Living Apologetics
Living Apologetics

Reading Ramblings - May 26, 2013

Reading Ramblings

Date: May 26, 2013, Holy Trinity Sunday

Texts: Proverbs 8:1-4, 22-31; Psalm 8; Acts 2:14a, 22-36; John 8:48-59

Contextual Notes: Holy Trinity Sunday is set apart for us to specifically consider the triune nature of our one God. This festival was first formalized by the Roman Catholic Church in the 14th century, however various unofficial celebrations of this were known much earlier. The Trinity is part of every worship, as we begin the service with the invocation, and throughout the service in the liturgy and often the songs that we sing. But one Sunday a year we spend time more specifically considering this mystery. It is often observed by the reading of the Athanasian Creed, the third (and least known) of the Ecumenical Creeds of the Church.

Proverbs 8:1-4, 22-31: This chapter personifies Wisdom as a lovely woman – a metaphor that is used often throughout the Proverbs. We first met her in the opening chapter of Proverbs, and she is contrasted with her opposite, the woman Folly, who is often described as the adulterous woman – enticing but leading to ruin. The verses in Chapter 8 for today emphasize more the eternal nature of wisdom, and as such, link the personification of wisdom more with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit of God that proceeds from the Father and the Son and has thus eternally existed before all creation, which is the emphasis of the second, longer set of verses in this reading. Jesus promises the Holy Spirit to his followers in John 14, emphasizing the Spirit's role in teaching and keeping the hearts of his followers. Thus it is the Spirit of God himself who makes us wise, who is the embodiment of wisdom.

Psalm 8: A psalm of praise to the goodness and glory of God. The glory of God is manifested in creation, but also in his designation of mankind as his stewards of creation.

Acts 2:14a, 22-36: The speech of Peter at Pentecost, which we began reading last week, continues today. The first section concentrated on the outpouring of God's power as prophesied in Scripture, and as an explanation for the bizarre linguistic ability suddenly given to the disciples. Now that Peter has justified their unexpected actions as the work of God, he proceeds to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah and Son of God. The hallmark of this identity, the defining factor is the resurrection (v.24). Peter preaches Jesus not just as the Messiah but as Lord, calling his hearers to repentance for the sin of crucifying Jesus. So it is that the Holy Spirit points people to Jesus as Lord and Savior, and in so doing, points to God the Father who sent the Son and the Spirit.

John 8:48-59: Some people are fond of claiming that Jesus doesn't explicitly call himself the Son of God. However this passage (and others) in John are a good place to refute that claim. Jesus counters claims about him as a demon-possessed heretic (the Samaritans were viewed as heretics and not properly Jewish by the people in Judea and Jerusalem). He is accused of being in error, and he counters by asserting that rather than dishonoring God through his error, He actually brings true honor to God the Father, rather than himself. As such, his words will continue forever. We remember John's emphasis on Jesus as the Word of God made flesh, which he lays out in John 1.

Jesus' hearers are astounded, because Jesus is claiming a greater honor than the patriarchs and prophets, men venerated by the Jews yet still understood to be only mortal men. How is it that these great and holy men could die, yet Jesus claims to hold the power of eternal life?

Jesus then claims to know Abraham, to know of his response at seeing the day of the Lord arriving in his own ministry. This also seems ludicrous to Jesus' hearers, who note his youth and mock his assertion to know Abraham. Jesus' response is telling. His claim of “I am” echoes the name that God gave himself when queried by Moses in Exodus 3:14. Jesus is equating himself to the Father; they share the same name, the holy name that the Jews refuse to even pronounce for fear of blasphemy. So it is that his hearers are prepared to kill him for blasphemy.

The idea that Jesus is also God is a difficult one for us to grasp hold of. It runs counter to our understandings – murky as they are! - of what it means to be either human or God. The doctrine of the Trinity, attested to by the Word of God, is one that we cannot intellectually grasp or understand in fullness. We can only bear faithful witness to what God himself has said about this in his Word and the Word made flesh.

Because of the challenging nature of this doctrine, plenty of people and groups have attempted to get around it or away from it. Arius denied the full divinity of Jesus. Jehovah's witnesses deny the Trinity as well. When we seek to substitute our own reasoning and logic for the revealed truth of God, we find ourselves denying and contradicting his Word in favor of an explanation that we are more comfortable with. But what a price that comfort demands!

We are forced to confess in the doctrine of the Trinity that the true nature and essence of God is beyond our understanding. We are unable to say more about it than He has revealed, and we are not free to ignore any of what He has said, either. This is the glory of God, that He is so above and beyond our ability to comprehend that we are left only with the options of worshiping him or rejecting him. We will never enjoy the presence of God by an act of the mind, by our comfort at being able to fully explain him. This is not the comfort we find in God. Rather, we find comfort in God in his revelation of himself and his will towards us through his Son, Jesus. Here it is that we find comfort from what we cannot explain, peace from the immense otherness of God. In God made flesh, we can approach God and know that He loves us, because He has first approached us.   

The Joy of Sarcasm

Because often there's so much truth behind the thorns.

P.S. Disney's California Adventure is a surprisingly enjoyable park.  But it does help to pretend that it isn't attempting to encapsulate and emulate all of California history and reality.  

Relativism and Honor

Our cultural march towards full-on relativism (the idea that there is no such thing as good and evil, truth or lie, right or wrong - each of these things is relative to the person and can't really be judged by anyone else) has a lot of interesting side-effects.  If you can't appeal to solid, objective values - values like heroism, bravery, honor, etc., what do you appeal to in order to modify people's behavior?

You appeal to self interest.

Consider this story that I caught part of last night on NPR.  I came into the story as they were playing the clip from the military video, part of an effort to help service personnel see that they have a role to play in avoiding improper behavior.  What caught my ear was that this little media clip demonstrates the matter of self-interest so perfectly.  

The reason that the characters in this clip decide to intervene is because they don't want to suffer because of the other person's actions.  They don't want to be part of a base-wide lock-down.  

No mention is made of the inappropriateness of grabbing a woman who is trying to leave.  No mention is made of honor, of chivalry, of any sort of concrete value beyond simple self-interest.  The situation is wrong not because of what their buddy is doing, but because what he is doing might negatively impact them.  The woman isn't even part of the equation!  

I was stunned when I heard this.  Stunned that this lowest common denominator approach to ethics and morality was what needed to be pushed out to the troops.  Once upon a time, our troops were looked upon as heroes who upheld the collective values and ethics and morals of our nation and culture.  They were expected to act selflessly to protect others, whether in a battle with the enemy or on leave at home.  

Is the best that we can expect of them now is that they will grudgingly act to intervene in a situation if and only if there might be negative repercussions to them?  Should the woman in this scenario be grateful not that there were men around who would act to protect her from an aggressor, but rather that there were enough bystanders present to force these men to act to protect themselves?

This disgusts me.  It ought to disgust a lot of us.  And it conveys a chilling warning to us all - don't depend on other people to put themselves at risk to defend a higher value.  The best we can hope for is that people will at least act to preserve their own self-interests, and that maybe those self-interests will coincide with our needs in an emergency.

I'm not sure that's a bet I'd like to make, though.

Constant-ness

Coming on the heels of a blog last week on the necessity of setting appropriate boundaries with technology, comes another cautionary note.  Just because you set boundaries and have safeguards and even have passwords to your child's phone or technology, doesn't mean that your child is safe. 

Someone mentioned this app to me in passing a few weeks ago.  Snapchat is an app that purports to allow you to take photos with your smart phone, and then send those photos to someone else's smart phone, but with a self-destruct timer embedded in them.  After the timer runs out, the images are deleted from their phone.

Why would you want to prevent someone from seeing a photo you send them for as long as possible?  So that you can sext safely.  Sexting is sending another person inappropriate photos of yourself, generally in a state of undress.  It is rampant.  Roughly 40% of teens claim to have sent or received this type of message.  Your child might never consider doing it.  But plenty of their peers are likely to have considered them doing it, or sending them an inappropriate photo.  And in a moment of weakness, they could do something that will haunt them for years.  Your child likely knows someone who has sent or received such a message.  Snapchat seems like a harmless way to have some fun.  After all, the images are deleted, right?

Except they aren't.  Not really. 

First off, it claims that the images are deleted, but it doesn't indicate that the receiver can't copy the image somehow, using screen-grabbing technology (screen-grabs basically make a picture of whatever is showing on your screen at the time, whether a smart-phone or a computer screen, and then stores this as another image).  But it will let you know if they have.  How comforting.  I guess that's so you can unfriend them or not send them any more photos, after they already have a permanent copy of an image you didn't want them to be able to see or save for very long.  How comforting.

Secondly, a basic knowledge of file-systems and how data is stored on a computer makes it clear that the data isn't really deleted, a fact that someone has now exploited.  

Talk with your kids about this stuff.  Talk with them about the repercussions of engaging in this type of behavior.  Not simply how it could destroy their reputation with their peers.  Not simply how it could haunt them for years to come depending on what people choose to do with compromising photos.  That sort of conversation is important, but it can also lead to the mistaken notion that the problem is in getting caught, as though if you could get away with it safely, it would somehow be OK.  

Talk with them about self-respect and the proper role of sexuality and the body.  If you have a Christian frame of reference, talk with them about how their faith should play into these sorts of decisions.  Talk with them.  Because odds are, someone else is talking to them already.




Reading Ramblings - May 19, 2013

Reading Ramblings


Date: May 19, 2013, Pentecost Sunday

Texts: Genesis 11:1-9; Psalm 143; Acts 2:1-21; John 14:23-31

Contextual Notes: Pentecost Sunday is the celebration of the birth of the Church. When the disciples received the promised Holy Spirit, they were enabled and permitted to go out into the world with the good news that Jesus is the promised Messiah through whom all creation can be reconciled to God the Father. The readings today run the spectrum from the division of mankind at the tower of Babel, to a Psalm pleading for rescue, to the account of the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, and the Gospel reminds us that the Holy Spirit was promised ahead of time to the disciples – once again the Word finds fulfillment in the birth of the Church.

Genesis 11:1-9: Following close on the heels of the Flood narrative and the story of Noah and his family, we see that from the most righteous of human beings, humanity still is enmeshed in sin. The Flood did not cure sin – nor was it intended to. It highlights that even were all the bad people to be eliminated, the good people bear in their hearts and minds sin which will continue to work in and through them.

The result of sin is division and isolation. By sinfully seeking their own glory rather than the glory of God, this division and isolation is made manifest by fracturing the languages of mankind. Unity is not possible because we cannot communicate with one another. The division in the hearts of mankind is now demonstrated in division by the words they speak.

Psalm 143: This is the last of the penitential psalms – psalms intended to guide the speaker in asking for forgiveness. Instead of appealing to the speaker's righteousness, this psalm makes a somewhat unexpected move in asserting the universality of sin (v.2). It is on this basis – that no body can stand blameless before God – that the speaker is bold to ask for forgiveness and deliverance from God. Surely, if God does not forgive and save, nobody can be forgiven or saved. The requested deliverance is not just for the well-being of the speaker, it is for the glory of God (v.11). When God exercises loving-kindness and mercy towards his creation, He demonstrates his goodness, and his worthiness to be praised.

Acts 2:1-21: The feast of weeks or the feast of firstfruits or Pentecost was an existing Jewish feast prior to the events of Acts 2. This is why there were so many Jews in Jerusalem seven weeks after Passover. Pentecost occurred 50 days after the Passover Sabbath, hence the Greek name Pentecost. Note that the disciples were waiting as instructed in Acts 1:4-5. The gift of speaking in tongues has a very practical purpose then, communicating the Gospel to Jews from all over the Roman empire. Speaking in tongues is not demonstrated here as a personal gift. The Holy Spirit intends their speech to be understood, and they are understood. At least their languages are! What they are talking about requires further explanation, which Peter supplies. The birth of the Church is marked by this momentary reconciliation of languages, a unity that stands in opposition to the dispersion from Genesis 11. God is beginning the process of drawing his people and all creation together again by his Holy Spirit's power. The division caused by sin is beginning to crumble – the Kingdom of God is inbreaking into creation!

John 14:23-31: The beginning of the reconciliation of all of creation begins in the death and resurrection of the Son of God, and the imparting of the Holy Spirit of God after Jesus' ascension. While Jesus will not remain bodily with his followers, the Holy Spirit will dwell in them. God the Holy Spirit becomes closer to them than even the incarnate Son of God has been!

But there are two stages being described here. Jesus as the Word of God abides where the Word of God is kept. Where the will of God the Father is sought, God the Father and Son (and Holy Spirit) are present. So it is that Jesus will continue to abide with his followers yet at the same time not with others. He will be with them for a time, and then not be with them.

But then, beyond the Word of God, the Spirit of God is promised. The Holy Spirit will instruct Jesus' disciples and remind them of Jesus' teachings – the Word of God that they are to keep. Grounded in the Word of God and empowered by the Holy Spirit, the followers of Jesus will receive peace. Not the passing peace of the world, not the mere temporary absence of strife, but rather true peace that is found only in the presence of the Word of God. Jesus points forward to the day of Pentecost. He will leave his disciples bodily (the Ascension), but his Spirit will dwell with them always.

So it is with the Church today. Those who know and trust the Word of God are assured the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit of God. You and I continue to be empowered by the Holy Spirit of God, the Spirit who teaches us and makes us wise and recalls to our hearts and minds the Word of God as we have read and heard it in Scripture. In this we are continually taught and made wise, and growing in understanding we gain greater peace in the midst of an uncertain world, certain of one thing – the victory of Jesus Christ over this world, and the promise of his return in glory!

Christian Bubbles

I'll preface this with the statement that I have nothing specific against Christian institutions of higher learning.  I have no doubt that they can be every bit as academically rigorous as their secular counterparts (if not more so), and that they have the potential to offer powerful theological and religious grounding for life.

That being said, they are not safety bubbles.  

An acquaintance on Facebook posted a link to this article.  The article itself is a fairly straightforward critique of some community colleges and the lack of academic rigor they may provide.  I'm sure there is helpful data to be taken away from this.  No comparison is made to how traditional 4-year universities would score under equivalent analysis, and the article does make the very important point that high schools are not adequately prepping students (or at least the students who attend community colleges) adequately for college-level work, which in turn drives down expectation levels in community colleges (and I'd argue in other educational institutions).  

The curious thing is that on Facebook, this article was referenced by a noted Christian thinker with the lead-in "Is community college a good idea for Christian families?  Some are rethinking."

Nothing in the article has anything to do with faith or Christianity or families.  Nothing in the rest of this person's evaluation of the article suggests why this is particularly an issue for Christian families.  Instead, in the comments that her post (which my friend shared and liked on F, she links to two Christian higher education alternatives.  

No mention is made of the academic standards of either of these institutions (although by her linking to them, she implies they are clearly higher than the community colleges criticized in the article she cites).  A basic article on academic standards at community colleges becomes fodder for pushing Christians towards Christian universities instead, without addressing whether or not the academic standards in those places are demonstrably higher.  I have no reason to believe either that they are or that they aren't.  The main issue seems (based on lack of academic evidence) to be that because they are Christian, they are better.  

Ultimately, it bugs me that someone is willing to take an article that has nothing to do with Christianity, claim that it has something to do with Christian families, and not bother to back up that link in any way while - from a position of influence - strongly implying that the easy solution to the ill-defined problem is a Christian education.  It isn't logically consistent, but it sounds nice.  And I think part of me is annoyed that my acquaintance fell for it (he has a background in law and philosophy).  What began as a critique of educational standards falls into baseless (in this instance, at least) partisan Christian vs. non-Christian rhetoric.  That bugs me.  

But since we don't talk very much, me coming out of the blue to question his intellectual rigor seems a bit heavy-handed.  So you get to hear about it instead.  Lucky you!





In Case You Were Wondering...

This is why I do not go to major sporting events.


Don't Aim For Success

Now there's a great title for a best-selling how to book.  Said no one, ever.  

But it's shorter than explaining why our definitions of success are so messed up.

Consider this article.  It's a great article on practical theology - loving your neighbor.  Your actual, physical neighbor, and not the theoretical neighbor that you muster up compassion for when an infomercial comes on or someone asks you to donate money to a cause.  

Now, I'll disagree somewhat with one of the thoughts expressed in this article - that loving your local neighbor is more important or the only thing that the Scriptural admonition to love your neighbor is talking about.  But I would agree that Jesus said to love your neighbor assuming that, in addition to loving whomever might come into your path virtually or otherwise, you were certainly to be loving the actual people that physically surround you.  C.S. Lewis writes on this topic as well.  We can be total asses to our actual, physical neighbors, yet be convinced that we're loving Christians because we send $20 a month to a family in Africa we've never met.  

But that's not what I really want to focus on here.  I think this article is describing a great thing, a fantastic realization and direction of people's energies and attention.  There are wonderful stories about people entering into the lives of their neighbors, and discovering that quite a lot more goes on in their lives than their manicured lawns (or non-manicured lawns) might indicate.  

That is fantastic.  It's Biblical.  It's faithful.  But I found it humorous how the writer focuses our ideas of success.  It isn't these individual stories of real personal interaction with neighbors that impresses the writer.  What impresses them, what they implicitly take as success, is that this program is spreading to other locations.  Because the program is cropping up in other cities and states, we can judge the program to be effective.  

In part, this is because the leaders involved are working on creating a movement.  It isn't just enough that we're doing this, we think everyone should do this.  This is often the definition of success these days.  It isn't enough that I find something effective and beneficial and a blessing.  Other people must find it so as well.  Simply being faithful isn't enough, we must have a movement, a name, a web site, an organization, a book, a YouTube video, and a mini-series.  Then we're successful, because other people say we are.  

Don't aim for success.  Aim for faithfulness.  The Good Samaritan doesn't start The Good Samaritan Club to encourage everyone in the city to care for victims of crime.  Jesus does not work miracles so that we can have The Miracle Program, whereby we can distribute healing and sight and food.  

Do what Scripture calls you to do.  You, personally.  Are others in your congregation doing it as well?  Great!  Are they not?  Great!  If you're personally doing what Scripture calls you to do, and are seeing the Holy Spirit working in that, give thanks and keep up the good work.  What matters isn't whether anyone else affirms you in that work. What matters is that you are being faithful.

I tend to think that if God wants others to get involved, He'll get them involved, He'll make them aware, the news will spread.  But when that seems to be the goal from the start - our goal - not just being faithful but creating a movement, well I suspect that we're already getting slightly off track.  We're already focused on something other than loving our neighbors - we're focused on getting some of our neighbors to act in a certain way.  Sometimes that might be a good thing.  Sometimes, that might just be a distraction.  

Love your neighbor, whether anybody else knows about it or not - (including your neighbor).  That's a pretty impressive movement all on its own.  

Teaching Tech

I have blogged before on the issue of setting boundaries regarding children and technology.  While I may be rethinking some of those earlier statements (I don't think that I'll try to prevent all texting, for example), the basic premise remains:  just because your kids are more comfortable with technology than you are doesn't mean that they don't need guidance in using that technology.  

A few months ago this story ran as a humorous piece, but I think it is spot-on in terms of how parents should approach their child's access to technology (which includes more than just a smart phone).  

Our oldest will be 11 in a few weeks, and I don't foresee his own phone (smart or dumb) any time in the near future.  His younger sister (going on 9) is already asking for one (and will be disappointed for years to come!).  Whenever we reach the point that our kids are both interested in and mature enough for a smart phone, we'll be talking about most of the points on the list in the article above.  

I was talking with the parent of a teenager today, and we discussed how youth culture is dependent upon and expected to be texting and in more or less constant availability to their peers.  I don't think this is healthy.  I suspect that there are studies that are beginning to confirm this, but I can't recall where I've perused them.  If there aren't already, there will be.  That's my prediction.  

Setting limits on appropriate times of day when they can interact with their friends - regardless of the modality (in person, via phone, texting, chatting over the PC, etc.) seems like a very healthy thing.  It's healthy for your kid because it helps them contextualize the influence of their peers, and helps to reinforce that they are first and foremost part of a family unit.  Which in turn I believe can lead to healthier families.  Friends are important and grow increasingly so as our children get older.  But that role needs to be moderated.  If you suspect that your child is dealing with an unhealthy relationship or may be the target of bullying, that moderation is crucial.

It's OK to say no.  It's OK to set limits.  Not just OK, necessary.  No, our kids may not always like that.  But as parents, we have the benefit (hopefully?) of hindsight to help us realize that what we like and dislike is not always analogous to what is good or not good for us.  At the very least, we should be talking with our kids about these things, because it's fairly certain that others will be talking to them about these things.  The boundaries may look different for different families (or even different children within a single family, though I'm sure that is trickier!), but there need to be boundaries.

Reading Ramblings - May 12, 2013

Reading Ramblings


Date: May 12, 2013, Seventh Sunday of Easter

Texts: Acts 1:12-26; Psalm 133; Revelation 22:1-6, 12-20; John 17:20-26

Contextual Notes: This is the final Sunday of the season of Easter. Next Sunday we celebrate the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost! However this Sunday also directly follows Ascension Day (May 9). As such, the readings for this final Sunday of Easter have a particular eye towards the Church that waits faithfully for the return of her ascended Lord.

Acts 1:12-26: What is the Church to do now that her Lord is ascended and no longer bodily with her? She continues to act in faith, as guided by the Holy Spirit who comes at Pentecost. The disciples' first order of business following Jesus' ascension is to select someone to replace Judas Iscariot. We are told of his fate following his betrayal of Jesus. The Twelve were not the only ones to have accompanied Jesus on his ministry, and now one of these others must fill Judas' place.

As such, the Church in all places and times waits faithfully for her Lord by ensuring that the proper preaching and teaching of the Word can continue, and that this requires a steady chain of command. Where leaders are persecuted or martyred or fall into sin, new leaders must step forward to take their place. In all situations, the criteria is faith in the full message of Jesus Christ, the Son of God incarnate, baptized, executed, resurrected and ascended. The purpose is to act as a witness to the resurrection, the central tenet of the Christian faith. Ensuring that the Word continues to be shared both with believers and those who have not yet heard is the central duty and privilege of the Church on earth. While tactics may differ somewhat, we should find unity in this common duty and privilege!

Psalm 133: This psalm emphasizes the blessings of unity beneath God. Oil was the symbol of blessing and abundance and health, and oil on the head was particularly the sign of one singled out by God for particular blessing and duty. It is in unity that we are able to perceive and appreciate more fully the gifts of God, namely that we will be brothers and sisters for eternity. As such, shouldn't that anticipation of future eternal unity drive our desire for unity here and now?

Revelation 22:1-6 (7-11), 12-20: The emphasis of these passages is on the imminence of Christ's return. This has implications on how we live our lives now, both individually and communally. Our actions do matter. While faith is what saves us, our deeds are often an indication of the condition of that faith. While we declare loudly that our salvation is in Christ alone, we also take seriously the impact of sin on our lives and the lives of those around us.

The duty of the Church is to remain faithful to the full Word of God, neither removing parts that cause us difficulty or adding portions to comfort ourselves or trouble others. Where the Word of God is silent, it is wise for us to remain silent. Where the Word of God speaks, we are to repeat it clearly and in love. This is how the Church, the bride of Christ, awaits the bridegroom. There is plenty to fill each day in remaining faithful to the Word we are entrusted with!

John 17:20-26: This section is part of The High Priestly Prayer – Jesus' final prayer for his followers before his arrest and execution. In whole, it is a loving depiction of Jesus' concern and love for those who had put their faith and trust in him. Considering what he knew this faith and trust would cost them, this prayer is particularly poignant.

His followers – his friends – would face major issues in the days and years following his death and resurrection. They would face persecution by religious authorities, threats on their lives, the martyring of Steven and then others, exile from Jerusalem, wanderings around the Mediterranean, and mostly premature and violent deaths, all for the sake of sharing with others the joyful news of the resurrection of the Son of God. They would have myriad forces attempting to destroy and delay them, and their unity with one another in the face of this adversity, unity mirroring the unity of the triune God itself, would be critical.

But Jesus' prayer specifically extends beyond his immediate followers to those who will believe “through their word”. This means you and I. We also are to seek unity with our fellow Christians. This means not just those in our congregation (though this is the first and most important place for unity!), but those in other Lutheran congregations nearby. But not just that, unity with Christians of all denominational stripes. Whether Catholic or Orthodox or Baptist or Mennonite, there is a unity to be found with all of them.

That unity is not in the glib glossing over of deep and pertinent differences in how we read and apply God's Word. The world's solution for unity is to pretend that there are no differences – for everyone to sacrifice who and what they are until nothing is left of any substance. This is not what Jesus is exhorting us towards. While the fracturing of the Christian faith over 2000 years is certainly not the most powerful witness to unity in Christ, it does not have to be the rejection of it, either.

We profess – with millions of Christians from varying backgrounds – the Ecumenical Creeds that have defined the Christian faith for 1700 years. The Nicene, Apostles', and Athanasian Creeds each guide us in the unity we posess – unity in the confession of the Triune God and his works: God the Father as creator, God the Son as redeemer, and God the Holy Spirit who abides with us still.

There are many things the Creeds don't address, and which have subsequently divided Christianity – issues regarding Sacraments and how the Word of God should be treated. But the Creeds form a baseline of unity. This is what it means to have saving faith, if we can confess as our own belief, the words of these creeds.

Focusing on our unity with Christian brothers and sisters through the Creeds helps us to remember that Jesus has prayed for our unity with the, unity ultimately demonstrated in fraternal love for one another. I may disagree with my Baptist brother or sister over the nature of Holy Communion or Baptism. It's an important topic with many repercussions and therefore we must agree to disagree, rather than pretend we agree or that there isn't a valuable reason to maintain our differences. But I am also called to be united with that brother or sister in Jesus Christ, demonstrating to them the love which Jesus has demonstrated to me.

Our focus as the Church in Jesus Christ is to bear witness to our unity in our Savior. To profess that as we will share eternity with one another, we love one another here and now even as we are forced by sinfulness to maintain important positions on critical applications of the faith. But it is my job never to speak poorly of that brother or sister in faith who differs from me on a point of doctrine. So long as they can affirm the truths of the Creeds as the faithful and core elements of faith as expressed in Holy Scripture, I affirm my unity with them, I pray for their well-being, and I look forward to an eternity where those differences will no longer exist.