200409 Maundy Thursday Drive in Service 200409 Maundy Thursday bulletin Sermon manuscript: About two and a half years ago our church celebrated the 500thanniversary of Martin Luther nailing the 95 theses concerning indulgences to the church door. This marked the beginning of an intense struggle throughout Christendom. Martin Luther’s writings caused much turmoil. Everybody had to take a stand. Was Luther correct or not?There was another man, named Desiderius Erasmus, who was a little older than Luther. He had long been in favor of cleaning up corruption in the Church at that time. For that reason he was sympathetic to some of what Luther was teaching. However, there was a lot that he didn’t like too. In a way he was rather conservative. He wanted to keep the teachings as they were, even if they weren’t biblical, because he feared the strife and dissension that comes with doctrinal controversies.So in 1524 Desiderius Erasmus wrote a short book where he attacked something that Luther had been teaching. Luther taught that we are born with an enslaved will. Erasmus said that we have a free will. This topic is important and beneficial to study. Perhaps we will some time. But I’m not bringing this up to discuss the controversy itself. I want to talk about something Erasmus said against Luther in course of his book.He basically said that Luther was being altogether too certain about what the Bible said. Over the course of history there have been a lot of people who have said different things about what the Bible says about this or that topic. The Bible, he said, was a confusing book. Who can make heads or tails of it? It is best to leave interpretation to the professionals. Let the priests, bishops, and the pope tell us what it all means, because the Bible is basically useless in settling any controversies.This really struck a nerve for Luther. I don’t think Erasmus was prepared for the vehemence with which Luther responded. I think Erasmus thought that all people thought that the Bible was a rather hazy and difficult book whose interpretation was best left to the professionals. Luther said, “No. The Bible is not hazy. The Bible is clear. If there’s anything that’s hazy, then it’s the people who are reading it. You will be better blessed by reading the inspired prophets and apostles than you will with reading all the other stuff that folks have written aboutwhat the Bible says. Each person can and should believe what the Bible says, not what people say.”I agree with Luther: The Bible is clear. It is plain spoken. It doesn’t beat around the bush and leave all kinds of things open to a person’s interpretation. If anything, the Bible is a bit too clear for our liking. People would like it to be less clear so that they can bend and twist it any way they please.I’ll give you a couple examples of the Bible being more explicit than we want it to be. When God called Abraham and his descendants to be his people he gave Abraham the sign of circumcision to accompany it. That means, “Cut off the foreskin from your penis, and cut off the foreskin from all your sons’ and grandsons’ penises eight days after they are born.” Does that make you a little uncomfortable? Well, that’s what circumcision is. I didn’t make it up. It’s right there in Genesis. How does circumcision do anything or benefit anyone? I’m not sure. But that’s what God clearly said.Or one time God told Abraham to take his son, his only son, Isaac, whom he loved, and kill him as a sacrifice on a mountain that God would show him. That’s all too plain in its meaning for our liking. We’d like to turn it into a metaphor or something so that we can safely ignore it. But Abraham believed this word to be true and faithful. He didn’t interpret it out of existence. Let God be true and every man a liar.This is how the Bible is. It records how God deals with people in a very simple way. The problem is that we often have a hard time believing it. But that isn’t God’s fault. Neither is it the Scri