Looking up at the sky tonight, I couldn't help but think about what it must have been like on the actual good Friday. What did the apostles think as they looked into the sky at the darkness? Just a few days later they must have seen such hope in the sky. The stars were symbols of the heavenly host, watching, waiting for the Messiah to make himself known. And now, he was gone. The moon was no longer the loving eye of God staring at them in joy, but the sly smile of Satan gloating his victory. Jesus was dead. The dream was over.
When you think about it, God left them hanging for about 40 hours. Jesus had left hints, but they didn't get it. So for two nights they sat and stared at the sky. How did they react? Did some cry all three days, overcome by sorrow? Did some think about joining in Judas' fate? Maybe others were numb from the shock. Some may have prayerfully ask for God to carry them through. Maybe one or two shook their fists at the Heavens and vowed that they had had enough of God's empty promises. Maybe others just say and contemplated what had happen in the last few years.
Because we know about Sunday morning, we look over the anguish of Friday night. I had a friend that was headed to a Lutheran Good Friday Service tonight. As he talked about it, I could see that some of my more conservative Church of Christ friends were sort of snickering. Why would you go to a Lutheran church to celebrate Good Friday? They do all sorts of weird stuff this time of year.
What they try to do, from what I can tell, with thier liturgical calendar and services, is help people experience Christ. From what I see in other religious groups, there is a value in living out Christ's reality in our lives. Thus we have lent to remember his forty days in the desert. We cry at his death on Friday. We celebrate when he is raised on Sunday. Every worship experience tries to connect you to the life of Christ. Such an approach may lead to hyper-allegorization, but it does try to immerse the congregants in the life of Christ.
We could learn from that in the Restoration Movement. Jason Ashlock spoke in chapel today. He talked about how we too can stand and look at Christ and scream "Hossana! Save us now!" That cry for salvation is just as necessary in the church as it is in the world. We have lost our connection to what Christ did. Because we fear messing up dates we divorce Christ's death from a day on the calendar. We don't realize that in so doing, we are making him a little farther from reality.
In churches of Christ, we have a heritage of baptism. We talk about how immersion is so important because it is a symbol of the death, burial, and resurection of Christ. In that act, we become one with Christ and our story becomes his story. Similarly, we value the Lord's supper because we want to remember his death. Why don't we take those values further? Why do we divorce Christ's life from any sort of real life holiday, and thus miss out on an oppurtunity to imagine what it was like to live with him.
I suggest that we adopt religious holdiays. Let's celebrate Christmas, Easter, Passover, whatever. In doing so, maybe we will be able to make Christ less a historical figure, which we can debate, pick apart, and analyze, and more a living being in us. Let us realize that we live out his life symbolicaly in many things that we do. We are called to carry his cross. Let's do what ever we can to show that Christ's story is our story and is still being told. It is not some old volume that is stuck on the shelves of history. It is a story that we live out everyday.
Showing posts with label HU Stuff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HU Stuff. Show all posts
4.14.2006
4.12.2006
Celebrations
Tonight I celebrated the Passover with some friends. It was an interesting thing. A couple of weeks ago we did something for Ash Wednesday. I really enjoy being around these various types of religious celebrations. For many of us, it is good to see the beliefs of others, and how they reflect God's nature.
In general, I wish that we could add more times of rememberance and celebration. I know that the Lord's Supper is supposed to be that, but we all know that we tend to neither celebrate or remember. It is another thing between us and Dixie Cafe. We really should add more time getting together and remembering our past.
Maybe we could make some new stuff up. What if congregations had a meal once a year where they remembered what God had done to bring them to where they were. Or maybe we should do something with our families. We could sit at Thanksgiving or some other meal and recount what God has done for us. What did he do so that our family knows God?
We need more times to remember God's faithfulness. Maybe our lack of understanding of God's presence in our life comes from not taking time to remember and think. We don't remember because we don't try. Let's not God for not seeing his presence when we aren't looking.
In general, I wish that we could add more times of rememberance and celebration. I know that the Lord's Supper is supposed to be that, but we all know that we tend to neither celebrate or remember. It is another thing between us and Dixie Cafe. We really should add more time getting together and remembering our past.
Maybe we could make some new stuff up. What if congregations had a meal once a year where they remembered what God had done to bring them to where they were. Or maybe we should do something with our families. We could sit at Thanksgiving or some other meal and recount what God has done for us. What did he do so that our family knows God?
We need more times to remember God's faithfulness. Maybe our lack of understanding of God's presence in our life comes from not taking time to remember and think. We don't remember because we don't try. Let's not God for not seeing his presence when we aren't looking.
4.11.2006
The Internet: Advancing Disunity in Brand New Ways!
I enjoy getting under peoples' skin. Playing the prophet is something that I get a kick out of. When I get a chance to blow the whistle and expose some sort of Christian cover-up, I go for it. But there is a thin line to walk. When do we cease to be calling people back to God and start calling them to doing what we want them to do?
Let's talk about Michael Moore for a minute. I will not try to include (or necessarily exclude) Mr. Moore in/from the Kingdom of God. Instead, let's talk politics. When Moore jumps into an ice cream truck and drives around the Capitol Building reading the Patriot Act because he believes that most of our legislators have no clue as to what it says, that is funny. Similarly, when he walks up to Senators and tries to get them to sign their sons up to fight in the war they approved, that is humorous. In general, I love Moore, because he tends to never give the guys in control a free pass. He wants to help out the little guy at all costs. We need a fly in the ointment like Moore, especially as more and more media outlets jump in bed with the politicians. However, Moore can be abrasive. I think that he is funny, but many find him disrespectful and rude. Besides, you can only make so many movies attacking the president before you start to look a little self righteous.
Many of us in the church, particularly my restoration heritage folks, could learn a lot from the example of Moore. It seems that a lot of folks have a laundry list of what churches of Christ do wrong. Many of those list are full of really good things. However, when do we cease to prophesy against corruption for the good of the Kingdom, and start sitting on an ideological high horse ridiculing others because they aren't as enlightened us we are. We want respect, but we don't give it out.
I love some of the comments that Scott Adair has made on Romans 14. He suggests that Paul has two messages. Those who are weak should not judge those who are strong. Those who are strong, should not condescend those who are weak. Both must appreciate the views of the other. I feel like we stand up a lot and say, "Don't judge me!" and then we turn around and pat our grandparents on the head and say, "God bless your narrow minded, ridiculous, immature, pea picking heart."
Growing up I got sick when I saw the venom that came from newspapers like "Contending for the Faith" or "Firm Foundation." My grandfather is big into some of that stuff and I don't get it. My image of him and his heart for Christ seem incongruent to stuff like that. I have to realize that in his heart he thinks that he is doing what is best for God's people. That doesn't make him right, but it makes him fallible, just like me. We have a new brand of newspaper in the fellowship. A new place where individuals can unfairly rip on others and treat them like they are idiots and worldly. A new place to rip down the brotherhood instead of build them up. This time, the progressives are doing the mud slinging. These newspapers are called blogs!
Jesus wanted his followers to understand that they should look at the log in their own eye before they start picking at others specks. It seems to me that we are all walking around with logs. I appreciate some of the folks that feel the need to expose balogna that happens in the brotherhood, particularly at Harding. On the other hand, when I read your blog, and I see you ripping everyone else, and there is not a singal confessing post or a post about the goodness of God, I wonder.
My nature leads me to be confrontational. You can scroll through my posts and see different groups, philosiphies, and maybe even people that I have attacked. I just pray that you also see a sinner broken by my own sin and redeemed by Christ. I claim nothing more. I don't get things right all the time, or even most of the time. I am just trying to do what I feel like is right. And as much as I don't understand them, I know that the church paper slanderers and the blogging slanderers are in the same boat. I just hope that we can all be more introspective and humble as we try to please our God.
Let's talk about Michael Moore for a minute. I will not try to include (or necessarily exclude) Mr. Moore in/from the Kingdom of God. Instead, let's talk politics. When Moore jumps into an ice cream truck and drives around the Capitol Building reading the Patriot Act because he believes that most of our legislators have no clue as to what it says, that is funny. Similarly, when he walks up to Senators and tries to get them to sign their sons up to fight in the war they approved, that is humorous. In general, I love Moore, because he tends to never give the guys in control a free pass. He wants to help out the little guy at all costs. We need a fly in the ointment like Moore, especially as more and more media outlets jump in bed with the politicians. However, Moore can be abrasive. I think that he is funny, but many find him disrespectful and rude. Besides, you can only make so many movies attacking the president before you start to look a little self righteous.
Many of us in the church, particularly my restoration heritage folks, could learn a lot from the example of Moore. It seems that a lot of folks have a laundry list of what churches of Christ do wrong. Many of those list are full of really good things. However, when do we cease to prophesy against corruption for the good of the Kingdom, and start sitting on an ideological high horse ridiculing others because they aren't as enlightened us we are. We want respect, but we don't give it out.
I love some of the comments that Scott Adair has made on Romans 14. He suggests that Paul has two messages. Those who are weak should not judge those who are strong. Those who are strong, should not condescend those who are weak. Both must appreciate the views of the other. I feel like we stand up a lot and say, "Don't judge me!" and then we turn around and pat our grandparents on the head and say, "God bless your narrow minded, ridiculous, immature, pea picking heart."
Growing up I got sick when I saw the venom that came from newspapers like "Contending for the Faith" or "Firm Foundation." My grandfather is big into some of that stuff and I don't get it. My image of him and his heart for Christ seem incongruent to stuff like that. I have to realize that in his heart he thinks that he is doing what is best for God's people. That doesn't make him right, but it makes him fallible, just like me. We have a new brand of newspaper in the fellowship. A new place where individuals can unfairly rip on others and treat them like they are idiots and worldly. A new place to rip down the brotherhood instead of build them up. This time, the progressives are doing the mud slinging. These newspapers are called blogs!
Jesus wanted his followers to understand that they should look at the log in their own eye before they start picking at others specks. It seems to me that we are all walking around with logs. I appreciate some of the folks that feel the need to expose balogna that happens in the brotherhood, particularly at Harding. On the other hand, when I read your blog, and I see you ripping everyone else, and there is not a singal confessing post or a post about the goodness of God, I wonder.
My nature leads me to be confrontational. You can scroll through my posts and see different groups, philosiphies, and maybe even people that I have attacked. I just pray that you also see a sinner broken by my own sin and redeemed by Christ. I claim nothing more. I don't get things right all the time, or even most of the time. I am just trying to do what I feel like is right. And as much as I don't understand them, I know that the church paper slanderers and the blogging slanderers are in the same boat. I just hope that we can all be more introspective and humble as we try to please our God.
4.10.2006
Toenails and Teaching Stories
Romans 8:28 is a really abused passage, but I think that it is important for our everyday sanity. I don't think that it means that God makes everything happen. He just takes whatever crap happens, and tuns it into furtilizer. Not the most poetic of thoughts, but it works. Many of us should approach more things in life with that in mind.
For example, today I got my ingrown toenail removed. It sucked. Unfourtunatly, God made me to be resistant to anesthesia. They did as much as they could to numb my toes, but it didn't work out as much as it should have, so it hurt. All day it has been nagging at me. I was really scared as I went. However, as I went, I thought that I maybe should look at it as an adventure. That was kind of stupid, but it worked some. When I looked back at some of the horrible experiences in my life, I realized all of the things that I have learned from those experiences. Much later on they became great stories and examples for future lessons.
When we go through things in life, we should realize the lessons that we might learn from it. In the end all things will pass. We can take from what has happened. Life should be embraced because we never know what we learn. Such a view can help us to really enjoy even bad things. We see life as a gift of God, not as something that just happens.
For example, today I got my ingrown toenail removed. It sucked. Unfourtunatly, God made me to be resistant to anesthesia. They did as much as they could to numb my toes, but it didn't work out as much as it should have, so it hurt. All day it has been nagging at me. I was really scared as I went. However, as I went, I thought that I maybe should look at it as an adventure. That was kind of stupid, but it worked some. When I looked back at some of the horrible experiences in my life, I realized all of the things that I have learned from those experiences. Much later on they became great stories and examples for future lessons.
When we go through things in life, we should realize the lessons that we might learn from it. In the end all things will pass. We can take from what has happened. Life should be embraced because we never know what we learn. Such a view can help us to really enjoy even bad things. We see life as a gift of God, not as something that just happens.
4.08.2006
Call Me Atticus
Today I was hit with an egg. I was blessed (in a way) by getting pegged with a hard egg, so it smarted some, but it didn't break all over me. It still left me really mad. Fran and I have been hit by water balloons in the past and that really makes me angry. I get very scared about Fran being in danger. I just freak out.
I never know how to react. From time to time I think about carrying around rocks, baseballs, or balloons filled up with paint. If those idiots met my wrath just once they wouldn't do stupid crap like hitting people with eggs. Another part of me wants to trail them in my car and get their license plate number or slash their tires. Anything to get back. But alas, I don't have the guts to do any of that.
In reality, I don't want to do those things. Over my college years I have developed into quite a little passivist, and I don't believe in fighting back. However, it is hard when you are sitting there with an egg bruise. Maybe I just don't have enough courage to step up against those who abuse me.
I know that I am not a courageous person. That really doesn't bother me. Some might find it ironic that Caleb means courageous, and I'm not. However, Caleb actually means dog in Hebrew. A more fitting title given my tendency to run away with my tail in between my legs. I am a coward in many ways. I hate bugs and snakes. I have anxiety over doctors and calling people on the phone. In general I consider the likelihood of dying while engaging in an activity before I actually engage in that activity. Others see adventures, I see useless risk. Never would I join the military or go backbacking across Europe. I enjoy a nice little house and peace and quiet.
Sometimes I feel like I should be more courageous. Going through "Struggles of the Faith Week" in chapel, or "Roll in the Mud Week" as I like to call it, I realized that I couldn't survive a lot of the things that those people went through. Last night I watched The Lion the Witch and the Waredrobe. I love how those kids come of age. Watching Peter scream "For Narnia, and for Aslan" as he charges, I think about Lewis' writings in general. He spends quite a bit of time talking about cowardice as a vice and the general attitude he had towards WWII. I find it disconcerting.
Why do we need to be so brave anyway? Jesus didn't seem all that brave in the Garden. Then again, we cowards tend to remember the Garden but not the resolute march to Calvary the next day. Still, isn't it some sort of macho, chauvenistic, antiquated thing to say "Be a brave man! Show some courage! Don't be afraid!" are the feminists right about the Bible? How much should I take to heart God's pep talks in the beginning of Joshua? Maybe those passages portraying men as the ones who need to buck up and fight on are just cultural reflections, not divine ones.
Yet I know that I am fooling myself. There is something in me that knows that it is good and holy to be courageous. Courage displays some kind of boldness and secureness that shows how real your faith is. If you can be brave in the face of certain disaster, it shows you believe God's promises.
Martin Luther King comes to mind. Think about the constant fear he would be in. Everyone wants to kill you and hurt your family. But still he gets up and speaks the truth. I may not buy the image of a nineteen year old strapping on an M16 and going over to the Middle East and dying for a misguided war, but I do understand King standing on that hotel balcony. That is a courage I can appreciate.
Courage is about doing the right thing at the right time, even when it is hard. Sometimes that means war (Joshua, Peter in Narnia). Sometimes that means saying no to war! When I hold my temper and not engage those idiots with the eggs, I guess I am doing the courageous thing by doing the weak looking thing. Sometimes the greatest sign of courage is the willingness to be meek.
I know that I will never be John Wayne. Frankly, I don't think God needs or wants a lot of John Wayne's. We do need, however, a lot of Jimmy Stewarts and Gregory Pecks. We need people who will do the right thing at the right time. That will look different in different circumstances. Each moment we are faced with the choice to do the right thing or the wrong thing. Sometimes facing Satan and ourselves is all the courage we need to have.
I never know how to react. From time to time I think about carrying around rocks, baseballs, or balloons filled up with paint. If those idiots met my wrath just once they wouldn't do stupid crap like hitting people with eggs. Another part of me wants to trail them in my car and get their license plate number or slash their tires. Anything to get back. But alas, I don't have the guts to do any of that.
In reality, I don't want to do those things. Over my college years I have developed into quite a little passivist, and I don't believe in fighting back. However, it is hard when you are sitting there with an egg bruise. Maybe I just don't have enough courage to step up against those who abuse me.
I know that I am not a courageous person. That really doesn't bother me. Some might find it ironic that Caleb means courageous, and I'm not. However, Caleb actually means dog in Hebrew. A more fitting title given my tendency to run away with my tail in between my legs. I am a coward in many ways. I hate bugs and snakes. I have anxiety over doctors and calling people on the phone. In general I consider the likelihood of dying while engaging in an activity before I actually engage in that activity. Others see adventures, I see useless risk. Never would I join the military or go backbacking across Europe. I enjoy a nice little house and peace and quiet.
Sometimes I feel like I should be more courageous. Going through "Struggles of the Faith Week" in chapel, or "Roll in the Mud Week" as I like to call it, I realized that I couldn't survive a lot of the things that those people went through. Last night I watched The Lion the Witch and the Waredrobe. I love how those kids come of age. Watching Peter scream "For Narnia, and for Aslan" as he charges, I think about Lewis' writings in general. He spends quite a bit of time talking about cowardice as a vice and the general attitude he had towards WWII. I find it disconcerting.
Why do we need to be so brave anyway? Jesus didn't seem all that brave in the Garden. Then again, we cowards tend to remember the Garden but not the resolute march to Calvary the next day. Still, isn't it some sort of macho, chauvenistic, antiquated thing to say "Be a brave man! Show some courage! Don't be afraid!" are the feminists right about the Bible? How much should I take to heart God's pep talks in the beginning of Joshua? Maybe those passages portraying men as the ones who need to buck up and fight on are just cultural reflections, not divine ones.
Yet I know that I am fooling myself. There is something in me that knows that it is good and holy to be courageous. Courage displays some kind of boldness and secureness that shows how real your faith is. If you can be brave in the face of certain disaster, it shows you believe God's promises.
Martin Luther King comes to mind. Think about the constant fear he would be in. Everyone wants to kill you and hurt your family. But still he gets up and speaks the truth. I may not buy the image of a nineteen year old strapping on an M16 and going over to the Middle East and dying for a misguided war, but I do understand King standing on that hotel balcony. That is a courage I can appreciate.
Courage is about doing the right thing at the right time, even when it is hard. Sometimes that means war (Joshua, Peter in Narnia). Sometimes that means saying no to war! When I hold my temper and not engage those idiots with the eggs, I guess I am doing the courageous thing by doing the weak looking thing. Sometimes the greatest sign of courage is the willingness to be meek.
I know that I will never be John Wayne. Frankly, I don't think God needs or wants a lot of John Wayne's. We do need, however, a lot of Jimmy Stewarts and Gregory Pecks. We need people who will do the right thing at the right time. That will look different in different circumstances. Each moment we are faced with the choice to do the right thing or the wrong thing. Sometimes facing Satan and ourselves is all the courage we need to have.
4.06.2006
... and You Can't Live Without 'Em!
Well, as I read more about David, I am continued to be interested in the women in his life. As stated yesterday, Michal, Bathsheba, and Tamar all either cause problems themselves, or their presence caused men to do sinful things. (I don't want to sound like I blame Tamar in anyway. I am just saying that often male sin in the Bible revolves aournd relationships with women.) But as I look at it some more, I see other women. We have Abigal saving David from mistakes. Then there is the woman who comes to show David his errors in the case with Absalom. Later, a woman helps Joab to not destroy a city for no reason. Even Michal and Bathsheba do good things. Michal helps David escape (maybe by choice maybe not), and Bathsheba helps David to put Solomon on the throne.
What does it mean. I think that we often underestimate the role that women play in the Bible. Becuase they are not kings or emperors or warriors (most of the time), we act like they are not there. That isn't true. They are all over the place, and we just don't see them. Women do so many powerful things in scripture, good and bad.
Why does any of this matter? Often we talk about women and women's roles, and we scratch our heads like they are absent in scripture. We discuss Eve, Lydia, and Jezebel, and then we can't think of anymore. Women are much, much more prevelant than I think we realize in the Scriptures. In the future we need to look at their role in the Bible. They are very powerful for good and evil, just like men.
Maybe we need to be more aware of these various characters. We have so many struggles of power in churches, yet peace broker seems to be a prominent role of several women in the Bible. Maybe we should incorporate women in some of these roles. We are having a fight in the leadership, maybe a woman could be a good mediator. Not to say that she would have the authority to declare someone right or wrong, but she may be a bridge that could help two parites to make decisions together. I don't know the implications of this, and I really am thinking of this all as I write, but what if we do help women to be in mediating role. Imagine how much better our world would be if hot headed elders talkded about their decisions with their wives. Not that women would be puppet leaders, but they would give some female counsel and impressions. Another scenario: a "men's meeting" is in a huge controversy over some issue. Side A wants thing A to happen, side B doesn't. We know a woman in the congregation is very good at reconciliation and helping peole with disputes. Would there be an authority issue if she sat down and listened to both sides and empathiticly listened, recounted what she heard, and helped translate what the two sides were saying? Most guys doen't listen well with the other person's perspective in mind. Maybe we need more Abigail's playing important roles in our churches.
I didn't mean to talk about all this, so let me wrap generally. Women are in the Bible a lot more than we realize, and we should pay more attention. I think that their are feminine strengths and roles we underutilize, because we fail to see them. Last night all I could think of was the seductive temptresses, but upon further reflection I see that God has always used both sexes in a dynamic way. That has led to issues at times, and great balance at others. We need to learn to use all of our gifts.
What does it mean. I think that we often underestimate the role that women play in the Bible. Becuase they are not kings or emperors or warriors (most of the time), we act like they are not there. That isn't true. They are all over the place, and we just don't see them. Women do so many powerful things in scripture, good and bad.
Why does any of this matter? Often we talk about women and women's roles, and we scratch our heads like they are absent in scripture. We discuss Eve, Lydia, and Jezebel, and then we can't think of anymore. Women are much, much more prevelant than I think we realize in the Scriptures. In the future we need to look at their role in the Bible. They are very powerful for good and evil, just like men.
Maybe we need to be more aware of these various characters. We have so many struggles of power in churches, yet peace broker seems to be a prominent role of several women in the Bible. Maybe we should incorporate women in some of these roles. We are having a fight in the leadership, maybe a woman could be a good mediator. Not to say that she would have the authority to declare someone right or wrong, but she may be a bridge that could help two parites to make decisions together. I don't know the implications of this, and I really am thinking of this all as I write, but what if we do help women to be in mediating role. Imagine how much better our world would be if hot headed elders talkded about their decisions with their wives. Not that women would be puppet leaders, but they would give some female counsel and impressions. Another scenario: a "men's meeting" is in a huge controversy over some issue. Side A wants thing A to happen, side B doesn't. We know a woman in the congregation is very good at reconciliation and helping peole with disputes. Would there be an authority issue if she sat down and listened to both sides and empathiticly listened, recounted what she heard, and helped translate what the two sides were saying? Most guys doen't listen well with the other person's perspective in mind. Maybe we need more Abigail's playing important roles in our churches.
I didn't mean to talk about all this, so let me wrap generally. Women are in the Bible a lot more than we realize, and we should pay more attention. I think that their are feminine strengths and roles we underutilize, because we fail to see them. Last night all I could think of was the seductive temptresses, but upon further reflection I see that God has always used both sexes in a dynamic way. That has led to issues at times, and great balance at others. We need to learn to use all of our gifts.
4.05.2006
Can't Live With Them...
Today I have a query more than an answer. I noticed recently, the unbelivable role that women have in much of Scripture. When we read about women in worship, it seems so sexist that Paul would go back to Adam and Eve. Are we really going to blame one woman and hold every other one on the planet responsible! It seems ludicrous! Maybe there is something else going on. Note also the way that Paul does not want to be married because he believes that it would get in the way of his ministry. Is Paul dealing with some cultural issue, or is their some biblical anti-feminism.
Over the pages of the Bible, you start to see that women are not put in all that good of a light. We have Eve decieved first. Then there is Abraham lying because of Sarah. Rebecca loving Jacob more. Rachel stealing the idols. Miriam causing revolt. Delilah wooing Samson. Bathsheba and David. Michal criticizing David. Solomon going after foreign women. Jezebel. Gomer. The prostitutes of Proverbs. It seems like many of the messes that men get into in Scripture happen because of the women. They do something dumb for a girl. David seems particularly to be a case of this. Women seem to just cause him trouble. In fact, he makes it clear that when he goes out to battle the women stay at home. What is this?
I know that God is not against women. He created them and has a special role for them. I am not saying that all of these situations are a woman's fault. What I am saying, is that often a man's sin in the OT comes about because of his relationship with a woman in some way shape or fashion. What do we learn from that? Is there a theological point, or is it merely a case of ancient sexism?
I know one possibility. Something powerful always has the option of going really well, or really bad. The relationship between a man and woman would be one of those things. Our most intense pleasures come from the man and the woman coming together in dating and marriage, but the most pain can come through fights and divorces. God created this sort of chemistry when he made two sexes, which seems to just blow up some times.
It could just be a sexual thing. Maybe God just made men so that their hormones where really strong, and Satan uses that as well as he can.
Maybe it is the connection with pride. Either the pride to have a great looking woman, or the pride to want to be in control of a woman. Maybe all of those men who messed up where just looking out for themselves. It seems like pride comes out really strong in men when it comes to women. We seem to always end up trying to control others instead of living in harmony. Women, the enviroment, God. We just want to call the shots.
In general, I was hoping to say something meaningful tonight about this topic, but alas I feel I have come up short. I think that something significant is going on with the motif of the deadly woman in scripture. I just wish I had a better insight into why.
Over the pages of the Bible, you start to see that women are not put in all that good of a light. We have Eve decieved first. Then there is Abraham lying because of Sarah. Rebecca loving Jacob more. Rachel stealing the idols. Miriam causing revolt. Delilah wooing Samson. Bathsheba and David. Michal criticizing David. Solomon going after foreign women. Jezebel. Gomer. The prostitutes of Proverbs. It seems like many of the messes that men get into in Scripture happen because of the women. They do something dumb for a girl. David seems particularly to be a case of this. Women seem to just cause him trouble. In fact, he makes it clear that when he goes out to battle the women stay at home. What is this?
I know that God is not against women. He created them and has a special role for them. I am not saying that all of these situations are a woman's fault. What I am saying, is that often a man's sin in the OT comes about because of his relationship with a woman in some way shape or fashion. What do we learn from that? Is there a theological point, or is it merely a case of ancient sexism?
I know one possibility. Something powerful always has the option of going really well, or really bad. The relationship between a man and woman would be one of those things. Our most intense pleasures come from the man and the woman coming together in dating and marriage, but the most pain can come through fights and divorces. God created this sort of chemistry when he made two sexes, which seems to just blow up some times.
It could just be a sexual thing. Maybe God just made men so that their hormones where really strong, and Satan uses that as well as he can.
Maybe it is the connection with pride. Either the pride to have a great looking woman, or the pride to want to be in control of a woman. Maybe all of those men who messed up where just looking out for themselves. It seems like pride comes out really strong in men when it comes to women. We seem to always end up trying to control others instead of living in harmony. Women, the enviroment, God. We just want to call the shots.
In general, I was hoping to say something meaningful tonight about this topic, but alas I feel I have come up short. I think that something significant is going on with the motif of the deadly woman in scripture. I just wish I had a better insight into why.
4.04.2006
Reverse Entropy and a Theology of Worship
It seems to me that the basic tenant of Biblical theology is that God is three and one. I feel a little shaky making that sort of sweeping statement about a doctrine that is not even directly stated in the Scriptures. However, I think that it is important. God makes it clear in the Old Testament that he is one, and that he alone should be obeyed and worshipped. Christ then follows up this teaching by continually talking about he is in the Father and the Father is in him. Those statements are concentrated in Johannine passages, but I think that they are important. Jesus further teaches that we are to be one with the Father and the Son, and that the Spirit lives in us if we remain in Christ. In general, the scope of scripture tends to deal with "withness." God walked with man in the garden, and now he has redeemed us so that we can sit with him in glory. Everything is centered around that community. It is a sort of reverse entropy. While our physical world disperses and spreads and disapates, God is working to make us all one in him. He is drawing all men to him so that in eternity there will be one people in one kingdom with one God.
I think that this plays a lot into worship. Worship I believe is God's way of trying to form that oneness. In fact, everything we do is to work towards that oneness. However, as I have been looking at worship a lot lately, I see it as important. It is sort of corny, but I see three "S's" of worship. Submission, sacrifice, and synagogue-ing.
Worship seems to be first and foremost about submission. If you think about it, whenever you meet with someone, there is some level of submission. If I call a friend and ask him if we can meet, he has to submit to my request. When we talk, if I start in on the weather, he has to submit to my topic and reply. He can refuse to, and switch to sports, but then I have to submit. If I ignore him and talk about school, and so on, we will spend all this time together with no communication or communication. We will be two people making random, unrelated statements. When we worship, we are submitting. We are saying, "God you are above us, so we are going to give up our own desires and interests to focus on you." While we debate how much Scripture has to do with the way we worship and battle hermeneutics, no Christian can help but admit that scripture and submission to it is the foundation of worship. We can sit and sing songs and have no preaching, but even the songs are based on God's word. If they are not, we have ceased to even do something Christian. Few would disagree that the teaching of the word, and the subsquent underlying urging to submit to it, is essential in some way in service. We come together to say, "I give up. I want God's way!" Otherwise, we would want God to come to our house and worship us.
Related to such submission is sacrifice. When we worship we give up our own way, and let God have his way. You can see it throughout Scripture. Note the sacrifice in all of these examples (and the submission):
-Cain and Able. Cain offers up something that God doesn't like, and God tells him that he has to give up to God what God wants in the way God wants, not what Cain wants.
-Abraham and Isaac, the first mention of the word worship in the Bible. God wants Abraham to do what he is told and give up his only son.
-Leviticus and its regulations deal with actual sacrifices. God makes it clear that no one is to come "empty handed." The sacrfices must be what he wants in the way he wants it.
-David refuses to sacrifice something that cost him nothing. He also refers in the Psalms to the sacrifice of praise.
-Ezra and Nehmiah seem to go crazy about giving up what we want to properly worship God. They are calling for divorces left and right so that the people can be pure before God.
-Paul calls our everday life our worship. That life is about sacrificing the way of the flesh for God's way.
Finally, we gather together, or synagogue. Paul actually uses that word to refer to meeting together. In doing this we are literally, verbally, led together. We come together so that Christ's body can be one. In Heaven, that worship will culminate in a great heavenly host full of all kinds of men and women.
What I am trying to say is this. God wants us to be one with him the way the Father, Son, and Spirit are one. This oneness only occurs when individuality, in a sense, goes away. We can't have it God's way and our way. There would be two sets of wills and purpose. Thus he asks us to come and lay it out on the line. We show that we submit to him and that we will sacrifice us to be like him. When that happens, we gain a mutual understanding with one another and with God. In that place we are one again with the Father.
We spend so much time trying to argue about the way we worship. In the end I think that we should use these criteria. When we worship we submit to God. In so doing, we have to sacrifice what we want for what he desires. Our time needs to reflect that we are spending time together and with him. There is a sense of mutuality. We see all of this best in the Lord's Supper. We submit to Christ's request to meet and remember him. We sacrifice our desires by renewing the covenant, and we reflect on God's sacrifice. It is a time to be "led together" into the presence of God. We communion with him.
I don't know if any of this makes sense. What I am trying to say is that our worship is about "what am I giving up" not "what am I getting." It is a fundamentaly opposite idea to American understanding of everything, but it is part of God's universal plan to bring all men into one body with him.
I think that this plays a lot into worship. Worship I believe is God's way of trying to form that oneness. In fact, everything we do is to work towards that oneness. However, as I have been looking at worship a lot lately, I see it as important. It is sort of corny, but I see three "S's" of worship. Submission, sacrifice, and synagogue-ing.
Worship seems to be first and foremost about submission. If you think about it, whenever you meet with someone, there is some level of submission. If I call a friend and ask him if we can meet, he has to submit to my request. When we talk, if I start in on the weather, he has to submit to my topic and reply. He can refuse to, and switch to sports, but then I have to submit. If I ignore him and talk about school, and so on, we will spend all this time together with no communication or communication. We will be two people making random, unrelated statements. When we worship, we are submitting. We are saying, "God you are above us, so we are going to give up our own desires and interests to focus on you." While we debate how much Scripture has to do with the way we worship and battle hermeneutics, no Christian can help but admit that scripture and submission to it is the foundation of worship. We can sit and sing songs and have no preaching, but even the songs are based on God's word. If they are not, we have ceased to even do something Christian. Few would disagree that the teaching of the word, and the subsquent underlying urging to submit to it, is essential in some way in service. We come together to say, "I give up. I want God's way!" Otherwise, we would want God to come to our house and worship us.
Related to such submission is sacrifice. When we worship we give up our own way, and let God have his way. You can see it throughout Scripture. Note the sacrifice in all of these examples (and the submission):
-Cain and Able. Cain offers up something that God doesn't like, and God tells him that he has to give up to God what God wants in the way God wants, not what Cain wants.
-Abraham and Isaac, the first mention of the word worship in the Bible. God wants Abraham to do what he is told and give up his only son.
-Leviticus and its regulations deal with actual sacrifices. God makes it clear that no one is to come "empty handed." The sacrfices must be what he wants in the way he wants it.
-David refuses to sacrifice something that cost him nothing. He also refers in the Psalms to the sacrifice of praise.
-Ezra and Nehmiah seem to go crazy about giving up what we want to properly worship God. They are calling for divorces left and right so that the people can be pure before God.
-Paul calls our everday life our worship. That life is about sacrificing the way of the flesh for God's way.
Finally, we gather together, or synagogue. Paul actually uses that word to refer to meeting together. In doing this we are literally, verbally, led together. We come together so that Christ's body can be one. In Heaven, that worship will culminate in a great heavenly host full of all kinds of men and women.
What I am trying to say is this. God wants us to be one with him the way the Father, Son, and Spirit are one. This oneness only occurs when individuality, in a sense, goes away. We can't have it God's way and our way. There would be two sets of wills and purpose. Thus he asks us to come and lay it out on the line. We show that we submit to him and that we will sacrifice us to be like him. When that happens, we gain a mutual understanding with one another and with God. In that place we are one again with the Father.
We spend so much time trying to argue about the way we worship. In the end I think that we should use these criteria. When we worship we submit to God. In so doing, we have to sacrifice what we want for what he desires. Our time needs to reflect that we are spending time together and with him. There is a sense of mutuality. We see all of this best in the Lord's Supper. We submit to Christ's request to meet and remember him. We sacrifice our desires by renewing the covenant, and we reflect on God's sacrifice. It is a time to be "led together" into the presence of God. We communion with him.
I don't know if any of this makes sense. What I am trying to say is that our worship is about "what am I giving up" not "what am I getting." It is a fundamentaly opposite idea to American understanding of everything, but it is part of God's universal plan to bring all men into one body with him.
4.03.2006
Old Stuff
I have posted all the stuff off of my old blog-A Broken Table and Torn Curtain. I don't know what all I said, but I felt like I should save it.
The Funeral March of Modernism
It seems to me that this hurricane should about put an end to the whole period we have known as modernism. After all, we have just seen how wrong we have been. One of the hallmarks of modernism was that man could control his world with enough knowledge and enough technology. Everything is a matter of logic. All that we have to do is just think and work hard enough and we would do alright.
Then our knowledge and technology defeated us. We saw nuclear weapons kill thousands and thousands of innocent people. We saw the very medicines we made create killer bacteria. We saw our airplanes, the pinnacle of our defiance, the device which dared to defeat gravity, used to blow up two towers.
And when that is not enough we see nature flex its muscles. In the face our brightest and best failed miserably. Actually, we are talking about Bush and a couple old UPS workers who he let run FEMA, so at least the most powerful failed. We were shown the power of nature. As AIDS rips continents apart we see that in reality, we have no hope of actually controlling the world around us. All that our science and modern minds have given us is death, failure, and a misplaced sense of pride.
I am amazed, however, at how the church continues to cling to modernism. She does not see what it really is. There is such a fear of postmodern thought, that we really aren't evaluating what is dying. With the death of modernism and the rise of postmodern we see the end of a period in which man tried to replace God. It was after all in the spirit of Modernism that Nietzsche declared that God was dead. He was no longer of consequence. In modernism we flew in the air and into the second heaven (outer space). We split the atom and created electricity. We took the divine mystery of salvation and grace and boiled it down to 5 easy steps. We learned how to take care of ourselves with no help from the metaphysical "myths" of those past idiots who proved that our social Darwinism was so wonderfully correct.
We were a people much like the men of the first eleven chapters of Genesis. Adam thought he was so smart and would become like God when he ate that fruit. He would not die and he would be as wise as his creator. God would be obsolete. Or what about those angels in chapter six who decide to sleep with human women and act disgracefully to God's created order? And then there were the most Modern of all of ancient Mesopotamia, those who built that Tower in Babel. They where going to reach God with their magnificent structure.
We all know what happened to all three. Banishment, a flood, and dispersion. At every corner God said "Not so fast, remember who I am (or remember I AM to put it in more personal language)." There are limits.
The Persians make a similar mistake in Daniel. They make a law about worshiping anyone but the emperor. Then, THREE TIMES, the text notes them bragging that the "Law of the Medes and Persians can not be changed." They were so confident that they were unstoppable. The King works all day to change things and can not reverse the law. (Sounds like they had stupid bureaucrats too.) They even put a stone and seal on the lions' den and say that they do it so that Daniel's condition can not be changed. They knew they had them. The king runs in the next morning and says "What your God ABLE to save you." It is God who was able the whole time. HIS law cannot be changed and the conditions HE creates can not be overridden. He shut the mouths of the lions, and that was unstoppable. They thought that they were so able.
The stone brings to mind one more group of people that thought that they had sealed the deal. They made sure no one stole the body of this pseudo-Savior. Guess what, they weren't too smart either. Jesus strolled out of that tomb and defeated death himself.
A modernism will tell you that this is all fake flub from some half crazed zealous Jews. A postmodern will tell you that they aren't sure.
Now there's the rub. We don't want anyone to say that we don't know. If nothing else the church has to hold on to her belief that she knows what is going on. I mean, if we aren't certain that we have our stuff right, we are in trouble. We don't want all of that relativism that would mean that we don't know anything. If we don't know anything about anything than we would be forced to believe!
Paul writes to the Corinthians, a society that thought that they were wise the following thing (my emphasis):
1When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. 2For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. 4My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power.
If nothing else the new postmodern reality which we face before us is humble. It does not assume to know everything about the world, or about any subject. It is willing to listen. It also seems that our world (pluralism, many new religions, loose morals, sexual immorality, violent entertainment, abortion, terrorism and all) mirrors very well the world of the first century. In Galatians Paul says that Jesus came in the "fullness of time." Something about the world at that point in history made it fertile for the hearing of the Gospel.
Katrina shows us yet again that humans can not do it alone. There are wonders and mysteries that are too far beyond us to handle. In fact, we know very little. We must look to the Heavens and recognize our own petty vanity. The postmodern dawn is growing brighter, and for Christians it might be a welcomed new day.
Then our knowledge and technology defeated us. We saw nuclear weapons kill thousands and thousands of innocent people. We saw the very medicines we made create killer bacteria. We saw our airplanes, the pinnacle of our defiance, the device which dared to defeat gravity, used to blow up two towers.
And when that is not enough we see nature flex its muscles. In the face our brightest and best failed miserably. Actually, we are talking about Bush and a couple old UPS workers who he let run FEMA, so at least the most powerful failed. We were shown the power of nature. As AIDS rips continents apart we see that in reality, we have no hope of actually controlling the world around us. All that our science and modern minds have given us is death, failure, and a misplaced sense of pride.
I am amazed, however, at how the church continues to cling to modernism. She does not see what it really is. There is such a fear of postmodern thought, that we really aren't evaluating what is dying. With the death of modernism and the rise of postmodern we see the end of a period in which man tried to replace God. It was after all in the spirit of Modernism that Nietzsche declared that God was dead. He was no longer of consequence. In modernism we flew in the air and into the second heaven (outer space). We split the atom and created electricity. We took the divine mystery of salvation and grace and boiled it down to 5 easy steps. We learned how to take care of ourselves with no help from the metaphysical "myths" of those past idiots who proved that our social Darwinism was so wonderfully correct.
We were a people much like the men of the first eleven chapters of Genesis. Adam thought he was so smart and would become like God when he ate that fruit. He would not die and he would be as wise as his creator. God would be obsolete. Or what about those angels in chapter six who decide to sleep with human women and act disgracefully to God's created order? And then there were the most Modern of all of ancient Mesopotamia, those who built that Tower in Babel. They where going to reach God with their magnificent structure.
We all know what happened to all three. Banishment, a flood, and dispersion. At every corner God said "Not so fast, remember who I am (or remember I AM to put it in more personal language)." There are limits.
The Persians make a similar mistake in Daniel. They make a law about worshiping anyone but the emperor. Then, THREE TIMES, the text notes them bragging that the "Law of the Medes and Persians can not be changed." They were so confident that they were unstoppable. The King works all day to change things and can not reverse the law. (Sounds like they had stupid bureaucrats too.) They even put a stone and seal on the lions' den and say that they do it so that Daniel's condition can not be changed. They knew they had them. The king runs in the next morning and says "What your God ABLE to save you." It is God who was able the whole time. HIS law cannot be changed and the conditions HE creates can not be overridden. He shut the mouths of the lions, and that was unstoppable. They thought that they were so able.
The stone brings to mind one more group of people that thought that they had sealed the deal. They made sure no one stole the body of this pseudo-Savior. Guess what, they weren't too smart either. Jesus strolled out of that tomb and defeated death himself.
A modernism will tell you that this is all fake flub from some half crazed zealous Jews. A postmodern will tell you that they aren't sure.
Now there's the rub. We don't want anyone to say that we don't know. If nothing else the church has to hold on to her belief that she knows what is going on. I mean, if we aren't certain that we have our stuff right, we are in trouble. We don't want all of that relativism that would mean that we don't know anything. If we don't know anything about anything than we would be forced to believe!
Paul writes to the Corinthians, a society that thought that they were wise the following thing (my emphasis):
1When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. 2For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. 4My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power.
If nothing else the new postmodern reality which we face before us is humble. It does not assume to know everything about the world, or about any subject. It is willing to listen. It also seems that our world (pluralism, many new religions, loose morals, sexual immorality, violent entertainment, abortion, terrorism and all) mirrors very well the world of the first century. In Galatians Paul says that Jesus came in the "fullness of time." Something about the world at that point in history made it fertile for the hearing of the Gospel.
Katrina shows us yet again that humans can not do it alone. There are wonders and mysteries that are too far beyond us to handle. In fact, we know very little. We must look to the Heavens and recognize our own petty vanity. The postmodern dawn is growing brighter, and for Christians it might be a welcomed new day.
U2, RNC, and Prophecy
First of all, if you actually read the first one and missed not having a post last week, I am sorry. But since I think no one has ever seen this, I am going to assume that I am just talking to myself.
So tonight I want to talk about prophecy. It seems to me that we live in a society that really is in need of prophecy. Maybe even a church that is in desperate need of a prophetic voice.
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not talking about predicting the future. The last thing that we need is some more creeps on street corners screaming about Jesus' blood running through the streets and doom coming (actually heard that in London once). What I am referring to is a voice which will stand up and challenge the powers that be. That will demand justice. That will call out for the will of God to be listened to and not ignored. A voice that will take the opposition on and speak what is true and right, no matter what people think.
In America, it would seem that prophets would be welcome. After all, when we rebelled against Britain to become our own nation, wasn't it a somewhat prophetic voice that was coming out of Philadelphia. Our value of the freedom of speech would see to be truly great environment for such speech. Then again, it seems lately that we don't care about those freedoms so much any more.
Look at our world and think about the prophetic voice that is needed. I have to admit right now that I am being influenced by the ideas of Jim Wallis in God's Politics. Wallis argues that in politics we need more prophets to stand up to the governments and church leaders and demand justice. We shouldn't be buying missiles for wars that were never justified when children die of diarrhea in Africa. I know that I am going to sound like a flaming liberal, but if we weren't blowing up someone in the Middle East then we might have saved some of those elderly women in the New Orleans projects that died from heat exhaustion, and who most likely we have failed as a society for decades. With a country like ours in existence there should not be poverty, especially for children, at the levels it now exists. It is nothing short of apathy.
And then there is Africa. The entire civilized world is dropping the ball on that one. There is a continent facing a modern day plague called AIDS. Many don't understand it at all. Then there are all the children who are orphans and infected themselves.
Who hears their cries? The church should. As the body of Christ we should be cupping his ear to the heart of those who are being oppressed by economics and politics and diseases that they can't do anything about. What is our response? "Its their own fault. If they were not so promiscuous then they wouldn't have AIDS. Besides, their government will just waste the aid if we give it to them." What is our government doing? Finding more ways to declare war on countries that aren't attacking us? Maybe we can give Israel a few more bombs so that they can oppress the Palestinians. And as I started this paragraph, before the tirade, what has happened to the church? Were are the men of God who are to raise these issues of justice and righteousness to the fore? Well, frankly we are at the RNC cheering on the war mongers and the idiots.
Make no mistake, the DNC has plenty of idiots in it as well, and its fair share of scum balls. But my point, actually Wallis' that I am stealing, is that as the church we should rise above the dirty politicians and make a call to be a just people that loves mercy and peace. We should go around healing, not causing war.
This is not to say that we don't have our own prophets in this day and age. I love that Martin Luther King is on the side of Westminster Abbey as a 20th Century Martyr. He was a prophet. He stood for justice and righteousness and he was killed for it. King was a man who believed that God had a sense of right and wrong, and he stood for it with all he had. The church, well the white church, largely called him a "trouble maker." Shame on us.
Then there is a more controversial choice. Bono. That's right, the lead singer of U2. The world's greatest rock star. Have you noticed that he actually cares more about the situation in Africa and helping those people than his music. And do you notice the mandate by which he preaches his message of debt relief and medical aid? He says that God expects it from us to care for them. Wow, that seems right. Maybe he swears and drinks from time to time, but he is living out the beatitudes. Have we made things like swearing our mint and cumin and neglected the weightier issues of justice? Doesn't God's criteria for the sheep and the goats seem to put Bono in heaven and us on a south bound train far too often?
What do I mean by this? Let me put it bluntly, mostly because this is a blog that no one reads. The church is the bride of Christ and his voice on earth. We should not be a bunch of tools for a political part or a government. To quote the new Switchfoot album, "I pledge allegiance to the country without borders without politicians, waiting for our sky to fall apart, we are broken, we are bitter, we're the problem we're the politicians, waiting for the sky to be torn apart, come in and break me." We must rise in this world of greedy and self importance, particularly coming from our leaders and declare the message of the gospel. We must represent a savior who said when he started his ministry:
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
So tonight I want to talk about prophecy. It seems to me that we live in a society that really is in need of prophecy. Maybe even a church that is in desperate need of a prophetic voice.
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not talking about predicting the future. The last thing that we need is some more creeps on street corners screaming about Jesus' blood running through the streets and doom coming (actually heard that in London once). What I am referring to is a voice which will stand up and challenge the powers that be. That will demand justice. That will call out for the will of God to be listened to and not ignored. A voice that will take the opposition on and speak what is true and right, no matter what people think.
In America, it would seem that prophets would be welcome. After all, when we rebelled against Britain to become our own nation, wasn't it a somewhat prophetic voice that was coming out of Philadelphia. Our value of the freedom of speech would see to be truly great environment for such speech. Then again, it seems lately that we don't care about those freedoms so much any more.
Look at our world and think about the prophetic voice that is needed. I have to admit right now that I am being influenced by the ideas of Jim Wallis in God's Politics. Wallis argues that in politics we need more prophets to stand up to the governments and church leaders and demand justice. We shouldn't be buying missiles for wars that were never justified when children die of diarrhea in Africa. I know that I am going to sound like a flaming liberal, but if we weren't blowing up someone in the Middle East then we might have saved some of those elderly women in the New Orleans projects that died from heat exhaustion, and who most likely we have failed as a society for decades. With a country like ours in existence there should not be poverty, especially for children, at the levels it now exists. It is nothing short of apathy.
And then there is Africa. The entire civilized world is dropping the ball on that one. There is a continent facing a modern day plague called AIDS. Many don't understand it at all. Then there are all the children who are orphans and infected themselves.
Who hears their cries? The church should. As the body of Christ we should be cupping his ear to the heart of those who are being oppressed by economics and politics and diseases that they can't do anything about. What is our response? "Its their own fault. If they were not so promiscuous then they wouldn't have AIDS. Besides, their government will just waste the aid if we give it to them." What is our government doing? Finding more ways to declare war on countries that aren't attacking us? Maybe we can give Israel a few more bombs so that they can oppress the Palestinians. And as I started this paragraph, before the tirade, what has happened to the church? Were are the men of God who are to raise these issues of justice and righteousness to the fore? Well, frankly we are at the RNC cheering on the war mongers and the idiots.
Make no mistake, the DNC has plenty of idiots in it as well, and its fair share of scum balls. But my point, actually Wallis' that I am stealing, is that as the church we should rise above the dirty politicians and make a call to be a just people that loves mercy and peace. We should go around healing, not causing war.
This is not to say that we don't have our own prophets in this day and age. I love that Martin Luther King is on the side of Westminster Abbey as a 20th Century Martyr. He was a prophet. He stood for justice and righteousness and he was killed for it. King was a man who believed that God had a sense of right and wrong, and he stood for it with all he had. The church, well the white church, largely called him a "trouble maker." Shame on us.
Then there is a more controversial choice. Bono. That's right, the lead singer of U2. The world's greatest rock star. Have you noticed that he actually cares more about the situation in Africa and helping those people than his music. And do you notice the mandate by which he preaches his message of debt relief and medical aid? He says that God expects it from us to care for them. Wow, that seems right. Maybe he swears and drinks from time to time, but he is living out the beatitudes. Have we made things like swearing our mint and cumin and neglected the weightier issues of justice? Doesn't God's criteria for the sheep and the goats seem to put Bono in heaven and us on a south bound train far too often?
What do I mean by this? Let me put it bluntly, mostly because this is a blog that no one reads. The church is the bride of Christ and his voice on earth. We should not be a bunch of tools for a political part or a government. To quote the new Switchfoot album, "I pledge allegiance to the country without borders without politicians, waiting for our sky to fall apart, we are broken, we are bitter, we're the problem we're the politicians, waiting for the sky to be torn apart, come in and break me." We must rise in this world of greedy and self importance, particularly coming from our leaders and declare the message of the gospel. We must represent a savior who said when he started his ministry:
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
Peter Never Used A Lexicon
Far too often I find that Bible majors are asking themselves this question: Why do I have to learn any of this? I can't say that I totally disagree. After sitting through 20 pages of a book describing the rise and fall of the kings of Judah and Israel and the related kings of Moab, Aram Damascus, Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt, I start to feel overloaded as well.
I feel like their is no better example of the tension between practicality and scholarship than the creation of a sermon. When we teach young preachers we harp about the importance of doing all the proper exegetical work.
The problem is this, we can't imagine Peter and Paul messing with lexicons, commentaries, and journal articles. I mean I don't think that there was 10 hours of study behind the day of Pentecost. I think that he just got up there and let it fly. He knew his message, and he didn't have to sit in an office and mess around with properly contexualizing his message. It just seems like the world of the New Testament was so much more organic in their approach.
Obviously we are at a bit of disadvantage. We don't speak Greek. We don't know Jesus from hanging out with him personally. Then there is that whole inspiration/Holy Spirit thing.
In the end I think that there must be an understanding of the gap between us and Jesus. Make no mistake, it does mean something that I am a 21 year old, suburban, American, English speaking, Church of Christer who is trying to follow a 33 year old, divine, Jewish Carpenter who grew up in Nazareth in the first few decades of this side of the Virgin Birth. I don't care what we say about everyone being able to understand the Bible easily (note I do believe that a knowledge that can lead to salvation is possible for anyone mentally capable enough to get lost in the first place) in the end there is too much that we just can't know with out study. Shouldn't we expect the revelation of the mind of God to man to be complex, especially after the mitigating factors of time, space, and culture?
I was talking with someone about one of the faculty members here at HU the other day, and I caught myself saying that he was a great paradigm for the mixture of faith, ministry, and scholarship. Then I thought, at what point did that become important? I think that the difference really is the contextual gap between us and Jesus.
There is also the issue of having the right tools to reach the world. If I go to underdeveloped nations than I need to be ready to dig wells. When I am in a place where people are dealing with loss I need to bring comfort. In a world that is still in the clutches of modern scientific thought in many ways (we still trust statistics and studies more than even personal experience) we use our brains as the primary weapon and extended hand to a world obsessed with the "facts."
I guess I am saying that I see an elementary need to be a more intelligent Christian, and I really don't know why I find that so important. Following a religion pioneered by average Joes in many ways it is hard to justify sometimes.
Maybe the best I can conjure is this. Christ said that he would expect much from the one who was giving much. I know that we as a society, and particularly I as an individual, have been given a great blessing in the wealth of mental resources we have, be it our brains or previous research. We should take full advantage of that.
I feel like their is no better example of the tension between practicality and scholarship than the creation of a sermon. When we teach young preachers we harp about the importance of doing all the proper exegetical work.
The problem is this, we can't imagine Peter and Paul messing with lexicons, commentaries, and journal articles. I mean I don't think that there was 10 hours of study behind the day of Pentecost. I think that he just got up there and let it fly. He knew his message, and he didn't have to sit in an office and mess around with properly contexualizing his message. It just seems like the world of the New Testament was so much more organic in their approach.
Obviously we are at a bit of disadvantage. We don't speak Greek. We don't know Jesus from hanging out with him personally. Then there is that whole inspiration/Holy Spirit thing.
In the end I think that there must be an understanding of the gap between us and Jesus. Make no mistake, it does mean something that I am a 21 year old, suburban, American, English speaking, Church of Christer who is trying to follow a 33 year old, divine, Jewish Carpenter who grew up in Nazareth in the first few decades of this side of the Virgin Birth. I don't care what we say about everyone being able to understand the Bible easily (note I do believe that a knowledge that can lead to salvation is possible for anyone mentally capable enough to get lost in the first place) in the end there is too much that we just can't know with out study. Shouldn't we expect the revelation of the mind of God to man to be complex, especially after the mitigating factors of time, space, and culture?
I was talking with someone about one of the faculty members here at HU the other day, and I caught myself saying that he was a great paradigm for the mixture of faith, ministry, and scholarship. Then I thought, at what point did that become important? I think that the difference really is the contextual gap between us and Jesus.
There is also the issue of having the right tools to reach the world. If I go to underdeveloped nations than I need to be ready to dig wells. When I am in a place where people are dealing with loss I need to bring comfort. In a world that is still in the clutches of modern scientific thought in many ways (we still trust statistics and studies more than even personal experience) we use our brains as the primary weapon and extended hand to a world obsessed with the "facts."
I guess I am saying that I see an elementary need to be a more intelligent Christian, and I really don't know why I find that so important. Following a religion pioneered by average Joes in many ways it is hard to justify sometimes.
Maybe the best I can conjure is this. Christ said that he would expect much from the one who was giving much. I know that we as a society, and particularly I as an individual, have been given a great blessing in the wealth of mental resources we have, be it our brains or previous research. We should take full advantage of that.
The Message of the Christological Bookends
I have to admit that I don't have too much to say this week. It seems like every Friday night I get ready to write and I get a block in my mind. Then, the next morning I think of about eight things that I should have written about. However, I do have a quick thought.
Wednesday I sat down and watched Newsies for the first time. In some ways it was not exactly my favorite. However, there are many things which I did really like about it. The first and most important is the general idea that ideas can change the world.
In the film, a group of newspaper boys group together to form a union and challenge the power of Hearst and Pulitzer. A newspaper man helps them with their cause. This group of mere boys was able to topple some of the most powerful men in America.
I love that idea. The idea that we can bring change through words and ideas. That we don't need violence and power, but moral supremacy, to win our battles. That is an idea which is at the core of America. It is an idea which governed most of our finest moments. In the last century it was an idea that ended segregation, communism, and apartheid. Then there is also the work of men like Gandhi. Peaceful protest is a concept which we all must learn to understand. I believe it is in the very grain of our society. As Bono put it last night on Conan, "America is an idea, and I fell in love with that idea."
However we have too often lost that idea. We somehow think that we can just muscle change into existence. Diplomacy is replaced with action. Sanctions and moral mandates are made inconsequential by missiles. Why have we resorted to being that type of people?
And why have we done it in the church? Both Randy Harris and Landon Saunders have been at Harding in the last semester, and they both have had a similar issue. Christians have made our mission about power. What political sway we have and how much we can be listened to and agreed with. We fight so that our politicians, media and art (I use the term here loosely), and general worldview is not ignored. "We will not be silenced" we say. People like Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell are seen as our leaders. Christians in America today are people who are screaming so that everyone will here them, not listening with the ears of Christ.
That is not to say that we don't have some sort of important role. I am merely saying that the church does not flex her muscles and use political clout as a weapon. The church is not a mere voting block. It may give us respect now, but it will not always. I would argue that it actually currently is making us more a pawn than anything else.
We are part of a kingdom that is ruled by a king born in a manger and killed on a cross. That should tell us how he made his impact. It wasn't with his might, sway, or popularity. He showed the world who God is by submission, rejection, and pain. We shouldn't expect the whole world to get it and agree with it, instead we should expect the darkness to be unable to comprehend the light.
I think on men like either the Newsies, or better yet Gandhi and MLK Jr., and I think, if only I had lived then. If only I could have been part of that cause and marched with them in their holy battles for the return to righteousness. Then I think, do I live in that time? Is it that we aren't in a time of reform, like the 1960's, or is it just that my eyes are not open. I think a man like Martin Luther King (or even Martin Luther for that matter) is defined by his vision. His ability to see injustice and see the reconciliation that needs to come. Jesus also had that vision. It is my prayer that he will strengthen it in me.
Wednesday I sat down and watched Newsies for the first time. In some ways it was not exactly my favorite. However, there are many things which I did really like about it. The first and most important is the general idea that ideas can change the world.
In the film, a group of newspaper boys group together to form a union and challenge the power of Hearst and Pulitzer. A newspaper man helps them with their cause. This group of mere boys was able to topple some of the most powerful men in America.
I love that idea. The idea that we can bring change through words and ideas. That we don't need violence and power, but moral supremacy, to win our battles. That is an idea which is at the core of America. It is an idea which governed most of our finest moments. In the last century it was an idea that ended segregation, communism, and apartheid. Then there is also the work of men like Gandhi. Peaceful protest is a concept which we all must learn to understand. I believe it is in the very grain of our society. As Bono put it last night on Conan, "America is an idea, and I fell in love with that idea."
However we have too often lost that idea. We somehow think that we can just muscle change into existence. Diplomacy is replaced with action. Sanctions and moral mandates are made inconsequential by missiles. Why have we resorted to being that type of people?
And why have we done it in the church? Both Randy Harris and Landon Saunders have been at Harding in the last semester, and they both have had a similar issue. Christians have made our mission about power. What political sway we have and how much we can be listened to and agreed with. We fight so that our politicians, media and art (I use the term here loosely), and general worldview is not ignored. "We will not be silenced" we say. People like Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell are seen as our leaders. Christians in America today are people who are screaming so that everyone will here them, not listening with the ears of Christ.
That is not to say that we don't have some sort of important role. I am merely saying that the church does not flex her muscles and use political clout as a weapon. The church is not a mere voting block. It may give us respect now, but it will not always. I would argue that it actually currently is making us more a pawn than anything else.
We are part of a kingdom that is ruled by a king born in a manger and killed on a cross. That should tell us how he made his impact. It wasn't with his might, sway, or popularity. He showed the world who God is by submission, rejection, and pain. We shouldn't expect the whole world to get it and agree with it, instead we should expect the darkness to be unable to comprehend the light.
I think on men like either the Newsies, or better yet Gandhi and MLK Jr., and I think, if only I had lived then. If only I could have been part of that cause and marched with them in their holy battles for the return to righteousness. Then I think, do I live in that time? Is it that we aren't in a time of reform, like the 1960's, or is it just that my eyes are not open. I think a man like Martin Luther King (or even Martin Luther for that matter) is defined by his vision. His ability to see injustice and see the reconciliation that needs to come. Jesus also had that vision. It is my prayer that he will strengthen it in me.
Competition
If you are looking at this old blog, let me challenge you. If you can figure out the references that I am making in the title of the blog, I will do something that would be hardly rewarding.
First Day of Blog
Well, here it goes. I have tried the blog thing before, but to little avail. I am going at it for real this time. I want to keep up with this every night. There are a lot of reasons, but I don't think that I need to post them on the internet for the world to see.
Tonight I can't help but think about Paul and his thorn. That was really obnoxious that God would not let him free of it. Sometimes I don't understand our lack of progress and God's aparent refusal to give us a hand. Paul had something that was nagging him and his ministry, and he asked for it to be gone. God said, "Nope." I can think of a million things in my own life that I feel like hold me back. When I expand that to the church in general, I can see another million things that I continually pray that God will help us fix. He could fix so many things with just a wave of his hand. Does he enjoy seeing us struggle?
Well, I don't think so. I think that he actually hates seeing us struggle, but we still do for three reasons. First of all, a lot of things we take out of our hands by not doing what we need to do to let him work. We quench the Spirit. Secondly, we learn from the struggles. We become better, and he knows that some things we are dumb enough to have to learn on our own. Finally, it seems that in general we have to get used to the fact he is God. Sometimes he recieves glory in our weakness. It seems like that is what he told Paul. "My strength is made perfect in weakness." Like the poor blind man in John, often I think that we struggle so that God might be glorified. I don't know what that means, and I don't like it, but I submit to God because he is God. I guess that I just have to get used to it.
I know this doesn't sound too optimistic, but the fact is that we give false hope if we say that things will certainly work out. They don't always. We have to get used to our God. He is not a tame lion. He is good, but he is not safe. That takes a lot of time, but we have no other choice. Christ may look at us in the hard times and say "Will you forsake me too?" I answer with Peter, "Lord, to whom else can we go?"
Tonight I can't help but think about Paul and his thorn. That was really obnoxious that God would not let him free of it. Sometimes I don't understand our lack of progress and God's aparent refusal to give us a hand. Paul had something that was nagging him and his ministry, and he asked for it to be gone. God said, "Nope." I can think of a million things in my own life that I feel like hold me back. When I expand that to the church in general, I can see another million things that I continually pray that God will help us fix. He could fix so many things with just a wave of his hand. Does he enjoy seeing us struggle?
Well, I don't think so. I think that he actually hates seeing us struggle, but we still do for three reasons. First of all, a lot of things we take out of our hands by not doing what we need to do to let him work. We quench the Spirit. Secondly, we learn from the struggles. We become better, and he knows that some things we are dumb enough to have to learn on our own. Finally, it seems that in general we have to get used to the fact he is God. Sometimes he recieves glory in our weakness. It seems like that is what he told Paul. "My strength is made perfect in weakness." Like the poor blind man in John, often I think that we struggle so that God might be glorified. I don't know what that means, and I don't like it, but I submit to God because he is God. I guess that I just have to get used to it.
I know this doesn't sound too optimistic, but the fact is that we give false hope if we say that things will certainly work out. They don't always. We have to get used to our God. He is not a tame lion. He is good, but he is not safe. That takes a lot of time, but we have no other choice. Christ may look at us in the hard times and say "Will you forsake me too?" I answer with Peter, "Lord, to whom else can we go?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
