Sunday, November 11, 2012
Jerusalem Baptist Church (Emmerton), Warsaw VA
Ordinary 32/Pentecost 24B
Hebrews
9:24-28
24For Christ did not
enter a sanctuary made by human hands, a mere copy of the true one, but he
entered into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
25Nor was it to offer himself again and again, as the high priest
enters the Holy Place year after year with blood that is not his own; 26for
then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the
world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to
remove sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27And just as it is
appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment, 28so
Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second
time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
Some of you may have had the opportunity to see the
movie ‘The Hunger Games’ that came out in March of this year. In the opening scenes,
we watch two young girls – one a teenager, the other a preteen – prepare for
some event that is not quite defined. They dress in their finest clothes and
leave their home and their mother to join hundreds of other children as they
stream into a central square. There is some kind of verification process they
go through, and eventually they are standing in formation – boys on one side,
girls on the other. A woman steps up to a microphone and announces that this is
the day that two of those present – one girl and one boy – will be selected to
represent their district in the Hunger Games.
What we are presented with as an introduction to the
selection – which is televised – is a brief summary of why there is a selection
day and why there is such a thing as the Hunger Games. Suffice it to say that
the day – and the Games – are about a competition – but
they are about as far from fun and games as you can get. Two representatives
from each of twelve districts – formed out of a nation that might or might not
be the former United States – in a semi-distant future – are selected to fight
each other to the death – until only one remains. These representatives are
called Tributes.
The tension in the scene jumps as the woman draws a
name from a glass container and it is that of Primrose Everdeen, the younger of
the two sisters. As she steps out with a look of utter disbelief on her face
and begins to make her way to the platform, being escorted by two
‘peacekeepers’ to be presented, her older sister screams “I VOLUNTEER! I
VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE!” which stops the entire proceedings for a moment, but
from which the authorities recover fairly quickly, and leave the younger girl
and receive the older in replacement of Primrose.
When she gets to the platform she is asked her name,
which she gives as Katniss Everdeen. The woman notes the same last name, and
makes the connection that Primrose must be her sister.
When the woman announces Katniss as the Tribute
selected, the crowd of children responds not with applause and cheers, but with
a silent, three fingered salute – a sign of respect and honor for the person to
whom it is directed.
One who did not have to put herself in harm’s way
chooses to do so of her own free will.
And the story begins. And because we’ve not seen it
presented in this context before, we are engaged and enthralled.
One of our greatest challenges within the Christian
community of the United States today is to retain a sense of the newness – the
uniqueness – of the message of the good news of Jesus Christ. After all, apart
from the history of the Gospel in the last four hundred years being so
intertwined with the history of the country, most of us have been exposed to
that message for our entire
lives. We have little if any memory of what our life was like before we first heard the message
that “God loved the world so much that he sent his only Son …”
Usually, our context for revisiting that story is
this – where we sit and stand right now – Sunday morning or Wednesday evenings
in a sanctuary, singing familiar songs, listening to familiar words, sometimes
rearranged, about familiar subjects and coming to familiar conclusions. That
very familiarity, for better or worse, puts us in a mindset where we do not
expect – and more critically – do not perceive – the newness of the message as
it comes to us. I’m not saying we don’t try – we DO – every week – to find that
new bit, that new aspect, that new glimpse – into the depths of the Gospel
message.
Some weeks we catch it and some weeks we miss it. It
is not for lack of interest or purpose, it happens because our brains
automatically fill in with familiar words what we hear and don’t catch because
they are unexpected or unfamiliar phrases or ideas.
That same dynamic was taking place in the minds of
those who first heard this sermon preached or read to them in the first
century. They were coming out of a culture – a religious structure – that
instructed that there was a requirement to repeat every so often – to present a
sacrifice – as small as a dove or as big as an ox … but that this sacrifice was
necessary to maintain or regain righteousness in the eyes of God, and thus to
remain in God’s favor.
The radical truth that Jesus lived and brought was
that God God’s self became one of us, and intentionally moved in history to do
away with that form of relationship maintenance between humanity and God.
In Baptist circles and most evangelical traditions
we are steeped in the ‘blood imagery’ of Christ’s sacrifice. We are familiar
with – and expect to hear on a regular basis – references to Christ’s atoning
sacrifice in our place.
The theological term is ‘substitutionary atonement’,
the idea that God demands a sacrifice in order to satisfy the requirement of
holiness if we are to hope to approach God; and that the only sacrifice that
met the strict requirements of God’s holiness was in the person of Jesus. Jesus
met those requirements because, as the sacrificial animals had to be perfect
specimens – no sickly or defective animal would do – so Jesus was free of
defect – free of sin – and acceptable as a sacrifice. And as such, he
substituted himself in our place in order to redeem us and make us fit for
salvation – to make us fit to be in relationship with God.
The preacher of the message in Hebrews was using that
as an example – as a way of describing what God was doing through the
incarnation. And in this particular passage what is being underscored was the
once-and-for-all-ness of that sacrifice – pointing out that Christ’s sacrifice
was one that need never be repeated, and THAT was the ‘WHOA?!’ statement for
those who were listening. You see, they lived in a context where it was part of
the understood ‘way things were’ that there were going to be daily sacrifices
going on in the temple. And that, periodically, there would be a particular day
when the high priest would approach the ‘Holy of Holies’, that most sacred
place in the temple, behind the veil, where they understood God to reside, and
offer up a sacrifice on behalf of the entire nation of Israel, to secure their
good favor for one more year.
The preacher is saying that none of that is
necessary any longer. That Jesus has fulfilled the requirement once and for all
time through the shedding of his own blood.
The mind-bending part of the story is this:
‘Substitutionary atonement’ is a descriptive term for what happened on
the cross. It is not a definitive
term for it. In other words, it does not completely encompass and explain what
happened in Christ’s sacrifice – in God’s act of self-giving love – on the
cross.
Think of it this way: understanding the cross as a
straightforward sacrificial exchange in which Jesus steps into our place to
propitiate – to make good – for our sins – in fact retains a view of God as
distant and ultimately uncaring – until you factor in that whole incarnation
piece.
When we take into account that Jesus was God
incarnate, God in human flesh – that understanding begins to shift. There is
now an awareness of God being engaged in – being invested in – seeking out a
relationship with us – his creation, and in that we begin to understand the
selflessness of God’s love for us.
And the term ‘substitutionary atonement’ doesn’t
quite catch it all. We are faced with a God who – motivated by a father’s love
more than a judge’s requirement of payment – steps into a process and re-images
it. Who takes a transaction and turns it into a foundation and a definition of
a relationship – while at the same time providing it as an example for us to
follow.
The last verse of the passage then pivots and looks
to the future, and again, while it does, on one level, speak to that ultimate
future we will all face, I would invite you to consider the two words that are
used to describe his followers in the meantime, and to ponder:
What does this mean for Jerusalem Baptist Church at
Emmerton?
To be ‘eager’ to do something means one is excited
about it – anxious to begin the process, or to continue in it. If we are
walking somewhere, and are looking forward to being at that place, our steps
are much more likely to be quick – if not an outright sprint – in order to
arrive at the location as soon as possible.
Growing up, we had a membership in a municipal pool
that was several blocks from our house in Santiago. Come summer, we would
usually go at least three or four times a week – in retrospect it seems like it
was that frequently – it may not have been that often. But I loved to swim. I
still do. And I remember the walks to the pool – or later – the riding our
bikes to the pool – were always much faster paced than the walks home FROM the
pool.
So how do we eagerly AWAIT something?
How do you put something that is inherently
action-oriented, like ‘eager’ with something that is by definition, passive –
‘waiting’? I hesitate to use this example, but it is what came to mind. Most of
you have had the opportunity to meet our miniature dachshund, Max. We’ve
probably explained to you that in Max’s world, momma rules – Leslie is his
leader. He gloms onto her whenever she is in the house. He has to be in the same
room with her, ideally he has to be touching her or at least near her. So when
she is not in the house, his entire demeanor is anticipatory. He will perk up
at the slightest sound that might be coming from the driveway indicating that
she might be pulling in. Yesterday afternoon, as I was sitting at my desk in
the study, he was making rounds – from the dining room door to the porch, he
would come back through the kitchen, down the hall to the bedroom, then back
through the study, across the living room, and back to the dining room door to
the porch.
It occurs to me that our eager awaiting as followers
of Christ needs to be at least that active. That we are called to be active in
presenting Christ to the world – again, not introducing through words alone, but
much more importantly, through actions.
Our anticipation of Christ’s return may then lend
itself to finding that, long before the actual event, we may well become a part
of his extended return insofar as we make his presence known in OUR hearts by
OUR living.
Would you pray with me?
