eightyfour

THOUGHTFULLY DRIVING THE PORCELAIN BUS

A Column by John S Schroeder

April 17, 2004

Well, last Sunday was Easter. I was treated to one of the more interesting Easter Sermons I have ever heard. It was entirely remarkable not for what it said, but for what it did not say. The image below is a scan of the listing of the sermon text:

Don't you find it just slightly odd that there is that one verse missing from the middle of that rather long passage? Just one verse! "Why?" one has to ask oneself. Well consider the WHOLE passage as quoted here. I have taken the opportunity to highlight the 'missing' verse:

Rom 8:31-39 (NAS)

31What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? ³²He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? ³³Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies; ³⁴who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. ³⁵Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? ³⁶Just as it is written, "For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered." ³⁷But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. ³⁸For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, ³⁹nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This is a great Easter text is it not? It is all about the overwhelming and complete victory we have in Christ. It's all about how once God has a hold of us He never lets go. I find that an overwhelmingly joyous message.

But note the missing verse, it changes the tenor of the passage completely. I am sure the pastor that preached this sermon would argue that he left it out because it was superfluous, re-emphasizing the message of the passage by quoting the Old Testament, and he simply did not want to belabor the point. But such an argument has to be a straw man; the 'missing' verse completely changes the tone of the entire passage.

Depending on one's personal theological bent, there are several things one could say about the 'missing' verse. For one thing I think it says there is an inevitability to suffering, even, or perhaps especially, to those that have God on their side. It certainly says we should be willing to suffer much for the sake of the God who loves us. I tend to think this is true. Paul said to "consider it all bless when you are persecuted for His name sake." As Christians we take on a burden that others do not bear. As one example, we burden ourselves with purity and morality. Is it not a trial to attempt to remain chaste (even if you fail) when all those around you are having a good time? Is it not suffering to fight your natural impulses to sin?

But I think the 'missing' verse makes a point that is deeper still. I think it speaks to the path to God. It is a simple question really, do we simply stroll up to God's door, knock and come in and join the party? Or instead is there more involved? See, as I read scripture, yeah we walk up to the door and knock, and maybe we can get into the entryway, but to really join the party we have to confess. Is not confession a form of sacrifice? Does not scripture say that we are made "dead to sin?" Did not Paul say that "We have been crucified with Christ and it is no longer I that live, but Christ within me?" Could this be what Paul is referring to in the 'missing' verse when it says, "put to death all day long?"

What's at stake in the question of the 'missing' verse is the very image of what it means to be a Christian. With the verse missing, the passage seems to be all about a benevolent loving God. It is the veritable picture of unconditional love, love that nothing can break or remove. It is all pleasant and happy.

But with the verse included the picture changes. Yes there is a love immense and unbreakable, but having that love has a cost. With the verse included that love demands that we deny ourselves and take up the mantle of Him who offers the love.

Now, those of us that are inclined to include the verse know one very important fact -- that the sacrifice and self denial result in precisely the kind of benevolent and happy picture that those the leave the verse 'missing' want to paint.

That is why it is so, so sad that some are inclined to leave the verse out. When the verse is left out, its like giving bad directions, it tells you the destination, but does not tell you how to get there. It's a cheat. We draw them in, but never let them get the reward. All they ever get is the promise of the reward.

It may be a natural tendency to leave this verse out. The church has done such a pitiful job of showing the rewards to the world that it understandable that the church would be afraid that no one would make the sacrifice. But the correct response to that situation is not to remove reference to the sacrifice so people will keep coming. THE CORRECT RESPONSE IS TO FIGURE OUT HOW BETTER TO DEMONSTRATE THE REWARD.

Dear God, I do not know why this particular lesson is so hard for your church, but it is. I ask you for the patience to tolerate such circumstances and the willingness to rely on You to correct it.

With Love,