Fine Prints: October, 2005

The Common Denominator October 1

The Most Important Part of Sabbath Dress    October 8

Tough Decision October 15  

The Ultimate Sin: Taking God's Name in Vain October 22  

If Your Right Hand Offends You . . . October 29  

The Common Denominator

In the June 4 Fine Print I asked what God most wanted from humans: humility or ethical goodness? I said he wanted our hearts.

Let’s continue the discussion with another question: For an automobile to function properly, which is most critical? Steering? Wheels? Engine?

But car operation involves more than just a car’s physical structure. So which is most critical? Steering, wheels, engine? Or fuel, oxygen, gravity?

Now let’s go further. Which is most important? Steering, wheels, engine? Fuel, oxygen, gravity? Or the fact that God created all the raw materials from which cars are made and all the physical laws by which they run?

Just how does one rank the relative importance of components when all are indispensable?

We could argue strongly that faith is the prime response God seeks from humans. Christ’s disciples asked: "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" (John 6:28, 29). On the other hand, Jesus said the greatest commandment was to "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" (Matthew 22:37). In at least three places the Bible says that "the fear of the Lord" is the beginning of wisdom/knowledge (Psalms 111:10; Proverbs 1:7 and 9:10). And there’s also humility and ethical goodness.

So which reigns supreme?

What I look for is an umbrella concept that can include all the ingredients just enumerated—and more. For me, that common denominator is "right relationship." "Give me your heart."

From my perspective, humility, though essential, doesn’t inherently include such things as the joy and certainty of forgiveness. Right relationship does. Further, I’ve heard it argued that "one can have no relationship with God prior to having humility . . . [and] one can have no character improvement without humility." Yet the disciples grew a lot spiritually in their three and a half years with Jesus, even though the story of the Last Supper (John 13) suggests that they hadn’t made much progress in the realm of humility.

The path of spiritual growth doesn’t follow a predictable, tidy pattern with defined sequential steps. There are as many variations as there are people. Very often, I believe, actions come before the beliefs. In fact, that’s why we teach little children to go through certain spiritual rituals that, initially, have no meaning for them. But we believe that the meaning will come.

Likewise, I would suggest, humility may be the precursor to being born again or it may be the result. Or it may be both. In the case of Saul of Tarsus, there certainty wasn’t any long-term humility preceding his conversion. His "new birth" happened in an instant. He was knocked down . . . and got up a changed man. And he hadn’t even requested it.

I understand C.S. Lewis’ assertion that pride is "the basic sin behind all particular sins." But we could equally say that lack of trust is the basic sin. Or lack of love. Or selfishness. Or covetousness.

But what is the common denominator in all these? A broken relationship. And the solution lies in the healing of that relationship.

Therefore, I still say, get their hearts, and their actions will follow.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

The Most Important Part of Sabbath Dress

[The following is excerpted from the Shabbat Letter sent by Rabbi Rick Sherwin and his wife, Elissa, to the members of Congregation Beth Am.]

I was tempted to write a letter to the editor after reading a newspaper column and an editorial on the topic of wearing proper attire in public. Both writers described how they were offended by women who did not wear stockings in offices, by men who wear shorts and tee shirts on airplanes and by everyone who wears flip-flops in public.

It would help to determine appropriateness if we would ask ourselves two questions: Will being dressed in a certain way disrupt the atmosphere someone is trying to create? Will we distract others from the focus of the situation and environment at hand?

Ultimately, the responsibility for making the determination rests not with columnists or editorial boards but with us as individuals. We bear the responsibility to dress appropriately, with sensitivity and consideration for others. We also bear the responsibility to be less judgmental of others. We must allow for cultural norms, generational differences, economics and differing opinions on which situations call for conformity and where it should not matter.

Judaism also addresses the physical aspect of the clothing we wear. There are discussions in the Talmud as to what constitutes modesty in dress, and what might be considered appropriate when entering a synagogue or observing a holiday, when gathering as a family to celebrate a wedding or to mourn at a funeral. In the end, we are guided by respect for ourselves, for each other and for God.

The rabbis of the Talmud often use clothing metaphorically to exemplify the values one should wear through the day. Every morning, the traditional Jew recites several b’rakho – liturgical expressions – to thank God for giving us the strength to live yet another day. Towards the end of the list we thank God as we tie around us a belt of strength and as we put on our head a hat of respectfulness.

The author of Proverbs similarly uses clothing as a model of the values we should sport in life: The Woman of Valor is dressed in a robe of dignity with sleeves of courage. In another verse we are told that fortitude and esteem are her clothing. Jewish tradition thus formulates a spiritual dress code that calls for strength, respectfulness, dignity, courage, fortitude and esteem.

Two very different books by the same title, [Always] Wear Clean Underwear, present the idea that clothing must convey more than a physical image. For the two authors, Rabbi Marc Gellman and Rhonda Abrams, "underwear" is symbolic of that which is beyond view: our actions, our attitudes and our attributes of spirit.
In Jewish literature, the joy of Shabbat really begins with the process of cleaning on Friday afternoon: We clean the house, perhaps set fresh flowers on the table and put on clean clothes. We cleanse our spirit as we focus on relating to – not judging – those around us, guarding our tongues from speaking ill and keeping our language clean.

Perhaps the most important part of our dress code for Shabbat is the smile we wear!

Tough Decisions

In the church I attended as a child, one family had eight children, all of whom attended the local Adventist elementary and high school. It wasn’t easy for the parents to keep the school bills paid, much to the consternation of our congregation’s head elder.

At a meeting of the church board–which doubled as the school board–the elder rather indelicately expressed his frustration concerning the irresponsibility of parents having families larger than they could readily support.

Instead of arguing, the father of eight immediately agreed.

"You’re absolutely right," he said. "I’m sure it was irresponsible for my wife and me to have so many children. But my problem is that they’re already here. I’ve come to love them. And I can’t decide which ones I could get along without. So I’m wondering if maybe you could come over to my house tomorrow night to make the decision for me concerning which ones I should get rid of."

The elder spluttered, turned crimson and declined the offer.

A week ago this evening, our oldest son, James, married Emily Kruckemyer in a ceremony at the chapel at Rollins College (from which he graduated in May). From my biased perspective, it was a grand event. Exceptional groom. Exceptional bride. Exceptional setting.

The only problem was, pocketbooks and venues placed numeric limitations on the guest list. So how does one go about deciding which friends are in and which are out? Simply spluttering and turning crimson isn’t an option. In this case, the decision had to be made. And the slots available, though not insignificant, in no way allowed for the kind of numbers that I consider to be our friends.

For starters, I come from a family of six children–which translated into 35 family invitations! Then there are James’s friends. And those who work with me every day in the church office. Leonie’s eating-out group. Leaders of the major ministries in our congregation. Those church members who have interacted extensively with James.

The list creation had barely begun before the names far outpaced the number of slots available. The process of pruning was painful. I guess it’s an occupational hazard of pastoring a church with a large membership of wonderful people who we really, really like. Maybe it would be easier if the congregation were smaller or made up of cantankerous, obnoxious, terrible-to-be-around people!

Ah, but there’s the key. You’re not that way. You’re just a great group of caring, loving, tolerant, understanding, great-to-have-as-friends, down-to-earth human beings. Which makes me willing to bet that, even if you would have liked to have been at the festivities, you’ll be sympathetic to our predicament.

But I do have some fantastic news.

If I read my Bible correctly, some out-of-this-world festivities are scheduled for the near future. They’ll make anything that happened last weekend pale into insignificance. You and I and all our friends and relatives and neighbors and even nodding acquaintances are invited. The venue is big enough, and the pocketbook knows no limits.

Having just had to prune a lot of wonderful friends from a guest list, I’m glad God won’t be facing a similar dilemma.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

The Ultimate Sin: Taking God's Name in Vain

[The following is extracted from an article in the Los Angeles Times on August 14, 2005, by Jewish radio talk show host Dennis Prager.]

The recent bombings in London once again raise an ancient question: What is the greatest sin? One common response is that all sins are equally bad in God’s eyes. But this makes little sense.

Do Jews who believe it is a sin to eat non-kosher food equate doing so with a Jew committing rape? Do Protestants who believe it is a sin to gamble believe that God views a night at the blackjack table as sinful as abusing a child?

It is particularly sad when religious people depict God in a way that renders Him less intelligent than His creations: "Sure, we humans think that murdering a family is worse than taking a stapler home from the office, but God doesn’t!"

On the hierarchy of sin the Bible seems to be clear: The worst sin is committing evil in God’s name. God abhors evil— the deliberate infliction of unjust suffering on fellow human beings. There are some differences between the Old and New Testaments (e.g., on divorce), but they agree that God hates evil and loves goodness.

So to discern what the greatest sin is, we begin with it having to do with evil actions. But that is not the end of it. Even among identical acts of evil, there is one category that is worse than any other: evil committed in God’s name.

Only one of the Ten Commandments says that God will not forgive—usually translated as "will not hold guiltless"—one who violates the commandment: "Do not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain, for he will not hold guiltless whoever takes his name in vain."

Therefore, anyone who attaches the name of God to evil is not only committing an act of evil, he is subverting the only hope for spreading goodness on Earth — belief in a good God who demands goodness. If there is moral anarchy when God is removed from morality, imagine what ensues when God is identified with evil.

This is almost always understood as meaning, "Do not say God’s name when unnecessary" (such as, "God, that was some home run"). But this is most unlikely. The idea that God can forgive murder, for instance, but cannot forgive saying his name for no good reason is morally untenable.

The literal Hebrew—"Do not carry God’s name in vain"—gives a much more reasonable understanding. It strongly implies that the great sin here is one who carries God’s name, i.e., talks and acts religious, but acts contrary to God’s will.

This understanding is further reinforced by Judaism, which has always held that the greatest sin is "desecration of the Name" (khillul Hashem), which means doing bad things while acting religious.

For these reasons, every person who believes in God and every God-based religion is hurt by the epidemic of Muslims murdering in the name of God. It reinforces every anti-religious stereotype and thus further alienates people from taking seriously any God-based religion. Bad religious people are far more destructive to the cause of religion

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

If Your Right Hand Offends You . . .

In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus made a striking statement: "If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell" (Mathew 5:30, NIV).

Australian Rules football player Brett Blackwell has provided a living commentary on Christ’s remark. Well, sort of. It’s actually his left hand. And it’s only one finger.

Blackwell, who plays for the Glenelg team in South Australia, has decided to amputate his left ring finger because it’s getting in the way of his ability to play.

"To chop a finger off, that’s a bit drastic," Blackwell is quoted in the September 26 issue of Newsweek as saying. "But I love my footy, and love playing sport, and if that’s going to help me to succeed at this level, then it’s something you’ve just got to do."

Three years ago Blackwell broke the offending appendage. It didn’t heal properly. And because of the ongoing pain, he has struggled with his game ever since.

"He just really wants to continue to play at the highest level," says Glenelg manager Ken Applegarth. "He’s been catching the ball on his wrist and bruising that all the time. So it’s off."

Doctors have said they can fuse the bone—which would reduce the pain but would ensure that the finger would get in the way of high-impact play. So Blackwell has chosen the more radical option of having the finger removed.

His decision—and I’m sure it wasn’t easy—had to do with priorities. It had to do with what counted most in his list of what really counts. And if losing a finger allows him to do what he really longs to do, it’s the lesser sacrifice.

We could argue forever about his decision. But, in principle, the man has it right. Some things—even good things—are dispensable if their loss yields a greater reward.

Jesus understood that concept clearly. The Bible tells us that "for the joy set before him [Christ] endured the cross, scorning its shame" (Hebrews 12:2, NIV). For Him, the rewards far outweighed the sacrifice.

Jesus wants us to have the same attitude toward what we "give up" for the gospel: "I tell you the truth, . . . no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life (Mark 10:29, 30, NIV).

Christ never said the Christian life would be without its pains. He simply said that the rewards so outweigh the sacrifices that even in this present life we’re 100 times better off.

Yes, Christ’s perspective—and that of Brett Blackwell—jolt us. But if we stop to think, what they have said and done makes a lot of sense.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor