When Oops is Part of your Religion

Sermon manuscript for Green Lake Church of Seventh-day Adventists
For October 22, 2016


October 22.

If you are looking for the birthday of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, this is it. October 22, 1844.

In the early 1800s, a man named William Miller was studying the Bible, especially the prophecies about the end of time. As he studied he came to believe he had deciphered prophecies which gave an approximate date for the Second Coming of Jesus. He couldn't believe this was really true, so he restudied the passages and double-checked his calculations. Every which way he approached it, he came up with the same answer. Jesus was coming back to earth in 1843, give or take a year or two.

He was amazed that no one else had seen this. How could it be that he was the only one? If it were true surely he should tell people. But if he was wrong, it would be irresponsible. So he kept quiet about it. But he experienced an intensifying inner conviction that he should tell others the good news. Finally, in an attempt to get the monkey off his back, he made a deal with God:

“You want me to tell people—you set it up.”

He figured that would take care of things. It was up to God. He was off the hook.

Shortly after he prayed this prayer, his nephew showed up at the house with an invitation to come preach at their church. Uncle William was not too happy about this, but a bargain was a bargain, so he preached. And the rest is history.

Other people got excited about his discovery. Invitations to preach started coming in. Over the next few years a huge movement sprang up as thousands, then tens of thousands of people caught Advent fever. Jesus was coming soon. In 1843, give or take a year.

Eventually, the entire nation was abuzz with Advent fever. People either believed it and thought it was the most wonderful truth they had ever heard or people dismissed it as fanaticism, fundamentalism, and a flat contradiction of Jesus' statement that the day and hour of the Second Coming was a mystery known only to God.

Sometime in 1843 someone came up with a refinement of Mr. Miller's prophetic scheme. This new interpretation pinpointed a specific date—October 22, 1844. That was the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, according to one Jewish calendar, 2300 years after a decree made by a Persian king providing for the rebuilding of Jerusalem. According to the Adventist interpretation, Christ was supposed to return on that day.

Among the true believers the excite was almost unbearably intense. Jesus was coming again. Farmers were so certain of this prophecy they left their potatoes in the ground unharvested. Why have a barn full of potatoes if Jesus was coming back. They could use their time more profitably sharing the good news with their neighbors.

Finally, the day arrived. It was like Thanksgiving and Christmas and the Fourth of July all rolled into one. It was the best day ever. Jesus was going come. War would end. Sick people would be released from pain and suffering. Crushing debt would disappear. Arthritis would quit hurting. The scourge of addictions—in those days that would have been alcoholism—would be solved. Life would be happy. People would be holy and healthy. What a day!!!!!!

The day passed. Nothing happened.

It was a great big OOPS!

It was utterly devastating for the true believers. It shook their entire religion to its very core. In the weeks and months after this Great Disappointment, the true believers went back to the Bible trying to figure out where they went wrong. They came up with new interpretations of the passages they thought had predicted the Second Coming. These new interpretations were still full of complicated calculations and leaping interpretations of obscure Bible verses, interpretations that don't do very well under the microscope of biblical scholarship.

The mistake was so painful, so embarrassing, the natural tendency would be to sweep it under the rug, pretend it never happened. But there were some interesting side effects of this massive disappointment.

This "oops" unsettled those early Adventists to the very core of their beings. They questioned thevery foundations of their religion.

What kind of God, they asked, would keep people alive for billions of years just so they could be tortured? The obvious answer—God would be a monster—had been obscured by centuries of Christian tradition. Because of the upheaval caused by their great oops, these early Adventists were enabled to reject this venerable tradition. They rejected the notion of eternal hell.

They rediscovered the Jewish Sabbath.

They rejected the belief in predestination. Even though it had been a popular doctrine for at least 1700 years, the shattering of their religion allowed them to ask the obvious question: How can it be just for God to give people life just so God could damn them. That's crazy. Insane. Unacceptable. They rejected predestination.

These theological advances were the fruit of the big oops. Their theological confidence had been so shattered, they were able to question all kinds of certainties and traditions. If the thing they had believed so happily and enthusiastically was wrong, what else could be wrong? It was a great question.

Because of this big oops, we learned humility. And never again, did we imagine that we had it all figured out. We shared our faith with others always aware that we could be wrong.

---I wish.  :-)

Early Adventists were humans. Very quickly, they created a new list of doctrines that were absolutely true. They imagined that their new Bible interpretations were the only possible interpretations for righteous, intelligent people. We imagined that if people disagreed with us, they were either unintelligent or unrighteous. That is, people who disagreed with us were either not smart enough to see the truth of what we were saying or they were wickedly refusing to admit what they could see.

Which brings us to today.

In politics we cannot help ourselves. We are certain that people who support the other side are either stupid or evil. Or both. It is not possible that an intelligent person with a good heart could possibly advocate voting for the other side.

It is the same in religion. Whether we are talking about the ordination of women or the age of the earth or God's blessing on faithful relationships between homosexuals or in other circles our theories about the Trinity and eschatology and networks of evil, whatever view we take seems to us to be the inescapable conclusion that everyone would come to, if they were just sufficiently smart and righteous.

What to do? Let's remember that our religion includes a Big Oops. Our own name for the birthday of our religion, October 22, is “The Great Disappointment.” We should just call it the Big Oops. We knew we were right, but we were wrong.

And it is not just our own particular denominational history that includes big oops. Christianity itself is full of “oops” on the part of venerated leaders.

It is common for Christians to imagine that the very best version of Christianity was “apostolic Christianity.” But the apostles made big oops.

The disciple John reported to Jesus: Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name. But he did not have authorization from you or even from one of us. So we told him to stop.

Jesus said, “What? You stopped him? How could you? He was helping people. And helping them in my name. And you stopped him? John, don't you understand that he is our ally?”  Mark 9 and Luke 9

Another favorite story, one that we rehearse every time we dedicate a baby: The disciples officiously asserted their authority to control access to Jesus. On this occasion, they used their status as the official assistants of Jesus to relegate mothers and children to the status of negligible people. Men mattered. Men needed to be taught, instructed, responded to. Men were spiritual leaders and as such, they especially deserved the time and attention of Jesus. Perhaps there would be time and place for women and children after all the men had been served. But the disciples were crystal clear on priorities. Men first.

Jesus was crystal clear. Children first. Children mattered. In fact, they are the very essence of the kingdom of heaven.

The disciples imagined it was their job use their position of authority as members of the inner circle of Jesus to enforce the natural ranking of their society and make sure Jesus served the important people first. The disciples were wrong. It was a big oops.

Just as we say Black Lives Matter because in our society, Black people have been pushed to the edges and denied equal access and equal justice, so Jesus insisted that children's lives mattered because in his society, they were regarded as unimportant. They had diminished rights.

The apostles were wrong. It is still very easy for us who occupy prominent positions in the church to mimic the apostles and imagine ourselves as gatekeepers for Jesus. If we do, we will probably be wrong. We will go Oops!

Nearly everyone around Jesus misunderstood his mission. As far as we can tell only the aged priest Simeon had any inkling that Jesus' mission included heartbreak. People believed in Jesus with fiery passion. They wrapped their entire hope around the triumph of God in the mission of Jesus.

Then Jesus was killed. Executed. What happened to their prophetic interpretation? Oops.

We heard the story in our Scripture reading.

On the Sunday after Jesus was crucified, two disciples were walking from Jerusalem to a nearby village called Emmaus. Somewhere along the road a stranger joined them and asked what they had been talking about so intently.
One them, Cleopas, said, “What do you think we're talking about? Unless from you're from out of town. We were talking about Jesus of Nazareth, of course.”
“Tell me about him,” the stranger said.
“He was a mighty prophet, a spell-binding teacher and incredible healer. The whole nation was stirred by his work. Then, just this past Friday the chief priests and our rulers handed him over to the Romans who crucified him.
“We had trusted he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. He was the Messiah. We were absolutely sure of it. And now, here we are. He is dead. We are devastated. Luke 24

They thought they knew what the work of Messiah was. They were sure. They could quote chapter and verse. They were wrong.

Our Old Testament reading today was from Jeremiah.

He lived through a time devastating loss for the Jewish people. The City of Jerusalem was besieged. Then captured and 10,000 people were deported to Babylon.

Just like religious people today, people in Jeremiah's time listened to prophetic voices, to preachers, hoping to learn how these catastrophic events fit into the grand scheme of history. The conservative preachers kept promising that God was going to intervene. God would never let the wicked Babylonians triumph over the Jewish people, the special people of God.

Jeremiah disagreed. He insisted the Jews did not have a special claim on God in contrast to the neighboring peoples. He told the people get ready for doom. How? What were the people supposed to do?

Over and over Jeremiah gave the same answer:

Do not trust in prophecies that proclaim God's favor on this temple or this city. Instead do this: Provide for justice. Be careful to protect the foreigner, the fatherless, and the widow, and do not shed innocent blood.  

That is chapter seven. In chapter twenty-two, Jeremiah comes back to the same theme. This time it is couched as advice to the king.

This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place. Jeremiah 22.

If we follow Jeremiah's counsel, our theological and eschatological theories won't matter all that much. Errors in our prophetic interpretation, even errors in Bible interpretation will become insignificant.

Jesus made the same point in Matthew 24-25. He talked about end times and prophetic speculations. Then he told the story of the sheep and goats. The smart people were not those who understood prophecy, but those who served.  Let's be smart.

I tried to grow a variety of seeds I came across, grape seeds, seeds from dates, seeds from apples I ate. One problem with growing these random seeds was that I never knew if they would actually sprout. And if they took a long time to sprout, I would forget to water them. The soil would dry out and any  seed sprouting below the surface would wither.

Then I stumbled on a technique to manage my interrupted interest. I planted the seeds in a pot that already had a plant in it. I would simply take care of the plant that I could see, and that care meant the unseen seeds hiding in the soil got the care they needed.

Our theological and prophetic theories are like slow seeds. Some will sprout. Some won't. It's hard to predict which will bear fruit. But if we will devote ourselves to the work outlined by Jeremiah—if we will seek justice for those at the margins, if we will remember that Black lives matter and that poor people matter and that children matter—if we will give care to these things, we can leave our theological and prophetic notions to work themselves out over time. Some of our doctrines will thrive and bless us. Some will wither and disappear. No problem. When we devote ourselves to justice and peace, to care and reconciliation, our theology will take its proper place and we will find our lives in harmony with the divine mission revealed in Jesus.

Over time our ideas will be winnowed, and we will be left with convictions and doctrines that are most helpful in our cooperation with Jesus in his divine mission. And our lives, which have been poured into service will not have written after them, Oops.

You Have Heard, But I Say

(This column is especially for Adventists over sixty-five. Everyone else is also welcome to read.)

You have heard the exam is so difficult scarcely any will pass. But I say, the teacher is so skillful scarcely any will fail. 1.

You have heard that God is so holy, humans scarcely dare dream of a place in his presence. I say that God is so holy, humans cannot find a path so devious or a place so far but that even there God with great affection and longing will be waiting for them to arrive. 2.

You have heard that we can expect a future time of trouble worse than any humans have ever experienced. I say that is not true. 3.

You have heard that there is a moment in your earthly future which will be absolutely determinative of your eternal future. It is called the “close of probation.” If when that moment arrives, the heavenly detectives can find a single instance of moral, ethical, or healthy habits failure which you have not confessed and repented of, then you doomed for eternity. But I say to you, if this were true heaven would be empty. 4.

You have heard that to successfully “go through the time of trouble” you will have to get the victory over cheese. You have also heard that wearing a necklace is an infallible sign of damnable pride and self-pampering. But I tell you that cheese and jewels are gifts of God. 5.

You have heard that “not one in twenty” will make it to heaven. But I tell you that the Shepherd would never tolerate such losses. 6.

You have heard that unless people believe in their hearts and confess with their mouths that Jesus Christ is Lord they will be lost. But I tell you that many will go into the kingdom who previously had no personal knowledge of the Savior or a knowing connection with the “People of God.” 7.

You have been told that God is forever frowning because his people are not good enough. I tell you that God is perpetually smiling because he delights in every breath his children take. 8.

I keep hearing from my Adventist friends who are over sixty-five comments that express profound uncertainty about their place in heaven. They may voice their rejection of legalism. They say they know we are not saved by our works. But when I listen for a minute longer, I hear words that indicate an ineradicable anxiety. The indoctrination in Adventist schools and evangelistic meetings is too deep. They know at the core of their being that God is fundamentally displeased with his children because they are not perfect. They know at the core of their being that to “make it through the time of trouble” one must be perfect, flawless, and that they have not yet arrived at perfection. And, given their last sixty years of effort, they are unlikely to ever reach perfection, even if they live to be 120.

You have heard that you are damned. I say you are saved. You have heard that God frowns when he looks your direction. I testify that I have seen him smile.

1. One of the names for Jesus used by the disciples was Teacher. Even in the traditional telling of the Jesus story, the teacher successfully graduates 91 percent of his students.

2. Consider the story of Jonah and the words of Psalm 139:7-17

3. None of the predictions in The Great Controversy is worse than the reality of life under Pol Pot or during China's Cultural Revolution in the 1970s or during the Rwandan genocide. Quit freaking out about some hypothetical “time of trouble” which terrified our parents and grandparents and great grandparents and never happened.

4. Only an evil god would order life so that all of eternity depended on a moment of perfection. The threat of the “close of probation” which terrorized me through my childhood must be denounced as an unfortunate distortion.

5. I don't even know where to start in debunking this. Jesus said not a word about cheese. Do we really imagine that the heavenly detectives will be inspecting our sandwiches to see if the cheese inside is soy cheese or dairy cheese? And Jesus' only comment that touches on necklaces is the story of the woman with ten coins—coins which were commonly worn on a necklace. And the woman wearing the necklace represents God.

6. The way Jesus tells the story, when the Shepherd is finished all one hundred sheep are safely home, when the woman quits searching all ten coins are restrung on her necklace, and the Father's final word to the most recalcitrant son is: All that I have is yours.

7. Luke 14:11-24 and Matthew 25:31-46

8. Talk to a mother about her disabled or criminal or addicted or maligned or depressed or troubled or troubling child. If her child is breathing, life is better than if her child is not breathing. So God takes exquisite pleasure in the sheer fact of our breathing. And if we manage to say word of gratitude or affection or faith or hope or pardon, the happiness in heaven is beyond human words.  

Whisper.

Whisper. Say it with a nod and wink and smile. Furtively. Because it's our secret, but no less true for that. Love will win. And so will we because we are lovers, and even more certainly, beloved. 

A response by the Norwegian Union Conference leaders to the GC document, A Study of Church Governance and Unity

I copied this from the web site for the Norwegian Adventist Church:
http://www.adventist.no/Media/Adventist/Images/2016/September-2016/A-response-to-A-Study-of-Church-Governance-and-Unity

October 4, 2016

A response to "A Study of Church Governance and Unity"

A statement by the Norwegian Union Conference leaders

The document "A Study of Church Governance and Unity" published recently by the General Conference Secretariat seeks, it claims, to develop unity in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The document has a number of weaknesses and is likely to contribute to the splitting of the church over the issue of equality for women in ministry. An attempt to coerce unions to comply with General Conference Working Policy is likely to set in motion a series of uncontrollable and unpredictable events.

Oversimplification

A major weakness of the lengthy document from the Secretariat is over simplification of the issue under consideration: the Adventist church’s approach to the ordination of women. The basic assumption on which the argument of the document is based, is this: Unity can only be achieved by getting deviant unions in line with General Conference Working Policy.

It is understandable that the General Conference Secretariat, whose function is to ensure that Seventh-day Adventist entities follow the General Conference Working Policy, writes only in terms of policy compliance, but it is a dangerous oversimplification based on pragmatic rather than moral and spiritual considerations.

Those unions which have ordained female pastors or stopped ordaining altogether, do so because they are convinced that the Bible tells them to treat men and women equally. Their decisions are not grounded in policy, but in spiritual and moral obligation.

The document does not properly take into account the theological understanding that has motivated unions to a course of action different to the stipulations of the Working Policy. This failure in understanding means that the document will not actually provide a basis for stronger unity, but rather the contrary.

The work of the Theology of Ordination Study Committee (TOSC) ended by presenting two opposite understandings of the biblical material on the ordination of women. When a worldwide church study of ordination concluded that both views are legitimate, it is futile now to call upon Working Policy to deny that diversity.

Diversity

Section III of the document discusses “Diversity, Union and Authority” and states: “In the Bible, diversity is a positive quality, not a negative one” (p. 10). The same is true in 2 the writings of Ellen G. White. The document goes on to raise the question of how the limits to diversity are to be defined. The Secretariat proposes the principle that decisions on the limits of diversity should be defined “collectively and collaboratively, not unilaterally.” (p. 12).

The document considers the early church council in Jerusalem (Acts 15) saying it “is significant almost as much for its process as for the theological decision that resulted.” (p 13). The document ignores the fact that there are two major factors for the success of the decision at the Jerusalem council. One factor was how the Holy Spirit lead to positions they previously held unthinkable as well as working mightily among gentiles. In the council, Peter told how he was asked to visit Cornelius, and Paul and Barnabas witnessed concerning their work among gentiles. The second major factor was the apostles’ brave leadership of guiding the church into a totally new understanding of Scripture, making room for different practices in the church.

In the Old Testament, God had prescribed a manner of worship and from their plain reading of the Scriptures, the Jews had drawn the conclusion that “it was improbable that He would ever authorize a change in any of its specifications.” (AA 189). Still the leadership of the church helped members to a broadened view. Ellen G. White says: “the very existence of the Church” depended on this decision (AA 192).

At the General Conference Session in San Antonio in 2015, the Seventh-day Adventist Church decided to deny the principle that guided the Jerusalem Council and made it a success. The work of the Holy Spirit through female pastors in China was not mentioned. Delegates decided against diversity in the practice of ordination. Previously, in the years while TOSC did its work, the General Conference leadership had followed a strategy of conspicuous silence regarding how to handle diversity. The General Conference behaved very differently from the apostles at the Jerusalem council, providing no leadership to the church on a very divisive issue. We believe that the General Conference leadership must take responsibility for its failure to reach a decision that would create the possibility for different practices to exist harmoniously, side by side within the church. Because of the “no-vote” in San Antonio, we are now in a much more difficult situation than we were in prior to San Antonio.

Need for leadership to lead

The question of ordination of female ministers has undoubtedly been the most divisive and most difficult issue the Seventh-day Adventist Church has faced in recent decades. When facing divisive issues, the church needs competent leadership. However, the General Conference President has made no attempt to create space for divisions and unions to allow ordination of women. The TOSC had not ruled any of the presented views as illegitimate. Therefore there was an obligation for the General Conference leadership to set aside divisive personal convictions and work for a unifying solution.

The General Conference was repeatedly urged to give a recommendation to the delegates to the San Antonio session. Most notably many members of the General Conference Executive Committee pleaded with leadership at the 2014 Annual Council to give guidance to the delegates. Leadership declined. The failure to create space for different views on the ordination of women to ministry was a grave mistake.

Elder Wilson made clear his personal opposition to the ordination of women, but he never attempted to defuse the situation by calling for a solution that would accommodate both sides. If unity was high on the agenda of the General Conference 3 leadership prior to San Antonio, they did not use the most obvious opportunity to create it.

The study document released by the General Conference Secretariat says not one word about the obligation of the General Conference leadership to safeguard unity by creating space for different practices. That is a major weakness of the document.

Dialogue is better than confrontation

Joshua 22 recounts a story showing the value of dialogue in changing policy. After the conquest of Israel, the account in Joshua 22, describes how some tribes heard that the two and a half tribes that took land on the other side of the Jordan, had erected an altar. The Israelites assembled for war against the two and a half tribes. They would not tolerate a departure from policy.

However, after representatives had talked with the leaders of the two and a half tribes, the situation was defused. War was avoided. The unauthorized altar was accepted.

Ellen G. White comments on the issue: “How often serious difficulties arise from a simple misunderstanding, even among those who are actuated by the worthiest motives; and without the exercise of courtesy and forbearance, what serious and even fatal results may follow (PP 519).

She continues to draw lessons of the greatest importance and relevance for the Seventhday Adventist Church in the present crisis: “While very sensitive to the least blame in regard to their own course, many are too severe in dealing with those whom they suppose to be in error. No one was ever reclaimed from a wrong position by censure and reproach; but many are thus driven further from the right path and led to harden their hearts against conviction. A spirit of kindness, a courteous, forbearing deportment may save the erring and hide a multitude of sins (PP 519.520 Italics supplied).

“The wisdom displayed by the Reubenites and their companions is worthy of imitation. … Those who are actuated by the spirit of Christ will possess that charity which suffers long and is kind” (PP 520).

This is the kind of attitude needed to make sure the Seventh-day Adventist Church stays united. Only actions bearing the qualities of the fruit of the spirit will bring true unity among the people of God. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law” (Gal 5:22.23).

Assessment of possible outcomes

It has become known that the General Conference is working on a document outlining how to discipline unions that do not comply with policy. Information from the General Conference indicates that the church leadership wants to use considerable pressure to get unions in line with the Working Policy.

It is our experience that few of the documents presented by the General Conference to the Executive Committee, contain any assessment of possible outcome scenarios. Therefore, it is important to ask, what are the implications of the church leadership’s failure to consider possible responses to the propositions in the present document?

We have noted above that the document "A Study of Church Governance and Unity" is oversimplifying the issue. Any thinking along the lines that an Executive Committee action would coerce unions into line, is far too optimistic. The major problem with this thinking is that the General Conference is appealing to policy, but for the unions in question this is a question of a biblical and moral mandate.

In a showdown along these lines, the General Conference is bound to loose. We are Seventh-day Adventists. We know by heart Acts 5:29: “We ought to obey God rather than men.” (KJV).

Here are some possible outcomes that must be be considered:

1. Unions accept the urge to return to following the General Conference Working Policy. This is probably what the General Conference is intending. It is, however, an unlikely outcome, given the biblical, moral and in some cases legal obligations felt by some unions that they have to treat men and women equally.
2. The General Conference tries to replace union leadership in unions that do not comply with the Working Policy. Any such move will most certainly meet with strong opposition, and may turn out to be impossible to accomplish because the actions of these unions are an expression of the convictions of the members in those unions.
3. General Conference will lose further credibility among large segments of the membership because of the handling of the situation.
4. The Church will split. The affected unions may sever connections with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. A domino effect may take place where many other unions leave the Seventh-day Adventist Church. By trying to coerce unions, a series of uncontrollable and unforeseen events will develop. 

The probability of splitting the church by voting harsh measures against unions which do not fully comply with the General Conference Working Policy is arguably higher than the probability of achieving the desired outcome of unity. That must be a sobering thought for everyone involved, particularly for the members of the General Conference Executive Committee.

There is always more than one option

The document "A Study of Church Governance and Unity" released by the General Conference Secretariat leaves the impression that the compliance of the Unions is the only solution to current problems.

However, in any situation there are always several options. Discerning leaders will always try to present various options when facing an issue that is a violation neither of any of the Fundamental Beliefs, nor of any clear biblical principle. To think there is only one option available is very dangerous for an Executive Committee facing crisis. Here are some possible options that may better preserve unity.

1. Leave the situation as it is. Continue a genuine dialogue with all parties in order to find workable solutions.
2. Work constructively toward a healing solution along the lines of Acts 15 opening up for diversity. It is within the power of the General Conference Executive to vote changes to the General Conference Working Policy that will ensure unity in diversity.
3. Create a new gender inclusive credential. It is the prerogative of the General Conference Executive Committee to create new policies.
4. Discontinue ordination in its present form. Specify a simple prayer of dedication as the norm when people begin ministry in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
5. Table the proposal and give further study to finding means of healing. 5 Never before in the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church have we been closer to a major split of the church. May leaders and members of the Executive Committee take to heart the lessons from Joshua 22 and Acts 15 and make wise decisions that will truly foster unity in our Church, despite our differences

Never before in the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church have we been closer to a major split of the church. May leaders and members of the Executive Committee take to heart the lessons from Joshua 22 and Acts 15 and make wise decisions that will truly foster unity in our Church, despite our differences.

Fall Lectures at Green Lake Church

Fall Lecture Series at Green Lake Church

Life and Work among the Disadvantaged 
October 7-8. 2016

Trevor Gardner will speak Friday night and Sabbath afternoon. Shelly Ngo will speak for Sabbath School and the worship service. Both will help us see into a world most of us have never experienced. They will talk about how faith has impacted their work and how their work has impacted their spiritual and religious life. Their presentations may re-shape how you view the world.

There will be a soup supper Friday evening at 6:30p before the presentation. There will be a potluck lunch on Sabbath followed by the final presentation and Q&A. We plan to live-stream all four presentations.

See the bios below.



Trevor Gardner is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Washington School of Law. Professor Gardner writes in the area of criminal justice with a focus on policing. His research addresses a variety of related topics including racial profiling, community control of police, racial peer-group identification among African-American police officers, and decriminalization movements among local governments.
After completing undergraduate studies at the University of Michigan, Professor Gardner earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he served as Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal. He then worked as a trial attorney at the District of Columbia Public Defender Service, litigating juvenile and adult criminal cases from presentment through disposition.

Professor Gardner left criminal practice to join academia, earning his master's and doctoral degrees in Sociology at the University of California, Berkeley.



Shelly Ngo is a writer, speaker, and social media strategist for the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Prior to her job at the prosecutor's office, Shelly worked as the director of marketing and communications for the international relief and development organization World Vision, which operates in nearly 100 countries worldwide.  She earned a master's degree in communication leadership and digital media from the University of Washington, and undergraduate degrees in journalism and political science from Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA.  Shelly is the mother of four teenaged children, the owner of a corresponding number of pets to teenagers, and a fan of the all-too-rare afternoon nap.

Faithful

.
Sermon manuscript for Green Lake Church of Seventh-day Adventists
For Sabbath, October 1, 20162016

Texts:
Exodus 2:15-21  Let's begin the scripture reading with the second word of the second sentence, “Moses fled from Pharaoh and went to live in the land of Midian. When Moses arrived in Midian, he sat down beside a well. . . .”
Luke 22:15-20

It would make a perfect romantic movie, a chick-flick I think they call it. Right up there with the Princes Bride. The adopted grandson of a wicked king strikes a blow for his enslaved native people. He kills a wicked, abusive supervisor. Then he has to run for his life.

He ends up in the remote wilderness of the Sinai peninsula. Afraid. Alone. But alive.

This particular afternoon, weeks into his fugitive existence, he is sitting in the shade at a well. A group of young women bring their sheep to the well to water them. They have filled the troughs and the first batch of sheep is just beginning to drink when other shepherds arrive. A bunch of guys. They rush toward the girls' sheep waving their arms and shouting. The sheep scatter and the girls go after them. The guys laugh and jeer. “Thank you for filling the troughs little girls. That was very kind of you.” The language went down hill from there. The girls gathered their sheep at a safe distance from the jerks.

The stranger gets to his feet, pulls a sword and marches toward the guys. His eyes flash fire. His body screams threat and indignation. “Get your sheep out of here or I'll turn them into lambchops and when I'm finished with them I'll turn you into worm food. Move.”

The guys are astonished then terrified. They had no idea who the stranger was, but everything about him said warrior, commander, boss. And his sword did not look like a toy.

They moved their sheep away. Not far enough. Moses drove them far from the well. Then he turned and beckoned the girls. They came shyly bringing their sheep. Moses grabbed the rope and hoisted bucket after bucket of water from the well as effortlessly as if it were a teacup. The girls didn't know what to think. Who was this stranger, this handsome stranger, this commander?

Their sheep watered they moved off toward home, chattering all the way with amazement.

At home their father wanted to know why they were home so early.

“Well, there was the guy. He chased away the other shepherds and filled the troughs until all our sheep were done.”

“What?” their dad exclaimed. “A stranger protected you and watered your sheep and you left him sitting by himself at the well? Go find him. Bring him home for dinner.”

The girls were only too happy to comply.

Moses came to dinner.

And stayed the night.

And accepted a job.

And married Zipporah, Dad's oldest daughter.

And they lived happily ever after.

Well, not completely ever after. There was that time when Moses' brother and sister family wanted to get rid of the black woman. It's not clear if they were opposed to Zipporah because she was black or they figured they could use her blackness to incite other people to be sympathetic to their allegations.

But it didn't work. Moses obeyed the expanded version of Genesis command. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and brothers and sisters and be one with his wife. Moses and Zipporah began their romance with a fairy-tale meeting and preserved their union through all the drama of Moses life.

Romance seems to part of the very essence of being human.  Whether it's Hollywood or Bollywood or Shakespeare or Homer or the modern Nigerian writer, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, every human story involves romance, our consuming guiding hunger for love and connection. As we watch these stories or read these stories our own hearts are captured. We find ourselves holding our breath hoping they make it, hoping again for the triumph of love.

In the Bible this theme of romance is linked directly with God. Our hunger for magical union—AND ENDURING UNION—is presented as a mirror of the hunger of God. God is a lover, a persistent, hopeful, we could even say, stubborn lover.

It is against this backdrop that we make the best sense of the command, “Don't commit adultery.” When we link our hearts and lives and bodies in romance, violation of that trust, turning our attention to someone else always rips and tears at the very fabric of our being. I remember reading the comments of a secular counselor. She was responding to a question about whether an affair is ever justified. Her answer: First, I tell clients who ask me this question, 'you must recognize that someone is going to get hurt. Always. Inescapably.

It is a law of humanity. Hence the commandment: Don't hurt each other. More than that, be stubborn in faithfulness.

Be faithful so you don't hurt each other.

And more, be faithful, because that is the way of God and you are God's children.

Because we are Christians we look especially to Jesus as the clearest exhibition of what God is like. With this idea of romance—and enduring faithfulness as the sweetest, truest flower of romance—let's turn our attention to the last supper.

Jesus had gathered a family, a whole gang of lovers. The intense relationship among these men reminds me of what I have read of the bonding of the members of a military unit who have braved combat together or among miners who have spent years watching out for each other in the dark shafts of coal mines or police who have shared risk and service together. They have become family. They have become one unit, one group, a unique intensity of union.

Over three years of intense ministry, constant service, occasional threat, frequent opposition and challenge Jesus and his twelve friends had become one. Jesus knows he has reached the end. He is going to die. So he plans a special meal.

That evening at the table he makes a speech.

“With great desire I have anticipated this dinner. Take this wine and share it among you, knowing that it symbolizes my blood. My ministry, indeed my very life, finds meaning in the family gathered here at the table. I will die before I let you go. I live in you. Drink, all of you. Even you, Judas. Drink.”


Faithful. Jesus was faithful. And when we take the bread and drink the fruit of the vine, we are receiving that faithfulness. We are saying, Thank you. Yes. Yes.

And we are pledging ourselves to carry forward the romance of Jesus. We will do all that we can to extend the love of God to all. We will die before we will kill. We will give before we allow someone to be be driven to theift by their need.

And will join Moses in protecting the vulnerable who would be driven from the well by coarse, bullying rowdies.

Today, at this table, let's take fresh resolve, fresh inspiration to join in the romance of God.