Isaac and Rebekah

³⁴So he said, “I am Abraham’s servant. ³⁵ The Lord has greatly blessed my master, and he has become wealthy; he has given him flocks and herds, silver and gold, male and female slaves, camels and donkeys. ³⁶ And Sarah my master’s wife bore a son to my master when she was old; and he has given him all that he has. ³⁷ My master made me swear, saying, ‘You shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, in whose land I live; ³⁸ but you shall go to my father’s house, to my kindred, and get a wife for my son.’

---

⁴² “I came today to the spring, and said, ‘O Lord, the God of my master Abraham, if now you will only make successful the way I am going! ⁴³ I am standing here by the spring of water; let the young woman who comes out to draw, to whom I shall say, “Please give me a little water from your jar to drink,” ⁴⁴ and who will say to me, “Drink, and I will draw for your camels also”—let her be the woman whom the Lord has appointed for my master’s son.’

⁴⁵“Before I had finished speaking in my heart, there was Rebekah coming out with her water jar on her shoulder; and she went down to the spring, and drew. I said to her, ‘Please let me drink.’ ⁴⁶ She quickly let down her jar from her shoulder, and said, ‘Drink, and I will also water your camels.’ So I drank, and she also watered the camels. ⁴⁷ Then I asked her, ‘Whose daughter are you?’ She said, ‘The daughter of Bethuel, Nahor’s son, whom Milcah bore to him.’ So I put the ring on her nose, and the bracelets on her arms. ⁴⁸ Then I bowed my head and worshiped the Lord, and blessed the Lord, the God of my master Abraham, who had led me by the right way to obtain the daughter of my master’s kinsman for his son. ⁴⁹ Now then, if you will deal loyally and truly with my master, tell me; and if not, tell me, so that I may turn either to the right hand or to the left.”

---

⁵⁸ And they called Rebekah, and said to her, “Will you go with this man?” She said, “I will.” ⁵⁹ So they sent away their sister Rebekah and her nurse along with Abraham’s servant and his men. ⁶⁰ And they blessed Rebekah and said to her,

“May you, our sister, become
thousands of myriads;
may your offspring gain possession
of the gates of their foes.”

⁶¹ Then Rebekah and her maids rose up, mounted the camels, and followed the man; thus the servant took Rebekah, and went his way.

⁶² Now Isaac had come from Beer-lahai-roi, and was settled in the Negeb. ⁶³ Isaac went out in the evening to walk in the field; and looking up, he saw camels coming. ⁶⁴ And Rebekah looked up, and when she saw Isaac, she slipped quickly from the camel, ⁶⁵ and said to the servant, “Who is the man over there, walking in the field to meet us?” The servant said, “It is my master.” So she took her veil and covered herself. ⁶⁶ And the servant told Isaac all the things that he had done. ⁶⁷ Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent. He took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.

Genesis 24:34-38, 42-49, 58-67, NRSV

 Here we find Isaac, through a servant of Abraham, finding a wife that is not a Canaanite. We’re not told the name of the servant here or elsewhere in Chapter 24. The consensus of scholars is that this is likely Eliezer mentioned in Genesis 15:2, in which Abram (not yet Abraham), laments that he continues childless having no heir other than his steward, Eliezer of Damascus. 

Regardless, this unnamed servant travels back to Nahor in Haran, from whence Abraham came, and finds there Rebekah, who was born to Bethuel son of Milcah (a daughter of Haran, a brother of Abraham), the wife of Nahor, another brother of Abraham.

 The impetus for this was to keep the Aramaic bloodline pure, unsullied by the native Canaanites.

Two View Points to Reflect Upon

 There are two aspects of the passages concerning Rebekah and Isaac that I suggest we consider:

The first is the faithfulness of Abraham’s servant who is “led” to the place where he will find the future bride of Isaac. See, 24:26-27 — in which he bows his head, praying, “Blessed be the Lord, the God of my master Abraham, who has not forsaken his steadfast love and his faithfulness toward my master. As for me, the Lord has led me on the way to the house of my master’s kin.”

Walter Brueggemann notes that the use of the term “led” (Hebrew נחה — “nāḥāh) merits special significance:

Use of the guidance motif is worth special attention. The term nāḥāh (RSV, “led”) occurs nowhere else in Genesis. Its two characteristic uses refer (a) to guidance in the wilderness sojourn (Exod. 13:17; Ps. 60:9; 78:14; 53; 108:10), and (b) to personal well-being as a request in time of stress (see especially the Psalms of lament, 5:8; 27:11; 31:3; 43:3; 73:24). Surely the best known usage is Ps. 23:2–3 which is a statement of utter confidence in God’s benevolent care:

He leads me beside still waters;

he restores my soul.

He leads me in paths of righteousness

for his name’s sake. (author’s italics)

 Brueggemann, W. (1982). Genesis (p. 200). John Knox Press.

 The other aspect that occurred to me as I was preparing for this meditation was the news coverage of the march by Patriot Front, of men in white masks marching and chanting “Reclaim America” – from foreigners.  I don’t bring this up to reflect on the politics of the group – I really haven’t given them that much thought.

But it did occur to me that people – including Abraham and Isaac – want to gather with people who look and act like them.  They want to preserve the tribal or family unit in other words. Which is odd when you stop and think about it because humanity is essentially one species.

This basic human tendency shows up here in the story of Isaac and Rebekah, and it’ll show up again in the story of Jacob who will also return to find a wife among “his people” – returning with Leah and Rachel.

But we are all one as far as God is concerned. 

I’d like to think that that’s something we need to remember and reflect upon on this 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

God Sees 

First, let’s look at where Isaac comes from to meet Rebekah (and where he ends up settling) -- Beer-Lahai-Roi, which means the well of the “living one” (El) who sees me.

 That location wasn’t named by Abraham, or Sarah, or Isaac.  It was named by the servant woman, Hagar (an Egyptian woman), who was driven away at the insistence of Sarah, who didn’t want Abraham’s son by Hagar, Ishamel, to compete with Isaac.

 So, Isaac and Rebekah settle in a location named by a woman who was a foreigner and a servant (in other words a slave).

God does have a sense of humor.  A man named Isaac, “God Laughs”, settles in a place named by the servant mother of his half-brother, Ishmael, “God Hears”.

 Communion

Which leads us to communion:

I decided to bake bread for the folks at Allen’s Chapel and Mooreville United Methodist Churches. I’m not ordained and so even though I would lead those congregations in The Great Thanksgiving, I asked our District Superintendent, Lynn Mote, to consecrate the elements. I had the “wine” (Welch’s Grape Juice), but I didn’t have the bread yet. Instead, I had the wheat from which I would mill the flour for the bread.

The wheat that I chose was a combination of Emmer and Spelt wheat berries — those ancient grains are the varieties of wheat that Jesus would have used in his parables and in the bread which he shared with his disciples. Lynn was gracious enough to agree to consecrate the wheat from which the bread would ultimately be baked. I milled the wheat berries and used the resulting “whole grain” to produce loaves for both churches as well as an extra one.

For those interested in the art of baking, I used a “no-knead” method with 1,000 grams of the milled wheat berries, 750 grams of water (actually, a little more because whole grains absorb more water), 75 grams of my rye-based leavening (sourdough starter), and 20 grams of salt.

We used the small individual cups of juice along with pieces of bread torn from the loaves at Allen’s Chapel and the method of “intinction” at Mooreville, where the people dipped the pieces of the loaves in a chalice holding the juice.

What follows is essentially the Service of Word and Table III from the United Methodist Hymnal –

The Lord be with you.
And also with you.
Lift up your hearts
We lift them up to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give our thanks and praise.

It is right, and a good and joyful thing, always and everywhere to give thanks to you, Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth. You formed us in your image and breathed into us the breath of life. When we turned away, and our love failed, your love remained steadfast.

You delivered us from captivity, made covenant to be our sovereign God, and spoke to us through the prophets. And so,with your people on earth and all the company of heaven we praise your name and join their unending hymn:

Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might, heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.

Holy are you, and blessed is your Son Jesus Christ. Your Spirit anointed him to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, and to announce that the time had come when you would save your people.
He healed the sick, fed the hungry, and ate with sinners. By the baptism of his suffering, death, and resurrection you gave birth to your Church, delivered us from slavery to sin and death, and made with us a new covenant by water and the Spirit. When the Lord Jesus ascended, he promised to be with us always, in the power of your Word and Holy Spirit.

On the night in which he gave himself up for us, he took bread, gave thanks to you, broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: "Take, eat; this is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me."

When the supper was over, he took the cup, gave thanks to you, gave it to his disciples, and said: "Drink from this, all of you; this is my blood of the new covenant, poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."

And so, in remembrance of these your mighty acts in Jesus Christ, we offer ourselves in praise and thanksgiving as a holy and living sacrifice, in union with Christ's offering for us, as we proclaim the mystery of faith.

Christ has died; Christ is risen; Christ will come again.

Pour out your Holy Spirit on us gathered here, and on these gifts of bread and wine. Make them be for us the body and blood of Christ, that we may be for the world the body of Christ, redeemed by his blood.

By your Spirit make us one with Christ, one with each other, and one in ministry to all the world, until Christ comes in final victory and we feast at his heavenly banquet.

Through your Son Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit in your holy Church, all honor and glory is yours, almighty Father, now and forever. Amen.

And now, with the confidence of children of God, let us pray:

THE LORD’S PRAYER

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name;
thy kingdom come,
thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
the power, and the glory,
forever. Amen

One Loaf

Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.

     The bread which we break is a sharing in the body of Christ.

  The cup over which we give thanks is a sharing in the blood of Christ.

 One People

A Test of Faith

¹After these things God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” ² He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.” ³ So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac; he cut the wood for the burnt offering, and set out and went to the place in the distance that God had shown him. ⁴ On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place far away. ⁵ Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; the boy and I will go over there; we will worship, and then we will come back to you.” ⁶ Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. So the two of them walked on together. ⁷ Isaac said to his father Abraham, “Father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “The fire and the wood are here, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” ⁸ Abraham said, “God himself will provide the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So the two of them walked on together.

⁹ When they came to the place that God had shown him, Abraham built an altar there and laid the wood in order. He bound his son Isaac, and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. ¹⁰ Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to kill his son. ¹¹ But the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven, and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” ¹² He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” ¹³ And Abraham looked up and saw a ram, caught in a thicket by its horns. Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. ¹⁴ So Abraham called that place “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”

 Genesis 22:1-14, NRSV

 This is a tough one.  It makes you wonder about the nature of God, doesn’t it – that He would ask for such a thing just to test the faith of Abraham.

We need to place this in context.  We begin with Abram (“excellent” or “distinguished” father) who answers the call to “go” to a new place.  His father was called – we forget that sometimes.

 Terah had three sons: Abram, Nahor and Haran, who was the father of Lot.  Terah, along with his son Abram (and Abram’s wife Sarah) as well as his grandson, Lot, left Ur which was down near the Persian Gulf in Mesopotamia – the land between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.

 Terah was supposed to journey to the land of Canaan, but he stopped in Haran (same name as his son, who died before the journey).

 Instead, it was Abram who actually answered the call, leaving Haran and journeying south to Canaan.

After a few detours, Abram did wind up in Canaan along with his wife Sarah, and his servant Hagar, with whom he had a child, Ishmael.

 I’ve been called myself the last few weeks to go here and there as a lay speaker and so I’ve been following along with Abram in Genesis.

 A quick synopsis – Abram answers the call in Genesis chapter 12 – we don’t know much about him other than he acted in faith and went where God told him to go.  He was told he would be a blessing to generations to come but he questioned God – how could he be a blessing to future generations if he had no heir?

 In Chapter 15 God promised Abram he would have as many descendants as there were stars in the sky and Abram believed God and God “reckoned it to him as righteousness.”

 He acted in faith when God called upon him to seal the covenant through circumcision in Chapter 17, he stood firm in faith though Sarah laughed when the three angels repeated the promise in Chapter 18 and so the promised child was named “Isaac” or “Yitsahk” (he laughed).

 He was told that the promise would be through Sarah and so he didn’t make Ishmael, the son of the servant woman, Hagar, his heir, but waited for Isaac.  (Ishmael means God hears), but when Hagar and Ishmael were driven away by Sarah, they were saved by God from dying of thirst because God saw them and showed Hagar the spring of water and Hagar called God “El-Roi” the God who “sees.”

 So, when the promised child does arrive we wonder why God asks this terrible thing of Abraham – that he sacrifice his son (we can talk about the vision of Abraham in chapter 15 and how that foreshadows what God will do through Christ, but not this morning – we’re limited by time).

 Walter Brugguemann in his commentary on Genesis emphasizes verse 8 – Abraham’s faith that God will provide a sacrifice.

 Abraham said, “God himself will provide the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So the two of them walked on together.

 Genesis 22:8

 In addition to genealogy, one of the things that interests me is etymology.  The source of our word “provide” comes from the Latin “pro-video” to “see before” or to “see to” – you see why I mentioned Hagar and El-Roi (the God who sees) now.

 God sees our need and God answers that need.

 God tests and God provides.  Why does he test?

 Brueggemann says that most Faithful people will be tempted to want only half of it. Most complacent religion will want a God who provides, not a God who tests.

God will test, but God will provide.

 Jesus taught us to pray about this, didn’t he?

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name;
thy kingdom come,
thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.

In the prayer he taught us he knew we would require provision and that we would face testing. Do you see it?

Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name;
thy kingdom come,
thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread (provision),
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation (testing),
but deliver us from evil.

Faith 

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

 Hebrews 11:1

I’ve struggled with the concept of faith, and I still struggle with the concept of faith.

 Today, I’m going to suggest to you that the opposite of faith is not doubt.  Instead it is what doubt leads to that is the opposite, or rejection of faith:

Denial

                  Deceit

                                    Despair

Denial

 Instead of saying “God will provide”, Abraham says to himself, “God doesn’t intend for me to sacrifice Isaac, so we’ll turn back – God will understand”.

 Instead of manifesting our love of neighbor by giving to the ministries of the church, or the Salvation Army or Sanctuary Hospice House or any other charity, we decide to leave “provision” to God – we fail the test.

Deceit

 Instead of binding Isaac, Abraham pretends to bind him while secretly looking for a substitute and, finding none, says to himself, “God didn’t mean it” or worse, “I’ll sacrifice Ishmael instead.”

 Instead of fulfilling our pledge to the Boy Scouts  or to the church or to whatever promise we’ve made, we cheat by claiming that changed circumstances (the new car, the trip to the beach, the fancy restaurant) lets us off the hook – we fail the test.

Despair

 Abraham turns from God.

 We turn from God – we fail the test

The test of Abraham is so troubling because it is so unlike our understanding of a loving God.  But the test was so great because the faith of Abraham was so great.  At least that’s my thinking.

 Our faith doesn’t match that of Abraham (or of Joan of Arc or Mother Teresa or some other “saint”).  Our tests are the small tests of everyday life:  ignoring the cry of the needy, cheating a little on reporting income, deciding to not tip the waiter or waitress.

Don’t fail the tests

The Three Angels

Shared with the folks at Allen’s Chapel and Mooreville United Methodist Churches

The LORD appeared to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the entrance of his tent in the heat of the day. He looked up and saw three men standing near him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent entrance to meet them, and bowed down to the ground. He said, “My lord, if I find favor with you, do not pass by your servant. Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree. Let me bring a little bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on—since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.” And Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah, and said, “Make ready quickly three measures of choice flour, knead it, and make cakes.” Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to the servant, who hastened to prepare it. Then he took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree while they ate.

They said to him, “Where is your wife Sarah?” And he said, “There, in the tent.” Then one said, “I will surely return to you in due season, and your wife Sarah shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent entrance behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women. So Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I have grown old, and my husband is old, shall I have pleasure?” The LORD said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, and say, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?’ Is anything too wonderful for the LORD? At the set time I will return to you, in due season, and Sarah shall have a son.” But Sarah denied, saying, “I did not laugh”; for she was afraid. He said, “Oh yes, you did laugh.”

Genesis 18:1-15, NRSV

I thought of focusing on Sarah’s laughter, that was a sort of echo of Abraham’s laughter in Genesis 17:17, when God made His covenant with Abraham, changing his name from Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah.

“Sarai” (שָׂרָי) and “Sarah” (שָׂרָה) are different forms of the same Hebrew word that basically means “princess/woman of strength”. It is likely that Sarai is simply the possessive form of Sarah (i.e. “My Sarah”). Sarah, therefore, signifies that her strength does not belong exclusively to her immediate family, but to the future nation of Israel and even the world-at-large.

And so “Isaac” – the child of Abraham and Sarah is literally “He laughs/will laugh”. The anglicized name "Isaac" is a transliteration of the Biblical Hebrew: יִצְחָק, romanized: Yiṣḥāq, which literally means "He laughs/will laugh".

But I decided instead to focus on the three “messengers” in Chapter 18.  The word angel primarily refers to a spiritual being believed to act as a messenger, guide, or servant of a higher power. Etymologically, it comes from the ancient Greek word angelos, which translates simply to "messenger" (so, angel means messenger)

It’s tempting for us to engage in “typology”.

In Christian theology and biblical exegesis, typology is a theory concerning the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament. Events, persons or statements in the Old Testament are seen as types prefiguring or superseded by antitypes, events or aspects of Christ or his revelation described in the New Testament. For example, Jonah may be seen as the type of Christ in that he emerged from the fish's belly and thus appeared to rise from death.

 So here, Christian commentators have been tempted to discern the three Persons of the Trinity; but the passage differentiates clearly between the Lord and his two companions see verse 22 – (So the men turned from there, and went toward Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before the LORD) and 19:1 (The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of Sodom).

Cf., Genesis 16:13 and 14 (13 So she named the LORD who spoke to her, “You are El-roi”; for she said, “Have I really seen God and remained alive after seeing him?” 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered.)

 Kidner, D. (1967). Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary

(Vol. 1, p. 142). InterVarsity Press.

 Despite the passage making clear that this was the Lord (“Yaweh”) accompanied by two angels (messengers), the passage has given rise to lots of “three angel” stories, songs and illustrations.  For that matter, while the passage makes it clear that one of the “messengers” here is the Lord himself, that doesn’t take away from the fact that the Lord himself was bearing the message.

So, we have, for instance, Ashley Hutchings’ “Three Angels” from the album “A Midwinter Miscellany” –

 All the stars shone Heavenly bright

Shepherds marvelled at the sight

And three angels came that night

Clothed in robes of gleaming white

Bringing tidings of good cheer

For the Christmas morn was near

Within the home a Christmas tree

Grand and beautiful to see

On the top were angels three

Clad in all their finery

Bringing tidings of good cheer

For the Christmas morn was near

All had feathers snowy white

All had perfect wings for flight

Each had a halo burning bright

From the stars that special night

Bringing tidings of good cheer

For the Christmas morn was here

We’re No Angels

Three angels is also a theme in the 1955 movie “We’re No Angels” starring Humphrey Bogart, Aldo Ray and Peter Ustinov.

 The movie is about three convicts – Joseph, Albert and Jules – who escape from prison on Devil's Island in French Guiana just before Christmas and arrive at the nearby French colonial town of Cayenne on Christmas Eve. Joseph (Humphrey Bogart) is a thief; the other two are murderers.

They go to a store managed by Felix Ducotel. The store is in a very poor financial position as it is the only one to give supplies on credit.  Mention the Three Angels Christmas ornament which is tattered and torn and lacking wings.

 While there, they notice its roof is leaking and offer to fix it for nothing.   They get involved in selling things in the shop and have a knack for it, selling a brush set to a bald man, and getting the first cash income in a long time.

 They offer to make Christmas dinner for the family and the meal is very successful.

 They do not actually intend to, but decide to remain there until nightfall, when they plan to steal clothes and supplies and escape on a ship waiting in the harbor. As they wait, they find that the small family of Felix, Amelie, and daughter Isabelle, is in financial distress and offer their services to hide the trio's all-too-sinister ruse.

 Joseph even gets to work conning people and falsifying records to make the store prosperous.

 However, the three felons begin to have a change of heart after they fix a delicious Christmas dinner for the Ducotels made mostly of stolen items.

Tensions heighten after the store owner Andre Trochard arrives from Paris with his nephew Paul, with a set of crocodile skin luggage. The Trochards plan on taking over the store, which they perceive is unprofitable due to its use of credit.

 Isabelle had planned to wed Paul, but it turns out that Paul is betrothed to another woman, to Isabelle's dismay.

 Before any action can be taken, Andre gets bitten by Albert's pet viper, Adolphe, and dies. Adolphe disappears and the three have to search for him. Eventually Adolphe is found: Paul is fatally bitten by the snake which was hiding in Andre's pocket, which Paul was searching through.

Isabelle finds another love, and the family is happy as the convicts finally get ready for their postponed escape.

However, while waiting on the docks for their boat to arrive, the three reconsider. Judging that the outside world is likely to be worse than that of the prison, they decide to turn themselves back in. As they walk toward the boat at film's end, halos appear over their heads...followed by one over Adolphe's cage.

You May Never Know

All of which leads me to reflect on the New Testament passage from Hebrews:

Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it.

Hebrews 13:2 NRSV

 Which I like better in the English Standard Version:

 Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

The Call of Abram

What I shared with the folks at Brewer and Shannon United Methodist Churches on June 7th, 2026

1 Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. 2 I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

4 So Abram went, as the LORD had told him; and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. 5 Abram took his wife Sarai and his brother’s son Lot, and all the possessions that they had gathered, and the persons whom they had acquired in Haran; and they set forth to go to the land of Canaan. When they had come to the land of Canaan, 6 Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. 7 Then the LORD appeared to Abram, and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the LORD, who had appeared to him. 8 From there he moved on to the hill country on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; and there he built an altar to the LORD and invoked the name of the LORD. 9 And Abram journeyed on by stages toward the Negeb.

 Genesis 12:1-9

This morning our Scripture, taken from the Old Testament, is about “The Call” of Abram.  What do we mean by “Call?”

I just returned from the 2026 session of the Mississippi Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church.  One of the things that happens every year at the session of the Conference is the service of Ordination.  It is a moving service.

The Elders and Deacons, robed in black and wearing their stoles, process into the worship space, led by the bishop and the person, almost always a bishop from another conference, who will deliver the sermon.

And then the ordinands and those who are called go through a liturgy consisting of questions and answers to affirm their ordination or commissioning. Because in our tradition you can’t simply be “ordained” – you have to go through a process.  Which is why Jim Jones was never ordained as a United Methodist Elder.

Determining whether or not a person is “called” to full time ministry in the United Methodist Church begins in the local church where the call is discerned by the SPRC (or PPRC, depending on whether the church employs only a pastor).  From the local church the process goes through the district, then the conference at which point the candidate has to go through education, residency and examination by the Board of Ordained Ministry (the “BoOM”) consisting of persons (clergy and laity) who review the candidate in detail before recommending that the process continues (for commissioned candidates) or results in ordination.

It ain’t easy.

So, what do we mean by “Call” in the first place?

In the case of Abram, I submit to you that the Call consisted of Mission and Vision.

In the case of the Mississippi Conference of the United Methodist Church, I submit to you that the “Call” also consists of Mission and Vision.

The Mission Statement of the United Methodist Church is “To Make Disciples of Jesus Christ for the Transformation of the World.”

 That is our mission.

 But what is our vision?

What’s the difference? In the context of the “Call” of Abram, I submit the difference in Mission and Vision can be summarized as follows:

•           Mission: "What has God called Abram to do"

•            Vision: "What will the future look like when Abram accomplishes that mission?"

                  For Abram the Mission was to “Go to the land that God would show him.”

                  The Vision was to be a blessing -- The focus of the narrative is not who Abram was, but who he will become.

 Genealogy – I’ve told y’all before that I’m prohibited from talking about genealogy in my Sunday School class, but here’s the short, short version of Abram’s genealogy:

 Abram is descended from Noah (we won’t go into Noah’s ancestry but it goes back to Adam’s son Seth):

Arpachshad [Arphaxad (Son of Shem)],

Shelah,

Eber,

Peleg,

Reu,

Serug,

Nahor,

and thenTerah

Terah

Now these are the descendants of Terah. Terah was the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran was the father of Lot.

Genesis 11:27

Our passage today (Abram’s Call) begins the story of the journey of Abram’s family, for it was originally Terah (Abram’s father) who had intended to go to Canaan. For reasons not explained, he settled the family in Haran in northern Mesopotamia:

       “Terah took his son Abram and his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, his son Abram’s wife, and they went out together from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan; but when they came to Haran, they settled there.”

Genesis 11:31

This enigmatic information about the background of Abram, followed by the abrupt command of God to Abram to depart and then by God’s subsequenr extraordinary blessing of him, gave rise to midrashic speculation. What made Abram worthy of God’s interest in him? What prepared him for the summons from God? These midrashic traditions credited Abram with being the first in his culture and even his family to see the falseness of idols and to worship only God.

 While one can understand the desire to fill in the gaps in Abram’s story, Genesis itself seems to be completely uninterested in Abram’s previous character and experiences.

                   Again, the focus of the narrative is not who Abram was, but who he will become.

         For us, the focus is not so much on who we are as United Methodists now (after disaffiliation, Covid and the rest) but on who we will become. 

 So, what is the Vision of the Mississippi Annual Conference?

² Then the LORD answered me and said:
Write the vision;
make it plain on tablets,
so that a runner may read it.
³For there is still a vision for the appointed time; it speaks of the end, and does not lie.
If it seems to tarry, wait for it;
it will surely come, it will not delay.

Habakkuk 2:2-3

What’s the difference?

• Mission: "What has God called us to do" (To Make Disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.)

• Vision: "What will the future look like when we accomplish that mission?"

 Vision

At this year’s session of the Mississippi Annual Conference the new vision (visions need to be renewed from time to time and it’s been twelve years since we last cast a vision for our Conference) was revealed:

Where did this vision come from

from us

                  It came from the Bishop’s Chat & Chew get togethers, where we told the Bishop what we thought the vision should be. And then . . .

It came from the Bishop’s Vision Task Force, a group of volunteers that took the feedback from those Chat & Chew sessions and met in person and via Zoom over a period of months and distilled your hope and your desire for where the Mission of our church would land us in the coming years.

  At Annual Conference I was struck by the vision and the future that was being revealed in two ways:

 First, in how we would, like Abram, be a blessing to others through being the hands and feet of Jesus.  Through our churches, through the wider community and through our connections (that very Methodist concept) we would be a blessing for ALL through outreach and innovation.

  Outreach

 Innovation

 Second, I was struck by the call that was answered by those who were ordained for service.

 And then, I was struck once again by the thread of FAITH that runs from Abram’s setting out through the entire history of the journey of those who followed.

 One of my favorite verses, one of the first I memorized, is Hebrews 11:1 – “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”

 The 11th chapter of Hebrews is a litany of those called by faith, like Abram (distinguished father) — who became Abraham (the father of many) — called to be a blessing.

 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going.

 Hebrews 11:8

 So, Abram answered the call — the mission to go — the vision to be a blessing. And now we, the United Methodists of Mississippi are also answering our call to fulfill the mission through our common Vision: building Churches, Communities and Connections for All through Outreach and Innovation.

Out of the Depths

When Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered around him; and he was by the sea. Then one of the leaders of the synagogue named Jairus came and, when he saw him, fell at his feet and begged him repeatedly, “My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live.”  So he went with him.

And a large crowd followed him and pressed in on him.  Now there was a woman who had been suffering from hemorrhages for twelve years. She had endured much under many physicians, and had spent all that she had; and she was no better, but rather grew worse. She had heard about Jesus, and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, for she said, “If I but touch his clothes, I will be made well.” Immediately her hemorrhage stopped; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease. Immediately aware that power had gone forth from him, Jesus turned about in the crowd and said, “Who touched my clothes?” And his disciples said to him, “You see the crowd pressing in on you; how can you say, ‘Who touched me?’ ”  He looked all around to see who had done it. But the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came in fear and trembling, fell down before him, and told him the whole truth. He said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease.”

While he was still speaking, some people came from the leader’s house to say, “Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the teacher any further?” But overhearing what they said, Jesus said to the leader of the synagogue, “Do not fear, only believe.” He allowed no one to follow him except Peter, James, and John, the brother of James. When they came to the house of the leader of the synagogue, he saw a commotion, people weeping and wailing loudly. When he had entered, he said to them, “Why do you make a commotion and weep? The child is not dead but sleeping.” And they laughed at him. Then he put them all outside, and took the child’s father and mother and those who were with him, and went in where the child was. He took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha cum,” which means, “Little girl, get up!” And immediately the girl got up and began to walk about (she was twelve years of age). At this they were overcome with amazement. He strictly ordered them that no one should know this, and told them to give her something to eat.

Mark 5:21-43

Perspective

This past week I bought a drone – an entry level drone that was 40 percent off.  It affords a person a different perspective.  For instance, I took the drone for a test flight (I’m very much a novice) over one of our flood control dams while it was being inspected by one of the people from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality’s Dam Safety Division.

While they were doing the inspection, I flew the drone out over the dam and took a photo of the riser that acts as a spillway for the water to go through.

Then I decided to fly the drone higher to get a photo of the whole dam.  I got a little over 200 feet and then turned the drone so I could get a shot along the length of the dam.

I kept moving the toggle sticks trying to get the best image and lost sight of the drone (it’s really, really small).  I could hear it in the distance but couldn’t see it or figure out where it could be.

Finally, as I fiddled with the angle of the camera I realized the drone – that I thought was out over the dam – was actually behind me. That’s me in the middle of the shot in the bottom third.

Not only did I learn a lesson in how things look from 200 feet up, I learned how my understanding could be confused.

Sometimes, it can be the same way with Scripture.

Last week we saw the Kingship of Christ over the created order – nature – when he stilled the storm.

This week we see his Kingship over life.  It’s a healing story that has within it another healing story – let’s take a look at the first story:

Jairus was a leader in the synagogue.  He came to Jesus asking for him to come and lay his hands on his daughter, who was at “the point of death.”

This man, a person of power and privilege in the community, humbled himself and fell at the feet of this itinerant Rabbi, begging him to come to his home.  In doing so, he was recognizing the Kingship of Jesus over life itself.  It was a very public confession of faith in who Jesus is.

Mark’s Gospel doesn’t relate what Jesus said in response to Jairus, but simply reports that “he went with him.”

But they didn’t go alone.  The Gospel tells us that a large crowd followed Jesus and pressed in on him.  Imagine this if you will.  We’ve seen images of crowds in the Middle-East where the people are massed together so closely, you wonder if anyone can move. And we’ve seen crowds here in this country — crowds at rock concerts, crowds at sporting events, crowds at demonstrations and protests, crowds that press and pack people close together.

Jesus and Jairus didn’t have secret service agents or personal bodyguards, they were surrounded by people.  You have to figure that they had to push their way forward toward Jairus’ home, maybe with Jairus in the lead pushing folks out of the way while Jesus and his disciples followed.

And in that crowd was another person.  A woman suffering from hemorrhages.

Another Perspective

Unlike Jairus, she was not privileged, she was impoverished.  She wasn’t powerful, she was vulnerable.  She wasn’t accepted and honored by her community; instead, she was considered ritually unclean. We are told Jairus’ name.  Mark doesn’t even record her name.

And – she was a woman: which, in that time, was to be considered a second class citizen.

But she had one thing in common with Jairus – Faith.

While his faith was public, hers was private.  Jairus fell at Jesus’ feet – The unnamed woman only dared to reach out and touch his cloak, but she did so believing it would be enough.

Last week, Jesus responded to his Disciples, asking them why they had so little faith. 

This week, we have two people who demonstrated their faith in who Jesus was even though they were only familiar with Jesus by reputation – by what they’d heard about him.

In both instances their faith was rewarded.

I titled this sermon “Out of the Depths.”  I did that because the Psalm in this week’s United Methodist Lectionary was Psalm 130. Here are the first lines:

Out of the depths I cry to you, O Lord
Lord hear my voice!
Let your ears be attentive
to the voice of my supplications!

Both Jairus and the unnamed woman cried out to Jesus from the depths of their despair – and he heard and responded to their cries.

Note that the woman was healed immediately upon touching his cloak.  But Jesus stopped and looked around, sensing that power had gone out from him and demanding to know who touched his clothes.

So she came to him in “fear and trembling” and fell down in her turn, telling him the whole truth.  Now, Jesus could have simply let the healing stand – but instead he drew her out from the crowd.  Surely, this was a second healing – acknowledging her as a person of worthiness in a community in which she had been ritually shunned.

At this point, Mark returns to the story of Jairus.

Talitha Cum

People came to tell him that it was too late, Jairus’ daughter was dead.

Of course, we know the end of the story.  We know that Jesus is going to tell the little girl to “get up and walk”.

But it’s interesting that now the crowd seems to disappear and Jesus proceeds with only Peter, James and John and the little girl’s father.

When they arrived at Jairus’ home and the people there told them that it was too late, they responded to his assurance that the girl was not dead but only sleeping by laughing.

Was this a lack of faith, a scornful response, or a sign of their sorrow and shock.  We aren’t told.

Accompanied by only his three disciples, along with Jairus and his wife, Jesus went in and simply said, “little girl, get up.”

And she did.

So, we have one very public healing and one that is virtually private.  One involving a woman who is “outside the law” because of the nature of her malady, and one involving a leader of the religious community.  Both of them involve answered prayers – a response to faith.

Unanswered Prayers

But what about prayers that aren’t answered – at least not in the way that we’d prefer. 

We’re tempted, aren’t we, to take a utilitarian approach to prayer.  It’s as if we go online to Amazon and order a drone (for 40% off) and expect to receive exactly what we ordered.

I was appointed to our state’s Information Technology Board some years ago and before 2020, I would drive down to Jackson each month for a two to three hour meeting in which we made decisions on every aspect of technology from computers, printers and cameras to software and data centers.

Then the pandemic came along and we started meeting virtually during the initial shut-down of in-person meetings.

It happened to be my turn to be chair during the Spring of 2020, and I used a photo of our board room as my virtual background.

It was funny because people watching online were calling, texting and emailing the agency staff asking if I’d driven down to Jackson to sit alone in the building to host the meeting.

Now we’re used to all kinds of virtual backgrounds. 

Who’s experienced Zoom meetings since 2020?  Raise your hand.

I keep a Daily Book calendar in our bedroom – the past few years I’ve bought the one with The New Yorker cartoons.

This past Thursday, it showed a prophet standing in a shaft of heavenly light and asking, “Hello, Hello, I think you’re on mute.”

I’m betting that’s happened to everyone who’s been in a Zoom meeting in the past four years.  Either the person speaking has forgotten to unmute themselves, or we find that we have.

So when it does seem as if God is “on mute” and our prayers seem to be unanswered, what are we to think?

Here’s where, upon reflection, I think we miss the point of Mark’s relating these two healing stories.

Maybe the lesson isn’t simply about our telling God what we want and using “faith” like a virtual debit card online.

My initial thought today about the connection between the Lectionary reading from 2nd Corinthians and the Gospel was that Jesus responded to both the important synagogue official and the outcast woman.  

Stay with me a moment.

In his letter to Corinth, Paul was urging the church to fulfill their “generous undertaking” of sending assistance to the poor saints in Jerusalem.  He noted that it involved a question of a fair balance between “your abundance and their need.”

Paul made the comparison in verse 15 to the story of Manna in Exodus, where those who gathered much had nothing over, and those who gathered little had no shortage; they gathered as much as each of them needed.

In today’s Gospel, Jarius and the unnamed woman each received just enough.  Right?

But more importantly, Paul’s letter tells us that we don’t dictate what God’s response to our prayers will be.  He reminds us here and elsewhere:

For you know the generous act of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich.

2 Corinthians 8:9

Paul reminds the church at Corinth – and he reminds us – of the nature of “divine economy”.

The Economy of God

One of the discussions at Annual Conference this year was about budgeting and the funding of the various ministries of the church.  With the changes and disruptions that have taken place in the last few years, many of those ministries have been threatened.  I imagine Paul would be urging us to remember to excel in our generous undertaking to support these ministries in difficult times.

We make a mistake in focusing on Jesus healing the woman with hemorrhages and restoring Jairus’ daughter to life as simply answers to their prayers.

Instead these healings pointed to the nature of Jesus’ divine Kingship over life and his identity as the son of God.

Paul pointed out in his Epistle and Mark recorded in the intertwined stories of these two healings what has been called the “economy of God” – 

The one who had the ultimate power to control the stormy seas and even life itself, emptied himself in order to bring himself level with our impoverished nature.

As Paul said in verse 15 of his letter to Corinth:

The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little.

2 Corinthians 8:15

Mark’s Gospel isn’t telling us that we should use our faith to simply call on the power of Jesus to do what we want as if faith were a coin we can spend.

There’s certainly nothing wrong in praying — for healing, for family members facing crises, for unity in our church family, for our country and for the world. However, we must also remember the example of Christ – who responded to the needs of others – who balanced the scales in God’s “divine economy.”

The challenge set for us in today’s Gospel and Epistle lesson is to follow his example by extending grace to our fellow beings — restoring the balance where it’s been lost.

What's in a Name?

There are two accounts in Genesis, separated by a few significant chapters, that involve names – specifically, the names of the people in the accounts and that of “the Name” (Hebrew HaShem השם‎) of the Almighty.  First, in chapter 16, there’s the account of how Abram came to have a child by his wife’s servant:

Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, bore him no children. She had an Egyptian slave-girl whose name was Hagar, and Sarai said to Abram, “You see that the LORD has prevented me from bearing children; go in to my slave-girl; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her slave-girl, and gave her to her husband Abram as a wife. He went in to Hagar, and she conceived; and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress. Then Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my slave-girl to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the LORD judge between you and me!” But Abram said to Sarai, “Your slave-girl is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she ran away from her.
The angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur. And he said, “Hagar, slave-girl of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am running away from my mistress Sarai.” The angel of the LORD said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit to her.” The angel of the LORD also said to her, “I will so greatly multiply your offspring that they cannot be counted for multitude.”

And the angel of the LORD said to her,
“Now you have conceived and shall bear a son;
you shall call him Ishmael,
for the LORD has given heed to your affliction.
He shall be a wild ass of a man,
with his hand against everyone,
and everyone’s hand against him;
and he shall live at odds with all his kin.”

So she named the LORD who spoke to her, “You are El-roi”; for she said, “Have I really seen God and remained alive after seeing him?” Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered.

Genesis 16:1-14

Then, a few chapters later, we have the account of Hagar and her son being driven out by Abraham’s wife, Sarah:

The child grew, and was weaned; and Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned. But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, playing with her son Isaac. So she said to Abraham, “Cast out this slave woman with her son; for the son of this slave woman shall not inherit along with my son Isaac.” The matter was very distressing to Abraham on account of his son. But God said to Abraham, “Do not be distressed because of the boy and because of your slave woman; whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for it is through Isaac that offspring shall be named for you. As for the son of the slave woman, I will make a nation of him also, because he is your offspring.” So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away. And she departed, and wandered about in the wilderness of Beer-sheba.
When the water in the skin was gone, she cast the child under one of the bushes. Then she went and sat down opposite him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot; for she said, “Do not let me look on the death of the child.” And as she sat opposite him, she lifted up her voice and wept. And God heard the voice of the boy; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Do not be afraid; for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. Come, lift up the boy and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make a great nation of him.” Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. She went, and filled the skin with water, and gave the boy a drink.
God was with the boy, and he grew up; he lived in the wilderness, and became an expert with the bow. He lived in the wilderness of Paran; and his mother got a wife for him from the land of Egypt.

Genesis 21:8-21

What’s in a Name?  Well, quite a bit if you stop and study it.

Genealogy

I’m into genealogy.  A lot.  So much so that there’s a rule in our Sunday School class that I can’t talk about genealogy – a rule that I sometimes break and, well, we’re not in my Sunday School class right now.

My Christian name is Thomas.  I’m named for my grandfather, Thomas Caswell Murray Wicker.  He was named for his grandfather, Caswell Drake Wicker, who was named for Richard Caswell, the first governor of North Carolina, and also for his great grandmother, Nancy Drake, who was born in Scotland and emigrated in the mid 1700’s to North Carolina.

I’m also named for my great grandfather, Thomas Street Wiley, who was named for his father, John Charles Street Wiley, his grandmother, Jane Street, and ultimately, his great grandfather, Joseph Street.  I’m not sure about the Thomas part when it comes to the Wiley family.

You could say that I’m also named for my 6th great grandfather, Thomas Oscar Wicker, or for his grandfather, Thomas Wicker, who was born in Devon, England, and emigrated to America in 1685, after the failed Monmouth Rebellion.  As far as we know, he was the first of many, many Thomases – so many that it can drive a genealogist crazy . . . I found a couple of instances where a Thomas Wicker had a son named Thomas and, after his first wife died, he remarried and had a another son named Thomas.

You can see why they won’t let me talk about genealogy in Sunday School.

Methuselah, Abraham and Sarah

But you can learn a lot from genealogies.  Including how Methuselah, the oldest person recorded in the Bible, died.  Everyone knows that Methuselah is the oldest recorded person in the Bible and the genealogies give us a strong clue as to the manner of his death.

Genesis 5:25-27 tell us —

When Methuselah had lived one hundred eighty-seven years, he became the father of Lamech. Methuselah lived after the birth of Lamech seven hundred eighty-two years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty-nine years; and he died.

Then we are told of Lamech —

Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and became the father of a son. Now he called his name Noah [Hebrew נוּחַ “rest”], saying, “This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the LORD has cursed.” Then Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years after he became the father of Noah, and he had other sons and daughters. So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years, and he died.

Genesis 5:28-31

And then Noah

Now Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water came upon the earth.

Genesis 7:6

You don’t need a chart to figure it out, but I thought a chart might be fun —

You could just as easily add 187+182+600 to find the answer

But back to our Scripture for today.

Notice in chapter 16, that Abraham is referred to as Abram (pronounced “Avram”) and Sarah is referred to as Sarai.  As you know, that changed in Chapter 17:

When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless. And I will make my covenant between me and you, and will make you exceedingly numerous.” Then Abram fell on his face; and God said to him, “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be Abram [Exalted Ancestor], but your name shall be Abraham [Ancestor of Multitudes]; for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations.

Genesis 17:1-5

The name “Abram” אַבְרָם(Avram) is composed of two words, av and ram, and means something like “exalted father.”  Abraham אַבְרָהָם (Avraham), on the other hand, derives from the words אַב (av) and הֲמוֹן (hamon), as explained by the phrase “because [I give you as] a father of a multitude of nations” (Gen. 17:5). So a one letter change makes the big difference.

And then in Genesis 17:15-16 –

Then God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. I will bless her, and indeed I will give you a son by her. Then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her.”

“Sarai” (שָׂרָי) and “Sarah” (שָׂרָה) are different forms of the same Hebrew word that basically means “princess/woman of strength”. It is likely that Sarai is simply the possessive form of Sarah (i.e. “My Sarah”). Sarah, therefore, signifies that her strength does not belong exclusively to her immediate family, but to the future nation of Israel and even the world-at-large.

Consonants And The Great Vowel Shift

There are a lot of Sarah’s in my family tree on Ancestry.com.  It’s a very common name throughout the generations, and usually someone named “Sarah” would be referred to as “Sally.”  [In the time of the Normans in the 11th and 12th centuries, people would often substitute the letter R for other letters (in this case it's replaced by two L's), and would add a Y to the end as well. And so Sarah became Sally.]

Have you ever wondered why people named Margaret are often nicknamed Peggy?  Well, a diminutive of Margaret was Maggie or Maggs which, changed to Meg or Meggie after The Great Vowel Shift in the 16th century.  Then, because it’s a common name, the English would use rhyming to distinguish one Meggy from another, by changing the first letter – in this case to Peggy.  Same reason we get Bill from Will, short for William.

{Words had very different pronunciations in Middle English from their pronunciations in Modern English.

• Long i in bite was pronounced as /iː/ so Middle English bite sounded like Modern English beet /biːt/.
• Long e in meet was pronounced as /eː/ so Middle English meet sounded similar to Modern English mate /meɪt/
• Long a in mate was pronounced as /aː/, with a vowel similar to the broad a of spa.
• Long o in boot was pronounced as /oː/, similar to modern oa in General American boat /oʊ/.}

The Name Of The LORD

But back to our Scripture –Notice that in Genesis 17:1, we have God  referred to as LORD.  Whenever you see that combination of a capital L followed by small caps “ord” it is a reference to the name YHVH or Yehovah – that is “I AM” or “I AM WHO I AM.”  [The word “LORD” when spelled with capital letters stands for the divine name, YHWH, which is here connected with the verb hayah, “to be”.]

In Exodus 3:13-15 we find this:

But Moses said to God, “If I come to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” He said further, “Thus you shall say to the Israelites, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”

God also said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the Israelites, ‘The LORD, the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you’:

This is my name forever,

and this my title for all generations.

So, when you see LORD it means YHWH which we sometimes say as “Yahweh” or even “Jehovah.”  [Note: Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua}.  Lowercase Lord, on the other hand, would translate as “sir” or something along those lines, and is usually a translation of the Hebrew Adonai.

But what about when we see “God”, as in the passage from Exodus and elsewhere – well, usually that refers to “El” or “Elohim.”  In Genesis 17:1 – where we see the LORD address Abram as “God Almighty” this is our English rendering of the Hebrew “El Shaddai.”

Now, you should not use “Yahweh” or any other rendering when talking to a person of the Jewish faith.  The name is not spoken.  In fact, the reference is actually to “the Name” or “HaShem.”

But back to Hagar and Ishmael.  We know that Ishmael derives from the Hebrew “El” or God, and “Ish” hears.  So, “God hears.”  And he does . . . in both chapters 16 and 21 of Genesis.

"Hagar" allegorically represents the Jewish church (Galatians 4:24), in bondage to the ceremonial law; while "Sarah" represents the Christian church, which is free.  Some sources say that the name Hagar comes from the Hebrew for “flight,” as in “flee” or “forsaken.”  Now, I told you I’m an “enthusiastic” genealogist.  My family tree on Ancestry.com has almost 26,000 people in it.  And there are a lot of Abrahams and Sarah/Sally’s.  But not one Hagar.

Now we’re getting down to where I want us to go with today’s Scripture.  Let’s take a look at Genesis 16 and 21 again.

So, What’s In A Name?

In Genesis 16, Sarai says, “You see that the LORD has prevented me from bearing children; go in to my slave-girl; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.”  And then she says, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my slave-girl [Hebrew “maid”] to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the LORD judge between you and me!”  And Abram replies, “Your slave-girl is in your power; do to her as you please.”

In Genesis 21, Sarah says, “Cast out this slave woman with her son; for the son of this slave woman shall not inherit along with my son Isaac.”

Abram/Abraham and Sarai/Sarah don’t recognize Hagar as a person, with a name, but as an object – “my slave-girl,” “this slave woman.”  For that matter, they “name” Isaac, but Ishmael is also simply “the son of this slave woman.”

Now let’s see how God views Hagar.

In Chapter 16 the Angel of the Lord addresses her – “Hagar, slave-girl of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?”

And in Chapter 21, when God hears the cry of Ishmael, the Angel of the Lord says, “What troubles you, Hagar? Do not be afraid; for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. Come, lift up the boy and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make a great nation of him.”

The difference in human and Divine recognition of Hagar tells us something about her (that she is a person of some worth) and about God (that God recognizes each of us as unique person of worth).  “Unlike Abram and Sarai who will never identify Hagar by name, the Divine speaks to her in a most personal way . . .” (Elizabeth B. Tracy, See Me! Hear Me! Divine/Human Relational Dialogue in Genesis, Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology, Peeters, (2015), p. 123).  “With the initiation of dialogue by the Deity, Hagar is not reduced, as might be expected, to quivering silence.  Instead, the appearance of the Divine and the questions asked have drawn Hagar to speak for the first time.” (Id.) In Hagar’s response, we see not a subservient person shrinking away but a person with an identity, recognized by God, who responds to God and even names him “El-Roi” that is, “God sees.”

“The blessing promised in Genesis 16:10 comes to Hagar; not a man, a husband or a patriarch.  Of all the women in the book of Genesis, she is the only one to receive this divine promise directly and one of just four people ‘to hear the language of the promise from God’s own lips’.” Tracy, Supra, p. 125.

I’ve titled this little talk, “What’s in a Name,” and you might think that it’s about the name of Hagar.  And it is.  But more importantly, it’s about the name of our God, which even in the Old Testament is not just about God Almighty, “El Shaddai,” or “Elohim” or “Adonai” or even HaShem but –

The God who hears

The God who sees

The God who does justice

The God who calls each of us by our names

The God who is Love. 1 John 4:8.

But I Say

“You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ 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. So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift. 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. Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 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. 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.

“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 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.

“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.’ But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one.

Matthew 5:21-37

When I looked at the Lectionary for this, the Sixth Sunday after Epiphany, my first thought was maybe I’ll preach on the Epistle instead of the Gospel.

For one thing, the Gospel lesson is long but long as it is, it’s incomplete – Verses 21-32 begin with Jesus saying, “You have heard it was said to those of ancient times . . .” and then he proceeds to recall three different passages that echo themes from the book of Deuteronomy.

But the last section of today’s Gospel lesson begins with, “Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times . . .” Then Jesus recalls three more passages from the Old Testament, but this time from Leviticus.  For some reason, the Committee on Common Texts decided to only include the first of the Leviticus related passages for this Sunday, leaving the other two for another day I suppose.  I’ve tried to figure out why that may be, but in the end decided to just focus on the context of what Jesus is saying in connection with all of these “You have heard . . . but I say to you . . .” passages.

So, if we’re going to talk about what Jesus means, we have to include the other two Leviticus related passages as well –

In verses 38-42 he says:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

And then, in verses 43-48 he concludes with:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Be perfect?  Really?

Are you serious, Lord?

To begin to understand this, we have to back up a bit to understand the context.  Immediately before this series of six “But I say” passages, Jesus proclaims that he hasn’t come to abolish the law or the prophets but “to fulfill.”

In verse 18 he says, “For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”

And then, in verse 20, he says, “[U]nless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”

We can’t have this – Jesus can’t really mean what Matthew has recorded him as saying here, can he?  So, we come up with all sorts of ways to interpret these challenging passages.  For instance:

• Jesus was teaching that righteousness through the law is impossible, setting up the need for justification by grace; or

• Jesus was speaking just to his disciples, not to us; or

• Jesus was talking about goals that we should aspire to even though they’re impossible to achieve.  By trying to live up to them we’ll be the better for it.

The problem is that when you read on through the Gospel you don’t find support for Jesus talking about these “but I say to you” challenges as a way to let us off the hook.  He means it when he says he hasn’t come to abolish the law.

Some commentators don’t refer to the “Old Testament” for this very reason.  They use the term “First Testament.”  God hasn’t done away with the First Testament as all, which is why we include it in our Bibles.

One of the heresies that arose in the first centuries after Christ was one that did away with the Old Testament altogether.  Saint Augustine recalled his struggle with this in his Confessions, in which he wrote of his experiences with sects such as the Manichaeans, who like many Gnostic cults, held that moral law did not affect their spiritual lives.

Similar beliefs arose during the early days of the Protestant reformation in which the belief in salvation by faith alone – sola fides – gave rise to what scholars call Antinomianism (against the law) which Martin Luther rejected. Even today, there are some folks who think that we’re freed from obedience to the law, when in fact we’re freed “for joyful obedience” when we confess our sin before Holy Communion.

So, the idea that Jesus was demonstrating that righteousness was impossible and that we could ignore the law and simply respond to the grace of God, is wishful thinking.

One of the alternative readings for the Old Testament lection this Sunday is from the deuterocanonical book Sirach in which it is written:

“He has not commanded anyone to be wicked,

and he has not given anyone permission to sin.”

But maybe when Jesus said, “I say to you . . .” he was only talking to his disciples.

Sorry, but no.

Jesus wasn’t just talking to his disciples as some sort of special humans who would be granted superhuman powers.  They were humans just like us.

If you haven’t watched any of episodes of The Chosen, I recommend it.

Some of the people in my Sunday School class and Men’s Bible Study have complained that the series starts off slow, but if you stick with it the episodes bring the disciples to life.

The series does take liberties with things not found in Scripture, such as Simon Peter being a debt-ridden gambler, or Nicodemus trying (and failing) to exorcise demons from Mary Magdalene and Thomas being the wine merchant in the miracle at the wedding at Cana.

But these liberties don’t detract from the main message of Scripture but serve to use drama to humanize the disciples.

Paradoxically, by taking away the “saintliness” of the disciples we find that we’re not allowed to do away with our own call to “saintliness”.

So, if Jesus wasn’t setting up an argument demonstrating the impossibility of living within the law or being as saintly as the first disciples, was he saying that we were off the hook as long as we at least aspired to an impossible righteousness but didn’t have to actually achieve it?

Not for us Methodists.  We believe that we are called to move on toward perfection.  That doesn’t mean aspiring to impossible standards but striving to achieve them.

Wesley wrote:

“God well knew how ready our unbelief would be to cry out, This is impossible! And therefore stakes upon it all the power, truth, and faithfulness of God, to whom all things are possible.”

So, what does Jesus mean when he says that we are to be perfect just as our heavenly father is perfect?

I believe that what he is saying is that we are to “put on Christ.”

Let me reference three other passages to explain what I mean.

First, there is Matthew’s recounting of Jesus’ parable of the great banquet that ends with people, both good and bad, being invited to the feast after the original invitees have declined to show up.  You’ll recall that one of the new guests is found to be without the appropriate wedding attire and is bound hand and foot and thrown into the outer darkness.

We’ll come back to this seemingly unfair outcome.

Then there is the Paul’s second letter to the church at Corinth, in which he writes in chapter 5, at verse 16,:

“From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once knew Christ from a human point of view, we know him no longer in that way. So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!”

Note that Paul is saying that we regard “no one” from a human point of view.  This is consistent with Jesus saying that we must be reconciled with those with whom we are angry and that we must love even our enemies.  To do this is to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect.

But again, you object and say this isn’t possible.  To which Paul replies in the same passage that we are able to regard no one from a human point of view by saying,

“All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

And then, finally, the passage that was so fundamental to the experience of both John Wesley and St. Augustine. The former when he heard a sermon on the passage being expounded as he stood on Aldersgate Street and the latter when he heard the children in the garden on the other side of the wall in the place he was staying in Milan as they sang, “Tolle Lege, Tolle Lege,” and turned and then indeed take up and read the book that lay just inside in which Paul, writing to the Romans, in chapter 13, verses 12-14, urged:

“Let us then lay aside the works of darkness and put on the armor of light; let us live honorably as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy. Instead, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.”

Back to the guest who was thrown out of the banquet for not being dressed appropriately.  We want to object that it’s not fair.  After all, he was called in off the street with others who weren’t originally invited.  How was he supposed to have the correct attire?

Because God provided it.

Through Jesus.  The Logos made flesh, through which God reconciled the world to himself and gives us the power to become perfect, just as our heavenly father is perfect.

Through Jesus, God abolished our lament that living up to the law is an impossibility and calls us to choose to put on Christ.

To strive to be one of The Chosen.

Scandalous Grace

When I looked at the Lectionary for this, the Fourth Sunday in Lent, my first thought was how can I say anything new about the story of the Prodigal Son? After mulling it over and praying about it, I decided that focusing my message today on Paul’s words in what we know as his second letter to the church at Corinth made more sense.

Here’s the text from 2 Corinthians 5:16-21

From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once knew Christ from a human point of view, we know him no longer in that way. So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

That decision found further support when I turned to the commentary in Feasting on the Word.  Feasting on the Word is a series of volumes on the three-year cycle of the Lectionary.  The passages for each Sunday are examined by different authors from theological, pastoral, exegetical and homiletical perspectives.

Ralph C. Wood, the author of the theological perspective on 2 Corinthians 5:16-21, began his reflections on the passage with the following words:

“Whether apocryphal or not, there is a splendid story that illustrates the centrality of this Lenten text. It is reported that Karl Barth was once asked what he would say to Adolf Hitler if he ever had the chance to meet the monster who was destroying Europe and who would ruin the whole world if he were not stopped. Barth’s interlocutor assumed that he would offer a scorching prophetic judgment against the miscreant’s awful politics of destruction. Barth replied, instead, that he would do nothing other than quote Romans 5:8: “While we still were sinners, Christ died for us.””

— Ralph C Wood. Feasting on the Word: Year C, Volume 2: Lent through Eastertide.

Okay, whether the story is true or not, that’s a wonderful reflection on the Christian character of Karl Barth, one of the preeminent theologians of the 20th Century. But then Wood added —

“If I were brought to a similar pass, I would hope to have the presence of mind to utter these words: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation . . . . We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:19–20 RSV).”

My first thought was that I appreciated Barth’s spare style much more than Wood’s, with the added attraction that it is familiar to all United Methodists as a part of the confession with which we inaugurate the Great Thanksgiving. Following the communal confession and the private meditation, the leader pronounces —

“Hear the good news: Christ died for us while we were yet sinners; that proves God's love toward us. In the name of Jesus Christ, you are forgiven!”

While I appreciate the expanded theology of Paul’s letter to Corinth, I could see it as being a bit wordy if you thought to use it when confronting a bloodthirsty autocrat.

Of course, this was Wood engaging with an audience most likely to consist of clergy and I figured he could get away with it. But then he made a compelling point that I thought could preach. The key to this affirmation lies in the beginning of the text:

“From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once knew Christ from a human point of view, we know him no longer in that way.” 2 Cor. 5:16

How often, when reading Scripture, do we “bleep” past some words and lose the deeper meaning along the way? Many of us might read this text and understand it to mean that we no longer view the risen Christ as merely the carpenter cum rabbi from Nazareth, worker of signs and wonders though he was, but as something much, much more. In doing so we miss a key element:

“From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view . . .”

No One.

Not even Vladimir Putin.

See why this commentary spoke to me?

Scandal Part One

In a little bit, I’ll try to connect Paul’s words to the parable of the Prodigal that Jesus related to the Pharisees and scribes who were criticizing him for welcoming sinners and eating with them

But first, think about how Wood’s words struck me when I read them a few days ago against a backdrop of the evil that Vladimir Putin has visited upon the people of Ukraine. Writing about Adolph Hitler and Karl Barth is one thing – after all they’re history now. Sure, we know that Hitler was a monster, but he’s a monster that has retreated into the mists of time: Putin is here and now and we’re witnessing the terror, the pain, the suffering and deaths of not just soldiers but innocents – including children.

Painting by Uta Kaxniashvili

I thought of the picture of the young boy fleeing from the terror of war, crossing the border into Poland, his face contorted in abject misery and fear, separated from his parents and carrying all he had in a plastic bag. Uta Kaxniashvili used painting to render this arresting image universal.

Substituting Putin for Hitler in the apocryphal story about Karl Barth, we are expected to say to Putin:

“In Christ, God is reconciling the world to himself, so not counting your inexcusable crimes against you, as God’s ambassadors we implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”

 Really???

This is what I mean by “scandalous grace.”

Scandal Part Two

 Merriam-Webster defines “scandal” as “a circumstance or action that offends propriety or established moral conceptions or disgraces those associated with it.”

 To me, telling Putin that God isn’t counting his trespasses against humanity against him is scandalous.

There’s another meaning of scandalous that we need to consider.

First, however, Wood references another of my favorite theologians when he writes of Hans Urs von Balthasar:

“[I]n his splendid little treatise titled “Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved?” [Balthasar] argues that if we deny this hope, then we have no right to confidence in our own salvation. To give up hope for any other person, no matter how wretched their condition may be, is also to give up hope for ourselves. How can we presuppose our own final deliverance from human wretchedness into divine worthiness, while assuming that others cannot be similarly saved?”

— Ralph C Wood. Feasting on the Word: Year C, Volume 2: Lent through Eastertide.

Paul wasn’t writing in the abstract in his letter to the Corinthians.  They were fighting among themselves over what constituted orthodox behavior and the correct understanding of what it meant to be a follower of Christ.  One group of the people of Corinth considered themselves to be righteous and others to be condemned.

 For the Corinthians it was scandalous to be told that they shouldn’t count their opponents’ trespasses against them.

Paul was having none of it, however — telling them that once someone was “in Christ” there was a “new creation” – that everything old was done away with, put behind us, because everything had become new.

 What did Paul mean by everything had become new?  For the answer to that question, we have to look at verse 21:

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Okay, that just seems to raise more questions, doesn’t it?  How could Jesus, God in the flesh, be made to be sin?

In his commentary in The New Interpreter’s Bible, J. Paul Sampley writes of verse 21:

“Rather than let the appeal for reconciliation conclude the tradition and its application, Paul makes a Christological development that is very reminiscent of the “story” that structures the Christ hymn in Phil 2:5–11 and that reappears later in the letter fragment before us. The “story” goes like this: (phase 1) The exalted (rich) one assumes lowly (poor) status, becoming like us (phase 2), so that we can become exalted (rich) like him (phase 3).”

— Sampley, J. P. (1994–2004). The Second Letter to the Corinthians., New Interpreter’s Bible (Vol. 11, pp. 95–96). Abingdon Press.

Here’s where I try to tie in the parable of the Prodigal son.

• First, just as with the Corinthian factions, the elder brother in the story of the Prodigal, was offended — “scandalized” — by his father’s actions in not only forgiving his profligate younger brother, but acting as if none of his bad behavior mattered.

• Second, I’m reminded of Karl Barth’s idea of Christ acting in a manner similar to the Prodigal by forsaking his inheritance and traveling to a far country (being made flesh) in order to bring us back with him to the Father.

Barth’s notion offends at first, but then so does Paul’s statement that Christ, who was without sin, was made to be sin so that he might erase our sin.

This brings me to the second meaning of scandalous. Well, really it’s the original meaning of the word; that is, a stumbling block or stone.

Scandal Part Three

In Greek, the word skandalon meant just that – a stumbling block.

 We’re most familiar with the use of that term in 1 Corinthians 1:22-23:

“For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,”

 We see it elsewhere in Paul’s letter to the Romans where, in Romans 9:30-33 he quotes from a combination of verses from Isaiah:

What then are we to say? Gentiles, who did not strive for righteousness, have attained it, that is, righteousness through faith; but Israel, who did strive for the righteousness that is based on the law, did not succeed in fulfilling that law. Why not? Because they did not strive for it on the basis of faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written,
“See, I am laying in Zion a stone that will make people stumble, a rock that will make them fall, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

So, what does this mean for us this morning?

Like the older brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son, we are “scandalized” by the “stumbling block” of God’s amazing grace. We see grace from the perspective of the “flesh” or human point of view:

The grace that saves a wretch like me is amazing.

The grace that saves a thug like Vladimir Putin is scandalous.

But, as Jesus wanted the Pharisees to understand, God looks upon the sinners they were so concerned with as having been dead but come to life; as lost but yet found. Jesus tried to make the scribes and the Pharisees look upon those sinners as God does — as those he seeks to reconcile to himself, not counting their trespasses against them.

Therefore, we are challenged to no longer regard anyone – even Vladimir Putin – from a human point of view, but are to become ambassadors for Christ, imploring all people – even Vladimir Putin – to be reconciled to God.

 Or, as Karl Barth is claimed to have said he would have told Hitler, “While we still were sinners, Christ died for us.”