In Luke chapter 2 the Angel of the Lord says something really profound (v.14)
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom God is pleased” (NAS)
It is beautiful in its simplicity.
I’m not trying to make this into a three point sermon, but it does seem to me that there are three interesting things said here:
God is pleased with us. That strikes me in a post ‘sinners in the hands of an angry god‘ era. Now, maybe someone wants to say that god was pleased with us before we killed his kid and rejected the gift… but that is not how I’m reading it here. Why is God pleased with us? Is it because god is gooder than we have been told? Probably. Is it because of something within God and maybe not within us? Possibly. But the bottom line is that God likes us and in Christ is well pleased with us! That is is a Christmas gift worth unwrapping.
Peace on Earth is God’s intention. God wants peace on earth. The angel said so. The sad part is that many Christians will argue with me about this. Fortunately, they probably disagree with part one (that God is pleased) as well … so you have take that as a whole package.
The Glory of God is peace on Earth. This is God’s house and we are God’s people. The state of your house and welfare of the people who live in it reflects something about you. The state of the earth and the welfare of the people who live in it reflects something about God. Now, people who emphasize the transcendence of God portray God as being so holy that God can have nothing to do with humanity’s sinfulness. The problem is that Luke 2 is about incarnation and God becoming one us. God is not just in the highest – as of Luke 2, God is also in the lowest.
So to you I say Merry Christmas! I join the Angel to say Peace on Earth! Goodwill to all mankind! For this is the Glory of God!
Bo Sanders: Public Theology 
November 30, 2011 at 6:15 pm
I absolutely loved this post and agree with you 100%.
November 30, 2011 at 7:15 pm
Thanks so much for the feedback! you are a valued conversation partner and I just love your passion, sincerity and integrity when it comes to this stuff 🙂
December 1, 2011 at 3:44 am
Hey Bo,
I’ve never responded to your blog before but have read it for a while and enjoyed it.
I’m struggling a bit over your word choice and I’m thinking that I might be getting bogged down unnecessarily. So clarify what was “enchanted” about pre-modern thought and how is it that they are “naive” in light of our post-modern world? How much do we all really understand “pre-modern” thought and the conditions it came from? I would challenge some of your assumptions that you’re as different as you think you are from the 1st century folks.
Indeed, the things you outlined are interesting, but are they complete?
So they didn’t have Facebook, printing nor the notion of Individualism. They still had hate, envy, strife, not to mention understandings of love, beauty and sacrifice. And frankly FB is a great example of how all those things are still at the core of our being, we’ve just found new ways to express them. I fully support the notion that the effects of technology and other things have created some interesting phenomena and even some major paradigm shifts, indeed! But make the connection for me how they keep you from fellowship with the 1st century Christians? Is it because theirs is a more “mythic”-based belief of the world and yours is a more hard-fact based view?
It’s an interesting fact (to me, at least…) that the more we understand about quantum theory and the elements of the universe, the more scientists begin to sound like poets.
All of this is really to put forth the notion that I don’t believe it’s as hard to identify with the ancients as we might think. When we realize that at our core we are more like them than not simply because of our humanness, I think we then get a fresh vision that asserts that our notions of technology and progress, even our individualism need not define us.
Thanks for letting me wrestle with these things with you.
December 1, 2011 at 4:20 am
HOLD ON! this is an amazing conversation BUT I think that you posted under the wrong one ! the ‘enchanted’ thing was under the 1st century blog not the Angel blog….
If you want to repost it there – great! if not – we can deal with it here in the context of angels 🙂
I am up for either one
December 1, 2011 at 4:23 am
Bo, argh!!! You’re absolutely right…my bad…I’ll repost it over there–thanks for understanding! 🙂
December 5, 2011 at 2:10 pm
“We should cut that entire account from the Bible since “in the highest” is a pre-Copernican phrase and a complete fallacy!” –The Grinch who deconstructed Christmas
December 5, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Couple of thoughts for you Mr. Grinch 😉
1) we never get to ‘cut’ things out. We have to authentically engage them and intelligently account for them.
2) The goal is to hear what is being expressed – the message of the angel (the word of the lord) – not to build a model of their represented conception.
3) deconstruction is not destruction. Sometimes people don’t understand that. It is an untying to make room for a better possibility.
-Bo
p.s. I’m surprised you didn’t take more to the ‘peace of earth’ part.