{"id":940,"date":"2019-04-30T20:35:32","date_gmt":"2019-04-30T20:35:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/2019\/04\/30\/refusing-to-be-silent-based-on-acts-527-32\/"},"modified":"2020-02-15T18:21:28","modified_gmt":"2020-02-15T18:21:28","slug":"refusing-to-be-silent-based-on-acts-527-32","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/2019\/04\/30\/refusing-to-be-silent-based-on-acts-527-32\/","title":{"rendered":"“Refusing to be Silent” based on\tActs 5:27-32, John 20:19-31"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/figure>\n

I’ll admit I have a strong
\nbias in this story. \u00a0It feels like my
\npersonal job to protect Thomas from the accusations made about him over the
\nyears. \u00a0I feel for him. \u00a0He said something reasonable and rational and
\nhas gained the title \u201cDoubting Thomas\u201d for 2 millennia. \u00a0(My desire to protect Thomas would make a bit
\nmore sense if the Jesus Seminar thought this story reflected historical memory,
\nwhich it does not, but that hasn’t had quite the impact you’d expect on my need
\nto protect Thomas.)<\/p>\n

The problem, I think, is that
\nthis story does what it supposed to do.
\nIt was designed to include those Christians who did not experience the
\nresurrection first hand, and to affirm their faith. \u00a0The line, “Have you believed because you
\nhave seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to
\nbelieve.”(20:29) \u00a0The story seems to
\nsay, because Thomas needed proof, but YOU managed to believe without it, you
\nare even better than one of the first disciples! \u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cHave faith, even in what you
\ncan’t see\u201d has been a perennial preaching favorite, and Thomas has been the
\nstraw man set up to make it work. \u00a0There
\nare a few issues with this though. \u00a0Most
\nimportantly, \u201cbelieve what I tell you because I told you so, even if it doesn’t
\nmake sense\u201d is a terrible way to lead people.
\nAlso, bodily resurrection is \u2026 a great metaphor, but not something to
\nget obsessed about as historical fact.<\/p>\n

This year, I came across a new
\ngreat way to defend Thomas, namely that none of the disciples believed the
\nEaster story to begin with. \u00a0Gail O’Day
\nin the New Interpreter’s Bible<\/i> says, \u201cJohn 20:19-23 is linked with the
\npreceding story in the garden by use the emphatic expression ‘that day’ (v.
\n19), although the disciples fearful conduct indicates that they have not
\ncredited Mary’s report (cf. Luke 24:11).
\nThe locked doors may be mentioned to heighten the drama and supernatural
\neffect of Jesus’ entrance into the room (v. 19b<\/i>, fc. 25; Luke 24:37),
\nbut their primary importance for the Fourth Evangelist is found in the phrase
\n‘for the fear of the Jews.’\u201d[1]<\/a>
\nAka, all the disciples were scared, and hiding in that room, even though they’d
\nheard the Easter narrative from the women already. \u00a0They hadn’t seen and they didn’t
\nbelieve. \u00a0It wasn’t just Thomas.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, as another
\nscholar says, \u201c\u201cThe women’s report should have been credible because (1) they were
\nrelating events of which they had firsthand experience (2) there were several
\nwitnesses (3) their character has been established by the reports of their
\nselfless service to Jesus and his disciples.\u201d[2]<\/a> \u00a0<\/p>\n

Now, before I can go on in my
\ndefense of Thomas, I need to take a break and talk about antisemitism in the
\nNew Testament. \u00a0It is morally
\nreprehensible not to, especially with texts like what we have today, and
\nshootings like we had yesterday \u2013 not to mention the past two millennia of
\nWestern history. \u00a0Now, I’m actually not
\nconvinced about whether or not the New Testament is inherently antisemitic for
\ntwo historical reasons. \u00a0The first is
\nthat at the time the New Testament was written, Christians understood
\nthemselves to be Jews who were following \u201cthe way\u201d of Jesus…. not unlike the
\nvarious denominations in Christianity today where all of us would say we are
\nfollowing the way of Jesus, but we might add that we’re doing so through some
\nof the teachings of John and Susanna Wesley.
\nGiven that the earlier followers of \u201cthe way\u201d were Jewish, the things
\nthey’re saying against the Jews are INTERNAL squabbling, reflecting something
\nlike the things I say about the WCA. \u00a0<\/p>\n

The problem is that while the
\nfollowers of \u201cthe way\u201d were an oppressed group in the time of the writing in
\nthe New Testament, they became the powerful group and the history of the
\nWestern hemisphere since Constantine has involved Christians having power over
\nJews and using the language of the New Testament to justify mistreatment of
\nothers of God’s beloved people.<\/p>\n

The second piece takes a
\nlittle bit more nuance. \u00a0\u201cThe Jews\u201d is
\nnot really a reference to all Jews, or Jews in general. \u00a0More often, it is being used to refer to the
\npeople in roles of authority within Judaism.
\nThis applies to the Gospel and to the story from Acts. \u00a0The people who were in roles of Jewish authority
\nwere the ones who had been placed there by the Roman Empire, with the intention
\nof controlling the Jewish colonies by controlling their leaders. \u00a0Because the Empire appointed, and removed,
\nleaders at will; the Jewish leaders served the Empire rather than the people,
\nor God, or the faith tradition. \u00a0So,
\nsometimes, \u201cthe Jew\u201d doesn’t even mean people who are Jewish, it means Roman
\nEmpire leadership appointed to Jewish roles.
\nIn our Sunday Night Bible Study, where people are great at asking
\nquestions and pondering, we have been wondering if \u201cthe Jews\u201d was really coded
\nlanguage for \u201cthe oppression of the Empire\u201d while being a FAR safer way to say
\nit. \u00a0Further, the Roman appointed leaders
\nREALLY wanted to keep the peace, and keep their jobs.<\/p>\n

But, again, even though I’m
\nnot sure the original language of John or Acts was anti-Jewish, because 1. \u00a0it was written by people who were themselves
\nJewish, about an internal fight within Judaism and 2. the references to \u201cthe
\nJews\u201d seems to refer to Roman appointed leaders, I KNOW that these texts
\nhave been used SINCE Christianity became a dominate religion to do harm, and I
\nwant us to be very very careful in how we hear, speak about, and reflect these
\ntexts in our lives<\/b>. \u00a0NOTHING about
\nJesus or the Jesus movement gives us permission to do harm (or allow harm to be
\ndone) to God’s beloved people, and God’s beloved people come in ALL faith
\ntraditions or lack there of. \u00a0Some of our
\njob in refusing to be silent is refusing to be silent about the mistreatment of
\nour Jewish siblings in faith by Christians.<\/p>\n

Now, all that said, in Acts,
\nwe hear Peter telling the Jewish authorities that they have murdered
\nJesus. \u00a0(Do you see now why I spent all
\nthat time fussing?) \u00a0The authorities are
\npresented as being concerned about disrupting the peace, which probably
\nreflects the fact that Luke-Acts was written AFTER the Roman Empire came in and
\ndestroyed the 2nd<\/sup> Temple ALONG with killing a lot of people (the
\nJewish historical Josephus says 1.1 million people died, that is likely an
\nexaggeration, but it reflects an enormous scale). \u00a0I think the Jewish leaders probably WERE
\ntrying to prevent something like that from happening. \u00a0<\/p>\n

Both Christianity and Judaism
\nwere transformed, perhaps even formed by the experience of death and
\ndestruction in 70 CE. \u00a0Nothing is the
\nsame as it was before then, and some of the separation of the traditions
\nhappened as the Temple was destroyed. \u00a0 I
\nbelieve that the New Testament, which other than the authentic letters of Paul
\nwas written in the aftermath of the destruction of the Temple, seeks to make
\nsense of that destruction in many of the same ways that the Hebrew Bible tries
\nto make sense of the destruction of the first temple and Jerusalem in 586 BCE.<\/p>\n

One of the ways we see God at
\nwork in the world is that what should be an end point, a death, a destruction,
\nends up being over the long run a source of great wisdom, creativity,
\ncompassion, and growth. \u00a0The faith
\ntraditions we have today were developed in the midst of horror and destruction,
\nbut they speak to growth, hope, faith, and love.<\/p>\n

In Acts, we hear Peter say, \u201cWe
\nmust obey God rather than human authority.\u201d
\nHow and when do we make that determination? \u00a0When are we clear that God’s will is distinct
\nfrom the will of those in authority? \u00a0Is
\nit simply the question of violence \u2013 that God is not for violence, passive or
\nactive? \u00a0Or is it about oppression \u2013 that
\nGod is not on the side of oppression? \u00a0Or
\nis it more positive? \u00a0That God is on the
\nside of life! \u00a0And love! \u00a0And expansive possibility! \u00a0This determination matters. \u00a0<\/p>\n

Now, the story in John is
\nhappening on Easter evening. \u00a0That’s why
\nit is so notable that none of those gathered seemed to have figured out that
\nhope and courage are the Resurrection narrative, not being afraid and locking
\nyourselves into a room by yourself. \u00a0We
\ndo know, because of the radical growth of Christianity in the early years, that
\nthe disciples did leave the room, and did so with great courage. \u00a0They continued sharing Jesus message of love,
\nof God, of hope and possibility, and were killed for it too \u2013 and they too died
\nwith great courage and integrity. \u00a0The
\nResurrection narrative is the story of facing fears with courage and letting
\nGod’s yes take precedence over the world’s no.<\/p>\n

In the midst of this
\nnarrative, in the midst of the fear of the disciples sitting in the locked
\nroom, we hear a repetition of a blessing, \u201cPeace be with you.\u201d \u00a0Peace is shalom here, it is a holistic desire
\nfor well-being, not just the absence of violence. \u00a0Shalom implies physical, mental, spiritual, emotional,
\nAND relational well-being. \u00a0That’s the
\nbest part of it \u2013 shalom can’t exist in just one person because it is
\ninherently relational. \u00a0It also can’t
\nexist without each person finding it, so all gain from it. \u00a0\u201cShalom, well-being, connection, love,
\nwholeness be with all of you!\u201d And this gets repeated.<\/p>\n

Then there is the weird thing
\nabout sins. \u00a0Did you hear it? \u00a0\u201cWhen he had said this,\u201d \u00a0(the peace bit) \u201che breathed on them and said
\nto them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they
\nare forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” \u00a0What does that mean? \u00a0Gail O’Day says, \u201cAny discussion of this
\nverse, therefore, must be grounded in an understanding of the forgiveness of
\nsins as the work of the entire community. … The forgiveness of sins must be
\nunderstood as the Spirit-empowered mission of continuing Jesus’ work in the
\nworld. \u00a0… Because the community’s work
\nis an extension of Jesus’ work, v. 23 must be interpreted in terms of Jesus’s
\nteaching and actions about sin. \u00a0\u2026 In
\nJohn, sin is a theological failing, not a moral or behavioral transgression (in
\ncontrast to Matt 18:18). \u00a0To have sin is
\nto be blind to the revelation of God in Jesus.<\/b>\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

Does that mean, then, that
\nwhat Jesus is quoted as saying can be understood as \u201cIf you teach people of the
\npossibilities of life as I taught you, they will be free from fear; but if you
\nallow them to continue to live in fear, nothing will change?\u201d \u00a0 \u00a0It is amazing, but this all fits with the
\nMaundy Thursday narrative about \u201clove each other as I have loved you.\u201d \u00a0O’Day says, \u201cBy loving one
\nanother as Jesus loves, the faith community reveals God to the world.\u201d[4]<\/a> \u00a0 And THAT, amazingly enough, releases \u201csin\u201d
\nin John’s perspective. \u00a0\ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n

Now all of this brings us back
\naround to my friend Thomas, the one who is as direct and honest as Peter when
\nhe says, “Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger
\nin the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not
\nbelieve.” \u00a0I really love this
\nline. \u00a0I love it especially because when
\nthe story then provides him with proof he does a 180 and DOES affirm the truth,
\nmore strongly than anyone has before him.
\n\u201cMy Lord and My God\u201d was a very strong statement. \u00a0I wonder how often, when we are presented
\nwith proof we’ve asked for, we are able to notice that it is there and it is
\ntime to change our minds?<\/p>\n

Most of all though, do we have
\nthe courage of Peter and of Thomas, to speak the truth? \u00a0Are we willing to say what we don’t believe
\nwhen we don’t believe it AND what we do when we do? \u00a0Are we willing to speak up and witness to the
\npower of love to transform lives? \u00a0That
\nis, to release the power of sin in the world?
\n(Giggle, it is so weird to say that.)
\nMay it be so. \u00a0Amen<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a>Gail
\nO’Day, New Interpreter’s Bible Volume IX: John, <\/i>Leander E. Keck
\neditorial board convener (Nashville: Abingdon Press,1995) \u00a0846.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> R.
\nAlan Culpepper, \u201cLuke,\u201d<\/i> in The New Interpreter\u2019s Bible Vol. 9<\/i>
\n(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994) 470.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a>O’Day,
\n847.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a>O’Day,
\n848.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\nRev. Sara E. Baron <\/p>\n

First United Methodist Church of Schenectady <\/p>\n

603 State St. Schenectady, NY 12305 <\/p>\n

Pronouns: she\/her\/hers\u00a0<\/p>\n

http:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/<\/a>
https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/FUMCSchenectady<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I’ll admit I have a strong bias in this story. \u00a0It feels like my personal job to protect Thomas from … Continue reading “Refusing to be Silent” based on\tActs 5:27-32, John 20:19-31<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[34,38,28,39,33,203,204,200,201,202,173],"class_list":["post-940","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sermons","tag-fumc-schenectady","tag-progressive-christianity","tag-rev-sara-e-baron","tag-thinking-church","tag-umc","tag-bringing-rationality-back","tag-christians-dont-get-to-be-antisemitic","tag-easter-2","tag-my-buddy-thomas","tag-new-interpreters-bible","tag-sorry-world-for-the-umc"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=940"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1155,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940\/revisions\/1155"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=940"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=940"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fumcschenectady.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=940"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}