Look—I Am With You. Dale Goldsmith

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ to continue your membership? Are there any standards that need to be met for you to be generally accepted as Christian in America?

      Someone was describing the standards and expectations for Christians in his hometown during his youth: Christians were people who were nice to the mail man. That suggests that to be considered a Christian you don’t need to clear a very high bar. Or, to put it another way, everyone is a Christian. Is that really the kind of group to which you want to belong? The comedian Groucho Marx once told of a country club that had standards so low that it would even admit him; he wasn’t sure that he really wanted to join an organization where standards were that low.

      The disciples spent some time discussing which of them was the greatest (most important) in the kingdom of heaven (18:1). Jesus preempted any such discussion by issuing the criteria by which Christians would be evaluated. In addition to being a servant and facing the power of the Roman empire, the criteria for greatness had to do with teaching God’s laws (all of them) and doing God’s laws (again, all of them). This is not work for the fainthearted.

      The German philosopher Nietzsche was scornful of Christianity because he saw it as producing wimps—people who would be subservient. He missed the point: Christians turned out to be the most powerful of all in the Roman Empire because they stood up to its power by loving and serving others and enduring persecution. Can Christians today pass this same standard?

      Prayer: God of power, give me the strength to be a college student, and to be strong when necessary. Amen.

      14 – It All Depends

      Matthew 5:21–26 — (21) “You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ (22) But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire. (23) So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, (24) leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift. (25) Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are on the way to court with him, or your accuser may hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. (26) Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.”

      In these “But I say to you” statements of Jesus he clearly was questioning the authority of the Jewish religious and cultural traditions of his day. He was proposing an entirely new way of thinking on the topic of killing. The real question had never been whether killing was wrong; it was only to define the circumstances that justified killing—to clarify when it would be right to kill. We were all aware that all sorts of “killings” occur every day: in war, in auto accidents, in capital punishment, in not sending food to starving refugees.

      For Jesus, there were no “it all depends” moments. He laid down an entirely new paradigm: no killing, period. Don’t even think about it.

      Here you are, between the commonly accepted way of thinking (killing is okay under some circumstances) and a new paradigm (don’t even think about it). In college you have some space to think about the two paradigms—their foundations, their implications. Moving from one to another is a huge deal.

      In his important study of how paradigms change in science (from, say, the world is flat to the world is round), Thomas Kuhn (Structure of Scientific Revolutions) showed that such changes do not occur smoothly (or easily) but when the shift in paradigms from one to another occurs, the old one can’t be understood through the framework of the new one (and vice versa).

      Jesus’ “But I say to you” challenges your faith with a similar change—to make the total leap of faith.

      Prayer: Help me to know that it is you who calls me to a truly radical new understanding. Amen.

      15 – Tinkering with the Rules

      Matthew 5:27–32 — (27) “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ (28) But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (29) If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (30) And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to go into hell. (31) It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ (32) But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

      One of my favorite student-worn T-shirts said, “Question Authority.” Indeed, that is pretty much what college ought to be about. But don’t waste your time questioning all authority—speed limits, income tax law, gravity. You can’t win most of your battles; so be selective about the battles you choose.

      Do you need to read all of the assignment? Can you skim it? Skip it? What about challenging the dormitory rules? Should you sneak your pet snake into your room? Or a gun? If you are really that much smarter than the professor and the people who run the college, why are you paying them the big bucks instead of having them paying you? There are so many rules to break and so little time to do it. Maybe it is easier just to follow the rules and even try to understand them.

      A news story reported the discovery of a young man in a motel room. The bathroom was splattered with blood. He was bleeding and in shock. A Bible lay on the bed, open to the Matthean passage you are reading today. Apparently the unfortunate young man had taken this portion literally, trying to cut off his hand. He should have tried to understand the rule first. Once you accept that Jesus is your true Teacher and offers the ultimate paradigm to guide you, you can work at refining your understanding of his truth.

      Prayer: Give me the courage to take what you say seriously and the wisdom to understand it clearly. Amen.

      16 – What You See is What You Get

      Matthew 5:33–37 — (33) “Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord.’ (34) But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, (35) or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. (36) And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. (37) Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one.”

      Did you ever dismantle a radio, a car, or a toy just to see how it worked? Then did you reassemble it and find that there were pieces left over that you couldn’t fit back in?

      One thing that you will encounter in college is the need to integrate facts, ideas, and theories. A theory or paradigm is an explanation. Its purpose is to explain things. If facts are left out of the explanation, then the explanation is inadequate, and a better, more inclusive theory is needed.

      Take for example the explanation (paradigm) of how the planets move. The ancient Greek scientist Ptolemy (85–165 CE) theorized that the planets followed perfectly circular orbits around the earth. However, since each planet’s actual path was different, he had to work in a lot of extra theoretical details. As additional factual observations added data, Ptolemy’s theory became too cumbersome. Finally Copernicus (1473–1543) offered an apparently simpler solution: the planets circled the sun, not the earth. His theory was undercut by Newton (1642–1727) with an even simpler explanation based on more information. The newer theories worked better to integrate more facts into a simpler explanation. СКАЧАТЬ