This fighting begin to calm down in 325 C.E. with the doctrinal formulation of Trinitarian thought in the Council of Nicea which was called by the Emporer Constantine.  He wanted the Council to decide once and for all on the Trinity what the church believed.  This would then be enforced as the standard creed and stop, hopefully all the fighting.  Constantine did not really care what the Council decided.  He simply wanted to unify the church so as to better unify his Empire.

At Nicea the classical orthodox (majority opinion) definition of the Trinity was set in concrete and remains today.  Backed then by the Civil authority of Rome the Nicean Creed soon squelched all opposing ideas and views on the Trinity.  There have been heresies since but they have never been major as they were in the pre-Nicean days.

The Nicean Creed says, “In God there is one substance and three persons.  Three persons but one God.”  It is in my opinion a rather sticky mess.

It is also more the product of Greek philosophy than it is of biblical thought.  It is a fact that these early church leaders were deeply in love with Greek philosophy.  This is not a bad thing.  A great deal of good came of this affection.  But it needs to be recognized so that we will be aware of where Greek philosopy too strongly influenced these early church leaders.  For being human they too are open to criticism.

Perhaps instead of Trinity we should use the term Mystery.  We could then say that  the Mystery of God in the Christian tradition  is expressed through the manifestations of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  We could say that and leave it at that.  Leave it at that.  Just declare Father, Son and Holy Spirit and never bother to explain it.  I think that might be a very wise course and would be very biblical.  Let people reflect on what Father, Son and Spirit might mean but make no definitive creeds that people are forced to believe to be Christian.

According to the best historical analysis Jesus never taught or said anything trinitarian.  The baptismal formula of Matt. 28: 19 is a formulation of the church placed on the lips of Jesus.  I practice it but I do not believe Jesus said it.  The Gospel of John statement that alleges Jesus as saying, “I and the Father are one,”  is also the later belief of the church and something Jesus would not have ever said.  I believe that what Jesus was and taught reveals God clearly but not that he ever claimed to be one with God.  So I do not think that Jesus ever taught anything directly trinitarian.  I think that Trinitarianism is the thought of the church as they tried to understand things that were present in their faith in Jesus.

This does not make Trinitarianism all wrong.  It just means there is room for us to keep thinking about it.  It and all of God is a mystery.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit are more in the realm of poetry than the realm of philosophical conceptualizations for me.  I do not like the word Trinity all that much.  It immediately conjures up images that detract for me from the feeling of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

What I do know is this.  When I sense God as transcendant (more than this life or world) and I yearn for Him to hear me, I instinctively cry out, “Father.”  When I feel God’s immanence, His nearness and His presence within me I cry out, “O, Thou Holy Spirit.”  And when I focus on obeying God, living His way in my life, I look to Jesus and often picture him walking beside me, my Example and Light in the way.  This is the Mystery I know.  It is as far as I go in trying to explain it.        

The stories of Jesus casting out demons also pass the test of contextual credibility.  The first century Mediterranean World records several significant miracle workers and exorcists with strong followings such as Pagan Apollonius of Tyana along with  several Jewish  holy men.

The people of that day believed strongly in miracles and demons.  What you find in the New Testament Gospels  about demons is the Jewish cultural beliefs of that day and not sound theology.  The demand of the people of that time made it nearly impossible to be a holy man without performing some miracles and exorcisms.  Mat. 12: 27, 7: 22 and Acts 19:13 acknowledge the reality of Jewish miracle workers and exorcists besides Jesus. 

Jesus’s exorcisms were interpreted apocalyptically, that is as a sign that the Kingdom of God was present in Jesus and he and his followers thought it was coming on earth in their own generation.  This is the reason for the urgency in the New Testament.  Urgency for good is good but on the coming of the Kingdom on earth Jesus, Paul and his first disciples were wrong.  The New Testament acknowledges this in its later writings as the Rule of God is interpreted as being in the hearts of  believers.

Now, are demons and the devil supernatural spirits that can invade human bodies?  No! They aren’t existent as the culture of Jesus’s day believed.

The devil and demons are symbols of psychological and spiritual forces of self-destructive and self-defeating power that exist in all humanity.  In this sense they are very real but they have no literal historical existence.  The only Satan or demon you will ever see is the one looking back at you from your mirror.  But that one can and will destroy you if you are not careful.

Satan and demons as we see them in the New Testamnet were really a late historical development in biblical thought.  They came into being in literature and culture in the two centuries preceding Christ.

These destructive forces can be exorcised by grace through faith.  If I were dealing with a primitive culture that believed in demons as they did in Jesus’s day I would attempt to exorcise them in literal terms to help the people.

I believe I would have some success.  I know I have been successful in casting out my own and others’ demons of fear and insecurity through faith in God’s grace.  By God’s grace of acceptance may we all be successful in doing the same.

History can say that evidence shows that something happened about 30 C.E. that transformed a small band of disciples so that they changed our world.  This change is evidence of a great transformative power at work.  But historians can not say with certainty that this event was the  raising of Jesus physically or spirituallly from the dead.  They can only say that these early believers claimed that the source to their transformative power was Jesus being raised from the dead.

I believe in miracles, mystery and awe.  I am overwhelmed by them from time to time.  But perhaps some people’s problems with miracles, those who believe in them and those who don’t, is that they think of miracles only as improbable events that violate the known laws of nature.

And perhaps for  some believers and non-believers, their problem with the miracle stories in the Bible is that they believe one must believe in them literally for them to do one any good.  But I say to you that the importance and power of the miracle stories is not in seeing them only as literal history but in discovering the meaning they convey of life and God for oneself.

If miracles trouble you, leave them in mystery, forget the literal questions and demands and ask and answer the question, “What is the inspired meaning of these stories for me?”

When I was about 14 years old, Jesus appeared to me in the middle of the night.  A blue aura surrounded him.  He spoke to me and said, “I want you to be a preacher for me.”

I was fascinated by the vision and terrified at the same time.  I hid under my covers but when I looked out he was still there and he repeated the same words.

Finally, I said,”Yes, I would be a preacher for him.”  Peace filled me.  The terror left me and I fell back asleep.

The next morning I thought it must have been a dream and tried to dismiss it.  But something gripped my heart and said, “No, it was real.”  Again, I affirmed that I would be a preacher for Christ and I did and I am.

Years later, at age 18, I came home from college to help move my folks from that old rent house to a new brick home.  It was the only home they ever owned.

As I cleaned out my old bedroom, the cause of my vision of Jesus dawned on me.  It was a reflection in the mirror on the dresser at the foot of my bed.  A reflection of a phosphorescent blue wax figurine of Jesus that hung over the head of my bed.  It had been there for years.  I had forgotten its existence.

This event gave me insight into miracles.  They do not violate natural law, of which, God is the author.

I define miracle as Paul Tillich and Carl Jung did.  It is an external sign event, often mysterious, that coincides with significant internal attitudes so as to be transformative in its impact.

My vision of Jesus came to have a very rational, scientific explantion.  I do not believe in the literal history of the miracles of my religion but I seek to understand their theological meaning.

In so far as I understand them I live by their meaning.  My life is often full of wonder, mystery, awe and power.  I feel that God asks no more of me than this.

I am a historian and a believer.  I really did see and hear Jesus on that night long ago and I have not and do not recant my vision. 

Several times the record shows Jesus speaking of this Son of Man in the third person as if it was someone different from himself.  It was the later church that interpreted Jesus as being this Son of Man. 

Jesus taught that the first in society now would be the last in God’s coming kingdom and the last in present society would be first there.  Jesus behaviour reinforced this teaching in three ways.

He associated often with prostitutes, tax collectors, and sinners (those who had no concern to keep the Jewish law) (Mark 2: 15-16; Matt. 11: 19, 21 and Luke 15: 1).  He associated often in public with women (Mark 15: 40-45; Gospel of Thomas 114; Luke 8: 1-3; John 4, etc.).   And Jesus fondly spent time with children.

The acceptance of those classified as wicked illustrated that God’a kingdom would come to these people and not to the rich, eminenent, powerful and religious.  The acceptance of and working with women showed that God’s Rule was one of equality and not oppression.  Women in Palestine then were generally considered inferior.  The blessing of children revealed that God was for those who were humble and related to others by trusting and loving. 

Does it seem plausible to you that Jesus thought that wicked people would enter God’s Kingdom before those who were trying to be righteous?  I think it is because the scriptures infer that this wicked class were more repentant than many of the religious ones.  They also seemed hungry for that which would give them a sense of acceptance and brotherhood with others.  The pious were more interested in protecting their wealth and living in their form of “gated communities.”

They were more ready to accept the message of coming judgment upon their society preached by both John the Baptist and Jesus.  This judgment did not come as anticipated with the cosmic Son of Man but a temporal judgment of war with Rome C.E. 66-74 did destroy Palestine.

Who is willing to accept the possibility of America losing its number  one status im the world today, the wealthy elite and those occuppying the Halls of Government, or the poor of this land?  Don’t we have a class of leaders today who think we can profligately waste our resources and our armed services and do anything we please and come out smelling like a rose?  And aren’t they backed by much of the Christian Church?  Do we not compare in a scary fashion to the social situation in Jesus’s time?

The Son of Man did not come in Jesus’s own generation as he taught.  But death is imminent for all as individuals and as societies in every generation and after that comes the judgment.  We must be open and humble for the first shall be last and the last first.

Have you been challenged by preaching to go all out for Jesus?  Told that you should sacrifice everything for him so that  he will not deny you before the Heavenly Father?

Usually such preaching is focused on sacrificing materially and in family relationships in order to be all sold out to Jesus.  Most often these exhortations are based on a misunderstanding of some of Jesus’s ”hard sayings” which only make good sense when understood in their historical context.  Two examples of much abused sayings of Jesus are Mark 10: 17-21 and 29-31 and Luke 14:26 and Luke 12: 51-53.

The proper historical context is this.  Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who believed that in his own generation the Kingdom of God was going to break into history on earth and make all wrongs right.  These sayings are in light of that belief.  They are part of Jesus short term ethic.  There was no time for messing around.  You should do it this way and you would be ready for the soon arriving Kingdom of God.

Jesus meant just what he said in these “hard sayings.”  There is wisdom in these sayings but they are not good ethics for the long term haul of life.  The early church soon recognized this and sublated them or changed them later in the New Testament to a more long term spiritual ethic.

Proof of this is seen in the early church at Jerusalem in the book of Acts.  They at first followed Jesus’s short term ethic on posessions, selling everything they had, holding it in common and distributing it to the poor.  About 10 years or more later, after a severe drouth in Judea, these sincere Jerusalem Christians are starving.  Paul and others are taking up relief offerings from all the Christians in Asia Minor to help the impoverished Jerusalem Christians (the Corinthian Letters).

The church never practiced Jesus’s short term apocalyptic ethic again.  It was sublated into the more spiritual teaching of being generous and loving with all that you have and are but don’t destroy the means that enable you to produce wealth so that you may have to give.

On family the church realized that there will always be division between those who are spiritually minded and those who are not.  But you never want to divorce yourself from your family if you can help it.  You want to work it so they will be present holding your hand when you lay dying.

 I believe interpreting the Bible historically promotes a more mentally healthy religion.  Good mental health is a product of following the way of life that is exemplified in how Jesus sought to live in God’s way.

I think Jesus, Paul and the early church were wrong in expecting the Son of Man to come and usher in the Rule of God on earth in their own generation.  This belief did not hurt them.  It made them better people for they went all out for God’s justice to be experienced in their lifetime. 

This expectation is called an apocalyptic view of the Kingdom or Rule of God.  It was very popular in Jesus’s day.  It expected the Rule of God to break into human history very soon, in the apostles’s own lifetime.  Evil rulers and systems would be thrown down and the gentle, merciful, humble, peacemakers and righteous would be exalted.  Jesus’s twelve apostles would rule over Israel on twelve thrones.  Therefore you should not hang on to any of your wealth but share it immediately with the poor (Acts 2 and Mark 10: 17-22).  If you could bridle your sexual passion you shoul not even get married for the time was so short (ICor. 7).

This is what Jesus, Paul and the early church taught and lived.  And time proved them wrong and their interpretation of the Kingdom of God was changed.

This is reflected in the New Testament.  At first the church lived passionately by Jesus’s short term ethic.  But after all the apostles died and no cosmic Son of Man or Kingdom had come the church’s fervor for this short term ethic rightly cooled and was transmuted into the more long term ethic that faithful Christians try to live by today.

This transmutation is called sublation which is negating or canceling a previous biblical teaching with a higher more spiritual interpretation of the old scripture.  This is a biblical principle which Jesus used all the time.  Every time Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount of Old Testament religion, ”You have heard that it has been said, but I say unto you……..,” he was sublating old scripture or teaching with a new higher, spiritual interpretation.  Go thou and do likewise.

The church used the principle of sublation on Jesus’s Kingdom teachings and the Son of Man is coming in this generation teachings in writings like Luke and John.  There the Kingdom of God is declared to not be of this world but is rather the Rule of God within you (Luke 17: 21).  And John spiritualizes the apocalyptic end time teachings of judgment and resurection by saying these events are occuring now when one accepts or rejects Jesus and his way.  All good modern Christian theologians call this realized end time teachings or realized eschatology.

Jesus never claimed to be sinlessly perfect or absolutely right on all things.  He only claimed to be on the right path.  He told a man who overpraised him that he was not perfectly right and good and that no man was.  Only God can be thought of as perfectly good (Mk. 10: 17-19).

So what should we do with Jesus’s the Son of Man is coming in this generation teachings?  We should sublate them as the Bible teaches us to do.

Heb. 9: 27-28 states that it is appointed unto men to die once and after this comes judgment and Christ shall appear a second time for salvation.  Let us interpret the Second Coming and final judgment as occuring for all of us at our death.  Our death is imminent.  It can occur at any time like a ”thief in the night.”

We should live passionately according to Christ’s way of love prepared at any moment to meet our God.  Let us do this and quit wasting precious time and money on foolish books and preachers of prophecy about the end time. Amen! 

No one can prove that God raised Jesus from the dead.  But there are valid historical witnesses that point to Jesus being alive and caught up into the eternal reality of God.  I call these witnesses circumstantial evidence.  I may not can prove that Jesus was raised but these witnesses, of which Sunday as the Lord’s Day is one, definitely point to something tremendous that happened about 30 C.E. that was world transformative.  And that is a historical fact.

I do not believe that Jesus’s resurection was a literal physical resurection.  I believe it was spiritual and that it involved all the essence of what Jesus was as a human being.  I believe the resurection is the same for all of us.  One can believe that Jesus’s resurection was a physical one but one does not have to, to be a true follower of Jesus and honor the biblical story.

How did Sunday become the Lord’s Day?  Because the gospels all teach that Jesus’s being realized as alive from the dead  occurred on the first day of the week, Sunday, (John 20: 1).

The Church, which was entirely Jewish at first, made it an immediate habit after Jesus’s resurection to gather on the first day of the week and have holy communion together (Acts 20:7).  Soon Sunday became known as the Lord’s Day. 

These Jewish Christians continued to keep the Sabbath on Saturday and attend Synagogue.  But Sunday was a holy day for them also.  Before too long the Sabbath receded and the Lord’s Day received preeminence.  This is a tremendous witness to the spiritual  power of the story of Jesus’s resurection.

The Sabbath meant rest.  There were many Sabbaths but the King of them was the weekly Sabbath on Saturday.  It signified remembering creation by God (Gen. 2: 1-3), freedom for the Hebrew people (Ex. 20: 1-2, 8-11), differentiation from other peoples (Ezk. 20:12-13, 20) and  personal trust and faithfulness by even the weak and lowly of society (Isa. 56: 1-5).

The Sabbath was so important and ingrained in the Jewish soul that at least once Jewish soldiers committed suicide rather than break the Sabbath by fighting on it.  It took something of tremendous spiritual power to cause Jews  and Gentile converts to Judaism to create a new holy day of corporate worship.  This is how Sunday witnesses to the resurection of Jesus.

To the witness of the Lord’s Day I add my own.  My life for a long time has been centered around the living Jesus who is my doorway into the reality of God.  I believe God raised Jesus because He has raised me to newness of life in love through the story of Jesus.  Every morning is a resurection from the death of sleep to life in love, faith and hope.  In history this has been so for many, many millions of people.  This is the only proof one can have of Jesus’s resurection but for multitudes it has been and is enough.

This Easter, it is not important if you believe that Jesus’s tomb was literally empty.  It is only important that you live as one in whom the Christ now lives and serves others through you. 

P stands for the politics in existence in Palestine on Palm Sunday when Jesus rode into Jerusalem.  The ruling politic was a domination system with Rome in charge ruling through the collaboration of the wealthy Jewish noble class and the priestly family class. 

It was an oppressive system.  Rome’s taxes took about 14% of a Jew’s annual income.  The collaborating priestly and noble classes took approximately another 20% in Temple and associated taxes.  This combined 34% burden upon the Jewish common people was a destructive load.

Some commentators think that the religious right’s marriage to the Republican Party has helped make for a domination system that is increasingly destructive to the working poor and the middle class of America.  What do you think?  This is of course a direct contradiction of the politics of Jesus.

Jesus’s politics were first of all a peace movement of the Spirit.  He sought in all things to establish the Rule of God and its justice for his culture and society.  God’s justice according to Jesus had not as its primary goal the enrichment of a few but the provision of meaningful work for all  whereby they could have enough for a decent life for their families (Matt. 20: 1-16).

These two diametrically opposed politics were headed for a clash when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a young donkey.  This is the drama of Palm Sunday.

A stands for alright.  Jesus knew the danger he faced.  But his life was guided by in God’s ultimate rule and providence.  One may suffer horrible things while living under God’s guidance but ultimately everything will be alright for God  vindicates his righteous children and raises them from the dead.

One must be born from above by the Spirit to see God’s rule as Jesus did (Jn. 3: 3).  He saw it as benvolent, nurturing, sustaining, bringing deliverence in spite of our sins.  He saw God, in whom we live, move and have our being as always working for the good.

A similiar view of the universe was espoused by the great Greek schools of Philosophy, the Pythagoreans and the Stoics.  They called it Harmony.  Jesus and Paul in Rom. 8: 28 called it Providence.

L stands for Liberty.  The cross to which Jesus was headed revealed the evil of the world’s domination systems.  They always kill reformers wherever they have the power.  But the cross of Jesus is also the symbol of the Way of God which brings liberty.  The Way of God is death to self and coming alive to righteousness and it always liberates one from the power of the demonic forces of self-destruction, self-defeat and self condemnation.  To take up the cross and follow Jesus is to be liberated from the fear of death.  Palm Sunday is about liberty from the destructive forces of life.

M is for mess.  Palestinian politics were in a mess.  The followers of Jesus were in a mess.  What did the death of Jesus mean?  Where would his movement go now?  What about the Kingdom of God which they expected to intervene in their lifetime?

The followers of Jesus became aware of the gift of the Divine Spirit within them.  They listened to Him and were led in working out the truth of their messy questions as it is portrayed in John 16: 13-16.  But it did not happen overnight.  It took a while.  Our messes are not solved overnight either but the meaning of Palm Sunday gives us hope.

This new way of seeing Christianity confirms the conviction that there are no “serious intellectual obstacles to being Christian.”  Much of traditional Christianity does raise unnecessary intellectual roadblocks to becoming or being Christian.  Historically some of these roadblocks have become entrenched in the Church only in the last 300 years.

Traditional Christianity has lots of good folks who have done lots of good works.  But this does not mean that their viewpoint is the sum of Christianity.  It is time to pay serious attention to this Emerging Paradigm of Christianity which is a pattern for “lovers of faith and those seeking a faith to love.”

Compare the Existing view with the Emerging view on the Bible.  The Existing sees the Bible as ”a divine product with divine authority” while the Emerging sees it as ”a human response to God”.

The Existing interprets the Bible in a literal-factual manner.  The Emerging understands the Bible in a historical and metaphorical way.  Historical means the Bible is not dictated by God but rather “is the historical product of two ancient communities, ancient Israel and the early Christian movement.  “The Bible was not written to us but for the ancient communities that produced it.  A historical approach emphasizes the illuminating power of interpreting these ancient documents in their ancient historical contexts.”

Metaphorical means that the Bible is seen as “more than literal, more than factual.”  One does not have to be concerned with the historical factuality of the Bible’s stories, but much more with their meaning.  This view is not bothered by the possiblity that the stories of Jesus’ birth and resurection are metaphorical rather than literally factual accounts.  Rather it asks what are these stories saying?  What meanings do they have for us to hear and obey?”

The Existing view has often made Christianity exclusive as the only way to salvation.  The Emerging Pattern sees Christianity as one of the world’s great religions but not as the only pathway to God’s salvation.

The Emerging sees Jesus not as the only way to God but as the incarnation and clear exemplification of the way to God.  But that way is so great and full of grace that it can be found and experienced through other religious paths also.

Both of these patterns share in common “the reality of God, the centrality of Jesus and the Bible,  the importance of a relationship with God as he is known in Jesus, and the need for all of us to have a spiritual transformation”  They just have a different way of seeing these centralities.  It will not hurt God’s feelings if you choose to see these things in the Emerging way.  (The above quotations and many of the ideas come from Marcus Borg’s wonderful book, The Heart of Christianity, published by HarperCollins of N.Y., 2005.)

The context into which Jesus was born shaped his destiny in many ways beyond his personal control.  His freedom existed in how he chose to respond to this destiny.  His political context made it his destiny to die for his politics.  But he freely chose his politics which were the way of life under the Rule of God.

For nearly 800 years prior to Jesus Palestine had been under foreign domination.  It began with Assyria in Northern Israel in 721 B.C.E., the Babylonians in Southern Judah 587-586 B.C.E., then the Persian Empire which was overthrown by Alexander the Great 336-323 B.C.E.

When Alexander died in 323 B.C.E., his general Ptolemy of Egypt took over the Middle East.  But Ptolemaen control of Palestine was removed by Syria in 198 B.C.E.

The Syrian monarchs were very harsh.  The worst was Antiochus Epiphanes.  He hated the Jews and Judaism extensively, harshly persecuting them to stamp out their religion.

Antiochus is the prototype of the Antichrist in all the modern sensational writing on the Second Coming of Christ by men such as Hal Lindsay and Tim LaHaye.

The Old Testament book of Daniel was written during the successful Jewish Maccabean revolt against Antiochus in 167-163 B.C.E.  All Daniel’s prophecies were about this war and Antiochus.  They were all fullfilled at that time. 

Daniel or any other portion of the Bible does not predict any of the future in our time.  The Bible only tells us that all of creation shall ultimately be positively fullfilled in God’s plan of salvation.

Four major Jewish sectarian groups arose out of the time of Antiochus and were strong influences in Jesus’ day.  The Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes and the fourth philosophy which pushed for Jewish independence at any cost were tearing Jewish society apart in Jesus’ time.  Jesus disagreed with them all. 

The Maccabean revolt let Jews rule themselves till 63 B.C.E.  Then Rome took over.  Its taxation policy displaced Jewish peasants from their land causing starvation and poverty.  Jewish peasants revolted three times between 63 B.C.E. and 135 B.C.E.  They were slaughtered every time.  Peasants only revolt against such superior power when it looks hopeless for feeding their children.

Jesus grew up in this impoverished context.  Shared meals were an important, regular part of Jesus’ ministry primarily because about half of his Galilean followers needed a good meal.  He convinced those who had, to share with those who had not.  This pictured the Justice of the Rule of God.  This was Jesus’ politics.  Holy communion grew out of these shared meals.  The Lord’s Supper is grounded in Justice for the poor.

This angry and oppressive political context shaped Jesus’ destiny in the form of a cross.  His politics of compassionate justice for the poor were the primary cause of his execution.