Illegal Redemption
Christopher B. Harbin
John 9:1-41
Who makes the rules? Why are they made? What is their purpose? I've learned that rules often have a mishmash of purposes. Some are, "Because I said so." (Who knows?) Some are to keep us or others safe. Some are to protect power structures. Some are to punish people we don't like. Others follow no discernible purpose at all. Sometimes the most well-intentioned rules completely miss the mark. An Alabama state law makes it illegal to carry an ice cream cone in one's back pocket. What do we do when the purposes set before us conflict with the rules by which we live our lives?
Many religious songs for children present the Bible as God's Word. If the Bible says something, it is true-end of discussion. It makes for a nice, neat, little box in which to construct a belief system. At least it appears so until we discover that the Bible actually has to be interpreted into our vernacular and its meaning then distilled into our lives. Along the way, we find competing ideas presented in the Bible and various ways of understanding and applying its messages to our lives. Rick Warren recently remarked that while Baptist conservatives believe the Bible to be God's inerrant word, Baptist fundamentalists believe their interpretations of the Bible to be inerrant. We come to this intersection where two very conservative groups disagree on how the Bible should be read. That nice, neat, little box starts looking a bit ragged.
Jesus had a different way of interpreting God's commandments than many of his compatriots. I've often heard that if you gather four Jews in one room, you have five different opinions. Of course, I have seen such not limited to any one group of people. (I happen to like chocolate AND mint ice cream, as well as Moose Tracks.) The main argument leveled against Jesus in today's passage had to do with Sabbath observance. As far as they were concerned, when Jesus fashioned c ...
Christopher B. Harbin
John 9:1-41
Who makes the rules? Why are they made? What is their purpose? I've learned that rules often have a mishmash of purposes. Some are, "Because I said so." (Who knows?) Some are to keep us or others safe. Some are to protect power structures. Some are to punish people we don't like. Others follow no discernible purpose at all. Sometimes the most well-intentioned rules completely miss the mark. An Alabama state law makes it illegal to carry an ice cream cone in one's back pocket. What do we do when the purposes set before us conflict with the rules by which we live our lives?
Many religious songs for children present the Bible as God's Word. If the Bible says something, it is true-end of discussion. It makes for a nice, neat, little box in which to construct a belief system. At least it appears so until we discover that the Bible actually has to be interpreted into our vernacular and its meaning then distilled into our lives. Along the way, we find competing ideas presented in the Bible and various ways of understanding and applying its messages to our lives. Rick Warren recently remarked that while Baptist conservatives believe the Bible to be God's inerrant word, Baptist fundamentalists believe their interpretations of the Bible to be inerrant. We come to this intersection where two very conservative groups disagree on how the Bible should be read. That nice, neat, little box starts looking a bit ragged.
Jesus had a different way of interpreting God's commandments than many of his compatriots. I've often heard that if you gather four Jews in one room, you have five different opinions. Of course, I have seen such not limited to any one group of people. (I happen to like chocolate AND mint ice cream, as well as Moose Tracks.) The main argument leveled against Jesus in today's passage had to do with Sabbath observance. As far as they were concerned, when Jesus fashioned c ...
There are 9172 characters in the full content. This excerpt only shows a 2000 character sample of the full content.
Price: $5.99 or 1 credit
