So You’re a Priest: When Plan B Becomes Plan A

This is part 2 of a sermon series through 2 Corinthians. As I said last week, best guess is that Paul wrote at least 4 letters to the church in Corinth, and what we call 1st and 2nd Corinthians are the 2nd and 4th letters, respectively. The other two are presumed lost. After sending what we call 1 Corinthians to Corinth, Paul followed up by sending Timothy to check on the situation, and Timothy came back with a bad report. This prompted Paul to visit in person, and he left in humiliation. When he got back to Ephesus, he wrote the third letter, apparently scolding or reprimanding them.

Presumably in that letter, he indicated that he would be back soon for another visit on his way to Macedonia. Furthermore, he’d visit them again on his way back from Macedonia. However, at some point his plans changed. Paul went straight to Macedonia, intending to have a one, longer, visit in Corinth.

Put yourself in Paul’s sandals for a minute:

Why might you want to go straight to Corinth ASAP? On the other hand, why might you want to put off the visit as long as possible?

What would be the benefit of two, shorter, visits with a side trip to Macedonia in between? On the other hand, why might a single, longer, visit be better?

How might the church in Corinth react when you changed your plans?

2 Corinthians 1

Commentary

v12 boast. Last week I said that afflictions and tribulations are mentioned more in this letter than in any other NT book. Likewise, Greek word group for boasting is used more in this letter than the rest of the NT combined (31 of 61 references). One might think the two are related somehow, but the Greek for boasting can also mean rejoicing or glorying in (just as one might boast in, rejoice in, or glory in the Boston Red Sox).

v14 boast of us just as we will boast in you. In spite of all the troubles, Paul does not lose his long-term perspective. In the short term, we may have troubles of many kinds, but over time, can we boast, can we rejoice of, our growth in Jesus Christ?

v17 ‘Yes’ and ‘No.’ Reminiscent of Matt 5: 37, where Jesus says, "Let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'." What Paul and Jesus have in mind is double-mindedness—saying one thing even while making plans to do another, being so fickle in our promises that we have to swear oaths to make our words believable. The dilemma for Christians who pray for God’s will and commit themselves to a certain course of action is always the same: What do you do when circumstances change?

v20 ‘Yes’ ... ‘Amen’. Remember, amen means "truly," or "it is so," and is a holy affirmation of what has just been said.

v21-22 The point of Paul’s reasoning lies in the certainty of God—not us!—as the initiator and guarantor of what is to come

deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. The NIV overreaches in its interpretation. The conclusion is something more like, "put his Spirit in our hearts as earnest money." Earnest, or good faith, money is a down payment, vouchsafing a contract that has its fulfillment in the future. Such is God’s work in us.

Application

I’m not really happy with Paul’s reasoning for why he changed his plans. I’ve read the letter in different translations, hoping that Paul’s convoluted way of writing—do I say ‘Yes, yes," and ,"No, no"?—could be made clear by somebody’s interpretation of what Paul said. (And it would be an interpretation—reading between the lines—e.g. 2 Cor 7:8a: Even if I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it, though I did regret it—is interpreting Paul’s frame of mind and his motivation.) Certainly Paul is concerned that the Corinthians view him as a man of character, a man of Spirit, and apostle of Jesus Christ, and therefore a man whose words and deeds reveal not just a man of integrity, but a man sent by God on a mission.

Certainly we struggle with the same tension, the incongruity between what we say we are going to do and what we actually do.

It can happen with great, life-changing events, like jobs: I prayed about what I was supposed to do next, and I thought God told me to do Plan A, but no everything seems so hard, and wrong, and I’m wondering if I heard God right. In fact, I wonder if I heard God at all. Maybe it was Plan B all along. Or maybe I’m delusional. Maybe I’m just fooling myself.

It can happen with small, seemingly inconsequential events, like habits: I prayed about dieting, but then I forgot until the cheeseburger hit my lips, and by then it was too late. I need to pray harder, I guess. Maybe tomorrow.

Hint: they’re all life-changing events—if you realize that the power of God is not made manifest by what you do as much as who you are. The further we go with Christ, the more we realize he cares less about Plan A or Plan B than he cares about the person we are becoming in the process of following. Paul made his plans to visit Corinth (and no doubt he prayed about those plans before committing to them) and then life threw him something unexpected. His plans changed. The further we go with Christ, the more we realize that God is found at those forks in the road where we either doggedly follow our original plans or opt to go a new way.

Hint: we cannot make inflexible rules about following God—at that fork in the road, sometimes God is happy us taking either way, sometimes only one way, and sometimes neither way (ouch!). Perhaps Paul had to repent of his original plan—prayed over as it was. Perhaps Paul had a change of heart. Perhaps it had nothing to do with the original plan but rather Paul’s willingness to adapt. [1] Not all changes of heart entail yielding to temptations, but all changes of heart ultimately entail yielding to God.

God’s, "Yes!" is the word planted in you, the Spirit of Christ growing within you. We might vacillate, but God’s calling does not waver. We might stumble, but God will pick us up. We might be confused by the choices we have to make along the way, but God says, "I will rejoice in you, as you give me glory by turning to me in the process of making a decision." Often, that turning towards God is more important the actual decision itself. [2]

Points to Ponder

Religious groups that refuse to reconsider past decisions tend to end poorly, like Pharisees, Southern anti-abolitionist churches, or fundamentalist (polygamous) LDS churches. Where have you seen churches lose their way by sticking with theological or social positions forever?

Where are you living bound to a past decision? Could it be that God’s "Yes!" to you would involve you saying, "No!" to your past decision and moving on?

End Notes
1 - In 2 Cor 2:12-13 Paul indicates that he expected to rendezvous with Titus—who had gone to Corinth—in Troas. However, when Titus didn’t arrive, Paul pressed on to Macedonia. Was Titus’ extended stay in Corinth the hand of God at work?
2 - As I have said before, I think lots of our choices are like ice cream. Could it be that God says, "Chocolate or vanilla: pick what would make you happy, but thank you for asking my opinion. You are a good child for asking."

So You’re a Priest: Blessed by [Dis]Comfort

We are going to look at what it means for you to be a priest by looking at what Paul felt about being a pastor to (from what we know about them) his most ornery flock of parishioners, the church in Corinth. Reading between the lines, the Corinthians were huge trouble for Paul. After preaching in Corinth for 18 months, Paul went to Ephesus, and from evidence in Paul’s letters to the Corinthians we can reconstruct a timeline for what happened next:

From Ephesus, he wrote a letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5:9) which has been lost to posterity.

The Corinthians replied via a letter full of questions about problems they were having (e.g. 1 Cor. 7:1) from sexual promiscuity to schisms within the church.

Paul wrote a second letter (1 Corinthians) answering the questions, and sent Timothy to Corinth to follow up on addressing the problems.

Timothy returned to Ephesus with distressing news about the situation in Corinth, and Paul made a brief "painful" visit to Corinth (2 Cor. 2:1-2) and left in humiliation.

Paul sent a third letter "out of much affliction and anguish of heart" (2 Cor. 2:4) which was hand-delivered by Titus. Paul had been planning to go to Macedonia via Corinth and then return again to Corinth afterwards (2 Cor. 1:15-16), but he changed his plans and went directly to Macedonia, where Titus caught up to him with good news about a change of attitude by the Corinthians.

Paul sent Titus back to Corinth with a fourth letter (2 Corinthians) intended as a letter of encouragement and reconciliation.

Through this trials, Paul never lost sight of God’s blessings, knowing that he had been blessed in order to be a blessing to others. I pray you (and I) might be of the same mind as we live to bless others as well.

2 Corinthians 1

Commentary

v1 apostle. The legitimacy of Paul’s leadership is an ongoing problem in Corinth.

v3 God...Father...Father...God. This arrangement is called a chiasm, and it is intended to focus attention on the center of the passage, which in this case identifies our Lord Jesus Christ with compassion.

v4 troubles. This word is used more in 2 Corinthians than anywhere else in the NT—in fact over 20% of the NT references are in this letter. The word is frequently translated as affliction or tribulation.

Actually the NIV deemphasizes comfort in this verse! A better translation would be, "the one comforting us in our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble through the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God." What is that comfort for you?

v5 share in our sufferings [&] comfort. This verse is reminiscent of Romans 8:17: we share in Christ’s sufferings in order that we might share in his glory.

v8-11 The word translated as comfort in v3-7 also means encouragement. Re-read the text, substituting encouragement for comfort; does this change alter how you interpret v8-11?

Application

Comfort does not guarantee being comfortable.

Paul has been blessed beyond belief by the God of all comfort (v3) and his comfort overflows (v5). However, Paul is not comfortable. He is not living on easy street. He does not seek to satisfy his own needs first. If anything, we’d say Paul has had a tough time of it—in his own words (v8), "beyond ability to endure."

Protestants point to Christ’s enigmatic words on the cross, "It is finished," (John 19:30) as evidence that all his suffering was left on the cross. However, Paul suggests something different:

Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ's afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness—the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Colossians 1:24-27)

Christ came to earth and preached, "The time is near ... the kingdom of God has come. Repent and believe the good news!" (Mark 1:15). In Colossians, Paul reveals how that same message is going out today, through the Spirit of Christ, through Christ in the world, through the church, which is his body. If Christ suffered bodily when he was on earth preaching his message, so it is for the church, suffering as Christ suffered for the sake of the same message—the same goal—which is to bring those around us closer to God. Like Paul, we fill up in our flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ afflictions ... at least that’s what we do when we are living the life to which God has called us.

Like Paul, we have been blessed beyond belief by the God of all comfort and his comfort overflows; however, it is not for the sake of being comfortable that we are comforted. Indeed we, like Paul, can find ourselves at wit’s end, at strength’s limit, and soul’s breaking point, and that is when God speaks in a quiet voice and says,

This is not the end for you, because this is not what defines who you are: not your wits, not your strength, not your soul. My mind, my strength, and my spirit will raise you up again, and you will be a new person again, and you will go on. In these words take heart.

Take heart. Literally, that is what encouragement is, taking a new heart. That alone is our comfort. Our circumstances may not have changed one whit, but we can take comfort even in our discomfort.

Points to Ponder

A minister posted on a blog about the rejection he suffered at the hands of Christians when he was open and honest about his ongoing troubles (http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-real-prosperity-gospel). He says, in part:

Ask yourself this question: Why is it that so many western Christians find the greatest challenges to their faith are experiences that do not even qualify as persecution or serious suffering? Why will the loss of a job or the moral failure of a pastor lead to the end of faith? Why do interpersonal conflicts in a church cause so many to abandon Christianity altogether?

Could it be that our Christian life will be richer—and feel more authentic—when we realize that afflictions are an ever-present part of the Christian life and we are not losers for failing to achieve pain-free living?

So You’re a Priest: ‘What’s in it for me?’ Is Not the Question

Last Sunday during communion, I mentioned that the whole congregation is called to be priests—what Protestants call "the priesthood of all believers." Last Sunday, I wasn’t sure what I was going to be preaching on after the summer series of Olympic-theme sermons; I felt that a new direction was needed after two months of sermons on trials, endurance, and perseverance. However, it wasn’t until Monday that I realized what that new direction would be:

If you have given your life over to Jesus, your life is no longer your own. Even though you may often not feel up to the task, God is calling you to be a priest: a mediator of God to others, a mediator for others to God, making a difference in the world by taking grace into the world.

You can do it.

At first it looks like a lot of pressure. "Who am I," you say of yourself, "to be a priest?" I tell you a secret, "I know you’re not good enough to be a priest. I’m not good enough to be a priest. One of the mysteries of the kingdom of God is that he uses us anyway, and somehow it usually works. We usually don’t see until afterwards how it all worked. Not by our power, certainly, but by God’s power and for his glory."

1 Timothy 6:17-19

Commentary

Context: Paul’s comments appear in his final instructions to Timothy (1 Tim 6:3-21) which deals a lot with godliness and the love of money. In reading the larger context, one might conclude that godliness and the love of money are polar opposites.

During the sermon, we watched Rob Bell’s Nooma video, "Rich", which referred to today’s sermon text.

v17 Three commands are given in this verse for the rich. The first two—not to be arrogant and not to put hope in wealth—are prohibitions that amplify each other. Putting hope in worldly wealth is arrogance. The third command is the positive alternative: as opposed to trusting in material stuff, trust in God. With this comes the promise that he will give you what you need.

v18 Likewise, the four commands given here amplify one another. Several weeks ago, I said that when Paul charged Timothy to train himself to be godly (1 Tim. 4:7) that Paul did not expect perfection; rather, he wanted Timothy to develop a bias for godliness, i.e. a predisposition to do good. We see an example of that bias here. Good deeds without a generous heart are worthless; and a good attitude with no follow through is dead (James 2:14-18).

good deeds. Bell described this as doing mitzvoth: doing the commands of God. The good deeds Paul has in mind are a frequent topic in this letter (2:9-10; 5:9-10; 5:24-25) as well as elsewhere in the Bible (Matt 5:14-16; Eph 2:10; Heb 10:24-25; 1 Peter 2:11-12; ).

v19 lay up treasure ... truly life. The verb here is a compound word that means something like, "from their own treasure they will amass treasure." We are called to take one form of treasure—material wealth—and turn it into a better form of treasure—spiritual wealth. Material wealth will fail to satisfy, but spiritual wealth will last forever. In material wealth we will die impoverished and alone, but in spiritual wealth we will live in the company of God and the saints. One way looks like living, but the other way leads to real life. (Luke 16:1-15)

Application

We have been blessed by God in order to be a blessing to others. However, we live as if we have been blessed by God to order to indulge ourselves. How could we get everything so wrong?

The typical advertisement we hear on the radio or see on TV is designed to make us dissatisfied with what we have or to create in us a yearning for something that we heretofore didn’t realize that we needed. "I thought my life was OK. I didn’t realize that I was missing out on Blue-ray movies! I didn’t realize that I was committing a grave error by driving the wrong kind of car! I didn’t realize that my clothes were to hopelessly out-of-fashion!" The ads urge us to consider only our own needs and desires, e.g.:

Have it your way (Burger King)

Yours is here (Dell Computer)

Live richly (Citibank)

Just do it (Nike)

Do what tastes right (Wendy’s)

You deserve a break today (McDonald’s)

What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas (Las Vegas Convention & Visitors Authority)

What is your favorite ad that urges you to overindulge?

When we become dissatisfied with what we have, we come to believe the lie that God is not going to give us what we need. We become discontented with God. When we give in to our newfound yearnings to indulge, set ourselves in opposition to God: we will decide what is good for us; we will decide what is enough; we will provide for ourselves. This is the way it always is when we find the good life. When the Israelites were freed from slavery and returned from Egypt to Israel, Moses warned them:

When you have eaten and are satisfied, praise the Lord your God for the good land he has given you. Be careful that you do not forget the Lord your God, failing to observe his commands, his laws and his decrees that I am giving you this day. Otherwise, when you eat and are satisfied, when you build fine houses and settle down, and when your herds and flocks grow large and your silver and gold increase and all you have is multiplied, then your heart will become proud and you will forget the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery ... You may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me." But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today. (Deut 8:10-14,17-18)

Ironically, Moses told them they had been called to be a royal priesthood, a holy nation, and I am giving you the same message today. I just hope you have more success than the Israelites!

As part of my annual autumn anti-Christmas-consumerism diatribe, I submit that you’ve been messing around in a secularly priestly role for years. Every Christmas shopping season, you have become a mediator of Santa Claus to others, a mediator for others to Santa, trying to make a difference by taking material gifts into the world. To borrow a phrase Jesus (Matt. 7:11), "If you, brainwashed as you are by commercials, want to bring grace into the world through DVDs, flat screen TVs, and Aéropostale jeans, how much more does your Father in heaven want to use you to bring real grace, lasting grace, into a world that is dying for something real?" Our idea of being a blessing to others is a perversion of the real grace, the real peace, the real justice that God would have us bring into the world.

How would it look, how would it feel ...

... to live to be a blessing for others, taking the blessings you have received from God and passing them on to others?

... to find satisfaction from giving to those in need?

... to live on less in order to be able to bless others more?

What would have to change in you to make that a reality?

Points to Ponder

Everyone worries about cost of heat this winter. Economists predict Americans will spend an average of $850 per person on Christmas gifts. What is the priestly answer to this predicament?

The NIV only mentions "godliness" 10 times, but 6 of those references are in this letter from Paul to Timothy and 2 more are in the other pastoral letters (1 Tim 2:1-2; 3:16; 4:7-8; 6:3-11 (3x); 2 Tim 3:1-5; Titus 1:1-2). Godliness seems an impossibly high standard, but what practical examples of godliness do these verses cite? Could it be that living to be a blessing to others is part of what godliness is all about?

In Judaism, there are many ways of listing and talking about good deeds, but a good summary is the six constant mitzvoth, "six commands which are perpetual and constant, applicable at all times, all the days of our lives:" (1) to believe in God, and that he created all things; (2) to not believe in anything else other than God; (3) to believe in God's oneness; (4) to fear God; (5) to love God; (6) not to pursue the passions of your heart and stray after your eyes. How do the six constant mitzvoh fit into today’s lesson?

Faster, Higher, Stronger: Sportsmanship

This is the 9th (and last) of a series of Olympic-themed sermons. The title of the sermon series, "Faster, Higher, Stronger" is the English translation of the Olympic motto: Citius, Altius, Fortius. One of the most prestigious prizes awarded during the Olympics is the True Spirit of Sortsmanship medal, also known as the Pierre de Coubertin medal. At each Olympics, hundreds of gold medals are awarded, but in the 112-year history of the Modern Olympic Games, the Pierre de Coubertin medal has been awarded only ten times.

Frequently, the award winners have earned the award in the process of losing a gold medal. In the 1936 Olympics, silver medalist Luz Long gave Jesse Owen advice on the long jump; in the 1988 Olympics, Canadian sailor Lawrence Lemieux was in second place when he stopped to rescue two other sailors who had capsized (Lemieux finished 22nd); bronze medalist Eugenio Monti of Italy gave the British team a bolt off his sled when theirs broke (the Brits went on to win the gold, and defending his actions Monti said, "[He] didn't win because I gave him the bolt. He won because he had the fastest run.").

Sportsmanship doesn’t always sit well, hence the saying, "Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser." To some, winning is all there is. Consider Ara Abrahamian, Swedish wrestler in the 2008 Olympics, who lost in the semi-finals on a judge’s decision. Abrahamian protested, but officials refused to review the decision. Abrahamian won the bronze medal match, took part in the medal ceremony, shook the hands of the one of the other medalists, and then placed his medal in the middle of the wrestling mat, and left the ceremony. He said, "I don’t care about this medal. I wanted the gold." He was subsequently disqualified.

Above athletic success is the loftier goal of sportsmanship. The athlete who pauses during competition to help an opponent has not lost focus, but rather has in mind a higher goal, a more valuable crown.

Mark 15:16-20

Commentary

The context, of course, is the trial and eventual crucifixion of Jesus. Although the gospel accounts vary in the details and the sequence of events during the trial, in Mark’s account, from the time Jesus is handed over to the Romans until his death, the only accusation brought against Jesus is his claim to be king of the Jews. In Mark alone, while Jesus is alive and before the Romans, nobody (not even Jesus) alludes to his claims of divinity and divine sonship. However, his claim to be king of the Jews is mentioned repeatedly: v2, v9, v12, v18, v26, v32. Only after his death does the Roman centurion on the scene wise up and say, "Surely this man was the Son of God" (v39).

v17 twisted together a crown. There are several synonyms in English for a crown: chaplet, circlet, corona, diadem, laureate, tiara, wreath. There are several Greek words as well; the word used here refers to a wreath—a crown that is woven, twisted, or braided together. This was the same term used to describe the crowns given to victorious athletes at the Olympics and other games. This is the only term used for Jesus’ crown of thorns, and the word is also used later in the NT for other crowns: Matt. 27:29; John 19:2,5; 1 Cor. 9:25; Phil. 4:1; 1 Thess. 2:19; 2 Tim. 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; Rev. 2:10; 3:11; 4:4,10; 6:2; 9:7; 12:1; 14:14. A few of these verses refer to victorious athletes; however, most refer children of God who have overcome great challenges and who have persevered to the end. A couple refer to the crown worn by Christ on his return, but the crown is signaling the ultimate victor. In the old Westerns, you could always spot the hero, because he wore a white hat. In Revelation, the hero isn’t wearing a white hat, he is wearing the victor’s crown; he is the one who can say, "I have overcome the world" (John 16:25). In only one passage is the bearer of the crown evil (the exception that proves the rule).

v18-20 The language here is a curious mix of proper respect and brutality. They call out to him in welcoming terms … and strike him. They spit on him … and then genuflect before him. The brutality is made all the worse by the interspersed terms of respect which make the conclusion all the worse, "Then they led him out to crucify him."

Application

There is heavy irony in this scene of the persecution of Jesus; Jesus is being spit on beaten, and ridiculed for being exactly what he is: King of the Jews.

It is a maxim of political campaigns—and probably other arguments as well—that the arguments that work, the points that are valid, are exactly the ones that your opponent feels the need to refute—usually stridently.

The problem drinker is precisely the one who insists he does not have a problem.

The domestic abuser is precisely the one who insists he loves his wife.

The bigot is precisely the one who insists he respects "those people."

So it is for the Roman soldiers—and in the rest of Mark 15:1-37, the Jews as well. It is precisely those who insist, "We need no other king," who are in most desperate need of a new king. It is precisely those who are most vocal about the illogic of the notion of God who are most protective of their private god (whether they recognize it as a god or not). The old kings must be deposed; the old gods must be torn down; but those in denial will fight for the status quo. They are like Abrahamian, whose god was a gold medal when a greater "god" of sportsmanship (and a bronze medal to boot) was there to be had.

These same people—the ones protecting lesser gods and lesser prizes—will be the ones insisting that your standards are unrealistic, your goals are unattainable, your gods cannot deliver. One can imagine Pilate saying, "Look here, Jesus, renege on your claim to be king, and I’ll let you off with a only a beating." Sometimes the exact thing you will be asked to give up is the exact place where you are about to see victory.

How ironic the crown that was placed on Jesus’ head: the victor’s crown! There is another type of crown found in the NT—the diadem, a crown denoting power, the crown found on the best in the Revelation of John (Rev 12:3, 13:1). The beast, a false king, is all about power, but the real king, the one who will overcome evil, the one wearing the victor’s crown, is Jesus.

God the Father doesn’t tell you, or Jesus, to overcome by yourself. Jesus has to die to achieve the victory. You will have to die to a worldly way of living to see the victory. The crown of persecution that you are called to wear is the victor’s crown, just as it is for Jesus. God’s promise is not that you win without pain, but rather, after the pain, after death, after worldly loss, the Father will raise you up again to new life.

The Father never said it would be easy; he said it would be worth it.

Points to Ponder

Compare the four accounts of Jesus’ trial before Pilate and crucifixion: Matt 27:11-54, Mark 15:1-39, Luke 23:1-47, and John 18:28-19:37.

How do you account for the differences between the different accounts?

Is it a matter of different eye witnesses remembering events differently?

Could the different authors have had different readers in mind (and hence different themes) in mind when they wrote?

Church tradition is that the gospel of Mark was probably written by John Mark under the supervision of Peter for the church in Rome. Why would kingship have meant something different to the church in Rome than the church in Jerusalem?