Redemption Church KC Sermon Podcast

1. One big idea from Cole's sermon today, reflected in the work of Karen Armstrong, is the idea that “the gods we shape, shape us.” In other words, part of the theological work of mankind involves the creation and articulation of images and understandings of God. And those concepts, as they evolve alongside the cultures and contexts in which they exist, have an influence on the spiritual communities we create, and the way we live devout lives of faith. Spend a moment reflecting on this idea. Where might you have seen its fingerprints in your own experiences and/or life? In what ways has your own concept or God evolved as you have grown & changed? In what ways have those evolutions impacted the way you respond to God?2. Cole taught that the texts included in the Bible reflect a time period before early Christians were able to reconcile some important theological ideas:1) the Shema's insistence on oneness2) with the divine identity of Jesus (see Phil 2:6-11) &3) the real presence of the Spirit (see Acts 2)He said, “as the pages of the Bible come to a close…the early Christians had not really landed on a consensus about what in the world was going on with Jesus. They hadn't really come close to anything that resembles the doctrine of the trinity.” Cole shared Jaroslav Pelikan's idea that the dogma of the Trinity didn't have its origins in speculative theorizing, but instead, in the nature of the life that the early church lived as they pursued a deep commitment to Jesus. As they did so, they lived the idea of the trinity before they even understood it as a concept. It was out of that embodied truth that the language and more formed concepts were born. Cole suggested that, like those early Christians, we are constantly living and acting in accordance with something we haven't yet understood. How do you feel about the idea that early Christians lived ideas they didn't have language for or real understanding of, and that it's those ideas we embrace today in our faith? What questions surface for you as you contemplate that reality?In what ways do you see yourself living and acting in accordance with something you don't yet understand? What's challenging about that aspect of living? What's good about it?What do you think we can learn by living and acting in accordance with ideas we don't yet understand? What, if anything, is the value of this dynamic in our lives? 3. Cole also taught about a concept of God, widely embraced in Western Christianity, which is easily used as a convenient tool of empire. This God is pure and cut off from creation, set above the concerns of ordinary life. In this theological paradigm, empire gets to control access to God and how God comes to us. This removed inaccessible God doles out peace the same way empire doles out peace, as a benevolent, fleeting gift for those who can earn or deserve it. In contrast, an authentically communal God, a trinity inseparable from relationality, births communities in which God's presence and peace come by way of common relationship & common life. As Cole said, “this God is a community, and participation in cruciform community is to be caught up in God.” This allows church to be about connection, rather than getting people to accept some idea, behavior, or message. Reflect on these ideas for a moment. How do you feel about the idea that our Western concept of God is very congruent with the empire in which we live and operate? How does that make you feel about your own history with different churches and with the versions of God shaped by those communities? How do you understand the idea that “participation in cruciform community is to be caught up in God?” Do you understand it? What questions do you have about that idea and what it looks like? What parts seem clearer? Where have you seen that in practice in your own experiences?

1. Today, Tim set up his discussion of Jesus' new command (John 13:34) by sharing about the concept of pleasure v. enjoyment.This slide outlines what he shared:In light of this concept, Tim taught that the reason the original 613 commands of the law couldn't transform the Israelite people was that they worked against human nature. We're wired to seek continual opportunities for enjoyment, often found by transgressing the “commands” in our lives.Spend some time with this dichotomy. Think of ways in which you've experienced pleasure, as it's conceived of here. Think of some ways in which you've experienced enjoyment. Share some examples of each with your group.Which of these experiences feels more familiar? More appealing? What do you think it is about your personality that leads you to answer in the way you are?2. Tim also taught about the opportunity for enjoyment that's provided by exclusion. He said, “any kind of exclusion makes our sense of belonging so much better.”Where do you see/have you seen this principle at work in yourself? What groups/categories have you seen engage in frequent exclusion?How/when have you been excluded? How did you respond to that exclusion? How did it make you feel about the crowd/people from which you were excluded?3. Tim taught that Jesus' new command (from John 13:34) leads to enjoyment in a new and different way; rather than finding enjoyment through transgressing commands, we find it through transgressing the self. This process of loving sacrificially leads to both pleasure and pain. It also provides opportunities for endless enjoyment. Tim said that, as the church, our only real command is love and inclusion.When you think of your life in and as a part of the church, how do you feel about this sole command? What thoughts, ideas, and feelings arise for you as you take a moment to consider this command as the command for the church?Are there [other] “commands” that you have embraced in the past hoping in their ability to create transformation in your life? How has that worked for you? Do you have commands (other than Jesus' new command to love) that you embrace now, hoping for them to produce transformation? What fruit, if any have you seen from those efforts?What experiences do you have that speak to the power of sacrificial love's ability to create transformation when it's embraced or enacted as a command? See if you can think of experiences in which you've been the one loving actively and experiences in which you've been loved in this way. Share some examples as a group. If you can see transformation that has resulted, share about that with the group.

1. One of Tim's slides read, “we get to re-narrate our own stories & decide what meaning they will have for us. We can't change the events of our past; we can change their meaning.” How does this idea strike you? Does it intuitively make sense? Does it challenge any ideas you may hold about the meaning of events in our stories? Or about the nature of our stories themselves?When you think generally about a person's past traumas, experiences of disorientation, or failures, what are some of the other ways in which you've seen people respond to difficult experiences? What do you think of “rewriting its meaning” as one of the options? What makes it an appealing option? What makes it less appealing? 2. Reflecting on the ways in which Peter may have felt disqualified or defeated by his denials of Jesus, Tim taught that Jesus' response to Peter demonstrated that God's covenants and kingdom are those of grace, love, and reconciliation. In effect, Jesus' demonstration of love and grace helped to re-narrate Peter's failure as a natural part of Peter's discipleship process, rather than a transgression for which Peter must offer restitution. Spend a little time thinking about this, and as you do, reflect on times in which you might feel like you've failed in significant ways - or maybe even failed God. There's no pressure to share your own story, but in light of your experiences, what might you imagine that Peter could be feeling as he sees this grace-filled restoration offered to him, with no condemnation or remonstrance? To what degree do you think it might have been difficult for Peter to fully accept this second chance? What might have given him cause for resistance? Do you feel resistant to the idea of unrestrained and limitless second chances being extended to you? Is that more true in concrete examples or in abstraction? What are the factors that you suspect could lead to any resistance felt in yourself, in Peter, or in someone else? 3. As Tim shared, Redemption Church hopes to be a community in which we help each another to re-narrate the stories of our lives, and to assign them meaning within the story of God, aligned with God's kingdom of love, forgiveness, and reconciliation. Have you had experiences of this in your time at RC, in big or small ways? Have you witnessed it in others? How do you think it works in the practical realities of community and relationships at church? What does it look like to be a part of this process in regards to the narration of your own stories? What does it look like to be a part of this process in the stories of others in our church? How does it feel to be a part of this work in the lives of others? To have others be a part of this transformation in your life?

1. Tim juxtaposed religion that packages the cross and resurrection with certitude, as a solution for the puzzle of our “sin problem” and a faith that engages with the cross and resurrection as “a mystery of how God can be born into the world through us.” He discussed the ways in which this happens on both personal and societal levels. We lack insights that, in our present form, are simply beyond us, so God is always leading us toward something deeper. As a group, generate a list of some of the ways in which you think that, as a society, we are lacking the insight we need to address places and things that simply aren't working for us anymore. How do you know those are places where we, as a society, lack the insight and wisdom we need? How can they be identified? 2. Tim taught that the cross and resurrection help show us that in order for new things to be born, we have to let go of old ideas that we are attached to, that feel like they're a part of us. Do you have experiences of this principle at work in your own life? Share any examples of times in which you recognize that, in order to survive and thrive, you had to let your old way of being die, so that something new could be born. Continuing this theme, Tim talked about how, Thomas sat in fidelity with his friends, even though he doubted their story of Jesus' resurrection, and that this mysterious space prepared him for the ability to see all new possibilities once he did finally encounter Jesus for himself. (This idea is connected to the fact that Thomas, after his encounter, was the first to recognize and declare Jesus, “My Lord and my God!” )Reflecting back on the examples you just shared about places of death and rebirth in your own life, can you identify any new insights and visions of possibility made possible through those experiences? 3. Shifting back to some of the societal challenges the group identified in the first question, spaces in which society lacks the insight to move forward and address our challenges, which ideas do you think that you, personally, are attached to that might need to die in order to create opportunity for new birth and life in our society? As we collectively sit in places of longing to know, while not knowing, Tim taught that we have to trust God in the mystery…that that's the life of faith that leads to new life. What do you think of this idea in the practical? How does it work? What does it look like? If you're “doing it,” what does that mean?? How do you feel about the prospect of allowing death to come for ideas you've held as part of yourself and identity that may need to die? What feelings and spaces of resistance arise for you?

1. After talking about Mary's over-the-top and unreasonably lavish display of love for Jesus in John 12, Tim said that this text invites us to think about what opportunities would have been missed if Mary had cared about all the social taboos she was ignoring in her actions, and had not anointed Jesus' feet. Take a minute to really think through the scene and the moment. What do you think would have been missed? For Mary? For Jesus? For those who witnessed the moment? For us and others who read of it all these years later? You might address those scenarios one-at-a-time in your discussion. 2. Tim shared a slide that read, “we face the same choice all the time, between playing it safe…or having the courage to love lavishly, generously, holding nothing back.” In what areas, relationships, or spaces do you need this reminder most? Where is it most difficult for you to love and demonstrate your love without holding back? With family? Friends? The marginalized? Your partner? Someone else? In which contexts, if any, do you find it easier to demonstrate your love in lavish and generous ways? Why do you think it is that the places that feel easier feel that way, and that the spaces in which it feels harder feel as they do? Do you see themes or commonalities in your responses that could help you become more aware of the places you hit resistance and restraint? 3. As he closed his sermon, Tim reminded us that every single person out there in the world is fighting really hard battles and is “armored up” as they try not to get hurt. Christians, he said, are the ones who should be out piercing through those coats of armor with love. What do you think about this idea? What does it look like? How does it work? What armor do you tend to wear as you live your daily life? Have you had experiences in which someone else has helped to pierce your own armor? If so, how did they do it? Can you think of people in your spheres who you sense need someone to help pierce their own self-protective armor? What would it look like for you to begin to do that with your love? What barriers might you encounter?

1. Early in his sermon, Tim said, “to be human is to be self-alienated.” He was speaking about the unavoidable universal experience of humans disavowing (or, sort of, ignoring and being in denial about) parts of ourselves that don't fit with the projected images of ourselves that we embrace as our self-concept.He went on to say that to be human is to be a bundle of contradictions - even to ourselves. And that our persistent self-alienation shapes the way we show up in the world. Later, when looking at the story, Tim pointed out that, before the prodigal son could be reconciled with his father and community, he is first reconciled to to an aspect of his own identity from which he's been estranged. First, how do you respond internally to the idea that you don't know yourself as thoroughly as you might hope? How easy is that to accept? How do you feel about that fact? How interested are you, in general, in learning and recognizing more about yourself? For some it may feel difficult, daunting, scary, interesting, exciting, or something else entirely! How does the prospect feel for you? How motivated are you to engage intentionally in self-discovery of this sort? How do/would you go about it? What barriers have you encountered to the process?Have you had experiences in which, like the prodigal son, you have a sort of “aha moment” in which you recognize a previously unknown truth about your self or personality? Or have you been a witness to a similar experience in someone else's life? If so, share about those experiences and, if possible, what the precursors to those moments were.2. Tim said, at several points in his sermon, that “All exiles are self-imposed.” Thinking about the spiritual part of our lives, what does exile look like? How would you identify spiritual exile within your own life? Is this something you've experienced personally? Is it something you've witnessed in others? How do we go about recognizing this self-imposed nature of exile while coming from a place of compassion, rather than of judgement? Does engaging with this idea compassionately feel easier or harder to do with self than with others? What do you make of that? 3. Tim talked about the response of the older brother, and related it to the way in which we can use religion to reinforce our “carefully curated and highly defended identities as good little boys and girls.” In this paradigm, the idea of God's joyful and unconditional embrace of all of humanity into God's love and family can be upsetting. He pointed out that the story's older brother has built his sense of self and worth around the idea of having worked to earn both his father's love, and his position in the father's household. When the father's unhesitating embrace of the prodigal pairs with the father's equally open embrace of this elder son, it throw's the older brother's sense of things into a tailspin. How much do you relate to this older brother? Or do you relate more to the prodigal? In what ways? Have you or do you feel any resistance to the idea that a fortune-squandering, family-shaming child of God is as fully beloved and appreciated as God's perfectly performing children? If you can, think of someone you know who has perhaps squandered some fortune that could have been yours or who has shamed your family or loved one. Do you feel resistance to the idea of that person/those people as fully as beloved and appreciated as God's perfectly performing children? Does putting someone real into that question impact your sense of resistance at all? If so, how? What do you make of your answer?

1. Tim taught that the word often translated as “the devil” in the “Temptations of Christ” narratives is a combination of two Greek words that, together, mean, “to throw through, in order to divide.” So, “diabolos is what we call anyone whose intent is to divide or cause division between God, self, other, and the world.”Building on that concept, Tim later said, “the world God imagines for us cannot be established through division and violence.”So, if our desire is to honor this and work toward creating the world as God imagines it, what does it look like to engage in personal, communal, national, or global crises without using division or violence?Is passivity the only alternative? If not, what could active engagement look like? What might its hallmarks be? Would that Kingdom-building engagement look different in, for example, personal settings compared to global settings? Why? How so?2. Tim taught that diabolos says to us that the ends justify the means, but that in the way of the kingdom, the means are the ends. How does this principle challenge you as you face struggles and suffering - whether personally, in society, or otherwise? How can you tell if you are engaging methods of division and violence if they're more subtle in nature? What do you need to look for? What are some of the ways you might engage with yourself when you realize you're tempted to use division and/or violence to move your own agenda forward? How does that look different in personal v communal v global etc contexts? 3. Tim characterized Jesus' response to the third temptation as another way of saying, “the wilderness isn't a place for testing God; it's a place for testing us.” Reflect on the way you may think about the concept of the wilderness in general. When it comes to your sense of what “wilderness” is, how congruent is the idea that the wilderness is meant to test us rather than God? Does that fit? Why or why not? Do you think it should fit?Also spend a moment considering times in your life when you've felt you were in “wilderness seasons.” Do you tend to think of these times as times in which you waited to see if God would “pass the test” and take care of you? Or do you tend to think of them more as times in which you were being tested? If you are the one being tested, what does “passing the test” look like?

1) In today's sermon, Tim told a story originally told by Douglas Rushkoff about a group of billionaires seeking wisdom about how to prevent problems after what they called “the event,”basically the apocalypse.When you're in a place of fear, and considering worst case scenarios, what is “the event“ for you? Why do you think that is? What kinds of plans do you tend to make in your mind should “the event” come to pass?2) Tim shared a slide that started with the question, “what makes us safe in this world?”He then listed the six most common types of answers we come up with to that question. They are below. Which of these do you tend to gravitate to First? Are there a couple that seem most right to you or are your defaults? Which are at the bottom of your list? If you're among those that have been stressed and fearful lately, it might help to consider the types of solutions you've imagined for the problems you are seeing. 3) Toward the end of his sermon, Tim stated “when the church loves like Jesus did, the kingdom of the world cannot stand against us“. He then prayed that we would have “the courage to try to stay committed to love.” What does that look like in the practical? In your daily life? In places where you may be actively resisting troubling things happening around you?

1. When you think of Jesus, what descriptive words come to mind? If someone asked you, “what is Jesus like?,” what would be some of the things you'd say?Then take a moment to revisit the scriptures Mandy preached over today, Luke 6:17-26.How do his words come across to you? How, as you absorb Jesus' teaching, would you describe Jesus in this moment, as he confronts the crowd with proclamations of the Kingdom that are very counter to what they might have hoped or expected to hear (& may be counter to what we hope and expect to hear)? To what extent does the Jesus of this moment align with the descriptive words you listed initially? What do you make of the similarity or dissimilarity you find between your general description of Jesus and Jesus as he shows up in this passage in Luke?2. In her sermon, Mandy pointed out that Jesus isn't good news for people who want to avoid disruption. How do you see yourself in this paradigm? What's your general orientation toward disruption? What emotions does the word “disruption” elicit for you? How do you feel about characterizing Jesus as a disruptor? Do you see yourself as disruptive in any contexts or ways? How do you feel about your answer? 3. Toward the end of her sermon, Mandy said, “when you embrace the idea of Jesus becoming the lowest of the low, it changes everything.” How do you feel about this characterization of Jesus? Do you feel the desire to add qualifiers or explanatory notes to the idea of Jesus being the lowest of the low?How do you respond to the totality of Mandy's statement? To what extent do you think that you “embrace the idea of Jesus becoming the lowest of the low?” How, if at all, has that changed things for you? How, if it has, has it changed you?

1. Tim talked about Peter's response to Jesus after, heeding Jesus' illogical directives, he and his partners catch literally more fish than their nets and boats can hold. For this first question, you're invited to take the time as a group to imagine a personalized scenario similar to that in today's passage. It may take some time, and you may need to encourage each other if you're struggling to come up with ideas or if some are feeling self-conscious. This is just an exercise and an experiment for all of us. Help each other where needed. Have fun with it! (And if it flops, thanks for trying!

1. In Luke 4:21, Jesus says that the Isaiah 61 scripture from which he read was fulfilled “today” for his listeners, in their hearing. Cole pointed out that he says “today,” rather than tomorrow, or at the cross, or at the time of the resurrection. What do you make of that “today?” If we're taking Jesus at his word, how do you understand that idea? What was going on that day that was fulfilling the proclamation of liberty and Jubilee? And what do you make of the fact that he didn't indicate the fulfillment of the passage would be coming at the cross or the resurrection? What previously held ideas might that moment challenge? 2. Cole also posited that when the crowd responds favorably to Jesus, but immediately also asks, “isn't this Joseph's son?,” that perhaps after they see Jesus' demonstration of power, they're reassuring themselves that, as Joseph's son, Jesus is one of their own. And that, by extension, they can exercise some sort of control over him and feel safe from his action and activity. But, of course, they find that Jesus is on a mission of his own, and they cannot make him be who they'd like or act as they'd demand. In response, they turn on him completely. Where do you see this same inclination in yourself? Where does Jesus demand from you something beyond what you'd like to give? Where do you find yourself tempted to jettison Jesus, even just a bit, when his way of being in the world is a challenge to something to which you'd rather cling? 3. Cole talked about the Transactional Belonging inherent in empire, and which is prevalent in our society today. He compared it to the only other type of system that Israel could imagine: a purity movement and a system of Obedient Belonging. But, Cole taught, both of these systems end in violence, and that Jesus' model of belonging was wholly other and centered on solidarity. He provided a working definition of solidarity: “a way of being together where even our differences are evidence of our shared faithfulness, hope, and love.” Spend some time as a group talking about each of these three types of belonging. Do you have places where you've seen or imagined the existence of one or another in action? What does it look like to participate in a transactional system of belonging? An obedience system? Where and how can you see these systems ending in violence?When you imagine a solidarity system of belonging, what are the features you think of? What does it look like at its core? How does it operate? What is your part in enacting that system?

1. In the system of the Jubilee year (also referred to as “the year of the Lord's favor”), land, debts, and finances were to be redistributed back to an equitable baseline as orignally described in Torah. Tim taught that in inherent in this arrangement was the reality that, “nobody could ever become so rich that they could control the whole system, and make Israel serve their purposes.” We might be inclined to respond positively to the idea of everyone having enough and no one being able to become dominantly wealthy. However, the enactment of this arrangement on a global level would likely mean that many of us would be required to have less than what we have now. Less land, less home, less cash, less savings, less stuff, less advantage, less privilege, and etc etc.How do you feel about this idea at first blush? If you can, think of someone you know who may have noticeably less material wealth than you do. Imagine pooling your collective resources and then splitting them exactly 50/50. Maybe spend a moment picturing the process of taking inventory of all that is owned between the two of you. Now imagine ending the process with no less and no more than your counterpart, and much of what was once yours now belonging to them. What emotions and thoughts are surfacing for you? Where is resistance showing up? Where might your ideals and your priorities be in conflict within you? What does it look like to engage in those places of tension within yourself, and do so with curiosity and kindness?2. Jesus was reordering the world not only to include, but also to center those who'd been excluded and pushed out of society up to that point. And as he lived out his ministry, his actions created and reflected this same type of Jubilee-esque restructuring. With your group, generate a list of people-groups who, in our world today, are often marginalized, excluded, and discriminated against. What does it look like for you and/other individuals to live lives that functionally demonstrate a Jesus-like priority on and intention toward this social reorganization? What does it look like for a church to excel at centering some of the various groups you came up with? What do we do with the reality that limits on our time, energy, and financial resources most likely preclude us from fully engaging in the Jubilee-like re-ordering Jesus describes? What thoughts and feelings surface as you consider that pragmatic idea? How would you suggest navigating that tension? 3. Tim shared a slide that read, “The church is meant to be the one place in the world where Jubilee is still the dominant reality.” Yet the actions of many churches don't reflect that same value and priority. How do we love and revere the church-at-large with so many opposing ideas in our world about what a church is meant to do, and how they're supposed to function in relationship to the rest of the world? If you can, avoid veering into a “they're wrong/we're right” trap. How do you navigate the varied expressions of “Christianity” and church to which many lay claim? How do you understand it in your mind? Why are there such stark differences? How might you engage with someone whose experiences of church have left them disdainful of church in total?

1. Much of Tim's sermon today talked about reframing the way we understand John's presentation of Jesus turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana. What is it like for you to think about understanding the story, its symbols, and John's presentation of the event in a new way? What had your understanding of that story been before this week's sermon? How do you feel about the idea that a story as it's written can remain static, but the understanding we have of it - either as a collective or as individuals can shift, sometimes dramatically? How does this interact with the way you understand the Bible, its stories, and our relationships to it? How do you feel about that dynamic as it's played out/plays out in your own life?2. Tim talked about the value of being a part of an interpretive community living in the way of Jesus. How much does this connect to your reasons for being a part of Redemption Church? With or without this exact idea in view, how would you describe the value of your own present day experiences in such a community (Redemption or otherwise)? How would you explain why you go to church, why you go to this church, and how it impacts who you are and how you live your life? 3. Mary instructs the servants at the wedding to “do whatever [Jesus] tells you to do.” In what areas of your life do you need to listen and hear “whatever he is telling you to do” so that you can have more awareness of and access to the true abundant nature of the Kingdom of God?What would that listening and hearing look like for you practically? Do you have any reasons you might hesitate to create that space and time for listening? Why or why not?

1. In his sermon today, Tim shared a quote from Heraclitus: “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.” Later, of this quote, Heraclitus also said, “not that all things are changing so that we cannot encounter them twice, but that some things stay the same only by changing.” Tim then said, “to be human is to be the kind of thing that can stay the same only by changing… to refuse to change and grow is to diminish our humanity.” Consider Heraclitus' original quote. What does it speak to you? Does it resonate? If so, how? If not, why do you think that is?What does it mean to be the kind of thing “that can stay the same only by changing?” How does refusing to change and grow diminish our humanity?What experiences from your life bear witness to these truths? Where have you seen them in action? 2. Tim differentiated between religion and spirituality, sharing these definitions: Religion: submitting to a particular tradition for the purpose of human formation. Spirituality: the habits, rhythms, and practices that help us engage with God & our traditionHe then taught that “Jesus' spirituality led him to question & rethink his religion.” Think about each of these definitions. What stands out to you? Is it new to consider spirituality and religion as separate and distinct counterparts in your life of faith? What do you think about the idea that Jesus' spirituality led him to question and rethink his religion? What might you imagine this looking like for Jesus internally? How does this connect to your own experience? Share about ways in which your spirituality has influenced your religion and vice versa. 3. One of Tim's first slides read, “Christianity teaches that our emotional, spiritual, physical, and psychological well-being - as persons and communities - depend on our willingness to surrender and constantly update our working models of reality.”His final slide read, “we must all find a way to let our spirituality call our religion into question.” How comfortable to do you feel with the idea that disruption is essential to your well-being? How attached do you feel to the idea of keeping your perceptions of reality unruffled and unchallenged? What do you think about the idea of your spirituality calling your religion into question? What experience, if any, have you had of this dynamic? What emotions does it bring up for you? Do you feel places of resistance within yourself? Whether your answer is yes or no, why do you think that is?

1. Near the beginning of his sermon, Andy talked about the essential nature of setting in any story, and how our stories are inherently linked with their setting and context. Think a little bit about the stories of your own life that are either prominent right now or have been in the story arc of your life so far. Share a bit about the stories that come to mind and the ways in which the setting and context of the moment are/were crucial to the overall shape of the story. 2. Andy shared what he called a “mini sermon” in the middle of his sermon. That mini sermon was this: small is often the way of God. Spend some time reflecting on this statement. How does it strike you? In what was have you seen its truth (or not!) in your own life over time?How does reflection on this idea and its truthfulness affect you in this moment? How can you take this idea and apply its wisdom in the challenging and painful places in your own life today? 3. Andy reminded us that “Jesus wasn't born into a sentimental and idealized version of life.”He went on to say, “the story of Bethlehem points us to the true essence of the Gospel! The ash heap of sorrow and grief can be turned into the birthplace of the Bread of Life.” What does it communicate to you to remember that Jesus did indeed come into a very real and messy version of reality? How does that thought make you feel? Now reflect on the idea of the ash heap becoming a birth place for the Bread of Life. Have you seen this truth in your own life? What do you think it means for the bread of Life to be born into the ash heaps and places of sorrow in your life? What does it look like? Is it possible to see that dawning of new life take place as it occurs, or only in retrospect? Would it be possible to miss it altogether? How might one recognize it?

Tim Suttle

1. One of Tim's slides in his sermon today read, “the trajectory of our lives will shape the way we react when Messiah shows up.”How do you understand what this means? How would you describe the trajectory of your own life, relative to this concept? What has it looked like or would it look like for you to orient or position your life on a trajectory that is or would be better able to receive Messiah when Messiah shows up?2. Part of John the Baptist's message to those who came to the wilderness to hear him was that they can't rely on their status as part of the people of Israel to ensure their ability to receive Messiah and move toward the Kingdom. Reflect on the fact that this admonition also applies to us today. Consider that neither your status in church membership nor your embrace of Christian cultural traditions are reliable qualifications for your readiness to receive Messiah in your life. How do you feel as you sit in that idea for a moment? What questions arise for you? What ideas? 3. Whether you count yourself among their numbers or not, how does it feel to consider those who are in processes of deconstruction and reconstruction as people in the process of repentance? Tim called the undertaking brave and faithful. How does that tally with the ways in which you usually think about deconstruction and those in the process?Do you consider yourself as one of the people in the midst of deconstruction and reconstruction? How does it feel to consider yourself, in that context, as brave? As faithful? As repenting?Share about what this framework for deconstruction and reconstruction stirs in your thoughts and feelings, and how it relates to your own experience.

1. When Tim reviewed the story of artist Phil Hansen, he said that a doctor advised Hansen to “embrace the shame… so he did.” Hansen's story, when quickly summarized, boils down to a single sentence what was no doubt a drawn out time of harrowing struggle and evolution for Hansen, both professionally and personally. Yet, this is often how our own life's stories are for others on the outside, and sometimes even for ourselves in retrospect. What we experience as a milestone period of extended struggle, crisis, or catastrophe can be told later in a simple few sentences in which it's difficult to convey the profound and transformative nature of the time. What experiences in my your life have become, with time, short easily summarized stories? Are you facing circumstances now that you hope will someday also be able to be seen as shorter, more easily summarized journeys? And how do you feel contemplating the possibility? What might you hope that story could sound like someday?2. In Tim's sermon today, he said that “only those who've cultivated a sensitivity to God will encounter God's presence in ordinary everyday things.” In contrast, many will need some sort of catastrophe or exile experience to get them to surrender their old dying world and ready to embrace what's next. Do you tend to lean more toward sensitivity to God in everyday things or do you think you're more likely to need a catastrophe to help you soften toward reshaping? Are there examples from your past that inform your thoughts on your tendencies? Are there different contexts in which you feel like your readiness for reformation may be more or less easy to access?3. After saying, “some of what we think we are won't survive [the process of reshaping prompted by catastrophe], but that's okay, because it's killing us,” Tim posed a question to us all: what are you hanging onto that you need to let go of? What crutch, pacifier, or way of being in the world might need to be released in order to allow you to embrace the experience of God that comes on the other side? After sharing your response to this question, reflect on practices you might undertake to help with the process of release and share with the group.

1. When telling the story of Phil Hansen's learned wisdom and artistic process, Tim said, “his limitation fired his imagination.” What limitations have you experienced or are you experiencing in your life at present? Are any of these limits in areas in which you also feel like you could really benefit from some firing of your imagination?Have you seen ways in which your Christian faith (or that of another) has been well suited to these times of limitation or disorientation? How so?Have you had times or circumstances in your past in which a limitation has led you to creative thinking, problem solving, or innovation? To new imagination? If so, share about how that came about for you. 2. Within the limiting bounds of exile, Jeremiah advised Israel's people to live fruitful lives in their new situation and station, and to seek the peace and prosperity of Babylon, as its prospering would translate to their own as well.Rather than fall into despair and hopelessness, Jeremiah seemed to embrace an idea articulated by Hansen: when faced with a limit, one ought to consider, “how will I find a new way to flourish within the bounds of this limit?” If these two ideas represent a spectrum of response to places of disorienting limitation, with despair and hopelessness on one end and curious exploration of new possibilities on the other, where do you tend to fall on this spectrum? Has that shifted over time for you? Are there different contexts in which one response is more likely than another for you? Think back to any present-day limitations you thought of in response to the first question. Where are you on that spectrum in regards to those circumstances? 3. Tim taught that as Empire desires to shape our lives, we can lean into the Christian practices that will help us to, instead, be formed into people of peace. He listed these practices for us to consider:Baptism & EucharistSabbath & tithingWeekly worship & daily prayerCommunity & solitudePeacemaking & solidarity with the outcastHe then asked, “as you think about your decrescendo, what practices will you engage in during Advent to make space for the future of God to be born in you?”As you answer this question with your group, share about any barriers that may hinder your practice(s). What might you do to avoid being stalled by these barriers?

1. What does it mean to be a witness?2. Is there a space in my life where I feel challenged to go against culture to follow Christ?3. Where does my story intersect with the story of Perpetua and Felicitas (social conventions, crossing lines, advocating for others, speaking up, resilience, hope in another kind of life, seeing suffering in a different light, telling my story)?

1. In his sermon, Tim talked about two parallel lines of church history. The first, the Historical Tradition, is characterized by dogmatic theologians and the general domination of men within its points of significance. In contrast, the Wisdom Tradition is characterized by mystical theologians, and women take a much more significant role in its history.The slide showing the two timelines is below. Does one of these feel more familiar to you? Its story more known or more relevant? Are there specific people or moments of significance in either that are personally important to you? If so, share about why. Are there some that you feel led to learn more about? If so, share about why. What thoughts are prompted by noticing the contrasts between these two timelines while also recognizing their concurrence? What influence might recognizing these parallel traditions have on your overall understanding of the history of Christian theology? Is it important to hold both of these traditions in view when considering Christian theological history? Why or why not? 2. Julian of Norwich's theology was neither sentimental nor sweet. She dove headfirst into difficult topics, including the problem of evil. In doing so, she wrote about Christ on the Cross. But unlike the views of her contemporaries, she didn't see anger and wrath in the picture of the cross, but rather God's solidarity and love. In the cross, she saw God absorbing man's evil and returning only forgiveness. Consider these different ways of understanding the cross. How do they compare with your own sense? Do you think of the cross as being more about wrath & anger? Or about solidarity & love? Whether you lean more toward one of these interpretations or some mixture, share about your sense of the cross and its relevance to your own personal faith practices. How does your conception of the cross affect your overall practice of your faith?3. Tim taught that Julian saw, in Christ, an invitation to bring our brokenness to God - a process that requires growing in self-knowledge. And that this process helps us to participate in God's well-making more and more. What are your thoughts about the link between growing in self-knowledge and God's ongoing well-making in the world? To what extent do you tend to think of your own self-awareness work as connected to God's redemptive processes? Do they seem linked or rather separate? What do you make of the through line drawn by Tim through the theology of Julian of Norwich? How does this influence your thoughts and feelings about the extent to which you've engaged in self-knowledge work? What feelings does this entire idea prompt in you? How significant does it feel?

1. In his sermon today, Tim talked about the ways in which St. Guinefort was embraced as an example of two of Christianity's core values: cruciformity & solidarity. Do you have people in your life who exemplify cruciformity and solidarity especially well in your eyes? In what ways do they do say? Why are they such exemplars for you? In what areas of your life are these two values particularly relevant? In which ways have you moved or do you want to move more toward cruciformity and solidarity in your own life & community? Brainstorm as a group some specific small (or large) actions you (individually or collectively) could take that will help you to further embody cruciformity and solidarity in your own life. 2. Tim shared a simple formula for helping us to move our lives more toward cruciformity. He listed some examples of status (see slide below for examples list & formula). Once we identify our own places of status, then we need to be intentional about not using or leveraging those advantages for our own self-advancement (as is the “mind of” our culture). But, instead, we are to pursue the “mind of Christ,” following his example of “kenosis,” emptying ourselves and instead engaging those places of status to help lift others in solidarity. Which advantages from this status list (or otherwise) do you identify in your own life? What do you think it would look like for you pour out, make void, and self-empty in that regard, rather than exploit or leverage your status/advantage/privilege? Do you think there should be limits to kenosis in your life? If so, how would one determine where they should be? If not, why not? What do you think influences your answer to this specific question? 3. Tim taught about Jesus' parable of the sheep & the goats (Matthew 25:31-46). He pointed out that in Jesus' teaching, “those who refuse God's grace to others they see as unworthy, are themselves unable to receive it.” In contrast, “those who practice cruciformity & solidarity with the excluded will come alive with a life that is truly life.”Further, Tim highlighted that Jesus' call to cruciformity and solidarity includes no litmus test for who is worthy of that inclusion and solidarity, saying “there is no means testing for God's grace.” Where are the areas in which you are most tempted to try to apply restrictions to whom “should” be able to receive God's grace, your solidarity, and/or any other form of inclusion? Why do you think those hesitations or refusals arise in you? Do you feel willing to move toward more cruciform solidarity in those areas? If so, how might you go about that? If not, why not?

1. In the first sermon in this year's Saints series, Tim taught about Jürgen Moltmann's life, work, and theological legacy. What jumped out at you during this sermon and its stories? What ideas impacted you or caught your attention? What were some of the big ideas you heard as you listened? 2. When Moltmann, interred in a POW camp, first read the Bible, and read about Jesus' cry from the cross, “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?,” he thought, “here is a fellow who understands me.” He described Christ as “…the divine brother in need, the companion on the way…the fellow sufferer who carries you, with your suffering.”Consider this view of Christ. To what extent does this align with the way you tend to this of the Son? Is there anything in this description that feels particularly resonant for you? Anything that feels kinda off? What, if anything, might you modify, add, or subtract to articulate your own sense of Christ more closely? What emotions or thoughts are prompted in you when you spend a little time considering Christ through this lens? Does the hope that surfaced for Moltmann feel relatable? Accessible? 3. Following are three of the Moltmann quotes Tim shared. Read through them as a group (all at once or one-at-a-time), and discuss your thoughts on each. What's stirred up for you? How is your sense of hope impacted? What resonates with your own experiences of hope and/or its absence?Is there anything here you needed to hear or of which you often need to be reminded? Is there anything in these words that inspires intention or action within yourself? “Peace with God means conflict with the world, for the goad of the promised future stabs inexorably into the flesh of every unfulfilled present.” “Hell is hopelessness.” “[the cross] encounters us as the great promise of our life and this world: nothing will be in vain…We are called to this hope, and the call often sounds like a command - a command to resist death and the powers of death, and a command to love life and cherish it: every life, the life we share, the whole of life.”

To find out more information about Youthfront: https://youthfront.comTo find more from Meredith Miller: https://meredithannemiller.com

Christina Bohn

1. In her sermon, Marina McClure spoke about the often unconscious assumptions we might make while we read the Bible. She specifically pointed out assumptions we might make about the underlying motives behind social interactions and/or the tone of voice being used in different exchanges. What are your thoughts about these ideas and the examples she gave from today's scripture reading? To what extent have you considered tone of voice when reading Biblical dialogue? How often are you aware of assumptions you might be making when you read? How often do you explore ideas about the different possible underlying social norms and subtext? How easy or difficult does it seem to integrate this kind of slowed-down and curious exploration of different possibilities as you read the Bible? How appealing is it for you? How valuable does it seem? 2. In a couple places in the scripture's story, Marina suggested alternative ways of understanding Jesus' experience of the moment, or a variety of ways of interpreting what's being communicated. What's it like for you to encounter alternative frames for understanding often familiar Biblical stories or ideas? Do you experience any resistance or does it feel interesting? Does it seem difficult to consider things in that way? Are there things about your own personality or background that might be especially congruent with your response to this way of thinking about the Bible? 3. Marina invited us all to try to engage with the Bible in a way that intentionally looks for questions and tries to practice active wondering as we read. What thoughts & feelings surface in response to these suggestions? How do you feel about the idea of intentionally seeking things you can't easily clarify? What do you think it might look like to try to engage in more “active wondering” as you read the Bible? What kind of impacts do you think this orientation toward reading the Bible could have for your own experience of the Bible and/or your faith?

1. Today, Nick Pickerell taught about Zacchaeus's repentance and immediate commitment to making reparations as told in Luke 19. He paralleled some of Zacchaeus' likely activities as a tax collector to some of the unjust practices of excluding and exploiting black people, native people, and other people of color that have long been codified in our country's governmental and social structures. How did you feel as you listened to Nick reciting the list of some of the unjust policies and practices that he shared as examples? What emotions came up for you?If possible, try to recreate that moment in your memory & share about your experience of it as you listened. Were there thoughts or ideas that surfaced for you as well? Reflecting back on the moment, what observations can you make about your own internal responses? Do you have any thoughts about how you responded and what your own experience of that moment was?2. Nick pointed out that, in response to Zacchaeus repentance and commitment to enacting justice, Jesus declared that, on that day, salvation had come to Zacchaeus's house. What do you make of this apparent cause-and-effect moment? What is it about Zacchaeus' actions that allowed salvation to come to the entire household? What wisdom for your own life today can you find in this moment of both Zacchaeus' commitments & Jesus' pronouncement? How is this relevant for you today? What questions or ideas does this part of the story prompt in you?3. Nick had us discuss a few questions together in smaller groups as he prepared to close his sermon. He first asked us to identify and name different systems of injustice which we've seen, participated in, or been made aware of. He then asked for us to identify different ways - big and small - in which we personally can impact or have impacted these and other unjust systems in our lives and communities. Spend some time as a group responding to those two questions. You can share what your group discussed during church if you were there and also come up with new examples and ideas together. Make a written list, as a group, of ways to engage. To whatever degree possible, generate a list of resources, organizations, or engagement opportunities you're aware of so that you can work together as a group to help support and inform each other's efforts to engage and enact justice in whatever capacity is possible for you as a way to remind yourselves that, as Nick said, every action matters and helps to bring wholeness to our communities.

1. Pastor Tim Keel began his teaching today by framing some ideas around politics and citizenship. He said: “Politics is about… * How we belong to each other* What we owe one another * What we owe society & * Who holds ultimate loyalty”What do you think of these summarizing statements? Does one or another capture something significant in your view or just jump out to you? Which and for what reasons?Are there any of these that seem more or less relevant to our present moment in history? More or less relevant in our lives as Christians? Share about how so or why not. 2. Tim also added that what we're really talking about with all these ideas is citizenship, and added that the a key question is, “when there is a conflict in loyalty, who wins?”Many of us know that our ultimate loyalty is “supposed to be” to Christ, and yet living our lives in that way is often much simpler in theory than in practice. What are some of the areas in life in which your divided loyalties are most likely to present themselves? Where do you most struggle to choose a path that honors your ultimate identity as a Christian rather than another loyalty or identity? Share about those spaces, what characterizes them, and the ways in which you experience the tensions between different loyalties that you hold.Are there contexts in which you feel like the idea of Christ-as-ultimate-authority is especially relevant? What about contexts in which it may seem like Christ's authority is or should be less a factor in your decision making or actions?3. Tim also talked about the impact of Emperor Constantine's adoption of Christianity as the state religion of Rome, and the far-reaching impacts on Christianity's relationship to politics and power. He said that, for the many centuries since, Christians have tended to believe that the Church needs the power of the state. What are your thoughts about this idea? What have you observed about the threads of this concept in the Christianity you see around you? Is there some extent to which you think that Christianity does need - or, at least, could be aided by - integration with powers of state? Alliances with powers of state? Is this something that's shifted for you over time? Share about your views & experiences. Considering these ideas, how do you then understand and integrate Paul's directive to “pray for those in authority…so that we may live peaceful and quiet lives?” In what ways does the idea of “peaceful and quiet” living align with your sense of living out your Christian faith and fidelity to Christ? Are there ways in which you feel some measure of resistance to or dissonance resulting from the idea of “peaceful and quiet living” as an ideal Christian way of engaging with secular authority? Share about your thoughts and feelings with the group.

1. In his sermon about the story of Hagar in Genesis 16, Dr. Taylor Johnson talked about the difference between anxiety and fear. Of anxiety, he said, “Anxiety is a response to a potential threat that may or may not occur at some point in the future.” He also noted that anxiety gets its power from the unknown, and that we often try to give ourselves a sense of control by predicting the future - even though the accuracy rates for our predictions are abysmal. What are some examples from your own past? Share about a time in which the unknown and its accompanying anxiety drove you to try to figure out the future. How accurate were your predictions? In retrospect, how do you feel about the energy you invested into making them, considering them, and carrying anxiety about them? When you've done this type of predicting to try to gain a sense of control, has it worked? Has it helped? What are other ways you might have tried to create a sense of control? And are they any more or less helpful in the long run? 2. Taylor also taught about the concept of liminal space, using Richard Rohr's words as a definition: “liminal space is where we are both betwixt and between the familiar and the completely unknown. There alone is our old world left behind, while we are not yet sure of the new existence.”Taylor talked about the liminal spaces in which Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar all most likely suffered. Think about, and if you're willing, share about a liminal space in which you have found or presently do find yourself. What was/is your experience of that space? (And it can be a liminal space of any significance, size or importance; there's no need to compare your experience to Abraham's, Sarah's, Hagar's or anyone else's). Are there things that made or make it less bearable? More bearable? Do you feel able to consider your own liminal experiences and discomfort in light of the compassion and curiosity Taylor talked about? Are you able to access compassion & curiosity when it comes to the liminal spaces of others? Is that easier or harder? Why? 3. Dr. Johnson spent some time re-narrating the stories of Abraham, Sarah, & Hagar - all with an emphasis on highlighting the pain they each must have experienced in their own liminal spaces. What's it like for you to reconsider these stories in this way? How does it impact your feelings about these stories? These people? Your own journeys through life and liminal spaces? God?What are you learning or reflecting on bevause of the stories of these three people after and because of Taylor's sermon today?

1. In his sermon on Mark 8:22-35, Dr. Brady Braatz pointed out that this story, in which Jesus restores sight to a blind man, stands alone as the only miracle Jesus performs in the gospels in which he has to give it a 2nd try to fully complete the miracle. What do you make of the fact that Jesus essentially tries again in this story? What do you think the different groups of people (disciples, onlookers, etc) around him might have thought or felt in those moments? What about the blind man himself? What do you think could have been happening for Jesus? 2. Brady then taught about the expectations that the disciples (and many others) had for a messiah. He also talked about the fact that, after Peter shares that the disciples think Jesus is the messiah, Jesus doesn't confirm or deny that for them. Dr. Braatz said this type of (non) response probably led to an explosion in the imaginations of the disciples - specifically because of their likely well-developed expectations for the long-awaited messiah. Take a second and let your mind imagine that moment between Jesus and the disciples. What tones of voice do you hear? How would you characterize Jesus' questions? Why do you think he's asking? What about Peter's responses? Spend some time imagining the moment knowing that there are no right or wrong answers. Then share or brainstorm together as a group about some of the different possible versions of that exchange. Are there any perspectives or imagined characterizations that surprise you? Any you think of as less or more likely? Why do you think certain versions resonate with you differently than others?What about the tail end of that story, when Jesus predicts his death and resurrection only to be contradicted by Peter. As Jesus responds to Peter by rebuking the accuser or Satan, how do you imagine the tone of that interaction? The responses of those witnessing it? What do you think was happening under the surface in that moment for Jesus? For Peter? 3. Finally, Brady tied these two stories together and suggested that we may be able to see parallels to our own lives of faith in each of them. As we contemplate the story of Jesus' 2-step healing of the blind man ,and that of Peter's confession to and subsequent rebuke by Jesus, we might also see instances in which - like some of those in the stories, we struggle with a moment that goes against our expectations of God or things of faith. Think about this dynamic in your own life. Can you share an occasion on which you struggled to let go of your pre-existing ideas in favor of a new understanding of some part of your story of faith? What other experiences do you have that relate to the idea of only partially “getting it” in your life of faith? What has been your experience of seeing things a new way or of shedding old expectations and understanding? What have the impacts of these examples been on your relationship to God and to your practice of life as a Christian?

1. What might you discern, in this final third of the year, that God might be asking you NOT to do?“Stress is a perverted relationship to time…we become [time's] victim.” John O'DonohueShe also asked (paraphrased) “do you think the way you live your life (and the way you engage with time) reflect God's vision for your life in the world?”“You are not a machine. Your life is a garden, and it's a life that needs to be tended.”“Hurry is the great enemy of spiritual life in our day. Ruthlessly eliminate hurry from your life.” - Dallas Willard “Hurry and love are incompatible. All my worst moments…are when I'm in a hurry - late for an appointment, behind on my unrealistic to-do list, trying to cram too much into my day. I ooze anger, tension, a critical-nagging - the antithesis of love.” - John Mark Comer“Love requires a slowness… love requires margins…love requires hospitality.” God prunes both the branches that are not bearing fruit AND the living branches… all in order for us to bear more fruit. (Re: John 15:1-2)What in your life needs to get pruned right now?2. What might you discern that God is asking you to continue to do? What in your life needs you to give it time to faithfully tend it?3. What new thing do you discern that God might be asking you to plant?“Whatever you plant in your life will be the thing that grows.” Where's the deficiency in your life right now?“When you step into that spacious place, what is God trying to tell you?”

1. Pastor John Bowles centered his sermon today on John 12:28. This verse includes this succinct prayer from Jesus: “Father, glorify your name.” John shared that this prayer can make him feel uncomfortable at times. He attributed that to the fact that, a lot the time, this doesn't align with what he really wants. Then he asked us all a simple question to begin: how does this prayer make you feel? Share your response to this initial question and your thoughts about why your response may be what it is with your group.John also asked this question: If glorifying God is to make God real and show his substance in a way that makes him real, how are we doing with that? Reflect on this question. What catches your attention in this shorthand definition of what it means to glorify God? What response does it provoke in you? Then reflect on the question itself. What are your thoughts? Do you feel personally engaged in this type of glorification? Do you think it is something you'd like to be a part of more? or less? or at all?How do you conceive of the links between individuals engaging in this type of glorification and the big picture community-wide and church-wide glorification of God? Which feels more urgent or important for you? Which feels easier to imagine or engage in?2. John shared this quote from CS Lewis: “All the loneliness, angers, hatreds, envies and itchings that this world contains, if rolled into one single experience and put into the scale agains the least moment of the joy that is felt in Heaven, would have no weight that could be registered at all.” What do you think about this quote? Does it ring true for you? Does it stir up objections for you? Agreement? What feelings does it prompt in you? When you think about the things that weigh on you as your own “loneliness, angers, hatreds, envies and itchings” in this world, what kind of emotions surface in you as you reflect on this perspective? What thoughts?3. John also talked about the positioning of this prayer within the book of John; it's smack dab in the middle. He framed it as a fulcrum in the life of Jesus with the time preceding this moment as a time in which Jesus' public ministry and profile were growing in both size and prominence. After this point of transition, Jesus moved more into a space of letting go of all that, and of living in a way that was more solely focused on what God desired of him.John suggested that as we pattern our lives after Jesus, each of us undergoes this type of transition as well. We may spend the first parts of our lives doing and building, but we then experience a time (often in midlife) of loss and transition in which we can learn that all those things we worked toward aren't really ours and aren't who we are. At that point, we move into a space in which we become more focused on something beyond ourselves.Where do you see yourself in this process? How does it correspond to your physical age? If we grant this process is accurately described, what do you think about it? John mentioned that many of us may resist this process. Do you feel resistance to it (or to the idea of it) in yourself? Whether your answer is more “yes" or more “no," why do you think your answer is what it is?

1. In his sermon, Andy shared about the three Transcendentals: The True, the Good, and the Beautiful. He taught that the true is correlated with the practice of Christian apologetics, and that apologetics should be the articulation of the view that Christ is the truth. He also said that much of discipleship in the modern church has been focused on a misapplication of apologetics, in which the focus is more on convincing people that the doctrinal claims of your church are correct.What's been your experience with apologetics? If you've had exposure to the idea or practice of apologetics, share about it with the group, including ways in which it may have evolved with time. What are your current senses of and feelings about apologetics as you've understood it? Consider the pursuit of apologetics as Andy framed it: the articulation of the view that Christ is the truth.” Does that shift anything for you? How so?2. After he spoke about both apologetics and ethics/justice, Andy spoke about beauty. He talked about Christian Aesthetics and the ways in which they can help to lead us into an encounter with God, using architecture as an example. He also talked about other forms which beauty can take, including nature, theater, painting, sculpture, song, poetry, and literature. Which forms of beauty tend to affect you most? What's your experience of beauty helping lead you into an encounter with God? If you have any memorable experiences you'd be open to sharing, please do.Andy reminded us that our capitalist society teaches us that worth and value are connected to function and utility… but that, in truth, beauty doesn't have a to serve a purpose. How does this reminder impact you? What thoughts and feelings surface? Does this feel like something that's easy for you to hold onto, or something more easily forgotten? Do you have resistance to it in anyway? What do you think would happen in your own life if you put greater emphasis on having experiences of beauty? What might impact do you think that could have on your faith?3. Andy put forth the question, “What is Christian beauty?” He gave his own answer as, “Christian beauty is nothing other than cruciform [in the metaphorical shape of the cross], because Christian beauty is found on the cross and in the resurrection.” He went on to say that the cross is beautiful because it is where human sin does its worst and divine love does its best.Share your response to this idea with the group. What surfaces for you? Does this seem challenging in any way? If so, how?Now consider spaces in your own life where you experience regular beauty. Do you see cruciformity in those places? How so? Alternatively, where you wish you could experience more beauty? Can you imagine ways in which a cruciform form of beauty could be brought into that space in a greater degree? What might that look like?

1. While sharing about his experiences dealing with infertility, Cole shared that though he deeply loved and cared for the church he was a part of in the past, he also had a sense that in that place and at that time, he didn't have a community, a faith, and an understanding of God that were deep enough to support him. What's your response to this idea? Does it resonate for you? Does it seem surprising? Cole also talked about some of the questions that surfaced in those experiences for him: “how do I bring God into this?” “Can God fix this…?” If you have experiences of a time in your faith that feel parallel, share about them with the group. What were those realizations about your own faith-space like for you? Share about any questions you wrestled with, whether they were the same or different from those Cole shared. 2. In the video about “Wholeness,” Tim said that wholeness isn't about becoming someone who lacks nothing or who has nothing missing. What do you this about this idea. What is wholeness? Suggest some words that might help to define it. Suggest some ways in which you can identify it either in yourself or in others. If there was anything else that jumped out to you from the Wholeness video, share about it with the group. 3. In the video talking about “Mission,” Tim suggested the question, “if you don't die tonight - if you wake up tomorrow - what are you going to do with your life?” When posed within the framework of mission, how would you answer this question today? How does your answer today differ from an answer you may have given in the past? Do you have a sense of “mission” in the world? In your world? To what extent does the idea of God's mission influence your life? When and how does it show up?

Mandy Hill

1. In his talk today, Jonathan Foster shared this definition of love:“Love is an uncontrolling, nonbinary, non-violent, non-scapegoating energy in relationship with God and others, meant for the flourishing of everyone.”Consider this definition. What are some of the ideas and thoughts that surface for you? If you were able to hear his sermon, what did you think when you first heard the definition?As Dr. Foster expanded on the specific parts of this definition, what stood out? Where did you find yourself particularly in agreement? What parts left you feeling uneasy? What parts left you with questions? What are those questions?2. Jonathan said, “some people use the words of the Bible to define love; some people use love to define the words of the Bible.” He went on to strongly endorse the latter approach.Spend some time as a group articulating these two approaches in your own language. What do they mean? What does each look like in practice?What are your words thoughts and opinions about embracing the latter over the former or vice versa?3. Toward the end of his sermon, Jonathan invited each of us to take this definition of love into our worlds and embody it in our lives.Where do you see the strongest need for this kind of love to be embodied in the places and relationships with which your life intersects? How might you accept Jonathan's invitation and embody this love in your life? Are there circumstances in which you can imagine this clarity & definition especially functioning as an asset? Share with the group.

1. Christina taught today about the relationship between place, YHWH, and Israel. She suggested that the land is a co-partner in the covenant between Israel and YHWH, and taught us that part of the significance of the land is that “the land is the place that Israel existswithGod.” With that as background, Dr. Bohn asked, “What does it look like to co-partner with the land as Israel did?” She asked what it would be like if we saw the land not as a space to pass through or own, but instead as a place in which to partner with the land and with Israel. Reflect on these ideas and questions and discuss your thoughts with the group. Have you ever considered the role of the land in the covenant? In the relationship between God's people and God? How does this idea sit for you? What thoughts does it prompt for you?2. Christina shared a quote from Willie Jennings: “Owning can never be a way of belonging.” What's your initial response to this idea? What surfaces as you consider it specifically related to land?With the concept of being a “landowner” so prominent in the political and social history of our country, what would it mean to stop thinking of ourselves as potential landowners, and instead as people in covenant relationship with the land? What does that shift and mean for you or your neighbors, whether your homeowners, renters, experiencing homelessness, or in another situation? 3. Christina also talked about rootlessness and its relationship to space, place, and the land. What does it mean to be rootless? She shared a quote from Walter Brueggemann: “it is rootlessness, not meaninglessness, that defines us.”What do you think this quote means? What's Brueggemann identifying about our experiences in life? How true does it ring for you? What's the wisdom to take away from this idea if we're looking at places in our own life that may feel meaningless? Could the idea of the land and our relationship with it factor in here? If so, how?

1. Quoting Walter Brueggemann, Tim taught about the “doable character of Torah,” and that this nature “frees the community of the faithful from from excessive preoccupation and anguish about how and in what ways obedience might be done.”How does this resonate with your own experiences of Torah, whether that's been over this summer at RC, over the last five summers, or in other contexts? How “doable” does it seem to you? How has your sense of the Torah evolved over the course of this time studying Deuteronomy and in the past?2. In his sermon, Tim pointed out that what was true for Israel so long ago is still true in our lives today: “God isn't the only one making offers of blessing.” Some of the examples of other offerers he shared are (a) individualism (aka “rights & freedoms”), (b) consumerism (aka “the economy”), and (c) nationalism (aka “national security.”First, as a group name some of the blessings on offer from the “-isms” above. What specifically is being offered?How real do you think these offers are? In what ways can these offered blessings be delivered? What and how do these “-isms” and others fall short of what's promised?3.. Tim shared the following quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer: “If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction.”What are same trains that you are on today or have been on in the past where you perhaps are trying (or did try) to run the corridor in the opposite direction?What do you think of Bonhoeffer's observation? Do you agree with him? Why or why not?What are some of the reasons it can be difficult to exit those misdirected trains? If you feel like you've had an experience of exiting this type of metaphorical train in your own life, how did you do it? Are you glad you did? What are some of the outcomes (positive, negative, or neutral) of de-boarding one of these “trains?” 4. When making the decisions alluded to in Deuteronomy 28:3-5, the decisions that lead to life and prosperity or to death and disaster, Tim reminded us that “today is always the day this choice is set before us.”How hard or easy is it for you to believe this? Does it seem true? Are there places or situations in life when you feel like it's too late to change your choices?Does the idea of “you get to choose again every day” feel more true for others than for you? Share about what this idea prompts for you internally as you consider it.