1 24 12 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b9a293fd373dc0a6b7b58b0923580fff.pdf b5c3ab4334ea60fc6feabb2d2758b308 PDF Text Text Paul: Simply Wrong About History From the series: Varieties of Religious Experience Text: I Thessalonians 4:16-17; I Corinthians 15:22-24 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan April 25, 1999 Transcription of the spoken sermon Nancy and I have finally succeeded in securing our future just in case Jesus doesn’t come in the year 2000. We consolidated our pension funds. We have a very fine financial advisor who lives in New Jersey and we’re so very happy with him. Michael is not only competent and honest, but he is also a committed churchman, a Christian, who seems to have a real personal concern for us, and he comes through once or twice a year to hold our hand and say, "All will be well." Michael came through this week. He is just finishing a term as Moderator of a large Presbytery in New Jersey, and so he’s really interested in the Church and he has been interested in Christ Community and in case anybody is at all interested, I have a dozen or two tapes I have at all times at the ready. (Silver and gold have I none, but sermons I have aplenty). And so, I share these around; they grow legs and crawl all over the globe. He must have gotten a tape from Advent, this past Advent when I announced rather boldly in the season in which we celebrate the fact that Jesus came and is coming again, that Jesus wasn’t coming. Remember that? Jesus isn’t coming again. Michael said he was listening to that as he was driving along on the New Jersey Turnpike and he almost ran off the road. He said to me, "Could you get me a printed copy? I’d like to study that." And he sort of still had a dazed look. Well, what I’d like to do today is to say that Jesus is not coming again and the reason we’ve been confused about that for so long is that Paul had it all wrong. Paul was wrong about history. Paul was wrong about history in terms of the time line, where he thought he was in the time line of universal history, and that caused him to be wrong about the meaning and significance of world history. Now, I understand it’s a bit presumptuous to take on the great Apostle, but hear me out this morning. Paul was obviously wrong about the time line. I have said that here for a long time. I mean, you can’t deny that. Paul had it wrong about where things were in the whole cosmic journey. Paul didn’t even grasp, through no fault of his, but simply that the information was not available about the whole nature of the unfolding of the cosmos and billions of years and this bio-historicalevolutionary trajectory on which we find ourselves. Paul thought that the End © Grand Valley State University   �Paul Wrong About History Richard A. Rhem Page 2   was very near, the end of his world as he knew it, the world as it was organized at his time. He thought the End had come, and he believed that in the death and resurrection of Jesus the climax had been reached and all that was left now was a brief interregnum, that is, a brief interim period in which Jesus was reigning from heaven, soon to return and bring all things to their consummation. Now, as I said, I have said for a long time here that Paul had that wrong. That’s obvious. Paul said Jesus was coming soon. Jesus hasn’t come yet. You can’t very well get the Apostle off the hook on that. He expected the imminent return of Jesus to wrap up all things, and that’s obvious in the readings of this morning. The first kind of labored paragraph that I read beginning with verse 12 shows that in Paul’s mind there was an intimate connection between the resurrection of Jesus and the general resurrection. If one didn’t happen, the other wouldn’t happen. If one happened, the other would happen, and they were intimately connected, and in order to maintain that intimate connection, even though Jesus was resurrected and glorified and the rest hadn’t happened, Paul used the figure of speech, the "first fruits." Jesus was the first fruit of those who would rise, but the first fruit, you know, is the first ear of corn that is ripe, the first tassel of oats that is ripe, the first apple, the first strawberry, that is the first fruits. You say, "Ah, we got one ripe." But, the first one ripe doesn’t precede the rest by very long or you have a problem, and when there is a hiatus between the first one ripe and the rest, something is out of kilter. That was the image that Paul was using Christ the first fruits, and then the rest at his coming, and his coming has to be rather soon in order for him even to conceive of first fruits, and he had to conceive of it that way because there was an intimate connection between the resurrection of Christ and the general resurrection, in Paul’s thinking. Paul goes on, then, to give us the scenario of the End in his understanding at that time, for Christ is presently reigning, subduing all contrary powers after which he will yield up the kingdom to the Father in order that God may be all in all. All of that, obviously, is to happen in relatively short order. Jesus will return after he has subdued all contrary power. The dead in Christ will rise, and he will turn it all over to God, big "G." That he believed that and that he preached that is obvious from his letter to the Thessalonians. He went there, founded a congregation, then kept in touch with them, as he did with the congregations he had founded, dealing with the problems that cropped up, and at Thessalonica, the problem that cropped up was that he had taught them so well that Jesus had come, died, was resurrected in order to give them eternal life, and would soon return, that they got up every morning and said, "Maybe today is the day," and they looked skyward hoping there would be a rift in the sky and the appearance of the Son of Man on clouds. Then, a loved one died, and then another loved one died, and they began to look at each other and ask, "Will our loved ones who died before the grand event miss out?" © Grand Valley State University �Paul Wrong About History Richard A. Rhem Page 3   So, Paul said, "I write these things to you that you grieve not as those who have no hope, for if we believe that those who fall asleep in Jesus God will bring with him," and then he gets into the apocalyptic imagery of the trumpet and the angel and then we who are alive at the time, Paul expecting still to be a part of that company who would be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, who has brought with him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus before the grand event, and so he says the only thing that’s really important in that paragraph, "We will be forever with the Lord. Comfort one another with these words." He was dealing with a very concrete, pastoral problem that was precipitated by his preaching of the imminent coming of Jesus who didn’t come soon enough in order to get there before Aunt Bessie died. Obviously, this is what Paul believed. This is what he proclaimed, and he was wrong. He was wrong about the time line of history. And being wrong about the time line of history, which is beyond refute, he gives us a distorted sense of the significance of history, of our present experience, of our human experience, of our ordinary experience before the face of God, and I think that you will see that quite readily when you will remember that Paul was obviously in the apocalyptic mode and the shorthand for explaining that is simply to say that Paul was a throwback to John the Baptist. We’ve looked at that, time and again here, most recently in our Lenten series where we saw how Jesus distanced himself from John the Baptist because John the Baptist was calling down fire and judgment from heaven and the outpouring of the wrath of God and the vengeance of God on all that was evil and in opposition to God, as well as the salvation of the chosen. John participated in the very widespread and pervasive apocalyptic expectation of his day, and so did Paul. If we had time, we could read on in the second chapter of Thessalonians, and you would see all of the apocalyptic imagery is there, including the vengeance of God. Paul is talking now about the vengeance of God being poured out at the coming of Jesus from heaven who has been received into heaven for this little brief period of time. Paul was apocalyptic, and apocalypticism was in the air between 200 before Christ to 100 after Christ. During that whole 300-year period, Jewish thought was permeated with apocalyptic expectation; it was in the air. John the Baptist was the one who was waiting for God to do something, and Paul knew that God had done something but hadn’t finished it yet and would soon take care of the rest, bringing all things to consummation - God’s vengeance on the unbeliever, God’s chosen justified. Thus for Paul and his contemporaries, life between Jesus’ ascension and his coming again was an interim. They were cooling their heels and waiting for the end to come. To Corinth he writes, ... the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not © Grand Valley State University �Paul Wrong About History Richard A. Rhem Page 4   rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no possessions, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away. I Corinthians 7:29-31 So, sit loosely, don’t get encumbered. That was counsel for an interim, temporary experience and that must be a limited, less than normal kind of human existence. Paul was quite uninterested in everyday ordinary human life. And Paul was not really interested in the life of the historical Jesus. Once he says we knew him after the flesh, but we know him thus no more. The reigning Christ about to return was Paul’s total focus. Jesus’ life and concrete existence played no part. Now, this is the opposite of the case with the Gospels. There God’s salvation is embodied in a very real human life. Incarnation is key and the historical Jesus is concerned about very concrete human life, about justice and mercy, about table fellowship and healing of the body - in a word, about transforming the human situation dominated by power issuing in violence. For Paul, the present was a time of feverish activity - proclaiming the Gospel, calling to repentance, getting as many into the number of the saved as possible before the end arrived. Now to make Paul’s understanding of the time between the two comings normative would miss the meaning and significance of human existence and human history which comes to expression much better in the life of Jesus, where we claim the eternal God was embodied, incarnate. What’s an alternative to Paul’s missed reading of the times, which led to a misunderstanding of the nature of things? Well, the alternative, I think, is what we see currently in the research on the historical Jesus. Dominic Crossan introduced us to a Jesus whose life was a non-violent protest in the name of the God of justice. The Jesus who distanced himself from John the Baptist who had said, "God can’t you do something," and Jesus rather representing a God Who said, "Why don’t you do something?" The difference is a God in the face of Jesus, as Marcus Borg will speak of Jesus, a Spirit person, concretely in human existence, healing and embracing. I mean, you have to sense that this is so. Obviously, if the curtain of history is going to ring down very soon, as Paul thought, then you adjust your life one way. You certainly don’t celebrate birthdays. No need to plant a seedling or to clean up a river. I suppose you might celebrate flowers, but you’d see a cut flower as a symbol of everything that was soon to wither away. The alternative would be to see that God is to be known and served and worshiped in this life, that it is not "out there," but right here and right now that I am to live before the face of God, that it is here and now that I am to find © Grand Valley State University �Paul Wrong About History Richard A. Rhem Page 5   meaning for my human existence, that it is here and now that I am to be the continuing embodying of the Spirit of God as was uniquely embodied in Jesus. It makes all the difference in the world how I look at my world, how I meet my day, how I live my life, whether I think that I have to simply endure and hold on until ..., or whether I recognize that this is the place, for God’s sake, where God has placed me to live before the face of god, to love justice, kindness, walk humbly with my God, embrace my neighbor and to find meaning and significance in my ordinary days. "Ah," you say, "this world? This life? What of shootings and violence in Colorado? What of bombings in Kosovo and Belgrade? What of the constant eruption of evil and darkness? This world is that to which you would point us for meaning and significance and communion with God?" I would say, "Yes," for this life is not only violence and darkness. It is also a marvelous spring morning in which there are blossoms with the prodigality of color to delight the eye. It is also a world of an Olivia and Alexandra, beautiful creatures, children who smile, as well as dirty diapers. It is also a world in which one can look into the eyes of another and say, ‘I love you.’ It is a world that has all the potential to self-destruct and lie in ruins, or a world that has all the possibility of being a human community, a family where hands are joined and hearts entwined and peace reigns. NATO at fifty? Bombing, but bombing in order to say "No" to an inhumane monstrosity because we have come to see that we cannot stand by and allow that to be. Haclav Havel, addressing the NATO leaders, said, "Peace is something which we must be willing to defend." I can understand the temptation to cry: “God, can’t you do something? Take me out of here!" The answer is "No, I have put it in your hands. You do something." Paul was wrong in the time line. He is not a prophetic voice to follow in wringing the best out of human life and history. There’s something so much better. David Hartman, the Rabbi who has taught me so much, is the first person who incarnated for me one who could live fully today without all of that eschatological baggage and all of those questions about the future that we really don’t know anything about, but could well just leave to God. I got a letter from him recently and in a lecture that he gave, the Cardinal Bernardin Jerusalem Lecture, he concluded it with these words, My primary interest is in being alive and in finding significance in everyday reality. History has holiness, not because it points to the messianic kingdom. History has holiness when it provides opportunities to © Grand Valley State University �Paul Wrong About History Richard A. Rhem Page 6   live in a covenantal relationship with God. History has significance when we can bring God into everyday life. And all God’s people said ... Amen. © Grand Valley State University � https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/28a24b66e41746f4045e6e1be44a5921.mp3 720078e80e231a9ee2639b9563fb845c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Eastertide IV Series Varieties of Religious Experience Scripture Text I Thessalonians 4:16-17, I Corinthians 15:22-24 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19990425 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1999-04-25 Title A name given to the resource Paul: Simply Wrong About History? Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 25, 1999 entitled "Paul: Simply Wrong About History?", as part of the series "Varieties of Religious Experience", on the occasion of Eastertide IV, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: I Thessalonians 4:16-17, I Corinthians 15:22-24. Compassion Eschatology Justice Resurrection https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/0dc2e2851a8bae9990018f78c1d4d5da.pdf 2b3370796315a085a7496679855e9837 PDF Text Text To Bring Justice From the series: Waiting For Messiah To Come – Text: Isaiah 11:4; Luke 1:52 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent, December 8, 1996 Transcription of the spoken sermon The lesson from the Hebrew scripture is Isaiah, chapter 11. Let me be clear this morning. I'm going to be asking you to engage with me in some thought about the meaning of Advent. I am not so much making claims as inviting you to think with me about the traditional ideas that are associated with this season and what we ought to be doing about it. The bold print in your bulletin says "Waiting For Messiah To Come," the smaller print, "To Bring Justice." Waiting for Messiah to Come - that is the posture of Advent. Waiting for Messiah to Come. And then, when he comes, to bring justice. It's going to take us all of Advent and Christmas, and you're going to have to stay with me because I probably can do no more than raise some consciousness this morning, but what I want to try to do in this season is to take a fresh look at this Advent expectation. In a word, I'm going to suggest to you that it's time we stopped waiting and started doing something about it. I'm going to suggest to you that for us to wait for Messiah to come to bring justice is to miss that which has been revealed to us so clearly - justice is not something that will come at the end of the line that Messiah will bring. The Call to Confession this morning was from Micah 6:8, "The Lord has shown you what is good, and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, to love kindness and to walk humbly with your God." We have that embodied in Jesus. So, it is not as though we don't know, and it is not as though we do not have the resources. It is that we lack the will. I simply want us to think about that in this Advent season. Advent is a season of preparation for the coming of the Lord. Now, we are not preparing to go to Bethlehem. We are preparing for the End, the end of history, the consummation, the Kingdom of God - that's what we are preparing for. Advent is a sober season in which we are reminded that we will all be called to give account of our lives before the Judge of all the earth. Advent in the Christian Church is not anticipation of the miracle of Bethlehem; it is anticipation of the End when the one who was born in Bethlehem comes in power and glory to judge © Grand Valley State University   �To Bring Justice Richard A. Rhem Page 2   the nations. That is the Advent theme. It's awfully hard to squeeze it in, to get a word in edgewise for Advent in the Church. This is not the Christmas season, in spite of appearances. The Advent theme of the final consummation of all things is to be considered in these four weeks prior to Christmas, and then, on December 24 in the evening, we can begin to celebrate Christmas. I take my life in my hands and I live with some peril. We haven't sung a Christmas carol yet. Some of you get downright testy about it. You really wanted "Jingle Bells" this morning, didn't you? But, you see, the Church has its own calendar and I think the Jewish people are a distinct people after all of these thousands of years because they live by their own calendar. What is it - the year 5757 or something like that on the Jewish calendar? They live according to their festivals and their seasons quite apart from the rest of the world. We have a calendar, too. There's nothing divine or inspired about it, but it's a calendar that sets out for us seasons, the rhythms of life, moods, foci of concentration, and to live by that calendar is to be shaped by those ideas. In the shaping, we are also able to distinguish ourselves from the culture at large. The culture at large has co-opted our day, eh? The commercial interests have backed Christmas way up on the other side of Thanksgiving. It was the 16th of November when Nancy and I went to Bethlehem at Radio City Music Hall. We've already been to Bethlehem! Fantastic, spectacular program, Rockettes and all. But, a Christmas show on November 16! How in the world do we ever get a word in edgewise for Advent and for the serious contemplation of that which lies before us at the end? We're waiting for Messiah to come. The Jewish people are waiting for the messiah, too, except they're waiting for Messiah to come the first time. They say to us, "Messiah has not come." We say, "Jesus was the Messiah." They say, "No, you've got to be wrong." They may be right, because Jesus did not claim to be Messiah. It was his followers who said, "That was the Messiah." But the Jewish people - after all, you know, we get the idea of Messiah from their book - they tell us quite rightly that the idea of Messiah coming was to issue in the peaceable kingdom. They say Messiah hasn't come. Look at the world - it's full of war and violence and destitution and poverty and all that's wrong. When Messiah comes, all that's wrong will be made right. There will be a total transformation of everything. Messiah, obviously, hasn't come. We say, "Well,... yes he has." But, we have to be honest. The whole New Testament, which is not a Christian book, folks; it's a Jewish book, you know. It's about Jesus, a Jew, written by Jews who had been nurtured in Jewish expectations. They encountered Jesus and they said, "That's the one!" And the only problem was he was crucified, and the world wasn't transformed, but they expected it to be transformed. They knew the vision; © Grand Valley State University �To Bring Justice Richard A. Rhem Page 3   they knew what Isaiah had spoken, that he wouldn't judge by what his eyes see or what his ears hear, but he would judge according to truth. They knew that he would decide with equity for the meek of the earth, and the consequence of that would be that the wolf and the lamb would lie down together and they would not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain, that beautiful Messianic dream. Those who encountered Jesus and who experienced Jesus said he's the one. They knew that dream. We read in the Gospel lessons and The Magnificat was also sung: He has shown strength with his arm. He has scattered the proud and the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones. He has lifted up the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich empty away. They said Jesus was the one. But, Jesus was crucified. "Ah," they said, "but he lives. We experience his living presence; he's with God, enthroned in glory, but he's coming, he's coming soon. Just wait; just watch; hold on." Acts 3:19: "Repent therefore and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out, so that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord and that he may send the Messiah appointed for you, that is, Jesus, who must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration that God announced long ago through the holy prophets." They were living on the edge. They shared a general cultural expectation of the end of the age, and they believed that Jesus was the Messiah; they had not expected that detour of crucifixion and resurrection and ascension, but that Early Church, this whole New Testament document written about a Jew by Jews was posited on the supposition that the one who had come would come back very soon. That's clear. Now, 2000 years later, we still read the beautiful Messianic dream of the prophet, we still hear The Magnificat sung, and we get into Advent and we get into our prayers and our rituals and our hymns and our liturgical formulae and we sort of go through it, never, I think, stopping to think that, when we wait for Messiah to come, we are really copping out of what should be obvious to us and incumbent upon us - that Messianic dream that we read and love and that The Magnificat that we hear, that speaks the language of the underdog who is praying to God to reverse things, turn the tables, change things around. I think our problem in the Christian Church is that we have an underdog religion and we've become top dog. Just think about it for a moment. Listen to The Magnificat again - "He has thrown the mighty off their thrones. He has raised up the lowly. He has fed the hungry and he has sent the rich empty away." Who are they talking about? They're talking about us, folks! We have taken over the religious yearning and expression of an underdog people and now we who are the dominant, powerful, affluent people of the world are still waiting for Messiah to come to do justice! We're waiting for God, and I think God is waiting for us! © Grand Valley State University �To Bring Justice Richard A. Rhem Page 4   "For have I not showed you what is good and what does the Lord require but to do justice, to love kindness and to walk humbly with your God?" You see, that Messianic dream was Israel's dream, little Israel, that little piece of real estate at the end of the Mediterranean Sea, buffeted about by all the world's empires - they had chutzpa! They thought that God had chosen them; they considered themselves the navel of the earth; they were battered about by Assyria and Babylon and Persia and Greece and Rome, and the prophets of Israel, living in an occupied nation, in a conquered nation, being the pawn of the power brokers of the earth; yet they had a dream. They had a dream one day our God Who has called us will exalt Mt. Zion and all nations will flow to Mt. Zion and we will teach the world Torah. We will lead the world to God. We have been called by God to be a beacon to the nations. Is that chutzpa, or not? You bet it is! Here they were, this little people, and they had a dream. They said "One day it's going to be different than it is. One day Messiah's going to come, and the whole earth will be wrapped in beautiful peace, and we'll teach the whole earth to walk in the ways of our God." Then into that little community into which Jesus was born, poverty-stricken, occupied, down-in-the-mouth, poor, poor society, comes The Magnificat! It is a song of an underdog people. It is a song of a people who are oppressed, who are poor, who are hungry, who are saying, "God, when are you going to make it right?" And they saw Jesus and they said, "Aha. That's the one." But, then he died. They said, "Ah, but he lives. He'll come back; he'll come back. Come, Lord Jesus. Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus. Come, Lord Jesus. Do it! Do it, do it, because if you don't do it, it is so awful. This human condition is so terrible, the darkness, the darkness. Do something!" And here we are, affluent, well-fed, well-dressed, comfortable, Christian people 2000 years later, and we say, "Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus. Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus." We don't even understand what we're praying. For us to pray the Magnificat is to take the oppressed and the underdog's song and to say, "Lord, throw us down. Lord, throw us empty away." I suspect that if it would ever get through to us, we'd have to say, "Ah, I guess we shouldn't be waiting for Messiah to come. I guess we should be about the transformation of the world. I guess we who have so much power and so much resource and so much knowledge and insight and Wow! We ought to be about changing the world, because the dream, the dream is there." Rabbi David Hartman says that Messianic dream - that's not the end of history. That is the critique of history in every moment. That's the plumb line of God that measures every historical period. You reach that dream and you measure your own day by that dream and you will see how out of sync it is, how crooked it is, how full of injustice and oppression and inequality. You measure your society, 1996, Christ Community - measure your world against that dream. How does it measure up? It doesn't measure up, does it? © Grand Valley State University �To Bring Justice Richard A. Rhem Page 5   That dream is God's dream, God's intention. That dream has been embodied, for God's sake. The world has become flesh; it has dwelled among us. Jesus, the mirror of God's intention. The way of Jesus, the way that God calls us to go. We say, "We're waiting for Messiah." God says, "What are you waiting for? I've showed you throughout all of the prophecy; I've showed you in the face of Jesus. Why do you keep praying for Messiah to come? Why aren't you about turning your world upside down?" Well, you know, one could really get going on this thing, and I could probably tell you stories about your world and you'd just say, "Oh, I give up." Last month in Rome there was a huge international conference on food. There was one in '74 because they were afraid then we weren't going to be able to feed the multitudes, and there was another one just last month. In the report of that conference on whether or not the earth is going to produce enough for the people in light of the population growth, etc, it said there are in our world today 800 million malnourished human beings. Eight hundred million, and so you could say, "Ah, ..." I mean, at the time of Jesus, there was this apocalyptic strain where, for example, John the Baptist was saying things are so bad, God come down. You know, rend the heavens and come down. Damn the wicked! Stamp out the darkness; establish the righteous. Bring in Your kingdom!" I can understand that apocalyptic urge. We human beings can get so overburdened with it, so baffled by it that we sort of throw up our hands and say, "What can I do? Who am I? Who am I? What can I do? I'm only one person and the problems are global!" And I probably could ruin your Christmas by putting a little guilt on you. Probably get a pretty good response to the Alternative Christmas Market by reminding you how much you're spending on one another and maybe, you know, a few bucks for the Third World would be good. We have an oversubscription for our Thanksgiving Offering. That's beautiful. That's wonderful. You're a generous people. We feed 350 people - that's great. I think it's wonderful! We adopt needy kids for Christmas - that's beautiful. But it's just tokenism. Those are just tokens of a world that is wrenched with human anguish. And you know what I think? I think Christ Community is the kind of community that has intelligence and commitment and generous hearts, the kind of leaders of society. And wouldn't it be something if out of Christ Community there would come a catalyst group of God's gadflies who would harangue the Ottawa County Commissioners and that would go to Lansing, that would sit on Engler's steps, that would go to Washington, that would bother the Congress, that would petition the President. Now, there are always in this world those kinds of people that go into the ministry, do-gooders. They're kind of soft, they're kind of flabby; they don't think critically; they don't understand how the world works. They just think if you'd just be nice, everything'd be nice. There are a lot of people like me. But, you know what we need? We need some of you hard-headed, hard-hitting corporate © Grand Valley State University �To Bring Justice Richard A. Rhem Page 6   professional people who would get together and would say, "For God's sake, this world is in trouble. How in the world could we do something about it?" You see, we've got an underdog religion; we sing The Magnificat, but down deep in our hearts, friends, let's be honest, when you're on top, the biggest preoccupation of your life is to maintain that top position, and the hungry masses of the world, the poor, the suffering - they are our threat. They tell us that the gap between the rich and the poor is getting bigger. And a world where the gap between the rich and the poor gets big enough is a dangerous world. If we didn't want to do it because Jesus calls us to do it, if we didn't want to do it for God's sake, we ought to be thinking about how this world can be transformed because it's not such a mystery. Has he not shown you, O mortal, what to do? Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with your God. There is enough brain power; there is enough resource. There may be somebody here who could start a movement. After all, little Israel thought that God called it to be a light to the nations. There might be somebody here that would say, "You know, that's really true. We ought to be about something big, something big." The tokens - they're wonderful. Don't stop the tokens. But, there's a world out there, and at Advent I just can't let you hear The Magnificat four weeks in a row without feeling uneasy. "The mighty he has put down and the lowly he has raised up. He has fed the hungry and set the rich empty away." I don't have an answer. The human situation is so complex, but wherever there is injustice, wherever there is a human person given a less than humane existence, there's where we ought to be, in the name of God Who has given us that magnificent dream. You see, it's not that we can do it through human ingenuity alone. Obviously not. But, neither can God do it alone. The dream is God's dream and to be caught up in that dream - that would make Advent something really special. © Grand Valley State University � https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/470ca6c1bf1785eeec87b529c09c03c8.mp3 7a48cce9ebc19f65049903fb8ee78e80 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent II Series Waiting for the Messiah to Come Scripture Text Isaiah 11:1-0, Luke 1:46-56 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19961208 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-12-08 Title A name given to the resource To Bring Justice Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 8, 1996 entitled "To Bring Justice", as part of the series "Waiting for the Messiah to Come", on the occasion of Advent II, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 11:1-0, Luke 1:46-56. Advent Eschatology Justice Way of Jesus Divine Intention https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/53000072d1a70f81f792fb2453c2a205.pdf 2e81236d2593aff2d86951c2fdd44882 PDF Text Text The Vision of Faith Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in The Church Herald The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America December 6, 1985, pp. 6-7 The Advent season calls to our consciousness the end of history; to the realization that history has an end; that our personal history as well as the history of the world and humanity are moving toward a terminus, a final moment. If we can resist the insistence of the commercial world that the Christmas season begins before Thanksgiving and make space and time for the keeping of Advent, we will find rich resources for reflection on the biblical themes of the end of history. There is great curiosity about the “Last Things” and all too little calm and reasoned discussion about these matters of faith. Advent, properly kept, provides the opportunity to be reminded that the Christ who came is the Christ who is coming and to treat those questions which continue to live in the human mind and heart: What is the point of it all, this human drama? Where is it all going— whither the whole? What happens at death? What about heaven and hell, judgment and salvation? What do you mean by eternal life? In the autumn of 1983 I was involved in a seminar at the University of Michigan with Professor Hans Küng, who gave a series of lectures entitled “Eternal Life?” Standing in the center of that great secular institution of learning where there is but a token recognition of the whole sphere of religion, he spoke without apology on the themes of death, life after death, hell, heaven, and the kingdom of God. It was a fascinating experience to witness, not only because of the great depth of his discussion, but because there in the sophistication of this great university there were hundreds of bright young people eager to learn about life’s ultimate issue. This is simple witness to the fact that we can never be content to be born, to live out our days, and to die without asking why, whence, whither. God has put eternity into our hearts. When life has been experienced with its full spectrum of activities the question arises, “Is this all there is?” The biblical faith answers, “No, there is much more.” Reflecting the biblical teaching, Küng concluded his lectures © Grand Valley State University   �The Vision of Faith Richard A. Rhem Page 2   after a careful and thorough examination of the questions from medical, religious, and philosophical perspectives with this affirmation of faith: To believe in an eternal life means—in reasonable trust, in enlightened faith, in tried and tested hope—to rely on the fact that I shall one day be fully understood, freed from guilt and definitively accepted and can be myself without fear; that my impenetrable and ambivalent existence, like the profoundly discordant history of humanity as a whole, will one day become finally transparent and the question of the meaning of history one day be finally answered. That is a well-packed statement. It says in capsule form what Advent faith teaches. Advent means “coming.” Advent means Jesus is coming; God's kingdom is coming; consummation is coming. Test Küng's statement by this most familiar word from St. Paul. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood. So faith, hope, love abide... (1 Cor. 13:12-13). These are familiar words coming at the end of Paul's “hymn of love.” We rarely recognize the fascinating future reference of his declaration, but in this great statement we find acknowledged both the puzzle that is our history and the vision of our Christian faith. Let these words of the apostle provide our Advent reflection as we realize anew that God calls us to live trusting that he will fulfill his promises and bring his kingdom to its consummation. We must acknowledge the ambiguity of our present state. Is it not our common experience that a veil of mystery hangs over our lives and over history as a whole? It is impossible from an observation of the course of history to find history's meaning, to detect purpose, direction, and goal. We are caught up in the stream of history itself; we swim in the stream. We have no privileged position above history from which to survey it. There are those who deny any detectable meaning. H. A. L. Fisher, in his History of Europe, writes: One intellectual excitement, however, has been denied to me. Men wiser and more learned than I have discovered in history a plot, a rhythm, a predetermined pattern. These harmonies are concealed from me. I can see only one emergency following another, as wave follows upon wave, only one great fact with respect to which, since it is unique, there can be no generalizations, only one safe rule for the historian: that he should recognize in the development of human destinies the play of the contingent and the unforeseen. © Grand Valley State University �The Vision of Faith Richard A. Rhem Page 3   That is an excellent statement of the case by an eminent historian. From the study of history itself the conclusion is that it is “the development of the contingent and the unforeseen.” St. Paul admitted the same. If history itself be our focus or, more narrowly, the data of our personal histories, then, “we see in a mirror dimly.” For Paul, however, it is not only the data of history with which we have to do, but also the revelation of God in the history of Israel and in Jesus. Thus we bring something to history: the knowledge of the revelation of God. That revelation, which found its supreme expression in Jesus, embraced by faith becomes the interpretative principle by which we understand history. There is more to come. Paul went on to write: “Then [we shall see] face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been understood fully.” The meaning of history will be accessible to us only from history’s end. Paul believed that just as there was a beginning, so there will be an end. He who spoke and brought all things into being will speak yet again, and time will be no more. As another Advent season comes around, we realize anew that we are faced with a choice, a decision: Will we live by faith in God's promise or not? To do so is a decision, not a conclusion at the end of rational argument. Trust is necessary; not irrational trust but reasonable trust, trust as a decision of the whole person. Fundamental trust will live in the assurance of a gracious purpose threading its way through the confusing patterns of history. Such trust is a gift. Its foundation is laid in earliest infancy. We are from the beginning being pointed toward trust or mistrust. As an adult it is only through a significant emotional experience that one can move from mistrust to trust. An encounter with Jesus is the catalyst for a life lived in trust. Such trust is confirmed in experience; yet it always remains trust, an experience beyond verification in the scientific sense of verification. Mistrust is an option. It is the consistent position of atheism. The Nobel Prizewinning biologist, Jacques Monod, an atheist, maintains: If he accepts this (negative) message in its full significance, man must at last wake out of his millenary dream and discover his total solitude, his fundamental isolation. He must realize that, like a gypsy, he lives on the boundary of an alien world; a world that is deaf to his music, and as indifferent to his hopes as it is to his sufferings or his crimes (Chance and Necessity, p. 160). That is an excellent statement representing clear, concise thinking. As an atheist, Monod is consistent. If there be no God, then there is no future resolution of © Grand Valley State University �The Vision of Faith Richard A. Rhem Page 4   history's confusion, no future righting of wrong, no future realization of our hopes, dreams, and longing. If this be an impersonal universe with no heart, no mind at the center, no purpose at the beginning, and no consummation at the end, then it is true the universe is deaf to our music, indifferent to our hopes, our sufferings, our crimes. If, on the other hand, we bring trust to history’s puzzling data, then we live in the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Finally, we must choose. The vision of faith sees beyond history’s puzzle to the promise of his coming, who came to a people who had for centuries cried, “How long, O Lord, how long?” He has come. His promise is he will come again, scattering the darkness, revealing the eternal purposes of God which now are hidden from clear view. To keep Advent is to keep faith in the promises of God. The mystery will be removed and we will understand. Faith will be vindicated as the king comes and the kingdom comes to consummation. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19851206 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-12-06 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource The Vision of Faith Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Church School Herald Journal Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 6, 1985 entitled "The Vision of Faith", it appeared in The Church Herald, Dec., 1985, pp. 6-7. Tags: Advent, Faith, Eschatology, Mystery, Love, Fundamental Trust. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Advent Eschatology Faith Fundamental Trust Love Mystery https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/67450db648a60e2c64f7cdb5a81fa11e.pdf 6134a1e45b48a65c513371461ff0c784 PDF Text Text A Theological Conception of Reality as History Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Reformed Review A Theological Journal of Western Theological Seminary 101 East 13th Street, Holland, Michigan Autumn, 1972 I. Pannenberg in the Context of Modern Theology In his essay entitled “Evangelical Theology in the Nineteenth Century” Karl Barth speaks with great respect of the daring with which the leading theologians of that period, which was so replete with magnificent achievements in the arts and sciences, wrestled with the challenges of the modern world. They displayed an openness to the world which ought always to characterize theology and they accounted themselves well, both as Christian men and as scholars. However, Barth points out, their strength was also their weakness in that they allowed this confrontation with contemporary culture to become their decisive and primary concern. This, he maintains, was the key problem of nineteenth-century Protestant theology. This general assumption of openness to the world led necessarily to the specific assumption that theology could defend its own cause only within the framework of a total view of man, the universe, and God; which would command universal recognition.1 One of the leading exponents of this point of view criticized by Barth was Ernst Troeltsch, although his work extended well into the first quarter of the twentieth century. Troeltsch was critical of the leading representatives of the liberal tradition also, but for precisely the opposite reason. Though he, himself, had much in common with the dominant Ritschlian school, he was nevertheless critical of the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann line of development because, although they accepted fully the application and the results of the historicalcritical method in the investigation of Christian origins, they still maintained the © Grand Valley State University   �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 2   uniqueness of Jesus, rooting the redemption wrought by God through him in his person. For all their openness to the modern world and their conviction that theology must be restructured in the light of the modern world-view of the natural sciences, the epistemology of Kant, and the newly prestigious science of history, they nevertheless stubbornly maintained the necessity of the present experience of redemption being indissolvably related to Jesus of Nazareth. To Troeltsch this appeared to be a futile grasping after the last remains of dogmatic thinking which located absolute and definitive revelation in a particular historical phenomenon. He acknowledged that these theologians had broken with the old dogmatics of Protestant orthodoxy, but in the light of the development of historical thinking and the application of the historical method, he was convinced that they were holding an impossible position. They were resisting the pressure of consistent thinking by stopping short of admitting the relativity of each and every historical appearance. For Troeltsch the decisive fact was not the historical person of Jesus, but rather the idea which was concretized in him and from him has issued forth into history. Once launched, the idea or principle is independent of its initiator, its essence to be sought not in its initial embodiment but rather in the pluriformity of its historical configurations at any given stage in its development. In the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann line of thought Troeltsch saw a mixing of types of theological method and consequently a failure to distinguish the person of Jesus from the principle he incarnated. He criticized the failure sharply to distinguish person and principle, personality and idea, and likewise the contention that the historical person and a personal relationship to him were essential to saving faith in God. He saw this position rooted in the later churchly Schleiermacher and being strongly advocated in his day by Ritschl and Herrmann.2 In Troeltsch’s view the very historical-critical approach to Christian origins, especially to Jesus himself, undercut any attempt to salvage from the uniformity of history a final and absolute revelation of God. This was clearly demonstrated, Troeltsch maintained, by the fact that the History of Religions school, of which he claimed to be the dogmatician, had itself sprung from the Ritschlian school, differing only in the greater consistency with which it pursued the consequences of the very methods accepted by Ritschl, himself. Thus Troeltsch was convinced that the theology of the future would have to purge away these last vestiges of the old dogmatic approach and carry through more rigorously the requirements of the historical-critical method which draws all historical phenomena, Jesus of Nazareth not excepted, into the movement of historical process, allowing for no absolute uniqueness in the midst of the relative. Paradoxical as it may appear, Karl Barth quite agreed with Troeltsch—agreed, that is, that to subject Jesus to historical-critical research behind the witness of the New Testament is to bring him down to where he is one historical person among others, one in whom there cannot possibly be found the final and definitive revelation of God. Of course, agreement with Troeltsch, that having followed the path they did, the great nineteenth-century theologians could not © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 3   consistently stop halfway, does not imply that Barth advocates with Troeltsch that their successors should draw the logical conclusion, as Troeltsch counseled. On the contrary, Barth examines the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann Theology and discovers their fatal error, not in their failure to follow consistently the course on which they embarked, but rather in the course they chose to follow in the first place. It was not their decision to grant recognition to the use of the historical-critical method and then failure to draw the conclusions to which it led. Rather it was their understanding of religion as an innate potential of the human spirit and their failure to see that, defined in such terms, the Christian faith was not being spoken of at all. If Christianity was a phenomenon of the religious capacity of man, then it was one religion among others and could be understood only as Troeltsch maintained, by a comparative historical study. In such an instance there could be no talk of an absolute and definitive revelatory significance or meaning in history. If one started where Troeltsch started, Barth maintained, one would end where Troeltsch ended. But then, according to Barth, we have to do not with the religion of revelation, but with the revelation of religion3 and the application of the historical-critical method will discover in Jesus no more than a man among other men and in Christianity no more than a religion among other religions. The History of Religions school is only the logical outcome of a theology that speaks of the believing man rather than of the revealing God. Theology which takes itself seriously can speak only from the revelation of God who has grasped it, paying homage to no world-view, be it ancient or modern, no philosophical system or no anthropological analysis of the religious capacity of man. Theology must speak from out of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Thus Barth completely repudiated the counsel of Troeltsch and pursued the dogmatic method, reducing historical-critical research to a secondary, helpingrole in the explication of the biblical witness to Jesus Christ. One of the young theologians in the 1920’s who joined with Barth in his revolt from the theology of the nineteenth century was Rudolf Bultmann. He too recognized the poverty of Liberalism and its failure to give centrality to the decisive redemptive act of God in Jesus Christ. He criticized Liberalism for reducing Christianity to a system of timeless and eternal truths and the History of Religions school for reducing Christ to a cultic symbol.4 However, what for Barth was a secondary matter became for him the central concern, namely the hermeneutical problem. Granting that Christian theology must start from the Word of God, Bultmann could never emphasize too strongly that revelation must be understandable to man. This man he found most adequately defined by the analysis of existentialist philosophy as set forth by the early Heidegger. While he, himself, was unexcelled in the application of the historical-critical method, Bultmann denied that the results of such research were of any consequence for faith, faith which was not belief in factual information about Jesus, his life, death, and resurrection but rather obedience to the kerygmatic Word in the present moment calling men to a new self-understanding. Bultmann the historian and © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 4   Bultman the theologian never met; for apart from the fact that Jesus appeared faith has no relation to history. Great differences separate Troeltsch, Barth, and Bultman from one another. Troeltsch sees no alternative to pursuing the historical method in the analysis of the phenomenon of religion. Barth rejects the idea that the Christian faith is first of all a religion and he pursues the dogmatic method, judging all religion by the norm and criterion of Jesus Christ. Bultmann interprets the Christian faith within the possibilities afforded by an Existentialist analysis of man. Interestingly enough, however, there is one point on which they all seem in agreement; that is the understanding of the nature of history and the principles of historiography. For Troeltsch, history and the methods by which it is investigated rule out in advance any final and definitive revelation of God in history. The early Barth agreed and moved revelation to the frontier of time and eternity. Later he brought revelation back into history, defining history from the perspective of Jesus Christ but at the same time he continued to recognize the validity of historical science as defined by Troeltsch maintaining that it had no competency to deal with God’s revelatory action in history. Bultmann as a practicing historian followed the historical-critical method as defined by Troeltsch and, because he saw history as the realm of the relative and transient, he removed revelation from the sphere of history to the realm of human existence. All three agreed that history and historical science are what the great historians of the nineteenth century said they are and all three agreed that, that being the case, there was no trace of God’s revelatory action discoverable in history by the historian. In the last decade this whole conception of history and accompanying historiography has been called into question by the German theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg. German theology has often been characterized by drastic swings of the pendulum and, as Pannenberg’s early writings appeared, it seemed that once again the pendulum was swinging from the theology of the word which has dominated the twentieth century in its various forms to a theology of history. As Pannenberg has continued to address himself to the problems of revelation, history, and theological method, however, it is evident that we have to do here with more than simply a reaction to the one-sided emphasis of dialectical theology, a reaction in its turn as one-sided on the other side of the issue. Much rather, Pannenberg has sought to do justice to the valid insights of those who have preceded him. Specifically, he acknowledges the valid insight of Troeltsch that Christianity cannot be arbitrarily isolated from the rest of man’s religious experience, but much rather can be understood only in relationship to the whole of the history of religions. However, with Barth and Bultmann, over against Troeltsch, he speaks of the priority of revelation in terms of which the respective religious experience of man is to be judged, rather than seeing religious experience as the expression of an innate potentiality within man. With Troeltsch, over against Barth and Bultmann, Pannenberg sees the necessity of relating the Christian faith to the whole of reality. But over against Troeltsch, © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 5   he does not interpret Christianity in subjection to the prevailing worldview of modern man, but rather interprets the whole of reality theologically, submitting his argumentation before the bar of human judgement, being convinced that a Christian interpretation of the whole of reality is more rational than any other. With Troeltsch and against Barth and Bultman, Pannenberg insists that the claim of a revelation in history must be historically perceptible by means of historicalcritical research. The central revelatory event, the resurrection, serves as the model for his understanding of the relation of historical reason and revelation. But against Troeltsch, he affirms the historical verifiability of such revelatory action. In short, Pannenberg pursues the historical method as advocated by Troeltsch but, rather than ending with the loss of a final and definite revelation of God in history, he proclaims with Barth and Bultmann the finality of Jesus Christ in the definitive self-revelation of God. How is this possible? The answer lies in the fact that precisely where Troeltsch, Barth, and Bultmann were one, Pannenberg parts from all three; that is at the point of the understanding of the nature of history and the principles by which the past is known. Troeltsch gave definitive statement to the understanding of nineteenth century historiography. Barth and Bultmann recognized that in those terms the final revelation of God could not be posited within history and, rather than subjecting the understanding of history to a thorough critique, they removed revelation from the competency of the historical-critical method (Barth) and from the arena of history itself (Bultmann). By a critique of Troeltsch’s understanding of history and the principles of historiography Pannenberg attempts to do justice to Troeltsch’s demand to pursue the historical method while leaving room for a definitive revelation of God in history which Barth and Bultmann in their respective manners recognized as essential to the Christian tradition. Thus, in a sense, by tracing the understanding of revelation, history, and theological method in these four thinkers, we come full circle but, through Pannenberg’s critique of Troeltsch, the whole perspective is turned around and, rather than understanding Jesus in terms of the modern worldview of reality, reality is understood from the perspective of Jesus, the end of history, who has appeared proleptically in the midst of history. II. The Universality of Systemic Theology The theology of Wolfhart Pannenberg is characterized by a tension which, in his view, is given with the task of systematic theology itself.5 Systematic theology always resides in a tension between the two poles of the subject matter with which it has to do. On the one hand, there is the Christian tradition itself for which it is responsible, specifically, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Scriptures. On the other hand, Systematic theology must be concerned with all truth in general as represented in its various facets by all nontheological disciplines. Systematic theology cannot, as is the case in other © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 6   disciplines, devote itself exclusively to the investigation of its special subject matter, for inherent in its task is a universality which impels it to take up the question of truth per se. This universality follows inevitably from the fact that theology purports to speak of God. “One uses the word God meaningfully only when one intends thereby the Power determining everything that is.”6 To speak thus of God as the author of all reality brings with it the intellectual obligation to relate all truth to the God of the Bible and then to understand it anew from him. Pannenberg acknowledges that the theological task thus conceived may appear presumptuous. Yet, to the extent that the theologian is conscious of what he is doing when he speaks of God, he has no alternative. Pannenberg acknowledges further that the task can never be consummated once for all. But if this responsibility appears as an almost unbearable burden, it likewise constitutes the peculiar dignity of theology, especially in an intellectual situation which is characterized by fragmentation as a result of the present high degree of specialization, for it falls to theology to seek truth in its unity. Such a conception of the task of systematic theology is by no means generally accepted. Particularly in the last hundred years theology has been conceived rather as an independent science alongside of the other sciences with its own special subject matter, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ witnessed to in the Scriptures. Pannenberg counters, however, that the revelation of God is only really conceived of as the revelation of God when it is understood in relation to all truth and knowledge and when all truth is integrated into it. Only thus is it possible to speak of the biblical revelation as the revelation of the God who is the creator and perfecter of all things. Since Harnack’s famous characterization of the apologist’s assimilation of the Greek philosophical quest for the true structure of the divine into the Christian tradition as the “hellenization” of the gospel, that endeavor has been generally judged in a negative light. Pannenberg, however, rejects that negative judgement. While he grants that the apologists were not, in fact, successful in carrying through the assimilation in all respects, he disputes the idea that their efforts resulted in a complete capitulation to the philosophical quest. But apart from the degree to which the early church fathers were successful or unsuccessful in what they undertook to do, the real issue, as far as Pannenberg is concerned, is the fact that they undertook the task of offering the Christian gospel as the answer to the Greek philosophical quest. This undertaking is generally recognized as having been inevitable in that the Hellenistic world into which the gospel came was dominated by the Greek philosophical conception of God. Thus, in spite of the disastrous mingling of the Christian message with Greek metaphysics, there was no alternative. But such a view, Pannenberg insists, misses the primary point, which is that the Christian message itself necessitated the encounter with the Greek philosophical quest. He contends: © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 7   The discussion with the philosophical question of the true form of the Divine was, indeed, occasioned by the encounter with the Hellenistic Thought-world, but it was also inwardly rooted in the biblical witness of God as the universal God, responsible not only for Israel, but for all people. In the claim of the God of Israel to be the God, alone having jurisdiction over all men, it was, therefore, theologically rooted that the Christian faith had to enter into the philosophical question of the true nature of God and until today must give an answer to it.7 The ancient church fathers as well as the authors of the great scholastic summas understood the universality of theology, the responsibility that rests upon him who would speak of God. That modern theology has not so conceived of its task can be traced to Albrecht Ritschl’s attempt to carve out for theology its own sphere, the sphere of religious experience, rejecting all metaphysical elements of the Christian tradition in the face of the critique rendered by Positivism. Liberal Protestantism passed this heritage along to Dialectical Theology which had reacted so strongly against it. Pannenberg observes that Barth’s struggle against every vestige of natural theology is really in many respects an extension and radicalization of Ritschl’s idea of an independent theology with its own special theme.8 If we would discover where theology lost its universality, however, we must go back much further. Evangelical theology has never had a universal character since it inherited the Scripture-positivism which has been its hallmark from the doctrine of Scripture formulated in the late Middle Ages in, for example, the School of Occam. It has been axiomatic in the Protestant tradition that the theological task consists in the exegesis of Scripture. Thus to find the root of the loss of universality we must go back into Scholasticism, specifically to the thirteenth century and Thomas’ careful demarcation of two spheres of knowledge, natural and supernatural. Pannenberg recognizes the exigencies under which this bifurcation took place. Aristotelian philosophy prevailed, being generally acknowledged as the embodiment of all “natural” thought. If one would hold to the truth of the Christian tradition, one could do so only by setting it alongside the summation of “natural” truth as unfolded in Aristotelianism. Aristotelian philosophy represented that truth which could be discovered by man’s natural faculties; the Christian faith represented that truth which could only be bestowed by revelation. Neither Aristotelian philosophy nor the Christian tradition was intended for this kind of reciprocal supplementation, according to Pannenberg, but he asserts: It would seem much rather to have been the expression of a compromise of theology with the intellectual power of Aristotelianism. In this compromise lie the historical roots of the last of the universality of theology.9 © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 8   For Thomas, who was responsible for the consummate expression of the naturalsupernatural division of the spheres of knowledge, the two spheres were carefully coordinated into a systematic whole. In the course of time, however, the structure fell apart rendering the sphere of natural knowledge independent of any reference to the truth of revelation, the consequence of which was increasingly to render “supernatural” knowledge superfluous for a knowledge of the world and to make of theology a positivistic science of Scripture. Such a state of affairs hardly accords with Paul’s struggle to “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (II Cor. 10:5) and, with the unparalleled explosion of knowledge in the modern period in the wake of the development of the scientific method, the division of spheres of knowledge formulated by Thomas has resulted in an almost unbridgeable gulf. The task of understanding the whole of reality in its unity from the perspective of its author, the God of creation, is formidable indeed, and yet unless it is undertaken, the universality of theology will never be realized and theology, as an independent science with its own special theme, the exegesis of Scripture, will fade increasingly into the background of man’s pursuit of truth. Concentration of its own special theme has about it a pious sound and it makes for a comfortable co-existence of theology with the other sciences. It can only signify, however, the utter failure of theology to carry out its peculiar intellectual responsibility which is to take in claim all truth as witness to the one true God as the author of reality and, in turn, to understand all truth anew from him. Where does one begin? How can such an overwhelming task be undertaken? It is Pannenberg’s conviction that the conception of theology as an independent science alongside others with its own special subject matter must be rejected and that its universal character must be recognized by its addressing itself to the second pole of its dual concern, namely, to the questions which concern man in his experience of reality in the present cultural situation. Only by seeking the truth per se can theology do justice to its special subject matter, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Scriptures; for in that it purports to speak of God, it purports to speak of the Power determining all reality. Implicit in the responsibility of speaking of the Power determining all reality is the necessity of thoroughly grasping how modern man experiences reality, for only by speaking of the Power determining reality as it is presently experienced can theology speak convincingly. It is, therefore, incumbent upon theology to speak of God in terms of the present experience of reality. Thus the most general question which theology must answer is how one can speak of God in the present cultural situation. Only by determining this can theology once again undertake to exercise its universal function. III. Revelation As History Pannenberg’s unique contribution to contemporary theological discussion has had to do primarily not with the content of revelation so much as the mode of its occurrence. Stated theologically the question has been, How does God manifest himself to man? Stated anthropologically it is the question of how man perceives © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page 9   that self-revelation. The theological question has issued in the debate as to whether God reveals himself directly or immediately through his word, that is, through an act of speaking the content of which is God himself, whether he himself speaks, or another speaks in his name; or whether God reveals himself indirectly or mediately through his activity, his activity being conceived not in terms of a series of special acts next to other events explainable as “natural” as opposed to “supernatural” but rather his continuous dynamic relationship to the whole of reality as its Creator, transcendent Ground, and Destiny. In oversimplified terms, it is a question of whether God “speaks” to man directly, thus making known his essence to man, or whether God’s essence can be known only indirectly from what he does. Obviously, when stated thus “word” and “act” are placed in a falsely antithetical relationship and a biblical theology will rather understand them in a positive relationship with the priority given to word or act depending on the point of view of the biblical writer. Nonetheless, setting the question up in terms of the two poles, word and act, is helpful in identifying the problem. If we approach the problem from the anthropological side, that is, if we ask how the revelation of God is perceived by man, then we are asking whether God in his self-manifestation can be known by man through the exercise of his rational faculties or whether God can be known only through the means of some suprarational faculty however that may be understood. Essentially this is a question of whether God in his self-manifestation can be perceived by reason or whether he can only be perceived by faith. It should be underlined here that this is not a question of whether man by his own rational faculties can discover God or whether God must make himself known to man. If the question we are asking is misunderstood in this way—a not uncommon misunderstanding—the real issue will be missed. The point rather is: Granted that God can be known by man only through his self-disclosure, is that self-disclosure rationally perceptible or only supra-rationally perceptible. Again, it is not a question of whether the content of God's revelation is rational or supra-rational. It is possible to hold, as does Karl Barth, that the self-revelation of God is highly rational and yet deny that man through the exercise of his rational faculties can discover that revelation apart from an illuminating act of the Holy Spirit which can be described only as a miracle. For Barth, to be more accurate, revelation is never “there” to be perceived, but rather it “occurs” in the illuminating act of the Holy Spirit, although once it is given it is rationally comprehensible. From this it should be evident that of the two questions, or rather the two aspects of the one question concerning the revelation of God, the most basic question is not whether God reveals himself through word or event but whether man as a rational creature is able through the exercise of his rational faculties to comprehend the revelation of God. Whether that revelation takes the form of spoken word or historical event is to be determined subsequently. The primary © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page10   division of opinion will occur on the anthropological or epistemological question as to whether man as man can perceive the revelation of God. This point is illustrated by the fact that, for example, Bultmann and Cullmann represent two radically different positions in regard to the question of where God reveals himself, in word or event. However, in spite of their differences on the mode of revelation, they both agree in their own way that man comes into the possession of knowledge of God through an illuminating act of the Holy Spirit and not through the exercise of his reason over against the “proclaimed word” (Bultmann) or the “acts of God” (Cullmann). On this question Kerygmatic Theology and Heilsgeschichtliche Theology are in agreement. With regard to the first question as to how God reveals himself, whether through word or event or in combination of the two, we have an inter-theological debate. With regard to the second question, as to how man perceives the revelation of God, we are dealing with a matter that has wide-ranging implications for the whole sphere of human knowledge, depending on how we answer the question. If we answer it as do Barth, Bultmann, or Cullmann, to name only three representative figures, holding that man as man, by the exercise of his rational faculties can never achieve a knowledge of God apart from a supplementary illuminating act of the Holy Spirit, then, to employ Kantian terms, we remove theology as an independent science, into the realm of practical reason; or, in Ritschl's terms, we make theological statements as value-judgments; or, in Existentialist terms, we make theological truth equivalent to the truth of expression of the existing individual. If, on the contrary, we hold that although man by his own creative reason could never discover the knowledge of God, yet, given the fact that God has revealed himself and that man as man can achieve the knowledge of God so revealed, then we place theology squarely in the center of human knowledge wherein it will be obliged to demonstrate the revelation of God before the court of human judgment in terms of the generally accepted canons of rationality. For if the theologian is convinced that God is and that he has disclosed himself, and, further, that that revelation is available to rational reflection, he will not be content simply to affirm his conviction, nor will he be able to appeal to some sort of esoteric experience wherein his knowledge was ascertained, but he will find it incumbent upon himself to support the truth of his knowledge of God through rational argumentation. The case as stated here is intentionally stated in the sharpest possible contrasts in order most clearly to isolate the central problem we wish to discuss in our critique. It is our conviction that only in such a posing of the problem does the real significance and urgent importance of Pannenberg’s theology become evident. We have sketched in brief outline the crisis which developed in evangelical theology with the loss of the authority of Scripture. We have seen that that authority was undermined through the rise of historical thinking although, paradoxically, historical thinking itself and consequent secularism are in part fruits of the Christian tradition. Protestant theology over the last century and a half can best be understood as an attempt to come to terms with historical © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page11   thinking, but to the present no satisfactory solution has been found. We concentrated particularly on the attempt of Dialectical Theology as formulated respectively by Barth and Bultmann to disengage the revelation of God from the sphere of history thus removing theology from the lordship of historical thinking. More and more, however, it has become clear that the creation of a special sphere of theological truth inaccessible to the judgment of reason is selfdefeating, leaving theology in the position of affirming an existential truth (Bultmann) or a revelational truth (Barth) neither of which can claim generally binding power. Theological truth is reduced to private truth. We have attempted in our exposition of Barth and Bultmann not only to understand what they were saying, but why they were saying it. If we come to conclusions differing from theirs this is not because we have seen the problem more clearly than they saw it, but rather because we view it in a changed climate of opinion, changed at least in part through the genius of their labors. We are convinced that it is possible today in a climate of opinion radically different than that which prevailed in the opening decades of our century, to affirm the universality of theology. We are further convinced that in the systematic theology of Pannenberg we have the most adequate and most comprehensive attempt yet made to integrate the true insights of post-Enlightenment or modern thought into a theological understanding of reality. In the theology of Pannenberg we have the revolutionary truth of historical thinking, which is the hallmark of modern thought, incorporated into a conception of the Christian tradition which at the same time maintains the essence of the latter. We have seen both in our introductory discussion of the rise of historical thinking and in our exposition of Pannenberg’s theology that western thought shows widespread agreement on the fact that the whole of reality must be conceived as history, as dynamic process in contrast to the cosmological thinking of Greek philosophy which conceived Being as static. It was the greatness of Ernst Troeltsch that he recognized the fundamental revolution in human thinking which historical thinking occasioned. He was convinced that historical thinking was incommensurable with the Christian theological tradition because that tradition was formulated in terms of Greek metaphysical conceptually which had been undercut by post-Enlightenment thought. He was so certain that historical thinking was irreversible that he felt compelled to re-formulate the Christian faith in accommodation to it. In so doing he gave up the idea of a final, definitive revelation of God in the course of history, specifically in the history of Jesus. Troeltsch’s conception of the nature of history and his formulation of historiographical principles was so much the consummate expression of the prevaling intellectual climate that for a considerable period they were viewed as axiomatic. This was the climate of opinion when the young theologians who were to be grouped together as constituting the dialectical movement came on the scene. They were not prepared to challenge Troeltsch’s conception of the nature of history nor his formulation of the principle of the historical-critical method. Of one thing, however, they were certain: in such a view of history and © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page12   historiography there was no room for the definitive revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Therefore, being convinced that they must speak of God in his deity, his sovereignty, and his freedom in his revelation, they removed that revelation from the history whose nature Troeltsch described and from the access of the historical-critical method whose principles Troeltsch formulated. We noted above the self-defeating consequence of the removal of revelation from history. Theology pursued as an independent science becomes a matter of private truth. The widespread questioning, particularly of the position of Bultmann by his own eminent students, is an indication of the dissatisfaction felt with his handling of the problem of revelation and history, and, while Barth has indeed moved the occurrence of revelation back into the sphere of history, his existence, the subjectivity of truth, the openness and contingency of the historical process, reality itself as historical process—into a theological conception of history which finds in Jesus the definitive revelation of God, that we have contended that Pannenberg’s theology is the most adequate formulation of the truth of historical thinking and the Christian tradition yet attempted. His theological conception of history is not simply a rejection of and reaction against the prevailing dialectical theology as that theology had been over against the nineteenth century Protestant Liberalism and the historicism of Troeltsch. While Pannenberg rejects the authoritarianism and revelational positivism of dialectical theology, he nevertheless is concerned to preserve the essence of what that theology was saying, namely, that God in his sovereign freedom has disclosed himself in Jesus Christ. He recognizes the justification of dialectical theology’s reaction against Troeltsch’s historicism and he too is critical of Troeltsch. However he is equally aware that Troeltsch had a grasp of something which theology simply cannot bypass, the recognition of the revolutionary nature of historical thinking whose truth must be incorporated into the Christian tradition. In Pannenberg’s theological conception of history there is a meeting of the best insights of Troeltsch with the best insights of the theology of the Word, and the result is a significant advance, a breakthrough in theological understanding. IV. Dogmatic Theses Drawn From Pannenberg’s Thinking Thesis I: Utilizing the best insights of twentieth century historical science, Pannenberg has presented a valid critique of both Troeltsch’s understanding of the nature of history and his formulation of the principles of historiography thus creating the possibility of a theological conception of history and asserting once again theology’s universal function. It is characteristic of Pannenberg’s theology that he speaks of God in relation to the whole of reality. In so doing he seeks to integrate the best insights of the respective disciplines into a theonomous conception of reality. It is equally characteristic of his procedure, however, that he claims no privileged perspective as a Christian theologian when discussing, for instance, the anthropological structure of human existence or the nature of history. When discussing historical- © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page13   critical thinking he does not begin with some theological requirement to be forced on the historian, but rather listens to how the historians themselves understand their subject. How do they understand the nature of history? How do they conceive of the task of the historian? How do they justify the historiographical principles with which they carry out their investigation? His own critique of the science of history is then an immanent critique. Given an understanding of history as advocated by Collingwood, for example, principles of historiography as formulated under the impact of positivism must be modified. This is but one illustration of his method throughout. Only after he has determined what the leading thinkers in the various disciplines themselves have to say about the nature of their subject and their methodological principles does Pannenberg begin his theological reflection on that subject matter. He claims that if he is seriously to speak of God, which as a theologian he must do, then he cannot allow the historian’s truth to stand in isolation as simply the truth about history. Rather, if God is God then the historian’s truth which he has discovered by means of investigation and reflection must be relatable to the one unifying ground of truth, namely, God. What he does argue in this dialogue with the various disciplines of science is that, given their own self-understanding, the reality with which they have to do is more adequately explained on the presupposition of God than without him. To use history again as an example, Pannenberg cites several leading historians of the past and present to the effect that concrete historical research of a limited historical period always presupposes a wider context which ultimately presupposes some sort of universal-historical conception. But, he argues, such a conception of the total course of events is unavailable, as the historians too are vividly aware. Any universal-historical scheme which denies the contingency of events and the openness of the future contradicts our understanding of history. This was the fatal weakness of Hegel’s scheme, and since Hegel historians have eschewed every all-encompassing system. However, Pannnberg points out, the contemporary historian is in a dilemma: on the basis of his understanding of his work, universal history must be thought, but on the basis of his understanding of the nature of history such a conception cannot be thought. In other words, by means of this immanent critique of historical science Pannenberg points to an inner contradiction. Then, taking a cue from Collingwood, he asks what are the prerequisites for a model of history if its unity as well as its contingency must both find place? He concludes that such a conception is possible only if we conceive of a ground of history which is both the source of the contingency of its events as well the basis of its unity. Can such a ground be found within history itself? Pannenberg attempts to discover such, but concludes that there is no possible ground within history which can meet the requirements of the model. Therefore, he concludes, on the basis of the requirements of historical research and the nature of history, both as understood by the historian, a transcendent ground which bears the whole of reality as history must be presupposed. But, the objection may be raised, did not Hegel presuppose just such a ground, the Absolute, and did not his system fall in ruins before the recognition of the © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page14   openness of the future? Quite true, Pannenberg responds, and the objection to Hegel was completely justified. However, in rejecting Hegel’s grounding of the historical process on a transcendent Power, subsequent philosophy of history lost the only possibility of establishing the unity of history required for historical science. Hegel was not wrong in establishing history on a transcendent ground, but only in his conception of that Absolute coming to self-realization in his own philosophy. What is required is a transcendent ground, which not only establishes the unity of history but also is its future, its End. But how can such a Power be conceived, for the End has not yet arrived? We are back at the same point apparently. Now, however, Pannenberg offers a model which meets the requirements: the proleptic appearance of the End of history in the midst of history. If the End has already appeared, albeit provisionally, then the whole of history can be anticipated. Yet if the End has appeared proleptically, then obviously the process of history is still under way and the future is still open. Where did Pannenberg come up with such a model? Not out of the blue, of course. It is a model suggested by the eschatological character of the Christ-event. The model itself proves nothing. It can only be verified by determining if it explains the facts and, indeed, it must be subjected to a double test: is it an adequate explanation of the Christ-event and is it an adequate explanation of reality as history. In the case of the first test we are in the area of biblical theology; in the case of the second we are still dealing with history as the historian understands it. We limit ourselves here only to the latter case. The question is: does the model of history as process moving toward a still outstanding End within which, however, the End has already provisionally occurred meet the requirements of the historian’s conception both of his work and his subject matter? It would seem to meet these requirements. The next step would be to pursue concrete historical investigation in the framework of this model. Only then can it be determined if the model is, in fact, a true conception of reality as history. Here there are two criteria: positively, the model will be verified if it is able to effect the most adequate explanation of the data encountered in historical research; negatively, the model will be confirmed if known data remains unexplainable without the model. This verification process will be carried out by the historian using the best scientific techniques at his disposal. The phenomena presented to him are not perceived with any sort of “eye of faith,” nor must he operate with some sort of supernatural conception of God. In short, no special pleading is involved in his phenomenological research. Is this model the only possible model? Not necessarily. At least that cannot be presupposed. Anyone is free to propose a model as long as it fits the requirements of historical science’s own self-understanding. Should such a “competitive” model be presupposed, then it in turn must be judged on the basis of the criteria cited above. The conception of models can be various but they must all be subjected to the criterion of truth, that is, they must be tested as to their adequacy in © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page15   explaining available data and the impossibility of explaining data without them. In such a process of testing the model which corresponds to reality as presently comprehended will emerge. Only through such a procedure is it still possible to speak of truth. Further, should the model constructed in the light of the eschatological understanding of the Christ-event prove true, it would, at the same time, be a verification of the Christian conception of reality. The point we must make here is that Pannenberg has proposed a theological conception of reality not because, being a theologian, he automatically begins at this point. Whether he does or not is not the point. We may even grant that the model he constructs is suggested by his own orientation in the Christian tradition. This still does not detract from the general validity of his procedure. His theological perspective imposed on the historian neither his historiographical principles nor his conception of the nature of history. He allowed the historian himself to dictate the terms. Given those terms, he argued that those terms require some such model as he proposed. Still he makes no extrinsic demand on the historian. He simply asks him to test the model, working as a historian. Whether this model meets the criteria of truth or not is not in any sense dependent on a position of faith or theological position. The results are submitted to the bar of generally valid canons of rationality. But, someone objects, does this not subject the truth of the Christian faith to the judgment of human rationality? The answer is yes. There can be no sidestepping that test. There is no sheltered cove within which the Christian tradition can practice its faith. Either it is true and commends itself as such to human rationality or it must give up its claim to truth and be content to exercise itself as a private affair. This is not to say that man comprehends the depths of the mystery of the Deity or the secrets of the whole of reality. It does mean to affirm, however, that if God has revealed himself to man in the midst of history, then that revelation must be comprehensible to man. If God only makes himself known “vertically from above,” by miracle, through some supernatural illumination of the Holy Spirit, by means of some esoteric gnosis, why bother about a revelation in history. If revelation is punctilear, why the horizontal line or point on the plane of history? If revelation occurs only here and now, then why does it need a “dass” in history? As an anchor to guard it from myth? But why not myth? Because the Christian faith claims to be historical, not mythical? But why be concerned about the Christian faith unless it is true? And if it is true then revelation has occurred in history, so why all the strenuous efforts to deny that it is “there?” Bultmann admitted that he must come to terms with modern thought and so when he operates with a conception of history as defined by the positivist and then goes on to carve out a place for the Christian faith in the realm of existence we must admit that he is at least consistent. But what shall we say of Barth? He faults Bultmann for allowing modern thought to dominate. Barth rejects the idea. But what has he done? The very same thing! Barth’s whole amazing theological © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page16   endeavor can well be understood as an affirmation of the truth of the Christian faith in the face of positivistic thinking in which there was no room for it. But the paradox of the matter is that the very Achilles’ heel of his whole position is his contradictory statements about the historicity of revelation and the inaccessibility of that revelation to historical-critical research. The charge of revelational positivism is not unjustified. Is it not that he who denied the sovereignty of modern thought constructed his own theology as if positivistic historiography were indeed sovereign? Not exactly. Barth’s theology shatters all positivistic historiography as far as the whole of reality is concerned. But he left it intact as far as the historical process is concerned. He allowed Troeltsch the final word as far as historical science was concerned, thus conceiving the historical process as a self-contained entity set over against God. Historical science is competent to deal with the one-dimensional reality of history but theology speaks of the One who encounters the man who lives in that one-dimensional reality, and consequently historical science is not competent to deal with the intercourse of man and God. Pannenberg’s superiority must be recognized in two directions. Over against Troeltsch he says that the historical-critical method, to be sure, has an anthropocentric element inherent within it, but to that anthropocentric methodological element you have wedded an anthropocentric worldview, which not only is not intrinsic to the method but even hinders its effectiveness. Your anthropocentric worldview precludes any consideration of a transcendent reality and consequently contradicts the very requirements of historical research itself. Furthermore your conception of the principle of analogy which is a valuable tool for gaining knowledge is posited on the postulate of the universal similarity of all historical phenomena, thus again denying the insight of history itself that events are contingent and that history is the place of the arrival of the new, the unique, the unforeseen. The principle of analogy is not wrong but the application is. Rather than using it to determine the similarities of the respective phenomena, use it to delineate their differences, their uniqueness. Furthermore your principle of development denies the contingency of events and the genuine openness of the future. Your model of history as a self-contained, unfolding entity beyond which hovers the absolute, known only relatively within the course of development is an inadequate model in the light of historical science itself. At this point Pannenberg addresses Barth and argues that it is not Barth’s conception of history as encounter that is wrong but only his submission to positivistic historiography as being the legitimate conception of historical science. By his divorce of historical science from revelational history, Barth has introduced an unendurable contradiction into his theological enterprise. Such a contradiction has been responsible for the feeling as expressed by James Barr: “Though I still feel that it is Barth’s God whom I seek to worship, the intellectual framework of Barth’s theology has in my consciousness to a very great extent © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page17   collapsed in ruins.”10 Barth, Pannenberg would affirm, has begun to speak as a Christian before he has justified his speaking as a theologian, in fact, without recognizing the legitimacy of such a procedure, or even denying its possibility. Barth, in one sense, can be recognized as nothing if not bold. It is a question however if he was bold enough. In a world, a cultural situation, that is largely determined in its intellectual milieu by atheistic thinking, can the theologian speak seriously of God unless he has at least created the “room” for such talk by an immanent critique of atheistic thought itself? If the existence of God cannot be demonstrated, at least the acids of atheistic thought can be neutralized and a theological conception of reality can be demonstrated to be rationally as justifiable as an atheistic conception. Indeed, in Pannenberg’s thought we would even claim that the theological conception is shown to be more rational. However that may be, to think the matter through to its limits so that one is placed before the alternatives is no little gain. Human rationality reaches its limits but that is true not only for theological thought, but for atheistic as well. A rational choice is not necessarily a choice in which every piece of data is explained, every mystery disclosed. It is rather a choice in the face of all possible evidence. It is a choice made in the light of the widest possible understanding of reality. In this respect it can be maintained that the commitment of oneself to the God revealed in Jesus Christ is grounded upon a rational decision—a decision made in the light of all possible evidence. In this way theology stands in the middle of the sciences seeking to unify all truth through its relation to the God who is source, ground, and goal of truth. The universal function of theology is once again asserted and the world of fragmentary experience, specialized knowledge unrelated to the whole of reality, is brought into relation to him who is the Truth. The theologian claims no quarter. He demands no “eye of faith,” no special inspiration. He proposes his model, a model constructed out of the requirements of the respective sciences themselves. He then submits his model to impartial testing by the phenomena dealt with in the individual sciences. He brings the results before the bar of rational judgment. Should a competing and contradictory model prove more adequate, he has no recourse. But should his model pass the test, then he has demonstrated that a theological conception of reality is in fact rationally defensible. Is the risk too great? No, not if, when he speaks of God, he is speaking of the Creator of the whole of reality who will bring all things to consummation. Then the model will be verified. And if it is not? Then he must cease to be a theologian, for then there will be no theology. Is not the task too arduous? Certainly it is arduous, but have not the most profound thought and the most profound thinkers arisen out of the Christian tradition over the course of the centuries? The magnitude of the challenge is no deterrent. Much rather, if in the modern period the church has alienated the best minds, it is not because she demanded too much but too little. A call to serious © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page18   intellectual pursuit of truth will not offend but the lack of it certainly will— and has. Thesis II. Dogmatic theology must rethink the entire theological spectrum of truth from the perspective of historical thinking. Harnack’s criticism of the Hellenization of the gospel has a validity which can hardly be denied. Rather than judging this “translation” negatively as he did, we can understand today that the Greek metaphysical conceptuality was the most effective means at hand for expressing the central truth of the Christ-event, “God with us.” In the history of the transmission of traditions this was a necessary and effective new stage. It entailed nonetheless grave difficulties because an event actualized in a tradition that for centuries had been nurtured on the idea of the dynamic relationship of God and man in the historical process which was moving toward consummation had to be translated into meaningful terms for a culture that had been fully indoctrinated with the metaphysical categories of Plato and Aristotle and their successors. In such a setting, that which formed the culminating point of God’s self-disclosure in Jesus—his resurrection from the dead— there was formed an untranslatable conception which could only be announced, proclaimed, but scarcely comprehended. In such an environment the emphasis soon shifted to the coming of the Son of God, the idea of Incarnation. Such a conception did allow the message of God’s presence with man in Jesus to be expressed, but as the Christological controversy vividly demonstrates, it brought in its wake insoluble problems which plague us to the present.11 The church lived for centuries undisturbed by the irreconcilable contradictions of Chalcedon because Christian theology has been conceptualized by means of Greek metaphysical categories and thus the central idea of Incarnation communicated the Christian message. The crisis of theology today is not in the first instance a crisis of Christian belief but a crisis of Christian theological formulation which could not help but collapse when the Greek metaphysics in terms of which it was framed was undermined. This occurred through the rise of modern thought becoming particularly damaging to traditional theology through the rise of historical thinking which undercut the unquestioned authority of Scripture. The reaction of Christian theology to the crisis created by modern thought has often been defensive, evidencing an underlying insecurity. At other times it has sought so desperately to accommodate itself to modern thinking that it has given up its own central affirmation of God’s presence in Jesus, thus robbing the world of its one source of hope in the God of the future. These two extreme reactions can be found again and again over the past two centuries. On the one hand there has been a jealous guarding of traditional conceptuality: incarnation—true God—true man; three in one—coequal and co-eternal; inspired, infallible Scripture, etc., under the mistaken notion that God and his truth were cradled in the respective stammering human attempts to express it. On the other hand, there was an uncritical acceptance of modern thought, positivistically orientated, which from © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page19   the beginning practically shut out the possibility of a transcendent reality, let alone a God present in the causal nexus that defined reality. Where lies a solution? Is it not significant that western thinking, believing itself now to be free from the archaic metaphysical bondage of theology, has discovered reality as history? And furthermore it has been shown, for example, by Lowith that the conception of reality as history moving toward an End “is rooted in the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Is it not possible that we are in a position today to rethink such basic conceptions as the Trinity, the natures of Christ, and the Consummation and come to more fruitful results than has perhaps been the case in the long tradition of Christian thinking ? Thesis III. All Christological statements must be made from the perspective of the resurrection. Barth begins with the given of the Incarnation, Jesus, truly God and truly man. The question, how do you know this?, is simply out of place. If we know it we need not ask, and if we do not know it, it is futile to ask. The life of Jesus plays itself out between the twin miracles of the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection, both wholly the work of God, neither accessible to human judgment, examination or confirmation. From this everything follows. Prior to this there can be no discussion. Bultmann starts with the kerygma. In response to the proclamation you either say “yes” or “no” but you may not ask “Why should I?” or “Is it true?” Either question is already proof that revelation has not occurred. Even the Post-Bultmannians who feel uneasy with this approach are looking everywhere for a basis for the kerygma except in the one place that Bultmann and almost all New Testament scholars agree it is located, namely, in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Ebeling and Fuchs are retreading the paths of Herrmann, Bornkamm speaks of Jesus’ authority, Kasemann of his message, but none of them seriously considers the one place in which every kerygmatic utterance is rooted. It is here that Pannenberg makes a most significant contribution. He has dared to assert once again that you cannot ground New Testament Christology anywhere but where the New Testament itself grounds it. In so doing he has made progress possible in several areas where thought had reached an impasse. Perhaps the most crucial area is that of the natures of Christ. The long and bitter Christological struggles need not be recounted here. It is sufficient to say that Chalcedonian Christology is not a solution but represents an impasse, a compromise between conceptions which are logically irreconciliable. We understand the problem and we comprehend the intention, but what person would ever suggest that Chalcedon represents an intelligible and satisfying conclusion? © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page20   We would suggest that perhaps the problem lies in the inability of Greek conceptuality to express a phenomenon which was essentially historical. In the intellectual milieu of the Greek world the appearance of the Servant of God, the Messiah, was proclaimed in conceptuality which culminated in incarnational Christology and with incarnational Christology the whole problem of the divine and human presented itself but with no possibility of solution. We would ask, in terms of the Old Testament, in terms of the Messianic expectation, why must Jesus be God? In fact, is the Messiah as God really true to the Old Testament tradition? Chalcedonian Christology has such a long and impressive tradition that we often never question what biblical imperative there is for the divinity of the Messiah. The answer, of course, is not to reject Chalcedon, as does Bultmann because he is so determined by positivistic thinking that he cannot conceive of Jesus as anything more than a man, let alone his resurrection. If we must choose between Barth or Bultmann, we must choose Barth, for between the signs of the Virgin Birth and Resurrection God is present in history, but Barth can assert this only as an assertion and is utterly unable to say more about how we can understand incarnation. It is the incarnation as a starting point that is wrong. To start there is to be cut off immediately from all rational reflection. Revelational positivism is inevitable. Incarnation is a valid idea if it is recognized to be a step in the interpretive tradition leading from Jesus, an interpretation of an historical phenomenon that occurred in a Jewish apocalyptic setting rooted in the Old Testament tradition. Pannenberg has argued powerfully that Jesus must be understood in his own context and that in that context the resurrection “spoke.” One of his great contributions is his calling in question of the fact, meaning bifurcation. The fact in its historical context bears its own meaning. In the tradition expecting the final intervention of God at the End raising the dead, the resurrection of one who had been dead and buried meant the End had arrived. He has also quite rightly seen that resurrection did not carry that meaning in another context. Consequently translation was necessary. This brings us to the one point where we feel Pannenberg has not completely followed through on his own insights. He has recognized that an End-expectation and coming judgment are necessary presuppositions for a meaningful belief in resurrection and that consequently Paul stressed these matters to the Gentiles. He has further discussed how in our day resurrection can be meaningful as a more adequate conception of the immortality of the soul. The one thing he has been unable to do is to show how resurrection was translated meaningfully in the first century. The fact is that it was not. Is not Paul’s Athenian experience evidence of an indissolvable offense that adhered to the Christian message as heard by the Greek? Resurrection was the key and resurrection was untranslatable into the conceptuality of Greek metaphysics. © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page21   Is not this the reason that the focus shifted from resurrection to incarnation in terms of which God’s intervention into human history was powerfully expressed? God’s intervention, yes, but then the Messiah must have been God. Is not this why Jesus must be God? Thinking which utilizes Greek metaphysical conceptuality can only conceive of God’s presence in history in terms of incarnation. However, such was not the case with Hebrew thought. God would bring future deliverance through his Servant—David’s Son! God did not have to “enter” history for the Israelites. History was his domain—no self-contained, independent entity set over against him. In his holiness he ever dwelt in the midst of his people. Why the modern crisis of theology? Is it not rather the crisis of metaphysics? And why the crisis of metaphysics? Is it not occasioned by the rise of historical thinking? What is the answer then? It must be obvious. We ought to recognize incarnational Christology as no longer a meaningful interpretation of the historical self-disclosure of God in his servant Jesus, the Messiah. Paradoxically Greek metaphysical thinking in terms of which the Christian tradition has formulated its faith has fallen into disrepute making it possible once again to understand Jesus and his resurrection historically, as was the case for Peter and Paul. But this raises another question regarding Pannenberg. He has thought through the matter of natural law and has sought to show that the resurrection is not really a “break” in nature. Here we are uneasy. That in its context it had meaning we grant. But was it not also a “break” in historical continuity even for a Paul? To be sure, all historical phenomena are unique and history is the place of the new, it is irruptive. But still the resurrection cannot be leveled down to being an event next to others. Now if, as the apocalyptic tradition expected, with the resurrection of Jesus the End of history was in fact arrived at, then the historical process would have unfolded with no “break” in its continuity. Or if, as Bultmann holds, there was no resurrection, then the historical process still continues with no “break.” But if it happened, as Pannenberg claims it happened—and we think he is right—namely, that what Paul thought was the beginning of a fast-approaching End, was really—as we know 2000 years later— an isolated, proleptic occurrence of a still future End, then there has occurred in the midst of the historical continuum a radical, indissolvable “break,” an act of God which is unique, in a sense “more unique” than the uniqueness of historical phenomena in general. Pannenberg has acknowledged the problem of identifying the resurrection of one man with the expectation of the resurrection of all men. That is just the point. The expectation of the resurrection of all men was indeed the presupposition for finding meaning in Jesus’ resurrection. But, the resurrection of Jesus nevertheless shattered apocalyptic preconceptions also. It was to Jew and Greek alike an unforeseen, unforseeable self-disclosure of the God who remains free and sovereign even in his historical self-revelation. © Grand Valley State University �Theological Conception of Reality as History Richard A. Rhem Page22   Why has Barth been able to speak so powerfully the truth of the Christian faith to his generation? Because he said what the gospel wants to say: “God with us.” Why does such a powerful witness engender such sharp reaction? Is it not because while saying what the gospel wants to say, he has utilized a metaphysical conceptuality which no longer commands respect? We come back to our question why Jesus must be God. If God anointed his Servant, the Messiah, to proclaim his Kingdom and announce the new age and then raised him from the dead as a confirmation of that message and of his Servant, what does it add to the matter if Jesus were divine? If Jesus were God then resurrection is not quite so amazing. But if Jesus is my brother because a man like me and if God raised him from the dead, then something truly amazing has occurred. The New Age has dawned in the midst of the Old. Then while still struggling in the old aeon, I have a real basis for Hope. Then I live in anticipation. That is, I live by faith. If this is the case then I can understand the Apostle who wrote: On the human level he was born of David’s stock, but on the level of the Spirit—The Holy Spirit—he was declared Son of God by a mighty act in that he rose from the dead. . . Jesus Christ our Lord. (Rom. l: 3b-4, NEB). 1Karl Barth, The Humanity of God, Richmond, 1960, p. 19. 2Ernst Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Gescbichtlichkeit fesu fur dem Glauben, Tubingen,1911, p. 11. 3Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, I.2 Edinburgh, 1960, p. 284. 4Rudolph Bultmann, Kerygma and Myth, London, 1953, pp. 13ff. 5“Die Krise des Schriftprinzips,” Grundfragen Systematischer Theologie, Gottingen, 1967, p. 11. 6Ibid. 7“Die Aufnahme des philosophisches Gottesbegriffs,” Grundfragen .... pp. 308f. 8Ibid., 9”Die p. 297. Krise des Schriftprinzips,” Grundfragen …, p. 20. 10James Baar, Old and New in Interpretation, SCM, 1966, p. 12. 11Cf. H. Berkhof, The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, Richmond, 1964, for his daring challenge to traditional Trinitarian conceptuality. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19721001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1972-10-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource A Theological Conception of Reality as History - Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Reformed Review; a journal of the seminaries of the Reformed Church in America Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 1, 1972 entitled "A Theological Conception of Reality as History - Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg", it appeared in Reformed Review, pp. 178-188. Tags: History of Theology, Historical Thinking, Truth, Eschatology, Revelation. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Eschatology Historical Thinking History of Theology Revelation Truth https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/55841695425903d393e0d9c42e6beba7.mp3 aaf308b45480b680f29037acf8aceaf9 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1d1252e5f8978008830c8c117cc2b798.pdf 160625694162c7e874504fc9749588e6 PDF Text Text The Destabilizing, Troubling God From the series: Remembering Jesus, Experiencing God Luke 19:35-20:2 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan April 4, 2004 Palm Sunday Transcription of the spoken sermon The Gospel lesson that I read is really my favorite Palm Sunday passage. It's a very moving passage, such a poignant moment. By the time that Luke wrote that Gospel, of course, it was a half century since Jesus had lived and approached Jerusalem. Luke did not have to make Jesus a predictor of the future as he foresaw the devastation that would befall that city. For Luke, as he wrote, it was history. Jerusalem was an ash heap. The temple was no more. It was no longer the center of the ritual life of Israel. It wasn't even a significant center for the Jesus Movement at that point. Although Luke has him looking over the city and predicting the devastation, he did not have to have some kind of supernatural power to do that, for it must have been obvious to such a sensitive soul that there would be this moment of conflagration in wake of the confrontation that was inevitable. And so, he has Jesus weeping over the city, saying "If only you had recognized the things that make for peace." But, it was too late. In any given historical moment and situation, it can be too late to do the things that make for peace. In the words of Yogi Berra, I wonder on Palm Sunday, "Déja vu all over again?" Will the cycle of violence, the violence of the occupier continue to elicit the violence of the occupied, which in turn, will elicit greater violence by the occupier? Will the imperial power with its brand of violence through exploitation and domination always oppress to the point where there will be violence in return, which in turn will demand a greater expression of violence? What do you think? Do you think that it's just always going to be that way? Are you a kind of a realist who shrugs their shoulders and says, "Well, that's the human situation. It's always been that way; it's always going to be that way." Or, another possibility is that you may be one of the minority who really believe that we are on a course to destruction, maybe some global nuclear catastrophe, or © Grand Valley State University �Destabilizing, Troubling God Richard A. Rhem Page 2 maybe just the continual fouling of the earth, the air, the water. Do you perhaps fall into that group that sees doom down the line? Or, do you think that maybe we'll get on top of this? Do you think maybe, given enough time, given enough ingenuity, resource, power, finally we'll be able to bring some kind of humane, global community to birth? What do you think? What do you think? You know there's always been a dream deep down in the human heart, a dream of an alternative possibility, a dream of an alternative world. I think, for example, of the Hebrew prophets - they were such towering figures. We modern folks sometimes think that the world just arrived in our coming and that we're so smart, but 2500 years ago a magnificent dream of another possibility found expression through, for example, Isaiah, who envisioned a new creation, who envisioned a world in which people would plant gardens and eat the produce thereof and build houses and be able to dwell in them. He envisioned a world in which the lion and the lamb would lie down together and no one would hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain. Or Micah, who envisioned a world in which swords would be beaten into plowshares and every person would sit under his own fig tree and dwell in safety. Those were ancient dreams. The intuition of the human heart is known for a long time. With the violence and the destruction, war, domination and exploitation, oppression, suffering and tragedy - people have known for generations and millennia that there ought to be another possibility. The Hebrew prophets, as I said, were dreamers. They dreamed about Shalom. They had hope in history. The prophets spoke about judgment. They called the people to account and they were quick to point out where the covenant was broken. But, in the Hebrew prophet, judgment was always in order to restore and to renew. Judgment was always in order to turn and to call to repentance in order that there might again be established that covenant. Judgment was never absolute with the Hebrew prophet because the Hebrew prophet had hope in history, because that prophet believed in the movement of God in history. The prophet had hope in the historical process. There's another biblical model, however, and that's the model of the apocalyptist, for example, a John the Baptist. The apocalyptist despaired of history. He threw up his hands. He lost hope. He simply despaired of the possibility of any kind of amelioration within the process of history itself The apocalyptist threw up his hands, despaired, and cried unto God to do something, to intervene dramatically. When Walter Wink was here, he suggested that the apocalyptist created that vision in order that people might be shocked and turn around. I'm not sure he's right about that. I think the apocalyptist had so given up on history and the possibility of any kind of renewal, that he said, "God, how long, how long? Do something!" And when I read the apocalyptist in scripture, I get the sense that he © Grand Valley State University �Destabilizing, Troubling God Richard A. Rhem Page 3 can hardly wait, because, of course, he is the righteous and it is the wicked, the other that will be damned. So, there is that dualism in apocalyptic literature. The Book of Revelation is an apocalyptic reading in the New Testament with its visions of the gore of the judgment of God when the city will run with blood up to the halter of the horse. There is a kind of celebration in that. The apocalyptist, in contrast to the Hebrew prophet who had hope in history, was despairing of history and saying, "God, bring down the curtain of history. Damn the wicked, and vindicate your people!" Both the Hebrew prophet and the apocalyptist shared the conviction that, finally, God would intervene one way or another. The attitude was totally different, the spirit was different, the vision was different, but both of them had a sense that God was the sovereign of history who would eventually bring all things to consummation. That particular biblical vision was secularized in the modern period, particularly in the 19th century with the dawning of historical consciousness and the idea of evolution that was everywhere. The climate of opinion of all thinking people was shaped by the idea of evolution, evolutionary development, the 18th- century Enlightenment and then in the 19th century, for example, Charles Darwin and the "Origin of the Species," and there was a great optimism that arose. This was a secularized vision, really, of the biblical paradigm, but it would come now through education and human progress and human invention and ingenuity. As the 20th century dawned, Protestantism had moved to a classic liberal phase. The fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man was the great model. There was this great anticipation. I still subscribe to the most well-respected journal of Christianity, The Christian Century. It was named as the 20th-Century dawned. This would be the "Christian Century," and there was a great optimism about the human possibility. There was a kind of secularization of the biblical vision. But, here, too, in a secular way through progress and education, we were moving toward the kingdom of God. And then the 20th century - World War I in the second decade of that century. During that same decade, the Communist Revolution and eventually the Stalinist Communist regime with millions and millions and millions of people annihilated. Then the rise of Fascism in Germany, the rise of Hitler and Nazism, the Holocaust, the Second World War, the chaos of a world in the grips of devastation and violence. And the Cold War and the nuclear standoff of terror, the balance of terror. And '89 wasn't it, when the Berlin Wall went down and then the Balkans, after a bit of euphoria, exploded? Then Desert Storm. The 21st century dawns and 9-11 happens, and there is Iraq and there is Madrid, smoldering a second time. And in Falluga last week four American mercenaries are killed and their bodies are desecrated and there is rejoicing in the street, young men celebrating because the mighty have fallen and there has been pain and a wound inflicted on the great Satan. Well, what do you think? Do you think it's just always going to be this way? Where the occupying violence elicits violence from the occupied, which calls forth © Grand Valley State University �Destabilizing, Troubling God Richard A. Rhem Page 4 increased violence from the occupier? Of course. Of course. Our leaders tells us that Falluga will not intimidate us and our resolve is firm and we are poised to make a statement violently. That, I suppose, is necessary in order to remind the occupied that violence won't work. But, violence does work, for the terrorist is not an animal, the terrorist is a human being who in his own way has despaired like the apocalyptist, only he has taken God's role into his own hands. He is a freedom fighter of sorts. He is an idealist, a dreamer, except his dream has been crushed. Those young men celebrating in the streets - it's a terrible thing, it's an awful thing. And after we feel the horror of it, we get very angry about it, but those kids are just kids, and they are doing what happens sometimes in a soccer game in Europe where they get to rioting after England and France have played, and if we don't know that, within our own hearts, there dwells the potential for the very same kind of exuberant celebration in the light of the putting down of the big one, then we don't know ourselves very well. Those boys who appeared on television are mothers' sons, you know, nurtured in a culture of Saddamic oppression, and now occupied by the mightiest power on earth. What do you think? Is it just always going to go on this way? I entitled the sermon "The Destabilizing, Troubling God," and I was thinking about Jesus as the embodiment of God. Kings and empires don't appreciate destabilizers and troublers. Old King Ahab, who was the epitome of the worst king of Israel, when he met the prophet Elijah, said, "Oh, thou troubler of Israel," and Elijah had to say to him, "Ah, King, I'm not the troubler of Israel." The prophet would speak the word of God into the established, structured situation where that situation had become oppressive or dominating, where that structure had become defeating of the human possibility. And then in the name of the God of justice and righteousness and compassion, the prophet would roar. Kings don't like prophets, and empires don't welcome prophets. It was obvious that the temple establishment and the Roman imperial authority had to get their heads together and do something about Jesus. People were spellbound by him because somehow or other he addressed people in such a way that he elicited from them their humanity, their deeper humanity, and he gave them again some reason to hope and some new possibility. His action in Jerusalem, which was the culmination of that long journey there, was destabilizing and troubling. Not to the people, but to the established authority who had a vested interest in keeping the status quo. Ah, don't we long for stasis? Status quo? Stability? We're willing almost to give up all of our rights if we could just find some methodology by which there could be guaranteed to us absolute security. If we could just get back to normal, if the world could just be turned back again to where you could go about doing your business or travel where you wanted to travel without worrying about boarding a plane or a train, or what the next CNN report might have to say, where you could © Grand Valley State University �Destabilizing, Troubling God Richard A. Rhem Page 5 just get on with your life like it used to be, wouldn't it be wonderful if we could return to normalcy? Well, let's turn up the pressure. Let's turn the screws. Let's get stronger, more powerful. Let's dare the violent terrorist to raise his head. That's been the pattern for thousands of years, hasn't it? And the world has always been violent, but it's just that we have the potential now to do it so much better. We can do it so much more broadly. We can do it with so much more devastation. We can wipe out continents today, so why don't we just continue to do like we've always done? What do you think? Is that a possibility? Would that work? Can we finally effect transformation that way? As I come to the end of my ministry, I am so amazed at the impotence of the Church, and this country is the most religious in the modern, industrialized world. I am so amazed how we have been co-opted by the powers that be. We claim to follow Jesus. Well, we've made of him a savior figure to deal with us individually in our sin problem, but I suspect, as Jesus was weeping over Jerusalem, he wasn't worrying about what Mel Gibson says he was worried about, that is that he was going to bear the sin of the world as a sacrifice to God, but I suspect really what he was worried about was the absolute, tragic devastation that was going to be visited on this holy city, this heart of Israel, his people. His despair was the fact that no one was working toward peace, but rather, the powers that be were working at the status quo which was a continuation of the domination system. I think that's why he wept. I suspect he weeps still. Do you know a better way? I know you can identify with the dream. I know you wish there were peace and normalcy and I believe you are people of good heart who wish it for all people everywhere, which of course you do. Then, how long will we continue to operate under the myth of redemptive violence, that one more show of force or one more war or one more military escapade will finally bring peace? When will we find something inside us so stirred and transformed that we will as a people rise up and say, "You only find peace not by preparing for war, but by working toward peace." André Trochmé was a French Reformed pastor during the Second World War who saved scores and scores of Jewish people. He was a pacifist and was interned and, while he was in the camp, Stalingrad fell to the Germans. The Germans rejoiced and someone said to Trochmé, "You pacifist, if you had been in Stalingrad, should they have defended themselves? Or should they just have given up?" He said, "No. Of course, they had to defend themselves, because by the time the siege was laid, it was too late." You don't get into the crisis itself and then decide to lay down your arms. You work toward a situation where you avoid that moment, because then it's too late. That's what Jesus said - "If only you could have seen the things that make for peace, but it's too late." Do you know that there is only one nation on earth that can change the ongoing scenario of violence begetting violence begetting more violence? There's only one © Grand Valley State University �Destabilizing, Troubling God Richard A. Rhem Page 6 nation on earth that can alter that, and you know who it is. We who have power, wealth and dominance beyond anybody who is even close to second place are the only people on earth who could lead a global movement against violence, for an alternative method for the relating of the human family. This morning as I sat in my loft, it was still dark, and I looked out the window over the lake and suddenly smoky clouds cleared and there was this magnificent moon all ready to set into the sea. And a little later, behind me was the rising of this golden sun in crystal clear air. As I looked out my window, the pussy willow was in blossom and the daffodils are trying to push their way into bloom, and I thought to myself "What a wonderful world!" And when you add to the wonder of earth coming alive the possibility for human relationship, for love and grace, embrace, Oh dear God, let us not let it all come to ashes. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Palm Sunday, Passion Sunday Series Remembering Jesus, Experiencing God Scripture Text Luke 19:35-20:2 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-20040404 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2004-04-04 Title A name given to the resource The Destabilizing, Troubling God Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 4, 2004 entitled "The Destabilizing, Troubling God", as part of the series "Remembering Jesus, Experiencing God", on the occasion of Palm Sunday, Passion Sunday, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Luke 19:35-20:2. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Eschatology Grace Shalom https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cf4c036db374f1b659f4f609aa92ab6b.mp3 c8c52a05841e676edb84320be595fcd1 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/d8f005ffe23ce033843fa4664a70281e.pdf cf4f3cea3f0eee57773bddf9a55fba14 PDF Text Text Do You Suppose God Is Really Like That? The Prodigal Son’s Father From the series: Stories Jesus Told Luke 15:11-24 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan March 28, 2004 Transcription of the spoken sermon This Lenten season we are remembering Jesus, hoping thereby to experience God, and we remember Jesus not because he was alien, a God-figure from beyond that entered our history, donned our human nature and effected our salvation only to return to that eternal state. Rather, we remember Jesus because as John’s Gospel said, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” and that marvelous insight which is much more profound, I think, than anyone has ever plumbed, is that God has become human. So, in remembering Jesus, we are remembering a human being about whom our tradition has said, “There God is embodied.” A couple of weeks ago, Walter Wink was with us to suggest that our calling as human beings is not to become God-like, but to become fully human, because God is the only Human Being with a capital H and a capital B; and, that this cosmic process of billions of years has been evolving and has issued into this present state in which we are the products of that emerging process - alive, conscious, able to contemplate it all. That cosmic process of billions of years has culminated in the likes of us, but as Walter Wink reminded us, we are only primitively human, we are only human on the way, and if that insight of Jesus as the Son of the Man would indicate, then it is toward that full human existence that we are moving, by God’s grace, in order that we might become human as God is Human. And so, in remembering Jesus, we are seeking to experience God. Jesus is our story. There have been other human beings who have been overcome with encounter, who have been overwhelmed by some moment of epiphany, some rifting of the sky, some theophany, some manifestation of that Ultimate Mystery. Abraham heard a voice or saw a vision or had a dream and the instruction was to leave his family and his environment and go out. For Moses, it was a burning bush. The experience of the Buddha in enlightenment was not other than that, and Mohammed had visions which he then recorded in the Koran. Our window on God is Jesus and in John’s Gospel again, in that conversation with Phillip, as we noted, Jesus said, “If you have seen me, you have © Grand Valley State University   �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 2   seen the father.” To look upon the face of God, look upon the face of the human. And so, we have our window, Jesus, and it was Jesus’ life. But in his life, Jesus was a storyteller, and he told the story which I read a moment ago which is perhaps his most familiar and best-loved parable, the parable of the Prodigal Son. The story has a lot to say about the son, about human nature, but it’s more profoundly a parable about a prodigal God. It is a parable about the nature of God, for the father in the story is obviously God. As Jesus tells that story, he reveals his understanding, his sense of the nature of God. I want to think about that with you this morning with a question, and this is my question to you: Do you suppose God is really like that? The father represents God in Jesus’ parable. Do you think God is like the father in the parable? If the father image bothers you, if that is too much a throwback to an old, supernatural being beyond us, or if the father image as father bothers you, let it go. Think in terms of the Ultimate Mystery, or a source and ground of being, that abyss of limitless being out of which flows all that is. I don’t care how you think of it; image it any way you want to, it doesn’t matter. But, Jesus was talking about that which was ultimate. He was talking about Ultimate Reality. He was talking about the sacred, the holy, the Mystery. He was talking about God. I wonder, and I want you to keep asking yourself this morning, “Do I really suppose that that Ultimate, that God, is like that? Like the father figure in the story?” The story is so familiar. There is the request of the younger son against all tradition and all decency, really, to have his inheritance ahead of time so that he can depart, and he goes off into the far country. Since we’re focusing on the father figure, I want you to simply note that there was total freedom given to the son. There was no injured pride. There was no weeping and wailing. There was no judgmental attitude. There was no alienation. Jesus says the son made the request and we know the request was contrary to family order. But, there was no protest. The father gave him his inheritance and he left without any brokenness, any estrangement, which says to me that the Ultimate Mystery in Jesus’ mind is that which offers freedom, total freedom, that we write our own script. Now, when I say total freedom, I know I am speaking in a community where we have such ability to write our script. We are, of all people, most blessed with our resources, with our context. And I know that that is not true of millions and millions of earth’s children, so when I speak about the freedom to write our own script, I am mindful of the fact that that freedom has in some cases severe limitations. You perhaps have been reading again about women in Afghanistan immolating themselves, setting themselves on fire. Can you imagine? Can you imagine how tragic must be the human existence of one who would be driven to that kind of absolute desperation? Did you catch in the newscast last night that in Palestine the little children are collecting cards like our kids collect cards? Baseball cards, right? No. The Palestinian children are collecting martyr cards. Some Palestinian entrepreneur has created cards with the pictures of those who have been martyred. There were all these little children with their cards and they © Grand Valley State University �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 3   were filling their albums with martyr cards. Can you imagine a child growing up who, rather than having baseball cards, has martyr cards? Or, that young lad, 14 years old, with a bomb strapped to him who was fortunately intercepted by the Israelis, a suicide bomber really not wanting to die? So, when I think about freedom to write our script, I know I’m talking to those of us who have so much, so much beyond so many of the world’s peoples. There are limits to that freedom, but nonetheless, if there is no longer any freedom, there is no longer any humanity and so I would say that in the story Jesus tells, what he is saying in that getting over the yielding to the request of the younger son is that there is no absolute script that is written; there is no predestinated story that is unfolding according to some eternal plan; there is no sovereign, ultimate, absolutism in history. It is rather that we write the story with freedom in greater or lesser degree. Do you think God is like that? Do you think that reality is like that? Do you think that our human experience is like that? We can go from the departure of the son directly to his return. We don’t have to go into the far country and linger there, although a lot of great sermons have satisfied prurient interest about what went on in the brothels and the pig sties, but we don’t really need to go there because this story isn’t about the experience of the son. It’s really about the father. And so, from that granting of freedom, we go to that gracious welcome, a welcome that if you knew the color of the local society, the father an elderly gentleman picking up his robe and running to meet the son, defies all of the local custom about dignity and honor and what is right and proper, the father who doesn’t let the son get his well-rehearsed story out, but rather, embraces him with tears. Eighteen months or so ago, a few of us were in St. Petersburg and I stood in the Hermitage before that huge canvas of Rembrandt’s “Return of the Prodigal,” and pictured there is that old man, his arms straight from his shoulders, the son stooping before him, with a welcome without recrimination, with a welcome without any sign of alienation, with a welcome without any word of rebuke, that spoke not at all of some period of probation, a welcome that simply was a reunion and a celebration full of love and grace. © Grand Valley State University �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 4   Do you suppose that God is really like that? Do you suppose that the ultimate mystery of reality is like that? Well, if we would put it in contemporary terms that we have been talking about God becoming human, do you suppose that the cosmic process of 13 billion years has a bias toward love and grace? Would you think that maybe in this evolving process onto which stage we have emerged there is something intrinsic in the process itself that has a bias, a tendency toward love and grace, that kind of magnificent picture that Jesus drew for us? Or, would you say “No. No, a cosmic reality has no bias toward love and grace. It is a random process, a random, neutral process unfolding.” You may be right about that. But, if that is the case, we have emerged and one emerged about whom they said there is the embodiment of what is ultimate in the mystery of God, and that one told a story about this kind of love and grace and we have made that one our centerpiece, that one we say is our window on God; and that one spoke about that which is ultimate in terms of love and grace. So maybe it is a random process. Here we are; who would have thought it? Nobody directed it. That’s one possibility, but here we are and we can gather around a story like that © Grand Valley State University �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 5   which says that the ultimate values are freedom and love and grace effecting reunion and reconciliation. So, whether the process has that within itself or we come on the stage and recognize that and invest it with ultimate meaning, it doesn’t really matter. Whether intrinsic in the process or affirmed by us, love and grace and reconciliation and reunion are the Ultimate. Do you think, do you suppose that that’s the way it is at the heart of things? That’s not the way it is in traditional religious understanding. That’s not the way it is in traditional Christian understanding, for while in traditional Christian understanding the parable of the Prodigal Son is a piece of the puzzle, it is jammed into the blender with a lot of other stuff and what we get is an homogenized view in which you have to add some stuff to the parable of the prodigal in order to get a decent God. In the traditional view, there is something more that you have in the parable of the prodigal. The father who, in freedom, allows one to write one’s own story, and with gracious openness receives that one back into the bosom of love, in traditional Christianity you have, and it’s right at the heart of this season, you have the whole atonement thing and of course, the world will never be the same after Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” It will take another whole generation to wash out that popularization of the very worst conception of the death of Jesus. But there that violent suffering, that horrible suffering of Jesus is a sign of the costliness of the sacrifice that was demanded in order for God to be able to forgive us. That’s 180 degrees from the parable of the prodigal, for the father in the prodigal needed no payment, no pound of flesh nor pint of blood. The father in the prodigal parable simply, with heart broken with joy, received the son home. And that is 180 degrees from traditional Christian atonement theology which says yes, God is loving and because God is loving, God provided a way, but God is also just and therefore needed God’s honor to be satisfied. Those two are in irreconcilable conflict. I see it more clearly every day of my life. Those are two conceptions of God. Those are two conceptions of Ultimate Reality. In yesterday’s paper, perhaps you read that the final volume of the Left Behind series is out. This is a series of novels about the last things, the end times, a dramatization of the Book of Revelation. It is a total misreading and misunderstanding of the revelation of Jesus Christ to John, the last book of the Second Testament. It is a literalization of that which is highly symbolic, and it makes that writing, which was aimed at its own historical context in a time of intense persecution in the early days in the Christian movement, into history written ahead of time of the last times; and it is a travesty of any kind of intelligent biblical understanding or interpretation. But, be that as it may, other than that, how did I feel about it? This is more serious. This is a book review. The title of the book is Glorious Appearing, The End of Days. Apparently, those few believers who were not raptured at the time that Jesus came to take them out of history, those who were left and those who were converted during the time of tribulation are hovering in a rock fortress, and this review says, © Grand Valley State University �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 6   ... This rock fortress has been protected by God time and time again, but now its inhabitants face a mighty army whose sole goal is absolute annhililation. This battle is the Battle of Armageddon, it is the battle of the end time. Armageddon is a valley in Israel and this is the final battle when Jesus comes and encounters Satan and Satan’s hosts who have been, of course, afflicting the believers. Apparently this head dog is Carpathia and Carpathia himself leads the charge. But, he is no match for Jesus Christ who returns as prophesied to save the fortress. The battles continue with Jesus’ words alone wiping out hundreds of thousands of troops. The culmination is at the holy city of Jerusalem fractured into three by earthquakes as Jesus wins his final victory. Judgment comes for followers of Satan, but it is the peace that Jesus brings to believers that touches the heart. While Jenkins’ writing is swift and a bit colloquial, his use of scripture is truly inspired. Nothing but scripture is spoken by Christ, portions of the Bible that bring comfort, judgment, war and love. That Jesus is a warrior. That Jesus slays thousands with his words. That Jesus wins the final triumph, and effects the salvation of those that believe and the eternal damnation of those he destroys. That Jesus is totally contrary to the Jesus who tells the story that we looked at this morning, where the Ultimate Mystery is love and grace, where there is no final “No,” where the door is always open and the light is burning forever in the window. This is not just an incidental matter. This conception, the traditional conception of a God who needs a pound of flesh and a pint of blood, whose son will return as a warrior to destroy the wicked, this God is a God drawn by the myth of redemptive violence that ultimately the peaceable kingdom will be issued in by violence. Walter Wink used that phrase, the myth of redemptive violence. It is a totally different conception of the heart and center of reality, and in that myth of redemptive violence, you effect finally peace through war. President Woodrow Wilson had a dream of the League of Nations which his own Senate voted not to enter when it was established, but he led us into the First World War, a war to end all wars. More recently we have gone into Iraq in order to bring democracy into the Middle East and we continue to live under the delusion of the myth of redemptive violence. You may say to me, “Well, what is the other answer, then? Passivism?” I would say no, not passivism. It is non-violent resistance, and the cost of non-violent resistance may well be crucifixion and there may be hell to pay for a long time, but I’ll tell you this - it is the way of Jesus and it is the only hope of salvation of the world. There will never be peace brought by violence if we believe Jesus. If we believe Jesus, then there is wonderful news and scary news. The wonderful news is that the ultimate values are freedom and grace and love, that love and grace alone transform. Violence can coerce. Violence can control. Violence can keep the demons at bay. Love and grace alone transform. Love and grace alone alter consciousness. Jesus told the story about the Ultimate Mystery, God, being a God of freedom and grace. That’s the good news. The scary news is that it is in our hands. It is in our hands. © Grand Valley State University �Do You Suppose God is Really Like That? Richard A. Rhem Page 7   So, do you suppose that God is really that? Where did you get your image of God? Handed down, of course, as with all of us. But, isn’t it time for us to receive those traditional images critically and then take responsibility for the choice we make as to what is ultimate? The choice we make will determine whether the human family has a future, whether the peaceable kingdom will ever be realized. What do you think? © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Lent V Series Remembering Jesus, Experiencing God Scripture Text Luke 15:11-24 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-20040328 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2004-03-28 Title A name given to the resource Do You Suppose God Is Really Like That? Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 28, 2004 entitled "Do You Suppose God Is Really Like That?", as part of the series "Remembering Jesus, Experiencing God", on the occasion of Lent V, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Luke 15:11-24. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Eschatology Grace Shalom https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c2ca9837b191da69babad739c9c7c800.mp3 393f9ce183515fa351fd87153a1b9979 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a02df693385ba1e0c0f5939d1fd7bc39.pdf eb56a4fd13e695990fb86c0cb70c4f30 PDF Text Text Life After Life? Text Psalm 16:11; I Thessalonians 4:17 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent II, December 6, 1992 Transcription of the spoken sermon In your presence there is fullness of joy... Psalm 16:11 ...and so we will be with the Lord forever... I Thessalonians 4:17 The Season of Advent is a season in which we celebrate in the Church the One who came, the One who comes and the One who will come. Advent, the word itself, means to approach or a visitation. And Israel was that people who all of their history looked for one who would come, that one who would come, who would be anointed with the Spirit of God. “The one who would be anointed” - the Hebrew word was Messiah - the anointed one. The Messiah was the one who Israel hoped, prayed for and longed for in order that God’s will might be done on earth as in heaven. The anointed one, the Messiah, the longed-for one was predicted every time a priest was anointed with oil or a king was enthroned, anointed again with oil. For the oil, the sign of the Spirit, was a sign of God’s empowering of the Spirit, and every priest and every king was a sign pointing to that one who one day would come supremely, full of the Spirit of God and would bring justice and peace and Shalom. The Christian church believes that that one indeed did come, and that one was Jesus of Nazareth. Sometimes we speak of Jesus Christ as though it was a first and last name. But that is not correct. Christ is a title. Jesus of Nazareth was believed in the Church to be the Christ, the anointed one, the Messiah, the one longed for by Israel, the one who would bring the will of God into effect on earth. In the Christian church the expectation that this Jesus of Nazareth was the one grew in various ways among his disciples and his followers, and then they were despairing for they said, “We thought that this might be the one. But a crucified Messiah? No way.” But then he was raised from the dead and he appeared to them, and then they rejoiced. Then they began to see that the fulfillment of God’s plan and purpose came in a way quite other than they had expected. In a new © Grand Valley State University   �Life After Life Richard A. Rhem Page 2   way. In a surprising way. But they believed that Jesus, crucified, resurrected, and in the presence of God, was their reigning Lord whom they expected imminently. In fact, I read from the book of Acts this morning because it reflects one of the very earliest conceptions of these events that would mark the end. Peter, in having presented Jesus as the one who was crucified and raised by God, says to those who were listening, “Repent.” That is, “Change your mind. Turn around. Repent and understand that this one whom you crucified is God’s servant, indeed the Messiah.” He says, “Repent. Turn to God that your sins might be wiped out. So that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Messiah appointed for you. That is, Jesus.” Now when you think about that for a moment it is rather interesting. “Repent that the seasons of refreshing may come, that he may send the Messiah.” Well, didn’t they believe that Jesus was the Messiah who had already come? Yes, but in those early days when everything was fuzzy, they were saying Jesus was the Messiah but he was in the presence of God now and it was as though heaven were keeping him until you repent and turn, and the seasons of refreshing come and there is a universal restoration; then God will send the Messiah appointed to you, that is, Jesus. Now that conception of things did not prevail in the New Testament church, but it was one of the earliest understandings. Jesus of Nazareth, Messiah, in heaven for a while, soon to return. The expectation of the return of this one was obviously very vivid and the return was to be imminent. At the conclusion of the revelation given to John, the revelation of the ascended Lord – at the conclusion of the Book of Revelation, in the 22nd chapter, we have these words of the ascended Lord who gives the vision to John. He says, “Behold I am coming soon.” Now, how soon is soon? What do you think? Soon. He says, “Here at the tail end of the first century, I am coming soon.” What do we give him? Six months? Or would you give him a year? Ah, somebody over here says, “I would give him two years.” How soon is soon? What do you think? How about two thousand years? That’s not soon. That’s not soon according to any kind of soon I’ve ever understood. But yet for two thousand years there have been preachers taking this text and saying, “Go outside and watch the sky because it may be today.” If we had more time this morning I would sing for you a chorus “Jesus is Coming Again.” I’m really tempted to do it, (Laughing) but I won’t do it. Jesus is coming again, and you can flip your dial anywhere you want to on the radio today and you’ll hear preachers all over the country saying, “Repent because Jesus is coming, and it may be today.” How long can you hold your breath? How far can you stretch this thing out and still talk about Jesus coming soon? Do you think he is coming? Do you think he is coming soon? I don’t think you do. In all honesty I don’t think you do. I think after two thousand years anybody that expects Jesus to appear soon on earth and establish a kingdom is simply going along with a traditional conception of things that has a strong hold on the Christian Church, but I don’t think we really believe it. And that raises a question © Grand Valley State University �Life After Life Richard A. Rhem Page 3   to me as to whether or not the New Testament Church understood about Jesus, and the summing up of all things might have been true but it was cast in a form that really cannot carry the freight for us today two thousand years later. The way that I have come to understand this and have found most helpful in trying to translate all of that imagery of the Second Coming and the end events – and the rapture, or is it the rupture? The Second Coming, the great white throne, the final judgment, heaven and hell and all of that, the end events - the way that I have come to translate that for myself is in the same way that I have come to translate the opening chapters of Genesis. Somehow or other in the beginning we have been able to deal with the symbolic presentation of profound truth, moving away from the literal understanding, but over at this end we have never been able to get off the literalization of those images and understand them symbolically. But if we are over here in the beginning, you don’t really think there was a garden called Eden do you? You don’t really think there was a Mr. Adam and a Mrs. Eve? A snake? A tree? An apple? Well, with Adam and Eve, of course, there was pear. (Laughter) They say of Eve that she was a peach. (Laughter) But not an apple with a worm. Not a snake, a talking snake. (Laughter) No. But what it says is so true. It was Israel’s understanding of what was going on in their own present existence. And what they said essentially was, “Everything that is is because God said let there be.” And God said, “Let there be,” and God said, “It’s very good.” And then they said, “If it’s very good, how come it’s so bad? How come everything is so rotten?” And they said, “Not God’s fault - our fault because we who were created to worship and adore and serve, usurped God’s place in proud rebellion, in self assertion wanting to be God. We made hell on earth.” That’s what those chapters tell us. And what they tell us is profoundly true and touches our own existential experience of the human situation where we are drawn to heaven and mired on earth and caught in the tension of worshiping and rebelling, wanting to be God and yet wanting to be God’s. And in those symbolic representations of garden and tree and snake and apple and all of that, the most profound truth of the cosmos, of God, and of the human situation comes to expression. Somehow or other a long time since, I’ve been able to negotiate that and come to a deeper understanding of biblical truth. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent II Scripture Text Psalm 16:11, I Thessalonians 4:17 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19921206 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-12-06 Title A name given to the resource Life After Life? Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 6, 1992 entitled "Life After Life?", on the occasion of Advent II, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Psalm 16:11, I Thessalonians 4:17. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Anointed One Eschatology Jesus Messiah Nature of Scriptures https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/e1887fa554e635abde12ff2660feb73f.mp3 15d16a2af39b6b378dd9ff8b5c1f8540 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1453055d9391ff7d074e4536883f6d82.pdf 15869a96b27bf43d1261e47ce571de5f PDF Text Text The “Now” of the End Text 7:1-7,11 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent II, December 11, 1988 Transcription of the spoken sermon The phrase, “The End of History,” in the English language, can be understood in two ways: You can understand the phrase, “The End of History,” as some future, distant point in time, the point in time furthest out into the future. The End of History can speak of the terminus of history, the last act, the last event. That can be understood as the end of history. But, you can also understand the phrase, “The End of History,” in terms of history's goal, its meaning, its purpose. In that sense, it has nothing to do with future, terminus, last event; it has to do only with the present moment: the meaning and the goal of history in the present moment. And to use “The End of History” in that sense, is to recognize that the end of history is present to every moment of history. The goal and the meaning of history is present to this moment; it is present to every moment. Eternity. God is immediately present to every moment on the timeline. And so, in that sense, the end of history doesn't talk about something that is way out there in the future; it talks about the present moment before the face of God, the inner secrets, the core of history, its meaning, its purpose, its goal. The end of history is always present to every moment of history, and every present moment is filled with all of the potentiality and all of the possibility of history's purpose and meaning and goal. This present moment is the moment in which God deals with us. Sometimes we wish we lived in some other period of time. There's a little chorus the children sing bout Jesus taking children on his knee and blessing them and saying, “Oh I wish that I had been there then.” Well, it's not really so. There were all kinds of people that were there then who didn't see Jesus, that didn't see in Jesus the revelation of God. You could be present to Jesus physically and be miles away. And maybe you think it would be neat to be at the end of history, to be there for the final curtain. Well, maybe or maybe not. We can contemplate the end of the historical process. Scientists tell us maybe the whole thing will burn up and become a cinder, or maybe it will just grow cold and become an ice cube. We don't know how; we don't know when. © Grand Valley State University   �The “Now” of the End Richard A. Rhem Page 2   Now, there are a lot of people who talk about that last, furthest-out moment of history as though it were really important and the Bible had something to say about it, but it doesn't. History will wind down somehow or other, but you and I don't care. The Bible doesn't really have much to say about it; it doesn't matter. Here we are in the midst of time and the thing that's important for us to say is that we came from somewhere and so we talk about God as Creator, and there was a beginning point. Nobody was there. Nobody had a camcorder to catch it all. What we see are symbols and images and stories; we simply were here and believe that it began and so we believe that all of it came from God and so we talk about The Beginning, and we're here and we're on the way and so we talk about The End, and we believe that God was in the beginning, God will be in the end. But, as far as the beginning and the end is concerned, that's really all we can say. God was there; God will be there: God in the Beginning, God in the End. That's enough! Now, that's not where the Church has stopped. The Church in much of its tradition has loved to speculate about the events of the end and all that kind of stuff – I think distorting what is in the scripture with the images of the parables that are there about the end. But God doesn't really want us to bother about that out there. God is always concerned about this present moment. The Now of the End; that is, the present moment in terms of the ultimate purpose of history. That's really the only thing we have to be concerned about. I was coming out of a funeral home a month or three ago and as I walked out the door, there was a pastor (I knew he was a pastor because he had a great big floppy Bible) and he was there fleecing his flock, a couple of people. And as I walked by, I heard him say, “And that's the reason why I believe the Lord's going to come very soon.” And I had to smile. I said to Nancy, you know, pastors have been fleecing their flock that way for 2,000 years. How can you hold your breath for 2,000 years? How can you look in the sky or look at the history and say, “Well, obviously these are the last times. Obviously you see the signs all about you. Obviously Jesus is coming very soon.”? Friends, if you turn on your radio today you will find that everywhere on the dial is going to be all shot to heaven, and you are going to find pastors who will be telling you, “Repent and send in your offering, because the Lord is coming soon.” Now, there's going to be one set of pastors who are really living on the end who are going to be right. But, it won't be their fault. That's an accident. Somebody's got to be there in the end. But, as far as the Bible is concerned, we don't know when the end is going to be, and the Bible doesn't even care about it. The only thing that the address of scripture to us is concerned about is now. Now is the day of salvation. Now is the acceptable time. We don't know, we say there will be an end because there was a beginning and there is a present, and so there will be an end, but if we want to get serious with God, then it is the now of the end that God is really concerned about. It is this present moment. This present moment, God is © Grand Valley State University �The “Now” of the End Richard A. Rhem Page 3   present to our history. This present moment, eternity impinges on our time. This moment is freighted with eternity and that's the only moment we ever have to worry about. And so Paul went about preaching the Gospel, saying to people, “Receive the grace of God. Be ye reconciled to God, for the end is come.” Now, Paul in this letter was dealing with his own ministry, which was under attack. He said, “You know I sort of sense this old body decaying and wasting away, but I am being renewed every day.” And then he goes on to say in that fifth chapter which we often read at funerals, “And we know that if this earthly tabernacle is destroyed, we have a building with God not made with hands,” and oftentimes at funerals the application is that the physical body dies and that the spirit goes to be with Jesus. And then way out there somewhere there's supposed to be some kind of future resurrection. I really think we have to think that through. Paul is not talking about if this body dies, I have a building with God not made with hands. Paul is saying, “I don't want to die. This old body is decaying and getting crotchety. What I would really like is to have this old body clothed upon by my resurrected body, because I know that if this old body be destroyed, I've got a building.” We have a building, not we will have a building; we have a building now in heaven: the Body of Christ. Paul is so obsessed with his present, personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ that he sees death as an incidental passage, simply a moment in time. We have this thing already and I can't wait until I come into the full experience of it, he says. Oh, right now I grunt and groan and I decay and I'm full of anguish and pain, but he says the thing that God has made me for is that other thing. In fact, he says, I would rather leave this present burden, this ambiguous existence and come fully into the experience of my God. Now, Paul kind of thought the end of history and the end of history were the same. He sort of thought that history at its terminus and history in its purpose were almost happening synonymously. Paul expected to wake up one morning and to have a rift in the sky and to see Jesus coming. Paul was praying for it. Paul was wrong. I mean, he was at least 2,000 years off. But he thought so. That didn't really matter. We can see in his writings in the New Testament he begins to make adjustment, because, well, even Paul couldn't hold his breath, you know, for even a dozen years. And so he began to see that maybe he was going to die. He didn't really want to die. He wanted to go zippo, but maybe he was going to die. That would be all right, too. It was kind of incidental because those who die fall asleep in Jesus and he will bring them with him and so forth. He had that all worked out. He didn't know when the terminus point was, but what he did understand was what the purpose of it all was. And the reason he was so turned on was the fact that, as far as he was concerned, it was over, there wasn't anything more to do. Do you ever wonder why the New Testament keeps talking about the last days, these last days? Well, in terms of the terminus, it was wrong. But, in terms of whatever had to happen in order for history to realize its purpose, it was © Grand Valley State University �The “Now” of the End Richard A. Rhem Page 4   absolutely right. There wasn't anything more to do. What did he understand had been done? Well, he says we understand that if one died for all, then all are dead. And he died for all, he says. Jesus died for all. And so he says if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. Old things have passed away; all things have become new. “It's a whole new world, folks. It's now. It's present. I am living in a whole new world, a whole new creation. Death? Well, death, if death need be. But, death can't even touch me. If anyone is in Christ, it's a new creation. Old things have passed away, all things have become new because God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, but not imputing their trespasses to them. God made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. It's all over. It's done. Salvation is accomplished. Salvation is finished. Salvation is complete. There's nothing more to do. And so, come Lord Jesus!” So Paul thought. He was so convinced of the completion, the finished work of Jesus Christ for our salvation, of the issuing in of a whole new world, of the beginning of a whole new age, of the presence of the New Kingdom, that he was just marking time. Come, Lord Jesus. Any old day, now. Any old day, now. Where in the world are you? Well, maybe I've got to adjust my sights, but there's nothing more to do, it's all over. So, he says, who am I (in terms of his ministry now)? Why, he says, I'm just an ambassador for Christ, God working through me, pleading with you. I plead with you on God's behalf. Be reconciled to God. Why shouldn't you be reconciled to God? You should be reconciled to God. You should be friends with God. You should be friendly with God because God has become friendly with you in Jesus Christ. It's all over; it's all done. You want to carry your little knapsack of guilt around? What do you do that for? It's over. You want to carry a few sins around on your back? What do you do that for? It's over! Not imputing their sins to them. God made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be the righteousness of God in him. Be ye reconciled, for it's all over. It's all ready. It's all finished. So, as an ambassador of Christ, God beseeches you through me, turn to God Who has turned to you. Say Yes to God, Who has said Yes to you. Why? Why would you receive the grace of God in vain? Why would you frustrate the grace of God? Don't you see what has happened? Don't you see what God did when the word became flesh and dwelt among us? Don't you see how Jesus walked our way, bore our sins, buried it in the depths of the sea so it's remembered no more and opened up heaven? Be ye reconciled to God. Come, come! What are you waiting for? Why do you hesitate? Aren't you good enough? Can't you make it? Won't you be able to hold on? It's not up to you anyway. It's all of grace. It's all of God. Come, come. Now is the day of salvation. Now is the acceptable time. That's all the Bible knows. Wonderful, good news. Paul does two things because of the finished nature of our redemption. He says, for one thing, I try to live in a pleasing way to God. He says, for one thing, I try whether in this present existence or when I come fully into God's presence, to be acceptable to Him. Paul is serious about the life he leads. There's a kind of moral earnestness about the Apostle because he says we're all going to appear before the © Grand Valley State University �The “Now” of the End Richard A. Rhem Page 5   judgment seat of Christ. Now, you say, why'd you drag that in? You had all that good news going. Why'd you drag that in? Well, I'm sorry, but Paul did. He said we'll all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. You say, well, if he doesn't impute our trespasses to us, if he's removed our guilt, if he's forgiven us and graced us, what's this judgment seat business? Well, it's certainly not judgment in the sense of condemnation. We certainly don't have to wonder what the verdict is. The verdict has been given. You're not guilty. But, that doesn't mean that life isn't a serious affair. It doesn't mean we come to Jesus and cover up the past and get rid of it as though we can get away without becoming fully transparent in the presence of God. There will be a moment when I will own my story. Not the story I would tell you if I could tell you my story. The story as I've lived it. You'll all be there. Look him in the face. That's who you are, eh? That's who I am. No secrets hid. No dark corners unexposed. That's who I am. We'll appear before the judgment seat of Christ. And that's really a kind of liberating thought, when you think about it. Because Christ is the judge. No new revelation for him. He's removed it. But we'll own it. And the very fact of that transparency before Jesus Christ says to us now, today maybe we need to clean up our act. It's serious business. Living a Christian life. The second thing Paul does is he goes everywhere trumpeting the good news. Be reconciled. Be reconciled. God has said Yes. And God can't say anymore. There's nothing more for God to do. All done. Over. Accomplished. Free. Come! Receive it. Embrace it. Now. Now is the acceptable time. Now is the day of salvation. It's the only moment you'll ever have, good friends, don't worry about the future. Don't ask me about the cartoons in the book of Revelation. Don't ask me about the thousand-year reign or the rupture or the rapture, however you call it. Don't ask me about any of that stuff. The only moment, the only concern, the only biblical imperative is now, now, now, now. Get ready to meet your Lord, Who is full of grace. Now is the day of salvation, and God is as close and immediate to this moment as at any moment you'll ever know. So, come. Be ye reconciled. Throw away your alienation and your estrangement and just let yourself be loved. Say Yes. Say Yes. Say Yes to God through Jesus Christ, through whom God said Yes to us. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent III Scripture Text II Corinthians 6:2 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19881211 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-12-11 Title A name given to the resource The "Now" of the End Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 11, 1988 entitled "The "Now" of the End", on the occasion of Advent III, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: II Corinthians 6:2. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Advent Apostle Paul Eschatology Forgiveness Salvation Unconditional Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/400b6fee964a463d0ef9139a444576b4.mp3 576217d73a38da97b32207c8b717d5d6 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c0a6dba73158f64053f12f78f0532703.pdf cbb3b4a59a9429648b0a24d5ab6ee438 PDF Text Text In the End, God Text: I Corinthians 15:28 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent I, December 4, 1988 Transcription of the spoken sermon In the year of our Lord 1988 and the fifty-third year of my life, I finally got fired. And I think congratulations are due. Well, I didn't really get fired, but I did lose my job. Well, I actually took the initiative to remove myself from the teaching position at the seminary at the conclusion of this academic year. And I did that as a consequence of my feeling that my remaining there could have serious consequences for the seminary. Actually, I went to the Exec. Comm. and asked them simply to agree to my demise at the end of this year in order to avoid what I felt would be a serious conflict that would be damaging to the seminary. You should know that I did have more than enough support on the Exec. Comm. to be sustained and supported, but that probably would have been unwise and I judged that it was better to yield this round than to exacerbate the situation. For those who made the move upon me, being frustrated because they have a sense of being outside of power and disenfranchised, were they not successful this time, they would only have accelerated the move on the seminary. The controversy arose because of an article that I wrote in the theological journal of the Reformed Church called Perspectives. I have a couple of issues here. You perhaps know that I am on the board of editors of this theological journal. It is a journal of modest proportion. It is mailed to all pastors, college and seminary faculties, people in leadership positions in the Reformed Church, college and university libraries, and other persons who might desire to be on the mailing list. We have a circulation of about 4100, and its founding three years ago was for the purpose of stimulating theological discussion and thought within the Reformed Church, to push the limits a bit, to stretch the Church, to seek to nudge the Church forward in its theological endeavor, and to create a forum in which the leadership of the Church could exchange views and reflect together on the nature of the faith in the context of the contemporary world. Being a part of this editorial board has been a great experience for me, because it has given me the opportunity of writing and bringing to expression many of the things that I have worked through over the years, things which I preach, things which I have shared with you. I have written nothing that I haven't first preached here, so you wouldn't have any surprises, but apparently there were some surprises out in the © Grand Valley State University   �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 2   larger Church, which doesn't surprise me. But let me give you a little overview of how we got to this point. It was five years ago that you gave me the opportunity to go on Sabbatical and to do some serious study. I began that experience by going to the University of Michigan for two days a week to be with Professor Hans Küng, the Catholic theologian. I was admitted into a seminar with him on Tuesday afternoon, and on Monday nights he delivered lectures which have subsequently been published under the title Eternal Life?. In those lectures, he dealt with all of the questions of The End, the questions concerning the “last things.” He dealt with the neardeath experiences of those who have seemed to move into death and then back to life; he dealt with the great religions of the world and how they answered these ultimate questions; he dealt with the Old Testament and with the New Testament, the biblical record of resurrection, and questions of judgment, of hell, of purgatory and of full redemption. The University of Michigan is a vast institution of higher learning and it is a largely secular institution. There is a one-half time professor who has a half-time secretary who runs a Program on Studies in Religion. That's it. For the rest, that vast university is totally secular in its endeavor. There was some pressure on the university to take more seriously the whole field of religion, and Hans Küng was the first world-renowned lecturer brought in for a term in a new program that has brought others in the wake of that first year. It was a privilege to be with him, and as I listened to him on Monday nights deliver these lectures on themes of death and hell and resurrection, judgment, purgatory, I was amazed that the vast Rackham Auditorium was filled and sometimes filled to overflowing. There were students and faculty, the total academic community drinking in these learned discourses on these questions, sitting for an hour and a half to two hours to a lecture read with a heavy, Swiss-German brogue. And I said to myself, people are really interested in questions about the End. I admitted to myself that I hadn't really dealt with them in depth. You can preach pretty much your whole ministry and avoid some ticklish subjects. Just talk to me about it, I'll tell you how you do it. It was a moment for me when I recognized that these questions were very much a part of the secular person's agenda - that there were questions in the depths of the human person, existential questions about life and death, that people wanted to talk about and have some light about. So, I came back that very Fall, Advent season, exactly five years ago today, December 4,1983, and preached for the first time in this area. The Season was Advent when our focus is again the coming of the King and the End, and I preached on the double-image of the End, heaven and hell. I continued to think about it and study. I didn't really address it again in the pulpit until Advent, 1985, and then I did so seriously, with three messages - “Life Hereafter - Wishful Thinking?,” “The Images of Heaven and Hell,” and then the sermon, “Why I Believe in Purgatory,” which was a strange sound in a Reformed church. But, it © Grand Valley State University �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 3   began to raise the questions that I was thinking about and we thought about together. The board of editors of Perspectives, of which I am a member, meets twice a year in a kind of “think tank.” It's a wonderfully stimulating experience. And we try to determine what's going on in the world, what's going on in the Church, what the questions are, what the issues are that need to be addressed. How can we move the Church along in its own responsibility to translate the Gospel in the present age? In those discussions, I am sure that my experience with Küng and my conviction about the importance of these last things was a part of the mix that issued in the determination to have an issue on Purgatory. I have it here. “Purgatory-a Fresh Look at the Final Transformation of Life,” January of 1988. It was just a scholarly dressing up of the message I preached in 1985. We only got one response, I think. One person said you don’t have to send the journal anymore. For the rest, no reaction. Purgatory in a Reformed Church journal - no reaction? Maybe the Church is dead. So, as we came together again and continued to plan our issues we were talking about the triumph of God's grace, the covenant of grace as it is rooted in the Old Testament and finds expression in Jesus Christ, I think it was probably Gord's brother, Jim, who is our editor, who said to me, “Why don't you write an article on the covenant of grace and the triumph of grace,” and so I said, “Okay.” Over the years I have been working through this material theologically and biblically. Last spring as we were about to make our major plunge with our capital funds drive, I was so concerned during Lent and Easter not to become a promotional institution, but to make sure that our decision to move forward would be rooted in our understanding of who we are as a people of God. I put together a series for Lent and Easter very carefully. It was the major occupation of my winter vacation, and in March I preached a sermon simply entitled, “Universal Salvation” based in those chapters 40 to 55 of Isaiah and the Letter to the Ephesians and the Gospel of John. In that biblical study, in my theological reflection, I was becoming more and more convinced of the universal triumph of the grace of God, that what God began in the beginning, God would bring to consummation in the End, that the creation that had gone awry, would be reclaimed by the God Who would not give up until there was a conquest by love of all of those set in opposition against Him. It was in the sharp focusing of that, and then the series this summer on the foundations of faith and the understanding of the covenant of grace, that I came to the clarity that issued in an article in the September issue called “The Habit of God's Heart,” the habit of God's heart being to save. Well, if in January Purgatory didn't percolate a purr, in September, the suggestion that we might be able to close hell down caused a sharp reaction. Now, you have to understand that there was a theological issue here, and there were those that were concerned about that issue, but the larger picture concerned a growing discontent with some things at the seminary. Those things didn't really © Grand Valley State University �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 4   involve me, except that as I had been on the board for a number of years before I went on the faculty and had tried to push the seminary in the direction that I felt it should go; but the issues that were a source of growing discontent were not really my issues at all. But, I, with my article, threw a spark into a room loaded with fumes, and it exploded. I gave, with my article, my suggestion of the triumph of God's grace, an understandable, easy-to-grasp handle by which various disparate elements galvanized in a move on the seminary. It was, as I said a moment ago, my best judgment that the way to defuse that move on the seminary was to remove myself as an issue because my brothers in the faith were playing hardball and the threat to withhold funds from a small denominational school is a rather powerful weapon. You can be “dead right.” So, I simply felt that if I removed myself, the seminary would not be in jeopardy and we would not exacerbate the controversy, but be able eventually to recoup and hopefully regain the initiative. You have to understand that there was sufficient support in the Executive Committee to sustain me. I asked them not to, so in a very real sense, I didn't get fired, but I have lost my job. Now, that's a little bit of background. There are a couple of things that I want to say about that. The first is that through this experience I have been wonderfully supported. I have been supported by many people out in the Church who have written, who have spoken to me, who are grieved by what has happened and who have encouraged me. I have been marvelously supported by this community of faith. The Personnel Committee, Consistory, and right across the board - all of you who were aware of it have been forthcoming in your expressions of trust and confidence and love, and for that I am deeply grateful. I have not felt isolated, alienated or alone for one moment. I also want to say that this is a wonderful place to be able to come back to. Going through this experience I learned that at the seminary they really thought that I would eventually slide down there. Because I think, there no one can believe that someone would choose to be the pastor of a congregation if one could be a professor in the seminary. I tried to be clear when I went there, but I don't think they really believed me. But, for me to remove myself from there and to be here again fulltime is a bright prospect. I enjoyed the teaching very much. I really enjoyed the engagement with the class. But, I have been stretched, and I have been dissatisfied with my inability to do everything here I have wanted to do in a pastoral way. You have not complained; you have been gracious and supportive. But, I have not been satisfied. I was trying to do probably too much and I am not content simply to appear here on Sunday and to be incomprehensible and disappear on Monday and be invisible for the rest of the week. I want to be here, and so I am grateful for the fact that I can return in full power to this place. But, where do we go from here? There's never simply a going home. It cannot be just “business as usual.” And I want you to reflect with me about what this experience says to us as a community of faith. I have encountered the ugly face of the Church. I have run head on into the defensiveness, the tearfulness, the © Grand Valley State University �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 5   experience of threat, which is so much a part of so much of the Church. It's not a pleasant picture. And I am convinced that as Christ Community we must not retrench, we must not recant nor repent. We must not back down. We must become more of what we have been trying to become over these many years. I am convinced through this experience that far too many pastors stop thinking when they get out of seminary, and probably don't engage in serious theological wrestling beyond those years. It has become obvious to me that to engage in indepth theological discussion in the Church in general is almost impossible. The reaction of fear, defensiveness and threat is so strong that one does so at one's risk and peril. That tells me that Christ Community must not be less, but more of what we have become. That it is incumbent upon us to be a community that continues in that which has been our aim for eighteen years to combine intellectual integrity and evangelical passion: to bind together mind and heart, to be fully convinced of the glorious gospel of the grace of God in Jesus Christ, to be totally at home in this present age and day in this world translating the gospel for the last decade of the 20th century, preparing for Century Twenty-One with hearts full of hope, with confidence and with joy. It seems to me that what we have to become is even more of what we have been - a model, an island, if you will, a concrete, tangible community of faith in this place where we live out the gospel, where we incarnate the grace of God. We can become even more of a stimulus than we have heretofore. It is obvious that out in the broader structures of the Church one walks at one's peril. But, here, where we are in full trust and love in community, we can think together, reflect together and find new ways, other avenues, for impacting the larger Church. I think we cannot be content simply to have a good thing amongst ourselves. I think we must seek to continue to create here a community of faith that incarnates the gospel and that becomes a translator of the tradition in such a way that it may impact our day and our generation, and thereby become a stimulus to the whole Church. How can we do that? Well, I'm not sure, but there must be some ways, and I invite you, with me, to think about how as a local congregation we can have a larger vision and a greater mission. It's not an accident that all of this stuff was born in Advent, for Advent is the season in which we celebrate that the King Who came is the King Who is coming. It is the season in which we celebrate that the Kingdom inaugurated in Jesus' first coming is a Kingdom that will come to its consummation in the fullness of time. It is the season in which we think about the End, in which the last things come into sharp focus for us. John A. T. Robinson, a rambunctious bishop in the Church of England, now dead, was one of those people who was always stretching the Church, and he wrote a little book some years ago, In The End, God, in which he suggested that in a secular age the entree to the secular person with the gospel of Jesus Christ may well be through the avenue of the questions concerning the End. As I found at the University of Michigan in the secular campus, people, whether they were related © Grand Valley State University �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 6   to the Church or not, still have some kind of haunting question in the midst of their being about what it means to live, what it means to die, and what there is to look forward to beyond. What is the meaning of life; what is the meaning of history; whence have things come; whither are things going; and what does it mean to me here and now? I am convinced that when that impacted me then, I was right. Robinson says that is the very avenue through which to approach the secular age. The world is secular. The Church isn't doing it. Look around you at congregation after congregation after congregation! Friends, it's survival. It is maintenance mentality. There is no real dent on the modern age. There is no real mission, no real thrust, no real penetration. It is the reiteration of ancient thought forms, of classic statements of doctrine that in their own time of formulation were historic statements that impacted, but have become mere empty slogans in our day. How do we say Jesus Christ today? How do we spell hope today? How do we bring joy today? Well, the season of Advent is the season in which those very questions occupy us, and we have a message. It's a biblical message. Isaiah the prophet lived in the midst of human darkness and anguish. He lived in human situations where infants died in infancy, and where old men failed to fill out their days. He lived in the midst of human tragedy where people built houses and never lived in them, planted vineyards and never harvested them. He saw a day coming when things would be different. He saw a new world, a new heaven and a new earth. He saw the day when the lion and the lamb would lie down together and when they would not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain. He lived by a vision; he believed in God, the God of covenant grace. Paul knew that, and he was encountered by Jesus Christ, the risen Christ, and he was convinced the Jesus of Nazareth, crucified, had been raised by the power of God. He wrote to the Church in Corinth: “If Christ is not raised, you are yet dead in your sins. But, as a matter of fact, now is Christ risen from the dead, and as in Adam all died, so in Christ shall all be made alive, and he will reign until he has subjected all rule and authority and power and finally the last enemy, death itself, and when Jesus has subjected every rule and authority and power set in opposition to God and His Kingdom, then he will yield up the Kingdom to God and the Father, and God will be all in all.” Or as the RSV has it, “Then God will be everything to everyone.” Well, I've got a lot of questions about that. There are a lot of things I don't understand. There's a lot of Bible to bring into dialogue. There are many mysteries that elude my insight and understanding at this point. But, this I'll tell you. I am gripped by the good news of the triumph of the grace of God. I don't know how, but I believe that God will be all in all, and consequently, I am saved from despair even now in the face of the historical scene because Jesus reigns, Jesus is Lord. And I am saved, as well, from a kind of superficial optimism that © Grand Valley State University �In the End, God Richard A. Rhem Page 7   fails to reckon with the present opposition to the Kingdom of God. Saved from despair, saved from superficial optimism, by faith I believe in God. I don't believe that the kingdom will fully come and God will be all in all because there is something wonderful about human nature, that there is some kind of potential in the human person that through the evolutionary process will blossom into full bloom. I don't believe we have it in ourselves; I don’t believe that there is some seed of perfection in history; I don't believe that this old world can be transformed through any human possibility! But, I believe in God! And I believe that God, in His grace, has intervened in our time and our space, and I believe that God's triumph of Grace will be the realization of His purposes of love and thus in the face of the darkness of this world I can bring light, and in the face of the futility of this world I can bring hope, and in the face of the despair of this world, I can bring joy - because God will be all in all. I don't know how. I don't know when. But, I believe that, and that's the Advent hope; that is the vision; that is the dream and we can trust God for it. And in the meantime, live as a community of graced and forgiven people, full of love and care for the world, being here a beacon light, looking for the day when salvation will be brought to earth's fartherest bound. Thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us pray. Our Father, our understanding is so small; we only see as in a mirror dimly, but we believe the day is coming when we shall see face to face. We only know in part, but we believe the day is coming when we shall know, even as we are also fully known. And in the meantime, we know that faith and hope and love abide. And in Your love, we rest, clinging by faith to the promise, with hearts filled with hope, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. Reference: Richard A. Rhem, “The Habit of God’s Heart,” Perspectives, September, 1988. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent II Scripture Text I Corinthians 15:28 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19881204 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-12-04 Title A name given to the resource In the End, God Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 4, 1988 entitled "In the End, God", on the occasion of Advent II, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: I Corinthians 15:28. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Advent Community of Grace Eschatology Universal Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3da42e40db011119c88cd9f2c256bc06.mp3 3ae2ec1de6b29dc4254513c3e48b23b0 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/d46dcd58140ad682bd27813bbcaab207.pdf 3d60e7959b62e04bf93f9f443c72d12e PDF Text Text Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Again Text: I Thessalonians 4: 14; 5: 9-10 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent II, December 7, 1986 Transcription of the spoken sermon My soul doth magnify the, Lord. Our Advent hope is that deep assurance in our heart that Jesus Christ will bring us all together again. The biblical word is clear that our hope is sure, that we shall be redeemed, not only in this our present life, but through death into life eternal. We shall be together with the Lord. Not only together with the Lord, one to one, but all together, all together with the Lord – all together in the brightness of His eternal presence. That is the Christian hope; that is the Advent hope. Paul brings together very intimately the relationship of the coming again of Jesus and the realization of that final hope of the Christian Church. In this Letter to the Thessalonians, which was perhaps the earliest letter that we have from Paul, we have him dealing to a great extent with the coming again of Jesus. Paul must have gone through that ancient world with such passion and intensity focused on the event of Jesus, his life, his death, his resurrection, and his coming again, that he put his hearers on tinder hooks, as it were. He got his congregation to sit on the edge of their seats, to catch their breath, and to study the skies to wait for a rift in the clouds and the appearance of Jesus Christ. We know that, after writing this first letter, which must have reflected what he had preached to them, he had to write them a second letter which said to them, "Now wait a minute. It's good to get excited about these things, but a real part of life is also business as usual. So, don't quit your jobs, don't file for your Social Security, don't collect your pensions yet, don't take that world cruise on your life insurance. Keep working and waiting and watching and be alert. Jesus is coming, but in the meantime, be responsible and be active in your Christian life." He had to write to them to correct a sense of expectancy that was causing them to let go in the immediate expectation of all of this to happen. Paul didn't know what was going to happen, and he didn't know when it was going to happen - he simply believed that something would happen that would involve the appearance of Jesus who had been here, crucified and risen, and which would involve, as well, the summing up of all of history. We have to © Grand Valley State University   �Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Richard A. Rhem Page 2   restructure what Paul said because we don't believe in the physical universe like Paul understood it. Heaven was up, earth was in the middle, hell was down - a three-story universe. The ups and downs of Paul are not the beyonds of the physical universe as we know it. We know that Paul shared with the early Church that sense of the imminent return of Jesus Christ, but we certainly cannot, after 2,000 years, continue to hold our breath. And it really doesn't work for us to try to whip up some kind of emotion, to psych ourselves up so we can recapture that sense of the imminent coming of Jesus. I was reflecting on that myself. The Advent season - I'm really thankful for the return of the season. It becomes increasingly meaningful for me to celebrate this season because I am confronted again these weeks with the cry, "Come, Lord Jesus." And our prayer this morning said something to the effect that our hymn is our prayer - "Come, thou long-expected Jesus." And yet, good friends, to be honest, most of us live most of our days without really thinking very much about that or anticipating that or praying for that, let alone longing for that. It was different in the wake of the life and death and resurrection of Jesus. It was different in that first century when Paul had a sense of all of this now coming to its fruition, believing that the resurrection of all the saints would follow immediately on the resurrection of Jesus. He spoke of the resurrection of Jesus as the first fruits, and the first fruits are the first grain ripened of the harvest, but the whole harvest follows immediately. And surely it would have boggled Paul's mind if he would have had any sense that some 2,000 years later we would be taking his word and looking for the same event. The whole structure of the universe, the whole understanding of the scheme of the time calendar of the events of the redemption, all of that needs to be renegotiated. We really need not to stumble over the fact that Paul expected Jesus immediately, and it's been 2,000 years, or that he expected him to come from above, even though we know there is no above or below - all of that is structuring and symbolism. The only kinds of tools and equipment that were available to speak about these mysteries need to be retranslated and reinterpreted in our own experience, and I don't really know how to do that. It's not terribly important, if we continue to focus on the message and the essence of the matter. Paul was saying to Christians at Thessalonica, "Jesus, who has come, is coming again, and when he comes again, those whom you have loved and lost a while, will be with him, and you will be joined with them and together with him you will live in the brightness of his presence forever." That's the Advent hope. That is that toward which Christian hope is focused. The reason that Paul gave us the immediate paragraph of our scripture lesson is that, when a loved one died before Jesus returned, there was a fear in the hearts of family and friend that those who were dying were going to miss out. It was as though you have to keep alive and breathing until he comes, or you'll miss the grand event. Paul writes this in order to put those fears to rest. © Grand Valley State University �Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Richard A. Rhem Page 3   But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. (I Thessalonians 4:13) The word for death there, sleep, was common usage. It was simply a euphemism. It is interesting that Paul does use another word for Jesus' death when he says, For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. (I Thessalonians 4:14) as though what Jesus endured, which was real death, enduring all of the consequence of all of the darkness of all of the ages, and that sense of forsakenness which he went through - Jesus died so that we would not die, but rather, fall asleep. And his point is simply this. I write in order that you won't be ignorant of these things. Those who fall asleep before he comes will not be at any disadvantage over against those who are alive and present when he appears. Paul was simply saying that whether we are alive or whether we have died, there will come a point sometime in the future when we will all be gathered into the presence of the Lord. In the 10th verse of that fifth chapter, toward the end of the passage we read, He died for us so that we, awake or asleep, living or dead, might live in company with him. The Advent hope is that Jesus will bring us all together again. And so, in this Advent Season, the second Sunday in Advent, let me set before you this biblical truth, which I believe is the great source of our comfort, and let me say to you that there is a communion of the saints with Jesus Christ which is not touched by death. There is a communion of the saints with Jesus Christ that is not touched by death. Philosophers have studied the human situation, and some very profound and reflective spirits have said that the whole question of death is in the depths of our psyche, the ultimate question that we face. We all know that we will all die, and we will all, at some time or other, experience the loss, the death, of one dear to us, so death is a subject that is very urgent in the human experience. The Christian Gospel has something to say about death. What it says about death is that it is not very significant. I repeat, what it says about death is that death is not very significant. I've not faced death, and I run a certain risk in making a statement like that. I remember when I was a student, I did a little meditation at a hymn sing after church on Sunday night. Those were the days in which I had all the answers, and didn't understand the questions. What they should have done for the good of the church was lock me up for five or six years and let me steep a bit. But I made this grand proclamation about death holding no fear for us, and I remember a very © Grand Valley State University �Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Richard A. Rhem Page 4   saintly Christian lady coming up to me at the seminary that next week and saying to me, "My father was a godly man and he died a horrible death." That's all she said. That's all she needed to say, because I may have been dumb, but I'm not stupid. She said to me, "Be more sensitive when you talk about death." And so, when I say to you that what the scriptures say about death is that it is not very important, I say that knowing that I haven't faced death, knowing that some of you have, and also knowing that I have buried a father and a mother who were very dear, but both in their eighties after a full and rich life. With those qualifications, let me say again that what the Christian Gospel says about death is that it is not very important. Paul does admit that it is still the last enemy, but as I have been reflecting on that in this Advent season once again, I am struck by the Christian affirmation about the relativization of death. There is a communion with Jesus Christ now and then, which is not affected by our death, except that our death becomes the doorway through which we move into a grander dimension of that communion. And we need to say that in our day which has been blessed by medical science and by technological breakthroughs that have enabled us to enhance life and, in many cases, prolong life. We need to say that also in a day when keeping a body alive has become a task of heroic dimensions. Death is not that important! And the prolongation of physical life in this world is not that important. There is one thing that is preeminently important, and that is that now I am in communion with God through Jesus Christ, which binds me together with all brothers and sisters who are in Christ, and which communion will not be touched but only enhanced as I move through the portal of death. I want to say that with conviction and with some compassion, even with some sensitivity. The will to live is a God-given, wholesome, natural will and force. And the desire to enhance human life and to prolong human life, I believe, is a proper response to all that we know about the nature of life as it comes from the hand of God. But I also believe that, in a world that has become an increasingly this-worldly, onelevel universe, materialistic in its goals and in its strivings, and so largely disconnected from the spiritual reality which is the depth of our being - then I need to say, also, that death is not very important! And that it is possible, by laying hold of the comfort of the Gospel and the Advent hope of our Lord Jesus Christ, to contemplate it with some equanimity and to face it with serenity. If I stand at your bedside and you are terminally ill and you're afraid, I hope you'll be able to share that with me, and that what I am saying this morning will not add to fear or guilt because you may not be able to die easily, but nonetheless, I have to say what I am saying this morning because it is the Christian Gospel and it is true. When we lose someone we love, the loss is ours. When we are separated from one who is dear, the pain is ours. And when we weep, we are in good company because Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazarus, when he saw the pain that death brings into the human scene. But finally if we hear the Gospel, death is not that important. It is not that big a deal. Paul says that Jesus Christ died for us so © Grand Valley State University �Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Richard A. Rhem Page 5   that whether we sleep or wake, we may be in company with him. That means, whether I am dead or alive, I am in communion with him; that means whether I am dead or alive, I am alive forever more. That means that the depths of my being is fully alive and fully in tune and in touch with the Creator and Redeemer of my being, whether I am dead or alive in this present, physical, historical sense. The communion of the saints in the ancient creed spoke about that fellowship that transcends death and all ages and all places, and makes us one with all the people of God who have ever lived, all together, in the presence of God. I have been reading a good deal about the experiences of those who have had these near-death experiences and even, frankly, some psychical material. It is most fascinating, and I am convinced that I to this point in my life have been very shortsighted, and have tapped only superficially the depth of the comfort of the Gospel that promises to us a communion and a fellowship in the body and out of the body. There is more to us than these corpuscles and molecules that make up our physical existence. And Jesus Christ, who died and rose again, will bring us together with him when all things come to their consummation, however that happens, whenever that happens. There will be a summing up of all things, and when it happens, maybe some will be alive, and most will have died, but it won't make any difference, for that communion is untouched, real life is not touched by the portals of death, which is as normal on that end as birth is on this end. This old proving ground that we're engaged in now, this earthly pilgrimage, this veil of tears, this life that some of the cynics have characterized as being "no exit," as a bad joke - all of this life which we believe is that time in which our own being is being refined and prepared for the eternal fellowship - this life will be swallowed up in life that is Life, indeed. That's the Advent hope. And those we've loved and lost awhile are close to us, and more available to us than I've ever dared to believe. I've been thinking of my own father and mother recently and I read of a great Christian Scotsman, Ian McClaren, whose mother said to him, as she was dying, "There'll not be a day that I won't think of you, nor an hour in which I won't pray for you, and where I'm going, I'll know better what to pray for than ever before." The communion of the saints. Why do we give up? Why do we bury someone and consider that it's all over and it's done? Why do we look for our own death sometimes with fear and trembling, when – if we really, really believed the Gospel and believed the eternal God and the promises that in communion with Him through Jesus Christ we have life in another dimension, which can only be clarified and made more grand with that movement through the limitations of time and space and bodily existence – moving through death to life, that is Life indeed. Our Advent hope is that Jesus will bring us all together again. Our Advent hope is that nothing that is true or beautiful or good will fall away, that all of that will be gathered together and refined into the perfect kingdom of God, which is the © Grand Valley State University �Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Richard A. Rhem Page 6   complete rule of God in the totality of things. And one day we'll all be together in the presence of the Lord. At the risk again of sounding superficial or naive, let me say it to you again. Death is no big deal. For Jesus is our life, whether we sleep or whether we're awake, now and forever. That is our Advent hope. Thank God he has come! Thank God he will come! Thank God he is with us now! Let us pray. O God, these are the things that we most deeply believe. Enable us to lay hold of the Advent hope, and to live with the comfort of the Gospel, the comfort of His coming, and give us the sense, O God, of a communion and a fellowship that transcends every barrier, even death itself, making us one with all who are yours in the fellowship of Your Kingdom. Through Jesus Christ, our Lord, Amen. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent II Scripture Text I Thessalonians 4:14, 5:9, 10 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19861207 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-12-07 Title A name given to the resource Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Again Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 7, 1986 entitled "Advent Hope: Jesus Will Bring Us All Together Again", on the occasion of Advent II, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: I Thessalonians 4:14, 5:9, 10. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Advent Communion of the Saints Eschatology Hope Presence of God https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1e6d9a7fc0f69464b8ada2ad9f7a8014.mp3 25e45222517a2e09c9828616cd0e3d9c https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bef8019aaa16c21b20e0fa9ae13842c2.pdf 8a5532ad355c69e88dec92a91b342aa4 PDF Text Text It Is an Easter World! Text: I Corinthians 15: 20 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Eastertide III, April 13, 1986 Transcription of the spoken sermon It is an Easter world! I stress the positive affirmation. That is the meaning of the text. Paul had been dealing with an idea that would have denied the reality of the resurrection of Jesus. He showed the consequences of denying the resurrection and then he made the bold, simple claim of the text: But the Truth is, Christ was raised to life… That is the center of the Gospel, the basis of all we claim in our Christian faith. We believe it is true; Jesus is the living Lord and because he is the living Lord, we are bold to say, It is an Easter world! It is an Easter world despite all appearances and we must be quite candid about that. Our affirmation of faith is made in the face of a mountain of data that seems to contradict it. There is trouble in our world. We teeter on the edge of armed intervention in Libya. We tremble with every news report wondering where terrorists will strike next. And we carry a good deal of personal baggage with us – personal pain, broken relationships, vocational anxiety, and disappointments. Some of our neighbors succumb to the weight of it: Then we have the tragedy of a soul poisoned with cynicism and bitterness. Some, deeply wounded, wall themselves in, making themselves invulnerable to being hurt again, and, at the same time, invulnerable to love and grace – the walking dead. But this is the First Day of the Week; this is the celebration of the resurrection. This is the day that the Lord has made. We are here to rejoice and be glad because beneath the appearance is a deeper reality. Christ has been raised to life! It is an Easter World after all! © Grand Valley State University   �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 2   We are going to listen to St. Paul as he lifts up the reality of the resurrection of Jesus. We will reverse his manner of treatment but in so doing we will discover the positive ramifications of the resurrection of Jesus. For his statement, "If Christ be not risen...," after which he spells out what the consequence would be, we will substitute the positive affirmation, "Because Christ is risen ..." The Corinthian congregation failed to understand or refused to believe that there was yet a future consummation coming, an aspect of which would be the resurrection of the dead. They did believe Jesus arose and they believed they were already alive in him, but they denied that there was still more to come. They considered that they were already "resurrected" – spiritually they had been made alive – and that was true. But for them, the rest of history did not matter and the final summing up of all things – the new creation – had no reality. They "spiritualized" the truth of resurrection. In typical Greek fashion they understood salvation as deliverance from the body, from entanglement in the material world. They had no conception of the new heaven and earth and the "spiritual body," the resurrection body of which Paul speaks in the chapter. That is the problem Paul addresses. He does so by saying that to deny our future resurrection is to deny the resurrection of Christ. Obviously, Paul argues thus because he sees the vital linkage between Christ's resurrection and our resurrection. Thus he argues backward. To deny our resurrection is really to deny Christ's resurrection. But such denial is limiting. He began the chapter with the broad witness to the resurrection of Jesus. And then in our text he moves to the offensive with the straightforward declaration, But the truth is, Christ was raised to life – the first fruits of the harvest of the dead. I will say no more about the Corinthian problem with resurrection. Rather, I want simply to set forth what Paul says would be the consequence if Christ were not raised, or, stated positively, I want to set forth what is, in fact, the case because Christ is risen. First of all, Paul claims, if Christ be not risen, the Gospel is null and void and so is your faith. Later he writes, "... your faith has nothing in it." If we reverse Paul's treatment from the negative: If Christ was not raised... to: Now is Christ risen, © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 3   then we can state positively, the Gospel is true; your faith grips the truth, reality. This is of supreme importance. We want to know the truth; we do not want to live under delusion. We say sometimes "the Truth hurts." Sometimes we do block ourselves off from the Truth; we fear the Truth or we stubbornly refuse to recognize the Truth. Yet, most of us, most of the time, really want to know the Truth. Freud claimed religion was an illusion. He and Karl Marx and Ludwig Feuerbach and Friedrich Nietzsche created the foundation of modern atheism. There may not be large numbers of atheists in the world, but there is much practical atheism – people living without any essential reference to God or acknowledgement of Him. The foundations of the Christian Gospel have been penetratingly examined in the past two centuries and there is a great mass of agnosticism. The Church has been on the defensive and not always with the calm confidence in the Truth which is the most persuasive witness. We must always want to know the Truth. We must not duck the issues; we must look at the data, search the evidence and deal with integrity as we bear witness to our faith. What is our claim? Paul sets it out clearly: If Christ is not risen, the Gospel is false, our faith grasps an illusion. What, then, is the positive side? What do we believe to be true if we believe Christ is risen? We believe that God, the Creator and sustainer of the world, is the living God Whose power raises the dead. We believe He is the Sovereign Lord of the world and that beyond the machinations of governments and all forms of organization and human planning, scheming and conspiring, there is at work in history's unraveling a purpose, a purpose of love, a purpose that is moving all things toward re-creation. Christ is risen. He is a sign in the midst of history that God will redeem history. He is a sign in our world that life is stronger than death, that when the power of darkness utilizing the forms and structures of human government and religions have done their best – rather, their worst! – God is still God. His power is not limited, His love is all-embracing, His grace abounding. The Gospel is not null and void. The Gospel is good news pointing to an event, an act of God by which He "signed" the world for final Redemption. Christ is risen; the Gospel is true; our faith grasps reality. © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 4   History looks anything but redeemed, does it not? The American Fleet clusters in the Mediterranean. Terrorists plot to destroy, to maim and to kill. Wherever we look, violence and war threaten to burst forth. What do we conclude? What are the options? No God, no meaning, just human potential - both for evil and for good, and an endless nightmare? That is one possible conclusion. Then, one might despair and give up. Or, one might seek to maintain the upper hand and through power and cleverness avoid disaster but never find peace. Or do we acknowledge the continuing obstinacy of the old world, the continuing state of the world unredeemed with all the hell that that entails, but refuse to see the present state of things as the final state? Do we live by another vision and in the community of faith form an alternative community? And do we look for signs of resurrection in the old world? I happened to catch the NBC interview with Corazon Aquino this week. I was deeply impressed with the sincerity and simplicity of her faith. She was asked about the danger to her life. She responded that she was aware of it, but also that she believed God would enable her to fulfill her mission. And if my mission is fulfilled, she said, then it is all right. Well, what about her husband who returned to the Philippines to engage in a mission, but was gunned down? That did not refute her faith; rather it confirmed her faith. Her husband's death accomplished what it is unlikely his life could have accomplished. He sacrificed his life for the Philippine people and a remarkable, relatively peaceful revolution ensued. Corry Aquino lives in an exceedingly dangerous, corrupt, violent world, but rather than being paralyzed by it, she is set free by faith in God to live and lead with a measure of freedom and peace. When asked if she had a model she admired, she responded that Mother Teresa was a great inspiration to her. And we are bombarded daily with the world's bad news, but we must not forget that Mother Teresa is bringing love and life and healing to the poor and dying in this world. At the Maui Conference I met a psychiatrist named Jerry Jampolsky. This week we received a letter from him saying he was ready to take fifty children to Russia where he is involved in a national TV special on children titled, "A Child Shall Lead Them." He has forty centers around the world for terminally ill children where love and gentleness effect some amazing healings. On what basis does one move from possible paralysis of fear, despair, even cynicism and bitterness to loving service, meaningful involvement in the healing of the wounds of persons and society? © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Are we not freed for loving service on the basis of the truth that this is not all there is? There is more coming and the "more" will be "the more of God." Do we not seek peace, pray for shalom, bring healing because we believe that we are the instruments of the living God Who is bringing in His Kingdom, creating newness? If Christ be not risen, says Paul, then we are operating on an illusion. Then dead is dead. Then history is a tale told by an idiot. Then life ends with a whimper. Then weariness and despair will finally prevail. But Christ is risen - therefore, Paul concludes the great discourse, "Be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord inasmuch as you know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord." There is a second consequence of the resurrection. Again, Paul states the negative: …if Christ was not raised,… you are still in your old state of sin. The positive affirmation we derive from that claim is that because Christ is risen our sin has been removed. This brings us back to the mystery of the Cross. It is perhaps best simply to bow there wondering at what is revealed – the suffering of Jesus for the sin of the world, the love of God demonstrated in that sacrificial death, the total obedience of Jesus to the Father’s will, enduring the hostility of humankind and entering the darkness of forsakenness. Paul says God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. Peter wrote, He bore our sins in his body on the Tree. Paul wrote, God made him to be sin for us who knew no sin… I do not pretend to understand the crucifixion, but I do see how the fate of Jesus is a parable of what happens once again in our history. Certainly it is more than that and the life and ministry of Jesus stands by itself. Yet the suffering of the righteous, the triumph of evil and wrong is rejected in every generation. There, in a once-for-all event, we see One-for-all enduring the suffering of the world’s sin, the world represented in Israel. In that sense, we were there when they crucified our Lord. If we can see that much, then we are prepared to hear the amazing news of Easter, the good news that God made His move after "it was finished." History crucified him. Nature's verdict was, he is dead. © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 6   God's action reversed the flow of history and nature. God raised him up. God gave him life from the dead. Now in the light of that dramatic reversal, the Good News is that Sin was put away. The Gospel is that now God accepts us in Christ; we are received through Jesus Christ our Lord. His life is our life, His obedience is our obedience, His righteousness our righteousness. Thus the Apostolic mission is one of reconciliation We are ambassadors of Christ – be reconciled to God. There is no longer a barrier of alienation; now we can simply come home. Again, I do not pretend to understand the mystery of Good and Evil, or what great cosmic transformation was effected through the crucifixion of Jesus. But I do believe the truth of the Gospel invitation - Come; come to the Father through Jesus, the Son. There was an ontological shift in Reality through the Cross and Resurrection. The Good News of the Gospel proclaims that it is ontologically impossible to stand as a sinner before God. Do you hear that? Does that make sense? That has not been much understood in the Church. We have kept sin very much alive and most of us crawl around with a pretty good load of guilt on our back. We have been conditioned in the Church to keep our sin ever before us and to guard against the pride of self-righteousness. Well and good. I think the peacock is a magnificent bird but I am put off by its human imitator. A consciousness of sin is a healthy possession, which keeps us mindful of our vulnerability to temptation and our frequent failure to live in love with God and our neighbor. What we have not made clear, however, what has not really filtered down to the inner recesses of our consciousness is that all our sin and all our guilt has already been removed, taken away, put out of the mind and consciousness of God. We have not reckoned with the ontological shift in reality effected by the death and resurrection of Jesus. Thus we never really find the freedom to break loose from our past. We never get unshackled from our failure. We are too introspective, too introverted, too selfpreoccupied. We take ourselves too seriously. There are Christian churches that place so much stress on inward experience, groaning under sin and unworthiness, despairing over proneness to sin that they never get their eyes off © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 7   their own soul's navel to be able to look to God Who has a smile on His face saying, "Why don’t you just come here and let me love you?" Too much fascination with our own sinfulness and unworthiness is not a virtue, but a vice; it is not to be deeply spiritual, but unwholesomely self-centered and it becomes a strange form of human pride. Further, it is a denigration of the Gospel and an affront to the mercy of God as though no power on earth or in heaven could possibly forgive my sins! Hear the Gospel: It is ontologically impossible to stand before God as a sinner. He has removed sin and guilt from the world, from His presence, from existence. I am sure that raises all kinds of questions. There was a very acute thinker who was a member of this congregation who used to argue with me that there was no place for the Prayer of Confession in Christian worship. All that was possible, he maintained, is a prayer of thanksgiving that our sin has been handled. He had a point. I carefully phrase the Prayer of Confession that it not become a wallowing in how awful we are, but a consciousness of our failure in the presence of the greater reality of God's grace. Robert Schuller does not use the Prayer of Confession because he believes it reinforces the sin-guilt-negative self-image. He has a point. For the traditional Church and deeply conditioned Christian people, that reinforcement may keep us from grasping the radical message of God's grace – Sin is gone! If Christ be not raised - you are still in your old state of sin, but now is Christ risen; you are free of your sin. Forgiveness, freedom, is an amazing reality. Forgiveness - you are forgiven; does that sink in? Does that not make you want to dance and shout and sing? Say it three times, emphasizing a different word each time: I am forgiven! I am forgiven! I am forgiven! Believe it; live in the freedom of that gracious forgiveness. Trust the ontological shift in Reality. Live in the Ontology of Grace. There is a third consequence of Jesus’ resurrection. If Christ be not risen, © Grand Valley State University �It Is an Easter World! Richard A. Rhem Page 8   it follows also that those who have died within Christ's fellowship are ultimately lost. The positive statement of Paul's argument is that Christ being risen, those who die move through death to fullness of life. Here we have to do with the matter of Christian hope and the comfort of those who bury loved ones. Jesus said, Because I live, you too shall live… Again, he said, I am the resurrection and the life. If a person has faith in me, even though he die, he shall come to life; and no one who is alive and has faith shall ever died. John 11: 25-26 Paul counseled concerned believers in Thessalonians about the death of loved ones. He wrote with great sensitivity: I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep, that you sorrow not as those who have no hope... That is the critical point. Death separates. Death creates loss. Death leaves us with deep grief when one long and dearly loved is taken away. Sorrow is only natural. But it is not sorrow without hope. Hope enables us to transcend the loss in the conviction that those we love have moved into life in a greater dimension than we can conceive of and, furthermore, that we will one day be reunited with all those we love in the brightness of God's Eternal Presence. Death is a conquered foe! That is the verdict in light of Jesus' resurrection. Hope is grounded in Jesus' resurrection. That hope fastens on a future in which death, the grave, disease, pain and tears will be no more. Again this is a consequence of the Ontological Shift in Reality. Paul says if we have hope in Christ for this life only we are of all people most to be pitied. Hope in this life is critical, but it is not enough. We need a hope anchored beyond history in the Eternal God. Only then are we free to engage in history's struggle with good courage and sure confidence, only then can we relax and revel in the reality of forgiveness, only then can we bury our dead in the confidence that those we love have fallen asleep in Jesus. Christ is risen! This is an Easter world! Thanks be to God Who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ! Alleluia! Amen. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Eastertide III Scripture Text I Corinthians 15:20 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19860413 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-04-13 Title A name given to the resource It is an Easter World Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 13, 1986 entitled "It is an Easter World", on the occasion of Eastertide III, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: I Corinthians 15:20. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Community of Faith Eastertide Eschatology Forgiveness Freedom Hope Resurrection Shalom Sin https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f752bfb83983da3d38384392dd0df16d.pdf 56868c9b33bdeb0659e090d69a94a537 PDF Text Text Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey From the sermon series on the Cosmos Text: Isaiah 11: 1, 2-5 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Advent I, November 29, 1981 Transcription of the spoken sermon Advent means coming. The Advent of our Lord has for us a double focus: We remember that He came, We live in the hope of His coming again. Today we enter a new year - not a new calendar year, but a new Church Year or Christian Year. The Season of Advent comprises the period of the four Sundays before Christmas. It is a Season of preparation, a Season of penitence, a Season in which we ponder the mystery of grace in the first coming of Jesus and contemplate the Christian Hope, His coming in power to reign. It is appropriate that we enter this Holy Season around the table of our Lord for this Supper is a Feast of Remembrance and a Feast of Hope. He instructed his disciples, when they broke bread and poured out the cup of wine to remember him whose body was broken, whose blood was shed for them, for us, for the whole world. And in his instructions to them, he called them to do so "until he comes." Thus we are people who live in the time between the times. In the fullness of time, Jesus came. In the time of the End, he will come again. In the meantime, we celebrate his presence with us in the Spirit and in the signs he has given, the Bread and the Wine. The People of God are a people who always live by memory and hope. In recent weeks we have caught a glimpse not only of the immensity of space, but also of the eons of time in which our world has been evolving. We have a past. We have a future. © Grand Valley State University   �Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey Richard A. Rhem Page 2   God has acted in our past. God will act in our future. In this confidence we live. We remember. We hope. So it was with Israel. The symbol on our Advent Banner is a branch, reminding us of the promise which inspired the Old Testament prophet. Through long centuries Israel sustained its hope for the future Kingdom by remembering God's action in its past. Israel was born in the Exodus, a great liberation movement which was annually commemorated in the Passover Feast. Each spring, Israel reenacted their freedom flight as the Passover Lamb was slain, roasted and eaten. In the ritual of remembrance, there was the note of expectation and hope for the day when the Messiah, God's anointed one, would come and bring to fruition Israel's dream of a Kingdom of grace and righteousness. Through the long, weary centuries faith often grew faint and almost succumbed to numbing doubt and debilitating despair. Then she cried, "How long, O Lord, how long?" She lived by the promise. She clung to the hope of the coming One. There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. Isaiah 11:1 Listen to the description of this One Who was to come. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or decide by what his ears hear; but with righteousness he shall judge the poor; and decide with equity for the meek of the earth; and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked. Righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist, and faithfulness the girdle of his loins. Isaiah 11:2-5 How Israel longed for such a leader; one who would take the twisted, the warped, the crooked and the deformed facets of her history and her world and usher in the Age of Peace and Righteousness and Justice and Truth. And one day, when hope was about gone and the flame of faith was flickering but faintly, Mary had a child. One of the few still hoping, praying, waiting was old Simeon who took the child in his arms and blessed God, realizing that this was indeed the long-awaited One. Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word; for mine eyes have seen thy salvation which thou hast prepared in © Grand Valley State University �Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey Richard A. Rhem Page 3   the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to thy people Israel. Luke 2:29-32 For Simeon, for Israel, their hope rooted in a memory was realized. Jesus was born; Messiah had come. In the wake of that birth, life and death, a new community was born, gathered around the resurrected and reigning Christ who was present in the Spirit. And the story was repeated. Just as Israel looked back to its redemption from Egypt, so the Church looked back to the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus as God's mighty act of salvation for the world. And looking back to the One Who came and reconciled the world to God, she waited in expectant longing for His coming again to wind up the drama of history and finally establish the Kingdom of God. Just as Israel annually remembered the event of its Redemption, so the Church regularly commemorates the event in which she finds salvation. Just as Israel remembered her past and hoped for the future action of God in the coming of the Messiah, so the Church commemorates Jesus' death in the hope of His coming again. That is where we are today — remembering, hoping. In this Advent Season we take courage from our remembrance of the past. Jesus has come. God's anointed has assumed our flesh and blood. Eternity has invaded our time. Grace has touched planet Earth. And we sense the excitement of John who had a vision of the glorified Christ who promised He was coming. Hear John's words... Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, everyone who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so, Amen. And the coming Christ says, “I am the Alpha and the Omega”, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty. What are we to make of this promise of his coming nearly 2,000 years after this revelation to John? One need only to tune one's radio to most any frequency © Grand Valley State University �Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey Richard A. Rhem Page 4   today to hear announced the near appearing of our Lord, coming to judge the world. The schemes and descriptions of the Last Things, the End Events, are without number. This waiting from which we take our text for this message has been the victim of the most fantastic and bizarre interpretations. Dates are set, predictions are made, but still He does not come. If already at the end of the First Century they were questioning, as II Peter tells us they were, the appearing of Jesus, then how much more must we, 2,000 years later? Surely in the light of 10 to 20 billion years of cosmological evolution since the "Big Bang," 2,000 years is a blink of the eye. Yet our time is measured in generations and 2,000 years for us earthlings is a long time. Is it possible that, just as our expanding knowledge of the physical universe called for a new understanding of the Bible's references to the heavens and the earth, so our present understanding of time is calling us to a new interpretation of time and eternity? Time and space are interwoven. You cannot peer out into space without going back in time. And at high velocity, time slows down. For example, light travels at 181,000 miles per second. If we could design a spaceship to travel at near the speed of sound, we could reach the center of the Milky Way Galaxy of which we are a part in 21 years. However, what for us would be 21 years would be for those we left on Earth 30,000 years. Not many of our friends would be there to greet us upon our return. Time is relative to motion. At the speed of light there is no elapse of time. Thus, time and space are interrelated, both integral aspects of our cosmic journey. But they are not absolute. They are relative. Perhaps Einstein's Theory of Relativity is calling us to a new conceptuality, a new model of Eschatology - that is, the doctrine of the Last Things, the End. Behold He is coming! That is the message to every generation. That is the word for us. He is coming. Could it be that every generation lives on the edge of Eternity; that every generation is equidistant to the End? The End, that is, of this phase of our cosmic journey? If that is so, then death becomes the gateway to Life in a new dimension. If that is so, then death becomes but the moment of transition, the momentary passage into the Light of Eternity and the presence of the Lord. And if that is so, then, my friends, we do stand always but a breath away from His appearing. And at this new Season of Advent the question is, are we ready? Are we so living that at any moment we are ready to meet the Lord? © Grand Valley State University �Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Memory and Hope in the Cosmic Journey. Take the Bread and remember. Remember Jesus, remember the Cross, remember the event of Easter morning. Then reflect on your journey. Where did He first encounter you? Can you recall the early spiritual impression of your journey? Can you let your mind have free wheeling for a moment to recapture the emotions of those times when He revealed to you His grace? Let your cosmic journey be projected like a film on the screen of your conscious memory. In light of those encounters of Grace in your past, where are you now? Are you moving or plunging deeper into the wonder and mystery of Grace? Or have the wells of your soul dried up? Has the flesh of your heart, once tender, hardened and become encrusted with bitterness, made brittle with the acids of cynicism, despair and hopelessness? And for what do you long? Where does yearning take place in your life? Do you believe He is coming? Do you believe one day all wrongs will be righted, all hurts healed, all dreams realized, all hopes come to fruition? Come to the Table of our Lord. Remember that which bread broken, wine poured out symbolizes. He died that you may never die, but live, live abundantly. Come to the Table of our Lord. Hear the Word today — Behold, He is coming! Learn to hope again. From this Table, with memory refreshed, with hope renewed, go to live fully alive, fully conscious, praying for and expecting with confidence and joy, the Lord Who is surely coming. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Advent I Scripture Text Isaiah 11:1, 2-5 , Luke 2:29-32 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19811129 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1981-11-29 Title A name given to the resource Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on November 29, 1981 entitled "Memory and Hope in Our Cosmic Journey", on the occasion of Advent I, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 11:1, 2-5 , Luke 2:29-32. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Advent Cosmos Eschatology Eternity Faith Grace Hope Spiritual Journey