So That God's Works Might Be Revealed...

As he walked along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

Good morning, dear Christians!  This is not an unfamiliar question, is it?  How often in our lives, when bad stuff happens, do we ask ourselves, “What did I do wrong?”  Or "what did they do wrong?” This seems to happen, I’ve noticed, with circumstances that appear to have no other rational explanation.  Frequently it happens with children – what did I do wrong while I was pregnant? What did I do wrong while I was raising them?  But that’s not the only time – maybe if I had eaten more blueberries, I wouldn’t have cancer? Is God punishing me for not believing in him enough? For that awful decision I made when I was a teenager?  For that terrible, horrible, no good, very bad thing that no one knows about? 

Or we do it to other people…what did they do wrong that they’re homeless?  Or so incredibly poor?  Or can't keep a job?  People don’t get that disease unless they’ve done something they shouldn’t have been doing…

And it is true that there are plenty of circumstances in our lives that come about as a direct result of sin – our own sin, or someone else’s sin.  Sometimes life is hard because we sinned or somebody else sinned, and we are now stuck with the natural consequences.  Getting into a car accident when you’re driving drunk is not God punishing you, it’s just what happens when you do stupid things.  Flunking a test that you didn’t study for is not God’s punishment for being lazy, it’s just what happens when you don’t study.  Yes?  But there are also plenty – plenty – of times, more often than not, I’d wager, when rotten stuff happens to us or to people we love because it just does.  Because this world is not perfect, it is broken and scarred by sin, death, and the power of the devil.  Because God is working on a new Heaven and a new Earth when all this crap that we face in our lives will pass away, but it’s not here yet.  

This is why babies die in miscarriages and natural disasters happen and people who eat right and exercise every day get cancer and so much else.  The junk in this world that just is.  It is what it is.  Even Jesus will tell you that.  

Nobody sinned – this man was born blind.  Because sometimes that happens.

And in those moments when inexplicable, rotten things happen…when we feel most like perhaps God has abandoned us…it is at those times when He is most powerfully there…working, working, working situations that He didn’t cause…but that you better bet your britches He’s gonna use for good.  

So we’re going to play with the text a little bit here, I’ll teach you a little bit about Greek, and we’re actually going to use the screens – now this is the first time that Mike and I have worked on this, so give us both some grace here, but…let’s look again at John 9 verses 3 and 4: 

“Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned; he was born blind so that God's works might be revealed in him.  We must perform the works of Him who sent me..."

Well…not quite.  

Jesus does not say, “He was born blind so that…”

The actual Greek does not contain Jesus’ restatement about the fact of blindness.  The actual Greek reads more like 

“Jesus answered, ‘Neither this man nor his parents have sinned: but that the works of God might be revealed in him.’”  

 Well, that’s kind of an oddball sentence.  It’s like it’s missing a whole clause, right? 

Neither this man nor his parents have sinned, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him   ???  .   

And so most – not all, but many – translators have filled in what appears to be the obvious answer – he was born blind.  And we end up with sentences like the translation I read earlier, 

‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned; he was born blind so that God’s works might be revealed in him.  We must perform the works of him who sent me…’

But here’s the thing about Greek, and it’s why I want to depart a little from some of the major translations…Ancient New Testament Greek contains no punctuation.  They just wrote until they were done.  And part of the task of translating is to figure out where sentences end and commas belong, and so forth, so that what's being said actually makes sense.  We do this in English, too, don’t we? There's a world of difference between:

Let’s eat, Grandma.

Let’s eat Grandma.

Punctuation is important.  

So the Greek for these two verses actually reads, 

“Jesus answered neither this man nor his parents sinned but that the works of God should be revealed in him I must perform the works of him that sent me…”.   

We’re just going to leave the part about day and night alone for right now…  

But now we have to punctuate it.  Let’s fill in the easy stuff first.  It’s pretty obvious where the quote marks should go – Jesus answered – what did he answer? – Neither this man… so we’ll fill in the quote marks and the comma after answered, because that’s English convention.  Now, we can also put a comma after “sinned”, since the word ‘but’ is a conjunction, it’s the start of a new clause.    

But we still have a run-on sentence, or at least a run-on clause.  

 “…but that the works of God should be revealed in him I must perform the works of him that sent me [when are we performing those works?] while it is day the night is coming when no man can work.” 

 As I said before, the most typical translation breaks that run-on clause by putting a period and ending the sentence right here: 

“Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. I must perform the works of him that sent me while it is day: the night is coming when no man can work," 

But what if we change it up?  What if instead of putting a comma after "sinned", we put a period?  And instead of a period after "him," we put a comma?  So that the whole thing reads, 

“Neither this man nor his parents sinned.  But that the works of God should be revealed in him, I must perform the works of him that sent me…”

Well now, that’s different, isn’t it?  That changes the whole situation.  It shifts the man’s blindness from something that God did to him, or at the very least that God allowed to happen, just so that God would have an opportunity to perform a miracle, it changes that to something that, well, just happened, because these things do, but that God is now going to use to “perform his works” in the guy. 

 

Now, I do think we should be careful.  We need to have humility, and realize that most translators are not punctuating it like this. But. I really do think that we can go with it, and here’s why.  God does not willingly afflict people with suffering, just so that he can come back later and prove how awesome He is.  When life is miserable, for whatever reason, it’s true that God will use that to draw us closer to Him, He will take that opportunity to show his glory, his power to heal and resurrect.  But God does not decide to actively make our lives miserable, just so He can show off.  Not at all.  Not. At. All.  

So let’s run with this, for today.  “Neither this man nor his parents sinned.  But that the works of God should be revealed in him, I must perform the works of him that sent Me.”

Okay then, so…what is the work of God?  Miracles? Healing this man’s eyes, so he can see?  Well, yes.  Certainly God does miracles.  But we can’t read Scripture in a vacuum.  We will always have a better understanding of Scripture if we read what’s around it, if we know what else has happened in the story, or what is going to happen.  If we have a sense for even the entire book of the Bible that we are reading, and the entire framework that the author is working from.  So what is the work of God?  I’m glad you asked!  

Let’s flip back a few pages to John chapter 6, verses 28-30:

“Then they asked him, ‘What must we do to do the works God requires?’”  Jesus answered, ‘The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.’” 

The “work of God” is to believe in the one He has sent.  So let’s substitute that into our verses from chapter 9: 

“Neither this man nor his parents sinned.  But that God's work belief in the one God has sent might be revealed in him, I must perform the works of Him that sent Me.” 

Huh.  

This whole story is about the man who was born blind coming to faith in Jesus.  Please notice that this man does not begin the story with faith.  He is not blind old Bartimaeus, calling out, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”  This is not the woman with the flow of blood hoping to touch just the edge of his robe so that she will be healed.  He is not the centurion saying to Jesus, “I’m not worthy to have you come to my house, but if you only just say the word, my daughter will be healed.”  No, this man born blind is, by all accounts, just going about his day, minding his own business, and nowhere does he ask that his blindness would be healed.  But Jesus does it anyway.  Jesus heals him because it is that healing process, and everything that happens afterward, that leads this man to believe in Jesus, that leads to the work of God, belief in the one God has sent, to be revealed, to be made manifest, in his man.  

So then, let’s look at the rest of the story – pretty soon after the guy gets healed, the neighbors start to ask.  “Hey wait a second?  Is that the guy who used to have to beg for money because he couldn’t work?  Wasn’t he blind or something?  Well, he’s not blind now…It can’t be the same guy…no, I think it is… ‘Hey buddy, didn’t you used to be blind?  What happened?’”  

And he responds, “Yeah I was, but then some dude named Jesus did this thing with the spit and the mud and the… and when I washed it off, I could see…I don’t know how it worked, man, but I swear to you, that’s what happened.”  A man named Jesus.  That’s his starting place.

And while the neighbors might think it’s a little weird, the Pharisees are outright disturbed.  They can’t let this go on.  This Jesus guy has been running around upsetting apple carts all over the place…and now he’s healing blind people?  And on the Sabbath no less?  Oh, of course it was on the Sabbath…golly gee…it’s always on the Sabbath.  So the Pharisees, who, remember, are the rule-enforcers of the Jewish people, call the man in and ask him what happened, and he tells the same story.  He put mud on my eyes, and I washed them.  I was blind, and now I can see.  Now, the Pharisees are split over what to think – “He can’t possibly be from God…he was working…on the Sabbath!  Sinner.”  “Well, yeah, but how is somebody who is such a sinner able to do these kinds of signs?  That doesn’t make any sense!” So they ask the guy himself – gosh, there’s an idea – it was your eyes he opened, what do you say?  And the man says, “He is a prophet.”  Ok, so we’ve gone from “Some guy named Jesus,” to “a prophet.”

But the Pharisees, of course, because they have their own spiritual blindness issues going on, just can’t let it go.  So they go to the guy’s parents – “He really was blind from the time he was born?”  “Yeah, he really was.”  “Well, what just happened?”  “Uh, we don’t know.  Ask him, he’s an adult.  And, please don’t kick us out of the synagogue!”  So they call the guy back in, and they go through the whole thing all over again…and the guy says, “Why are you asking all this?  When I already told you?  And you didn’t believe me the first time?  Do you guys want to be one of his disciples, too?”…implying, of course, that he has since become one of Jesus’ followers…and he even puts the problem into sharp relief for the Pharisees… “Look, you don’t know anything about him, but that he healed me.  And we all know that God only does stuff like this with people who listen to him and obey his will…so there’s no way that he can possibly be a sinner…he’s got to be from God!”  To which the Pharisees’ response is basically, “Hey ya smartmouth, you think you’re better than us?”  And they kick him out.  

But Jesus goes and finds him – Jesus always goes and finds…Jesus goes and finds him and says, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”  “Who is he? Tell me so that I can believe.”  “It’s me, Jesus says.  The one you’re talking to right now.”  And the man answers, “Lord, I believe.”  

Jesus tells the crowds of people following him, “The work of God is to believe in the one He has sent.”  

Jesus tells his disciples, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned.  But so that the work of God might be revealed in him, I must perform the works of the one who sent me.”  

At the moment that the man says, “Lord, I believe,” the work of God – belief in the one God has sent – has been revealed in the man.  Praise the Lord.  

This is what Jesus does with us, as well.  Sometimes stuff happens.  Rotten things.  Things with no explanation.  Or things that have an explanation, but are certainly not our fault.  And even things that are our fault.  Even the consequences of our own sin, can be quite unpleasant.  Life is tough.  And while God never causes these things, once they happen, He works them over into something that is at least useful. 

 

By his own death and resurrection, Jesus has overcome all the death and darkness in the whole world.  He will open your eyes to see that He is the Christ, the one whom God has sent, to bring you out of darkness, and into his marvelous light.  He does indeed have the power to forgive our sins, to heal our sicknesses, to raise us from the dead, to put back together the situations and relationships that are broken beyond repair.  He alone has that power – He is the one who performs the miracles.  But as much as he does not wish us to suffer, his primary concern is not that we would have no earthly troubles.  His primary concern is not that life be smooth sailing all the time.  His primary concern is that you would believe in Him, the One whom God has sent.  And so as He is healing your sicknesses and infirmities, as He is fixing the things that are broken, in the moment when He is forgiving your sins and raising you from the dead, in the midst of that all of that, He is drawing you unto Himself.  He is teaching you to believe in him, and to trust him for everything, even for life itself.  

The very end – the last two verses – of John’s Gospel tells us exactly why John bothered to sit down and write all this out: “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”  

The world can be a terrible place, and terrible things happen in it.  But even in the midst of terrible things, know that God is hard at work, overcoming sin, death, and the devil, bringing you to faith, and teaching you to trust Him, to believe in Jesus, the One whom God has sent, so that by believing, you may have life in his name.  

Amen. 

Thoughts from an alum

Given the news coming out of Luther Seminary today, I thought I'd offer my reflections.  A couple of things I write here are suggestions of actions I believe would be helpful; some are simply my thoughts, feelings, and reactions.  Other people may disagree with my suggestions, or feel, think, and react differently.  That is fine.  Also, please note: I am a very recent alum.  I am not an HR guru, a finance person, or a higher ed administrator.  I am not a current student, nor a an old-timer with a degree from LNTS.  I'm a first-call pastor at a smallish congregation in a small Midwestern town.  So, here goes.

• I like Rick Bliese.  From his rosy Santa Claus cheeks to his "dad jeans", by all accounts, he is a good, caring person who loves Jesus and the students, faculty, and staff at Luther.  He has personally been very supportive to me during my time at seminary and in candidacy, and I feel bad that this is what eventually "had" to happen.
• We need to be in prayer for him and his family - obviously this is a huge, and hugely negative, transition for them, down to the fact that they live in seminary housing and so will need to find a new place to live.
• The seminary is going to have to find a way to start handling pastoral care for students.  I'm aware Luther just hired a new campus pastor - I know nothing about her except that she's supposedly good.  I hope she is, although she has no institutional memory at this point, and in times of major upheaval such as this, that can be somewhat limiting.  Others are going to have to step up.  Students on campus are literally (yes) dying for someone to care for them.  Administration is generally available to meet one-on-one, or hold a "forum" in the chapel for people to (sort of) air their concerns.  But very few individuals offer one-on-one prayers, or hugs-and-tears.  Students feel trampled-upon at frequent intervals, and the sense, I believe, is that even when policies, decisions, transitions, whatever are "good" or "right", they are handled in a way that communicates that students aren't all that important.  Just like churches that want to grow need to start asking, "If I were a visitor, how would I react to this?", Luther staff/administration needs to start asking, "If I were a student, how would I react to this?"  
• I feel lied to.  For years, we have heard from President Bliese and others that, "Look, the economy [and the 2009 decisions] have been rough on everybody.  We're struggling, but we're making good decisions, and we're going to be okay.  We're certainly in better shape than the others."  I'm not sure whether Luther is "struggling, and not going to be okay", or whether the other 7 are already 6-feet-under, as it were.
• This raises huge vocational questions.  What are any of us doing as pastors in the ELCA, receiving graduate education from her seminaries, when they are all barely - barely - keeping their heads above water? What is the long-term survivability of the ELCA?  And if the answer is "not much", then why are we all dragging ourselves through the torture that is candidacy?  
• It also raises huge vocational reminders: I don't believe (or at least, I haven't heard anything that would make me think) Rick Bliese is guilty of true illegalities: fraud or embezzlement or such.  Apparently he asked forgiveness today for "poor fiscal leadership".  Mismanagement and poor leadership are not illegal, but they are sinful.  As pastors/youth leaders/professors/etc, we need to be aware that our own mismanagement and poor stewardship of what we've been given (not necessarily, or only, money) is just as sinful in the eyes of Our Lord as embezzlement. 
• I love Luther, and I thoroughly enjoyed my time there.  (Well, most days...)  I love the faculty and staff, the administration, my fellow students.  I learned a lot of really awesome facts and ideas there, and I grew tremendously.  But I have a ton of educational debt, as do most of my fellow students.  The cafeteria is barely open anymore.  Contracts prevent students from purchasing books...at the bookstore. And yet, certain individuals and departments spend ridiculous amounts of seminary funds on high-end coffee and cookies every day of the week.  There are flat-screen TVs in every corner of Northwestern and the OCC.  NW and OCC have both recently undergone major asthetic remodels, while the dorms and apartments battle bedbugs and mold year-round.  I understand that fundraising is not as simple as "write us a check, please, and make it out to 'cash'".  I understand that donors want to earmark their money for things that they might not realize aren't totally the top priority.  But the administration needs to realize that students notice these things, and fair or not, find statements about "concern for rising student debt" to sound rather platitudinous against the backdrop of a flatscreen TV  hanging on the wall in the lunchline. 
• "Where there is no vision, the people perish."  Look, this isn't about Rick Bliese.  It's not really even about the economy, or about 2009 decisions that torqued off rich old ladies, or spending money on frivolities instead of necessities.  It's about the fact that much of the ELCA and many of her associated enterprises - Luther Seminary among them - has taken its eye off the ball.  We are told that we are to be missional - but missional about what?  A vast cohort of students, faculty, and staff (and therefore pastors, bishops, and synod staff) get more worked up about personal pronouns for God than personal relationships with God.  We are taught that to "want people to come to church on Sunday morning" indicates a lack of understanding that God works outside the church.  We are taught that the Church, and Word & Sacrament, are nice, you know, but so are justice and advocacy.  I spent more time in seminary learning about "family systems" than I did sacramental theology.  No, for realz.  I was assigned more papers about why we shouldn't evangelize, than about how and why we should.  I recognize that this is a huge indictment of the entire system, and I want to be clear that I do not, by any means, include anyone and everyone who is part of the system in this.  There remain many, many good and faithful students, faculty, staff, pastors, bishops, and synod staff.  But donors (and your average layperson trying to decide whether to venture out into the cold to go to church on Sunday, for that matter) don't get excited about advocacy for advocacy's sake, or "training students to reflect a baptismal approach to missionality blah blah blah", or even "buy your own hymnal!"  You know what's exciting?  Jesus.  Jesus is exciting because He forgives sins - our own, and everybody else's.  He is exciting because by the power of the resurrection, he transforms lives in the here and now.  He is exciting because he is constantly creating us anew, he promises us eternal life, he has already begun to set this upside-down world right-side-up again and one day he's going to finish the job, there's gonna be a new heaven and a new earth, where everything is going to be fixed, and how awesome is that going to be? Tell little old ladies that we're training pastors to reach out to the world around us and share the everlasting love of Jesus Christ.  Tell them that with passion, and conviction, like it's the best thing you've ever heard about (because it is - even better than sliced bread) and they'll start writing checks.  Tell them you've got students who are slogging through the economy just like the rest of us, but who are so in love with Jesus that they'd be here no matter what, come hell or high water, bedbugs or mold, learning how to spread the Good News in the 21st century just like Paul did in the 1st, and people will be fired up.   

So there you've got it - just some honest first impressions from the recent grad. Feel free to chime in with your own, or tell me I'm totally wrong.  But something's gotta be done, that's all I know.  And remember to pray for Rick Bliese.  

Update

So graduation turned out to be pretty okay.  I was sitting (mostly) by friends, and it turns out that we're all friends on a day like Graduation Day, so, yeah...

The service was...eh...mostly good.  Between Baccalaureate and Graduation, they managed to put together some decent worship.  My fam was around, so I had dinner with them afterward, and then got up the next morning to open at work. 

Excellent. 

Now I've just got a couple days left until I head home for my sister's wedding.  Eh.  I feel like every support system I have is systematically being stripped away.  In a way I suppose this is good, because it's forcing me to rely on God in ways that I don't know that I've had to before.  People who were my close friends are just sort of...not...anymore.  The friends I have that I'm still close to are so far away, and it sucks not having them around to be with.  By the time I get back from the wedding, another of my friends here on campus will have left to start her new job.  I'm really happy for her - I'm just going to miss her.

And I think that's part of my struggle with going home for this wedding.  I say "going home" because that's where my parents are, but really, Kansas isn't home for me.  I lived there the last three years of high school.  I haven't been there longer than 2 or 3 weeks since I was a college sophomore.  The people that I'm friends with from high school no longer live there, and the high school classmates that still live there I'm no longer friends with.  I'm headed to my parents' house where they are basically the only people I know or care about, to be drowned in the fact that everyone else but me has the one thing I really want.  

I suppose that's covetous or jealous on my part, and I wish it wasn't.  Because I'm trying really hard not to be jealous or bitter, it just hurts so much.  It's like being the last puppy at the pound, or kid at the orphanage.  Everyone else gets picked except you, and not only do you know it's happening, you're actually having to watch it, and what you want more than anything is someone to pick you.  Should I be joyful and content nevertheless?  Probably - I have the "one thing needful", after all.  But what do you do when your heart is so broken it can't break anymore?  How do you be joyful and content then?

I was deep into Psalm 51 last night, because I just have a bad attitude and a bad heart about so many things right now.  Sin, death, and the power of the devil are just so oppressive.  So often when we talk about freeing the victims of oppression, we mean the ones who are being sinned against by other people.  But what we often don't talk about is that those who are doing the sinning - to be trapped in jealousy and covetousness is every bit as oppressive - it's just that you're being oppressed by the devil himself, rather than somebody else.  And that's almost worse.  Maybe. 

It's days like this that I wish (modern) Lutherans hadn't ditched the tradition of private confession and absolution.

Like vs. Lust

Tracey over at palepage wrote about this a couple weeks ago, and I still am struggling with this here Modesty Survey.  (To see the data, click a category on the left, then choose a question on the right, then scroll down for the results.)  The upshot of the survey and its results are that no matter how hard women try, our clothing or makeup or jewelry or the way we sit or stand or walk is always going to constitute some sort of "stumbling block" to our brothers in the faith who (it seems) are constantly battling against the sin of lust.

Now.  I don't in any way want to underestimate or make light of the fact that men are very um...visual.  I get that.  I mean, I don't get it, but I understand the principle.  And I think that men or no men, women have a responsibility to dress modestly.  Our bodies have been given to us by God, and we should therefore treat them with respect.  It also (theoretically) helps protect us against being lusted after, and (theoretically) encourages men to get to know our personalities and characters, and not just our bodies.  And the Bible does indeed say:

...make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.  (Romans 14:13)

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak.  (1 Corinthians 8:9)

It's also true that regardless of what the sin is, as Christians, we should all be seeking to help our brothers and sisters avoid sin. 

If you look under "Open Questions", you'll see that, at least at some level, the guys taking this survey recognize that ultimately it's their job not to lust, and not to treat their sisters-in-Christ with disrespect.  But it seems like the survey language, crafted as it is with an extreme overuse of the term "stumbling block", is meant to suggest that women have an enormous responsbility to dress modestly not because it is a virtue in and of itself, but solely in order to prevent others from sinning.

I'm just not sure what I think about that.  I feel like Paul's admonishment not to place stumbling blocks in the path of the weak is mostly about people who are weak in the faith and have not yet come to enough spiritual maturity to understand proper exercise of Christian freedom.  I think if you can run around demanding that other people not place stumbling blocks in your way, then Paul's not talking about you. 

But let's look seriously at Matthew 18:6, Mark 9:42, and Luke 17:2 - all of which give us some variation of

And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.

All you Bible scholars out there: in light of this passage, is there a difference between deliberately dressing and/or acting to incite lust, and attempting to dress and/or act with a reasonable degree of modesty but still becoming an inadvertant object of lust by others who lack self-control?  Common sense seems to suggest that there is, but this verse in the synoptics paints with a pretty broad brush.  Thoughts?

And finally: There seems to be an implicit suggestion that finding a woman attractive is the same thing as lusting after her.  Maybe someone can clarify this for me, but I don't think they're the same thing.  Maybe this is where male and female responses to visuals part ways, but as a woman, I think it's entirely possible to look at a man and say, "He's really very attractive," and leave it at that.  Vis a vis the survey, I resent the implication that dressing in order to look attractive is automatically dressing to incite lust.  I don't think it's true, I don't think it's how most women think when they're getting dressed, and I think that continuing to push this meme that attractive women are naturally responsible for sins of their brothers-in-Christ can actually be very psychologically harmful. 

Maybe it's just me...