 |
 |
Fine Prints: July, 2008
Sharon Stone's Karma Conundrum
July 5
Pope's Visit Highlights Spiritual Conundrum-1
July 12
Pope's Visit Highlights Spiritual Conundrum-2
July 19
It's a Mitzva to be a Mensch.
July 26
Sharon Stone's Karma Conundrum
Movie actress Sharon Stone set off a firestorm when she
recently suggested that the earthquake that killed tens of thousands in
China may have been karma for what the Chinese government has done in
Tibet.
Ms. Stone quickly learned that, even if you truly
believe something, it might be helpful to remember the truism from
Ecclesiastes 3:7: There’s "a time to be silent and a time to speak." Or
maybe she should have remembered the Apostle Paul’s statement that
"‘everything is permissible’—but not everything is beneficial" (1
Corinthians 10:23).
Karma is the idea that both good and bad come to you on
the basis of how you live: Do bad, reap bad; do good, reap good.
To be sure, it’s a biblical principle that we reap what
we sow. But it’s also biblical that we may reap things we don’t sow (see
John 9:1-3). And it’s equally biblical that we don’t always reap what we
sow—at least not immediately (see Psalm 10:1-13). The sow-reap
connection clearly isn’t absolute.
Rigid belief in the doctrine of karma leads to major
distortions—distortions about as old as humanity itself. For example, if
bad "luck" is the result of bad living, it’s likely that when the
fortunes of my friend Job suddenly plummet, I’m going to assume that he
must be harboring secret sin, even though outwardly he seems a paragon
of virtue.
And if I’m Job, I may drive myself nearly crazy trying
to figure out what I’m doing that’s so bad that the forces of fate are
so arrayed against me. How do I know what needs to be improved?
Of course, the reverse is also true: If life is coasting
along wonderfully for me, it’s easy to pat my own back in
self-congratulations. Obviously I’m a mighty good specimen of humanity
or God/fate wouldn’t be rewarding me so marvelously. So I’m in danger of
saying, "I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing"
(Revelation 3:17).
To Christianity’s credit, invoking karma to explain the
negatives we encounter in life is on the wane—though not totally
eradicated. However, I’m not so sure that we show the same restraint in
invoking karma—although we’d never call it that—for the good things that
come our way.
For example, I suggest that tales such as Uncle
Arthur’s Bedtimes Stories, which were a mainstay in my upbringing,
seek to sell the idea of positive karma. The consistent theme of the
stories is: You do your part by being loyal, honest, faithful, prayerful
and a long list of other positive attributes and behaviors, and God will
always come through for you. There’s no hint that sometimes people reap
bad results from good behavior, let alone good results from bad
behavior.
The facts are: In the world of sin in which we live, the
rain (blessing) falls on the righteous and on the unrighteous (Matthew
5:45), and so does the hail (life’s adversity).
One final question: What kind of God would kill or maim
tens of thousands of ordinary Chinese citizens just because He might
happen to be mad at a few high-level government officials?
Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor
 
Pope's Visit Highlights Spiritual Conundrum--1
The pope’s recent visit to the United States
made quite an impression on me. But what struck me most might not be
what one might expect.
It wasn’t the non-stop news coverage. (Though, as a lifelong Seventh-day
Adventist, born and raised on Adventist end-time teachings, I couldn’t
help but take note.) Nor was it the extravagance. (After all, the
Adventist term "General Conference Session" isn’t synonymous with the
word "austerity.") Nor was it the pope’s too-little-too-late comments
about priestly child-molestation and bishoply cover-up. (I mean, we’re
still waiting for an official apology from our own church’s hierarchy
about what our denomination did in the church’s
female-wage-discrimination case brought to the fore by Merikay Silver.)
No, what really set my mind
awhirl was the "popemobile." Seriously.
As I watched the pope being chauffeured before adoring crowds, it struck
me as incongruous that this man, believed by many to have such a hotline
to heaven that he can speak infallibly on God’s behalf, should need the
protection of bullet-proof glass and a security detail armed with
state-of-the-art gadgetry to guarantee his safety. If God can’t be
counted on to protect the pope, then what hope is there for the average
member of the Catholic faith?
And what hope is there for
the average Adventist? If being part of "the one holy catholic church"
doesn’t guarantee anything for the pope and his followers, does being
part of "God’s remnant church" provide any guarantees for Adventists? Or
would we, too, be better off to put a little less trust in heaven’s
protective powers and a little more trust in bullet-proof glass and its
qualitative equivalents?
I grew up singing a familiar Protestant song that claims: "God will take
care of you, through every day, o’er all the way; He will take care of
you, God will take care of you."
In fact, the song gets even more specific: "When dangers fierce your
path assail, God will take care of you." And, more emphatic still:
"Nothing you ask will be denied, God will take care of you."
It sounds so wonderful. But things like the popemobile bring us back to
life’s grim realties. The song’s promised protections seem elusive at
best.
Few scriptures bear the poetic beauty of Psalm 91. But just how
literally are we to take the wonderful promises presented in this
passage? "A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right
hand, but it will not come near you. . . . If you make the Most High
your dwelling—even the LORD, who is my refuge—then no harm will befall
you, no disaster will come near your tent. For he will command his
angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways; they will lift you
up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a
stone. . . . ‘Because he loves me,’ says the LORD, ‘I will rescue him; I
will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.’"
Those are indeed heart-warming words. But, as a pastor, am I being
spiritually honest if I present such seemingly ironclad promises to
church members, without providing at least some form of disclaimer?
We'll talk about that next week.
Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor
Pope's
Visit Highlights Spiritual Conundrum--2
Last week I discussed the pope’s bullet-proof-glass "popemobile" and
the thoughts it triggered in me during his recent visit to the United
States.
Ironically, the pope’s form of conveyance implies that many of the
Bible’s beautiful promises of protection, such as Psalm 91, aren’t to be
taken too literally. In the final analysis, it would seem, protecting
oneself is primarily a human responsibility.
So last week I asked: As a pastor, am I being spiritually honest if I
present the seemingly ironclad promises found in passages such as Psalm
91 without providing at least some form of disclaimer?
The fact is, even the psalm writers recognize that things don’t always
work out quite as wonderfully as Psalm 91 seems to imply. Psalm 10:1,
for example, asks: "Why, O LORD, do you stand far off? Why do you hide
yourself in times of trouble?" Why ask such a plaintive question if God
always works things out positively?
And the problem doesn’t stop with the psalms. The same chapter in the
book of Acts that records Peter’s miraculous escape from prison also
records James’s beheading. Yet both men were among the three disciples
closest to Jesus. Why such marvelous protection for one and seemingly no
protection for the other?
The popemobile—and the insurance policies purchased both by church
entities and individual church members—highlights the disturbing reality
that, even though we Christians emphatically profess unwavering faith in
God’s ability to protect us, we have substantially less faith that He
actually will. Thus we sense the need for human-devised methods of
protection.
Should we label such actions as mere prudence and commonsense? Or should
we see them as a lack of faith? Just how much can God be depended on to
intervene on our behalf and make things work out well? And much is it
our own responsibility?
If my child is sick during the Sabbath hours (when an Adventist
typically wouldn’t buy or sell), should I forego buying medicine and
leave it with God to make the child well or relieve his or her
discomfort as He sees fit? Or do such circumstances trigger exceptions
to otherwise ironclad commands? If God could keep three ancient Hebrews
from being burned to death in a fiery furnace, is He not capable of
dealing with such issues as a medicine-requiring sickness during the
Sabbath hours?
If I assume that it would be sheer folly to forego popemobiles,
insurance policies, armed law-enforcement officers even in Adventist
enclaves, armies and a long list of other human protective measures,
then on what basis can I as a pastor urge people to quit jobs that
require Sabbath work or continue to tithe despite desperate financial
circumstances, assuring them that they can depend on God to look out for
their interests?
These aren’t theoretical questions.
A lot of Adventists probably looked at the pope’s visit primarily in the
light of our Adventist understandings of end-time events. I think there
may be more subtle issues to be pondered. These may include how to best
minister to those who must answer some of life’s most difficult
questions and make some of life’s toughest decisions right here and now.
Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor
It's a Mitzva to
be a Mensch
[The following was excerpted from a pastoral letter written by
Rabbi Rick and Elissa Sherwin to Congregation Beth Am, Longwood, FL.]
I recently completed an on-line course known as "Traffic School." One
of the questions I missed was: "Who has the right of way when a car
merges into heavy traffic on the Interstate?"
(a) the car merging from the on-ramp
(b) the car in the through-lane of the Interstate
(c) the two drivers decide upon making eye contact
(d) neither car has the right of way
The answer is (d)! The laws discuss only who must yield the
right of way. In this case, the car on the Interstate must yield the
right of way to the car coming in from the on-ramp.
All of us are familiar with traffic accidents in which each party
claims, "I was right to go first." The traffic citation isn’t issued on
the basis of who was right, but rather to the driver who didn’t yield.
In our daily lives, we’re often faced with situations in which we have
every right to go first, yet we yield: We let a car merge in front of
us. We allow someone to go ahead of us in line at the grocery store. We
hold a door open for the person who’s coming behind us. Allowing someone
else to go first isn’t a legal decision; in secular society it’s one of
common courtesy. Jewish Tradition considers such acts to be more than
common courtesy or a kind deed, but a mitzva: a religious
responsibility.
Whereas American law generally determines who’s right, Jewish law
determines that the "right" action is the responsible one. One
may have a right to say something negative about another, but, unless
there’s a constructive purpose, the responsible action is to remain
silent, even if the negative report is true. When we accept the
obligation to fulfill mitzvot, we acknowledge that when there’s a
conflict between rights and responsibilities, we yield to
responsibility, even when we believe we’re right.
In a small tractate of the Mishna entitled Pirkay Avot, the early Sages
of Jewish Tradition advised: Be careful not to take any mitzva
lightly or to determine that one mitzva is less important than another,
for you may not know how deeply your actions will touch others.
According to Tradition, the Torah presents us with 613 moral mitzvot
that we are to fulfill. Three hundred and sixty-five of them are
negative––the actions to avoid that are harmful to ourselves and/or
others. This symbolically corresponds to the number of days in the year,
emphasizing that we must control our impulses each and every day.
There are 248 positive mitzvot––the responsibilities that we are
to fulfill, corresponding to the imagined number of bones in our body:
We must do what we can to reach out to others with all our heart,
with all our soul and with all our might.
Our purpose in life is to translate such Godly attributes of
kindness, sensitivity, compassion and forgiveness into our lives
whenever and wherever possible. We refer to a person who accepts the
responsibility of demanding Godliness in actions as a mensch.
It’s a mitzva––a moral responsibility to be a mensch.
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
LIVE
NATIVITY.
Come join us celebrate the birth of Jesus on Sabbath,
December 13, 5:30 pm in the Outdoor Chapel. All Invited!
more...
|
|
 |
GRADES
9-12
SOCIAL.
We're going to attend a Basketball Game at UCF! Saturday night, November 29. Exact
time and details will be announced.
more...
|
| |
 |
COMMUNION.
This Thanksgiving allow Christ to become part of your
life through participation in the Lord's Supper on Sabbath,
Nov. 29 during both worship services.
more... |
| |
 |
Pathfinders Meeting.
Please note we won't have another meeting until Wednesday,
December 10 when we'll have our
Christmas
Party!
more... |
|
 |
Learning to Say Thanks.
Speaker:
Jim Coffin
more... |
 |
|
|
|
|
