Saturday Night Theologian
27 April 2003

Acts 4:32-35

The question of whether private property is a good or a bad idea has divided humanity for centuries. Consider these quotations on the subject:

Clashes between cultures with different understandings of private property-- white Americans and Native Americans, or white Australians and Aboriginal Australians, for example--always seem to result in great injustices. Moreover, the society with a higher regard for private property as a basic right generally forces its view on the society that views at least certain commodities, such as land, as not susceptible to private ownership. Some would argue that industrialized society would be impossible apart from private property, and the fall of the communist countries allied with Russia, as well as the transition of China towards a market economy, seem to support such an idea. But is it that private property is an inalienable human right, or is it that human beings are innately greedy and prone to desire ownership of whatever they can call their own? The early church began an experiment in common ownership that has been repeated in small Christian communities around the world through the ages. They shared their possessions, and no one was needy. Certainly that is not the case with the world as a whole today, so the church needs to look again at the principle of shared resources, particularly those resources most necessary to sustain life: land, water, food, medicine, and shelter. If you're uncertain about the issue, ask yourself this question--in your concept of heaven (or an ideal world), do you envision great disparities in wealth among the inhabitants? If not, then why do so many Christians tolerate, or even support, some of the unjust distributions of wealth and property that exist in the world today?

For another discussion of this passage, click here.

Psalm 133

I was a member of church where the pastor preached on Psalm 133 at least once a year--maybe more often! These three verses contain a message that Christians need to hear often, and we need to proclaim it to the world as well. In Ephesians, Paul speaks of some of the unifying factors of Christianity--one Lord, one faith, one baptism--yet the church is all too often divided. The problem is not merely that there are many denominations. In fact, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, because the multiplicity of denominations reflects the divergence of views on various subjects that is natural to humanity. The problem is not divergence of views but rather intolerance toward those with whom we differ. When Catholics won't commune with Orthodox, Pentecostals won't worship with Anglicans, and Baptists won't even accept monetary offerings from other Baptists for causes they all support, there is a problem. Intolerance is a sin and a blight on the work of Christ. However, simple tolerance of those with different beliefs or practices is not enough. Tolerance is only the first step toward respect for others, followed by acceptance, and finally by community. Of course, unity is not only important among Christians. Christians should take the lead in building bridges with Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and others with whom they differ doctrinally. There is much we share with those of other faiths who also see value in unity. In fact, in many ways, Christians who have a vision for unity have more in common with Muslims who also have that vision, for example, than they do with Christians who are content in their own little group. Nevertheless, as we reach forward and make new connections with those of different faiths (and ethnic groups, nationalities, etc.), we must always be ready and willing to reach back to our brothers and sisters in Christ who at the moment are not ready to admit others to their fold, because some day they may come around, too. In these troubled times, Christians must resist the urge to take sides against those who consider us their enemies because of our beliefs, whether of a theological or political nature. Too many Christians are setting the terrible example of condemning those with whom they disagree; it is our task as progressive Christians to set the example of toleration, love, and respect even for those who attack us. "Blessed are you when people revile you, and persecute you, and say all kinds of bad things about you for my sake. Rejoice and be glad, for they treated the prophets the same way."

For other discussions of this passage, click here or here.

1 John 1:1-2:2

When students of the Greek New Testament first begin to learn Greek, the first book they read is often 1 John. The vocabulary of the book is repetitious, and the grammar is simple, so it is easy to read. However, the ideas in the book are as profound as any found elsewhere in scripture. The passage in this week's reading illustrates this idea well. God is portrayed as light, the absence of darkness, so his true followers will live lives that reflect that light. However, since no one is perfect (and those who claim to be are liars), God has provided a means of forgiveness, so that his followers will not lose heart. If we confess our sins to God, he will forgive us, because he is a faithful and just God. The author portrays Jesus as our heavenly defense attorney, pleading our case constantly before God, the righteous judge. Even though we are guilty, Jesus himself has already paid the penalty through his death on the cross, so believers need only trust him and live lives of faithfulness. This simple passage reveals at least three profound truths. First, God is light, without a shadow of darkness. He is a God of love; he does not inflict harm on his followers, even when they fail him. Second, no matter how badly we stumble, forgiveness is always available to us. God's love could forgive Peter for his three-fold denial of Christ, and it could even have forgiven Judas, had he but asked. Third, Christ's death benefits not only Christians, but the whole world. Those who believe that God is on their side and opposed to their adversaries have not understood this principle: Christ died "not for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world." Although there are many different Christian understandings of the meaning of atonement-- substitutionary, sacrificial, subjective--this statement is a clear repudiation of the Calvinist doctrine of limited atonement: Christ's death benefits everyone, regardless of whether they accept it. In what way does it benefit non-Christians? One way in which non-Christians benefit from the death of Christ is through the testimony of Christians to what God through Christ has done in their lives. A second way that non-Christians benefit is when Christians lay aside their hatreds and prejudices and share God's love with their neighbors around the world. Let us learn more what it means to walk in the light as he is in the light!

For another discussion of this passage, click here.

John 20:19-31

"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast" (the White Queen to Alice in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass). One of the most valuable lessons I learned at church as a teenager was that "doubt" is not a four-letter word. In other words, doubt is not the opposite of faith. In fact, the person who never doubts never grows in faith. Indoctrination inculcates certainty and stifles growth; education raises questions, and even doubts, and stimulates growth. There is no virtue in believing the impossible; doing so is not faith, it's ignorance. Thomas demanded proof, and only when he had seen Jesus with his own eyes did he believe. Believers today have not had the opportunity to see the risen Christ, so we can only rely on the testimony of others centuries ago and on our own subjective experiences. Sometimes those experiences are as real as anything we've ever seen with our eyes, yet is there any wonder that many people doubt? Were Jesus' resurrection appearances actual physical manifestations, or were they visions of some sort? At times they are described in the gospels as physical appearances. At other times, as in Paul's Damascus road experience, they are more like visions. In the present passage the physical and the psychological are combined. Thomas is asked to touch the physical body of the risen Jesus, yet this physical body is said to be able to dematerialize and pass through locked doors. Believers have different opinions about the nature of Jesus' resurrection appearances, but what all agree on is that the disciples' encounters with the resurrected Christ were life-changing experiences (I use "disciples" here in the wider sense to include all of his followers--the Twelve, the women at the tomb, and others). The important question we must ask ourselves is not what our view of the resurrection is, but rather how our lives have changed as a result of our encounter with Christ. If we have the same beliefs as most of the others who live in our communities, what impact has Jesus had in our lives? If we equate patriotism with Christianity, while giving lip service to the idea that God cares for the whole world, what impact has Jesus had in our lives? If we horde our wealth and support tax cuts that will hurt the weakest members of our society, what impact has Jesus had in our lives? If we value American lives over the lives of those who live in other countries, what impact has Jesus had in our lives? Absolute certainty in doctrine is no proof of proximity to God's will, because people can be absolutely wrong. More important than doctrine is action; as Jesus said, "You will know them by their fruits." So let's follow Thomas, the apostle of doubt, and question many of the things that we've been taught, but most importantly, let's remember our encounter with the risen Christ, and let him transform our lives.

For other discussions of this passage, click here, or here, or here.