1 Timothy 1:12-17

Proper 19 (24) - Year C

How convenient that in matters of belief ignorance is a blessing, whereas in law it is no excuse at all. If that is not a selling point for mercy, I don’t know what is.

How would it change your theology to say that Jesus came into the world to find what is lost? Is too much lost for you when you claim Jesus’ presence requires the presence of a special class of lost—sin?

I wonder if Timothy would feel the same way if he didn’t identify himself as sinner in chief (competing with Paul) but was simply a mediocre sinner. Would he have then made the cut for the Bible?

Does being found while being a big sinner seem more exciting than simply being found after ignoring signs of where you have been and thus not be able to return from wandering on your own? Imagine not having a sliding scale of lostness and a resultant ability to deal honorably with folks regardless of their degree of lostness. I know it would make a difference in my life and I presume it would make a difference in yours.

http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2013/09/1-timothy-112-17.html

 

 

Paul claims he received mercy because he didn't know what he was doing (of course he "knew," in fact he was the initiator of the plan he was carrying out). It seems he didn't know the unintended consequences or a larger picture in which to put his experience. Violence seemed the surest way to his desired end and so he followed it. (Yes, there are probably recent repeats of this with the terrorism of strategic and tactical uses of violence within and against communities. You can begin counting the ways.)

The reason for pushing this a little is that we tend to want to give a justification, at least to ourselves, for why someone received mercy, when, if it were left to us, they would still be without it.

What are we going to do with an intentional violator rather than an ingnorant one? Are they still worth mercy or being sought after? Are we going to claim the neediness of some is so great that there is not enough grace to fill them to overflowing and thus to a new way of living?

I suspect there is not really all that much difference between being grateful for a smidgeon of mercy or a passel of grace. Even though we want to play the schmaltz game and claim that the bigger the grace the bigger the thanks, it may simply be that maturing a little at a time or in a big jump is of relatively little consequence or that thanks is simply thanks whether now or later or big or small.

It may be sufficient to simply know that mercy and grace have occurred and can yet occur. With this awareness we are able to speed our acceptance of them and respond with increased wisdom.

http://www.kairoscomotion.org/lectionary/2004/september2004.html

 

 

Did the lost sheep enter into the joy of the shepherd? Did the lost coin enter into the joy of the woman? When mercy is present, is joy present for both the giver and the receiver of mercy?

Was the sheep worth the effort? Joy says, "Yes". Was the coin worth the effort? Joy says, "Yes". Was Paul worth the effort? Joy says, "Yes". Are you worth the effort? Joy says, "Yes".

Did each of these need to be deeply and densely lost in the woods before the joy kicked in? Why does it seem that the more difficult the finding, the more abundant the joy?

What is the interrelationship between finder and lost? Is it focused on the third-party angels with the finder and lost simply being players upon their stage?

I'm sure (though often wrong in that surety) that we do not have to abase ourselves further to make the finding of ourselves all the more significant. To this end, how might a doxology look from the 21st century that does not posit a far off God lording it over us, to whom we must be grateful serfs?

I'm stuck in the task of updating a doxology and would be glad to hear of some models.

http://www.kairoscomotion.org/lectionary/2004/september2004.html

 

 

Here are two approaches to verse 16:

NRSV
making me an example to those who would come to believe in him for eternal life

THE MESSAGE
now he shows me off ... to those who are right on the edge of trusting him forever

We could play with "being made" versus being "shown off". For us being shown off is more participatory. We are not a vehicle but a result.

We could play with "belief" and "trust". For us trust is more relational. We are part of an on-going relationship rather than a snapshot in time.

- - -

grace mixed with faith
and both lovingly poured
anointing
seeps into souls
loosening its joints
exhibiting grace
strengthening sinews
demonstrating faith
receiving and passing on
mercy aka love

http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2007_09_01_archive.html

 

 

How does one save a sinner?

Different sinners respond to different stimuli.

Paul says there was already a saying out and about (perhaps even seeded by Paul himself) that explains Jesus - he's a sinner saver. This matches up nicely with people who consider that they need to be saved in order to arrive at eternal life (a supposed high value goal). Together, mercy offered and mercy received, a strong bond is established.

In every age there are those who don't emphasize eternal life as a major goal. They are far more focused on a present paradise than on a postponed promise. What value might Jesus have if it is not sinner saving for some later time? Is it enough that faith and love that are in Jesus simply were shown to one and all (some able to receive and some not)? This is not conditional, that it needs to be accepted to be fulfilled, but simply what Jesus does and invites others to also do - trust and love.

This passage is tightened up if verses 15 and 16 are deleted. They are tangential to Paul being strengthened (as a current witness, not for eternal life) and praise of a changed life flowing forth.

This also is worthy of acceptance: Jesus lived in this world with abundant mercy, abundant life. Those able to receive it were blessed and shifted from violence to non-violence that the abundance of life might be maximized. This application of mercy to violence brings eventual wholeness - not automatically, but holistically. So it is that Jesus is less about outcome and more about process.

It is helpful to meditate on the difference between Paul's statement of Jesus's mission (saving sinners for eternal life) and John 10:10b, Jesus' understanding of what he was about (abundant life). What is the interplay between abundant life, eternal life, and present life? Obviously abundance can overflow into some forever, but focusing on the overflow isn't quite the same as attending to the regular flow.

A case in point is my mother who finally died last night. Her work attended to the present without much talk about eternity. Each of her children and grandchildren experienced her as being on their side (that's a lot of differences to be affirmed, mercy to be extended). Her goal was to be engaged with the life in front of her and to encourage growth. Not much, perhaps, but well done and people came to overflow their bonds and bounds.

http://kcmlection.blogspot.com/2010/09/1-timothy-112-17-14.html