four counts of commercial burglary. She said her obsession with the beanbag toys began when she worked as a cashier at McDonald's and had to stuff Beanie Babies into Happy Meals. She was soon ordering for herself by telephone, using her own credit cards and, eventually, stolen cards.
Her ex-husband, Gabriel Maldonado, told police she threatened to run off with their young child if he did not bring her discarded credit card slips from his job at a hotel. She used the information to buy $8,000 worth of rare Beanie Babies at area stores. When arrested, police found 206 Beanie Babies at her home.[7]
Jesus teaches the Pharisees that their obsession with possessing power and prestige in the temple is as big of a waste as this woman’s obsession with Beanie Babies. Paul shows us a better way. He shows that what we receive by the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ surpasses what we could ever earn or take. What is valuable in the kingdom of heaven is not what we take, not what we possess on our own, but what we receive from the Lord Jesus—righteousness that alone is God’s.
[1] New Interpreter’s Bible. Leander E. Keck. General Editor, Vol. VII. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, page 414.
[2] Ibid, Vol. XI, page 526.
[3] Acts , 7:58, 8:1
[4]Brueggemann, Walter, Cousar,Charles B., Gaventa, Beverly R., Newsome, James D, “Texts for Preaching, A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV, Year A.” Louisville: Westminster-John Knox Press, 1995, page 512. The New Interpreter’s is more vivid recommending “excrement” (page 527).
[5] 2Samuel 12:1-14
[6] Sumner, Gordon, “Every Breath You Take.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Every_Breath_You_Take, retrieved October 4, 2008.
[7] From news services, “Beanie Babies Fan Gets Six Months for Credit Card Account Fraud,” The Washington Post, November 21, 1998, A11 found at Homiletics Online, http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/illustration_search.asp?item_topic_id=2721, retrieved October 4, 2008.
Exodus 20:1-4, 7-9, 19-23
Psalm 19
Philippians 3:4b-14
Matthew 21:33-46
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
There’s an old expression, possession is nine-tenths of the law. We’ve all heard it. This passage shows one example of how this works. In the parable, Jesus says, “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance.’” This sounds off to us, squatter’s rights doesn’t seem appropriate. But in this time, if the landowner dies without an heir, the tenant farmers would have a claim to become the new owners of the land.[1] Doesn’t seem right to us, but in the day it was the law.
Since possession was nine-tenths of the law, these wicked tenants were ready to cash in the final tenth.
And just to add one more proverbial log to the proverbial fire, the landowner provided a great vineyard for the tenants. There were vines in it, a fence around it, and a watchtower over it. There was even a press dug to accept the grapes to begin making wine. This is the Cadillac of vineyards. This is the place in Napa or Bordeaux that you find on the Travel Channel and on the Bloomberg Business Network. It was gorgeous and it was open for business.
No wonder they wanted it. It was fruitful; no wonder they were willing to take it. At the point of a sword, they were willing to take it.
Some would say they deserved it. After the hard work is done, the landowner sends his slaves and then his son to collect his produce. Matthew’s version doesn’t say “collect his share of the produce,” it says “collect his produce.” Considering the tenant’s perspective and the popularity of absentee landlords, some would say the tenants did earn it.
Let’s switch gears. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul shows who he was, and who he is now.
Paul had everything a Jewish man could want. He was everything a Jewish man ascribed to become. He was circumcised on the eighth day, showing that he was an Israelite by race, by birth. He was not a convert to the faith. He was not a newcomer to the faith. He was born into the tribe of Benjamin, a virtuous position because Benjamin was one of Jacob’s favorite sons. A virtuous position because the tribe of Benjamin remained faithful to the house of David.[2] He received these gifts of status for no other reason than by virtue of birth.
And if this were not enough, he earned more on his own. When known as Saul, he was a zealous persecutor of the church of Christ. In Acts we learn he was present at the stoning of Stephen, and that he approved of it.[3]
He was righteous under the law. He was a Pharisee, a sect renowned for adherence to the law and every regulation that pertained to it. They were faithful and sincere Jews who earned their righteousness according to their good actions. And this is where Paul tells the church at Philippi what his earned righteousness was worth.
“Whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ. More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Jesus Christ as my Lord.” Paul goes on to say that all of the righteousness that came from his birth or the law he now regarded as rubbish.
Oh, and rubbish is the gentle term. Dung[4] is a better, if more graphic, translation.
Paul came to know that all he was given by his parents, status, education, even Roman citizenship which isn’t even mentioned in this passage, is for naught in the light of knowing Jesus Christ as the risen Lord. Paul tells the church at Philippi that he has no righteousness of his own that comes from the law, but he is given righteousness in Christ that comes through faith, the righteousness from God based on faith.
Just to say this one more time, Paul has nothing of worth, nothing of value, and nothing of righteousness except what comes through faith in Christ. Righteousness is from God based on faith alone.
So back to the parable, historically, this parable is interpreted as an allegory. We plug in God the Father as the landowner and Jesus as his son. The slaves the landowner sends are the prophets of Israel. The tenant farmers are the leaders of the temple, the chief priests, the elders, and the Pharisees. The vineyard and the fruit are the kingdom of heaven.
All of the vineyard imagery ties back to the prophet Isaiah talking about the Lord planting a vineyard.
Jesus’ question to the Pharisees and their reply to Jesus harken back to Nathan’s accusations against King David’s adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah—as well as David’s response.[5]
The parable is a window into the temple at the time of the Christ and the people who run it. They are seen as taking what they will in their own righteousness to lift up themselves as much as they lift the Lord. The temple leaders, the chief priests, the elders, the Pharisees take what they think they earned; they take what they think they deserved. They take what they do for the righteousness of the law, the righteousness they understand.
But Paul tells us there is a better way than to take dung from the heap. People take; the Lord gives. Saved by grace through faith, the Lord our God, God in Three Persons gives us righteousness. Paul shows us that what we receive in Christ is far greater than all we can ever take for ourselves. Christ’s righteousness is greater than all we can ever take or earn for ourselves.
The wicked tenants know what they want, they know what they think they deserve. But when challenged by Jesus, the allegorical tenants of the vineyard, the Pharisees, know that these wretches will be put to a miserable death. They even begin to know that taken righteousness is no righteousness at all.
In 1983, a rock band called The Police recorded the quintessential love song of the early 1980’s. “Every Breath You Take” was number one on the Billboard charts for eight weeks in North America and four in England.[6] This song was the theme for proms all over America. Couples danced to this at their weddings. It’s haunting melody and wonderful vocal made couples everywhere say, “That’s our song.”
Every breath you take
And every move you make
Every bond you break
Every step you take
I'll be watching you
Every single day
And every word you say
Every game you play
Every night you stay
I'll be watching you
All right, it’s lovely. It misses something without the melody, but there’s a reason Kenny sings and I don’t. But if you think the last line of each stanza is a little foreboding, that’s nothing compared to the next two verses.
Oh, can't you see
You belong to me
Now my poor heartaches
With every step you take
Every move you make
Every vow you break
Every smile you fake
Every claim you stake
I'll be watching you
This isn’t a love song; it’s a song about possession. This isn’t romantic; it’s a theme song for stalkers. Grotesque obsession, not love, oozes from this song. This obsessive behavior is the fate of those who seek the righteousness this earth gives. Taking is not about righteousness, it’s about possession.
About ten years ago, a woman who used stolen credit card numbers to feed her habit was given six months in jail and five years' probation with the condition she did not touch her drug of choice: Beanie Babies. Tamara Dee Maldonado of Marina, California was sentenced by Judge Jonathan Price after pleading guilty to four counts of commercial burglary. She said her obsession with the beanbag toys began when she worked as a cashier at McDonald's and had to stuff Beanie Babies into Happy Meals. She was soon ordering for herself by telephone, using her own credit cards and, eventually, stolen cards.
Her ex-husband, Gabriel Maldonado, told police she threatened to run off with their young child if he did not bring her discarded credit card slips from his job at a hotel. She used the information to buy $8,000 worth of rare Beanie Babies at area stores. When arrested, police found 206 Beanie Babies at her home.[7]
Jesus teaches the Pharisees that their obsession with possessing power and prestige in the temple is as big of a waste as this woman’s obsession with Beanie Babies. Paul shows us a better way. He shows that what we receive by the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ surpasses what we could ever earn or take. What is valuable in the kingdom of heaven is not what we take, not what we possess on our own, but what we receive from the Lord Jesus—righteousness that alone is God’s.
[1] New Interpreter’s Bible. Leander E. Keck. General Editor, Vol. VII. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, page 414.
[2] Ibid, Vol. XI, page 526.
[3] Acts , 7:58, 8:1
[4]Brueggemann, Walter, Cousar,Charles B., Gaventa, Beverly R., Newsome, James D, “Texts for Preaching, A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV, Year A.” Louisville: Westminster-John Knox Press, 1995, page 512. The New Interpreter’s is more vivid recommending “excrement” (page 527).
[5] 2Samuel 12:1-14
[6] Sumner, Gordon, “Every Breath You Take.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Every_Breath_You_Take, retrieved October 4, 2008.
[7] From news services, “Beanie Babies Fan Gets Six Months for Credit Card Account Fraud,” The Washington Post, November 21, 1998, A11 found at Homiletics Online, http://www.homileticsonline.com/subscriber/illustration_search.asp?item_topic_id=2721, retrieved October 4, 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)