Sneakily, each of the descriptions in the previous post correspond to four movements or groups that were present in the culture of 1st century Judea. I took some liberties with the descriptions with two objectives in mind; to offer them as contemporary approaches to culture (as I think we have groups of Christians in our culture who correspond to each of these options), and to trick you into picking one of the options that Jesus rejected!!! It was into the midst of the following spiritual/social/political options that Jesus entered:
=====================
1) Zealots - This was a group who was fed up with the control of foreign powers and false leaders. They were committed to ushering in the Kingdom of God by means of force if necessary (and it was often necessary!). They were constantly fomenting rebellion, and rigorously opposed the Roman occupation of the Jewish homeland. Their posture toward the world was combative and antagonistic.
=====================
2) Essenes - This was a group of people who were committed to living out the values of God's Kingdom. They felt like the best way to accomplish this was to abandon the evil and compromising culture of the day for a pure and godly community in the wilderness. The Essenes built a community in the desert where they could bring God's Kingdom in by leaving behind the people who would hinder it. Their posture towards the world was one of seclusion and retreat.
=====================
3) Pharisees - This was a group who took it upon themselves to maintain the purity of the Jewish people. They held to a rigorous understand of purity, and they wanted to impose that standard upon all other Jewish people, whom they looked down upon as defiled. They believed that God's Kingdom would come when the Jewish people would turn from their dirty lives and enter into a life of holiness. They believed that they possessed this holiness and would dispense it to those who did not. Their posture towards the world was one of arrogance and disdain.
=====================
4) Sadducees - This group had attached themselves to the political powers. They saw their only hope of maintaining their place as the cultural and economic elites as aligning themselves with authority in an attempt to gain it themselves. They were willing to let go of some of the things that God had done, and to deny some of the things that God had promised to do, in order to cement their relationship with the political authorities. Their posture towards the world was one of compromise and connivance.
=====================
Jesus fundamental difference from those above lay in His understanding that God's blessing is always to be given away. These other groups saw God's blessing as theirs by right, they saw their status as 'God's Chosen People' as a reason to exclude others (the Romans, the sinners, the poor, the culture as a whole). Jesus realized that God wanted to breathe restoration into the world through Jesus. The others arrogantly assumed that God wanted to breathe privelege into them so that they could sit atop the world.
Jesus walked out a unique understanding of God's Kingdom. He did not look down on the less fortunates of the world, berating them for their poverty and ignorance like the Pharisees, nor did He choose to abandon the world to chaos and pain as the Essenes had. He chose rather to work to change the state of the world, to heal and emancipate, to resurrect and empower. His method for doing this, however, was not the violent force of the Zealot, nor was it to court the powers of the world, trading God's power for the impotence of worldly play-Kings as the Sadducees did.
Each of these four groups sought to define for themselves the Kingdom of God, usually reserving the place of honor in that Kingdom for people who (coincidentally) looked remarkably like they did. Each of these groups was willing to marginalize some other aspect of society to maintain their own place of primacy in the soon-to-be innaugerated Kingdom of God.
Jesus saw the Kingdom of God as God's good authority coming to those who were marginalized by these groups. His way of bringing the Kingdom was a sharp contrasting rebuttle to the ways listed above. Essentially, Jesus saw Himself as fulfilling God's purposes of putting things right in the world, He took upon Himself the calling of the Nation of Israel, to be a light to the world and a blessing to the nations. Jesus entered into the broken places to bring healing, taking the brokenness and suffering upon Himself so that others could recieve from Him the life of the Spirit. He was not passive, but He was peaceful; He was not compromising, yet He was compassionate; He did not run from the world, nor did He fight it; He embraced the world, with all of its pain and alienation, despair and violence, and He simultaneously embraced heaven, with all of its beauty and purpose, power and joy.
It is to this subversive and provokative way that Jesus beckons us. He bids us, "Come and die with me, so that you might live, and others will live with us... We will bring heaven to earth, and God's Good News to those who are in desparate need."
9.29.2007
9.27.2007
I am the Truth...
Why is it that we can refer to Jesus' words about truth as an excuse to have a verbal barrage of truth claims for every person we meet? The very person we are quoting asked more questions and made more cryptic remarks than He ever dispensed truth-claims. We can use the phrase 'born-again' in ways that flatly contradict the way Jesus used it. (In it's original context it was a brilliant exercise in purposefully confusing terminology, and we have made it into a badge of spiritual politically-correctness...) Instead of becoming like a baby, newly-birthed into a world of God-breathed beauty, we have become like religious grad-students, showing the world how much we know, religious thought police...
If as Christians we believe that truth is a person whom we learn from, not a statement that we believe, how should that change the way we handle people's questions? (Or our own?) How would that affect the way we determine what is and isn't an accurate statement about reality?
If as Christians we believe that truth is a person whom we learn from, not a statement that we believe, how should that change the way we handle people's questions? (Or our own?) How would that affect the way we determine what is and isn't an accurate statement about reality?
9.21.2007
From a Good Friend
Evolution of AFM
Growing up, sports were the focus of my life. I found my purpose in recess basketball games. My identity survived or came crashing down in accordance with the results of a neighborhood football game. There was no greater feeling then sitting in a baseball dugout with my best friends, spitting seeds and cheering on our teammates. There was no greater sense of accomplishment then winning a wrestling match over a childhood rival.
Sports created a simple world for me. I could understand it. I could work within its rules. I think this is why people of all ages sit in front of the television day in and day out and watch sports. There is a part of us that longs for life to make sense again. We long for purpose and an understanding of how to operate within such a purpose. Sports can offer this. But even though sporting events can mirror certain aspects of life, life asks us much bigger questions then can be found in the latest addition of Sports Illustrated, an ESPN highlight reel or through the atmosphere of a Monday night football game.
When I was younger I did not think about life’s biggest questions. I did not worry or ever cry out because of injustice. I never had regret. I was insulated.
As I grew older life became complicated. As a college wrestler athletics became a job. Life presented more questions then answers. My sense of purpose began to fade away.
After college I moved to San Diego and entered into a small theology program through Point Loma Nazarene University and tried to answer some of my questions. To pay the bills I became a certified personal trainer and a high school wrestling coach. All in all, my life revolved around training. I trained people’s bodies in my studio, I trained my wrestlers on how to win on the mat and I was getting spiritually trained in my theology program.
At first the three spheres of my life remained separate. I saw no real connection. However, I soon realized that spirituality encompasses every aspect of our lives. We live holistically. Nothing is secular. Everything is spiritual.
I then became excited about integrating spirituality into health and fitness. My sense of purpose came back. I started to feel alive again.
My excitement continued to grow as “spirituality” became a buzzword in mainstream America. Classes like Yoga and Tai Chi sprouted up everywhere as people began to realize that spirituality is integral to health and that our modern scientific culture was neglecting their spiritual needs.
I then heard about a conference in Las Vegas that dealt with the role of spirituality in health and fitness. The conference was put on by a reputable company whose goal was to inform the rest of the health and fitness community on how to integrate spirituality into their professions. So with the companionship of a good friend and fellow trainer, I packed up my bags and went to Vegas.
The conference was filled with smiling faces and charismatic speakers. Health was in the air. But a true sense of purpose and meaning was not. One speaker after another came forward and reproduced lines from watered down Hallmark cards while providing a relativistic view on life. I was about as inspired as a bachelor doing dishes alone on a Saturday night.
After one of the sessions I walked up to all the speakers who were sitting at a long table and asked them a simple question. “What do you mean when you say the word ‘spirituality?’” Silence was my first response. Which would have been better then what followed. After a long pause they all looked at each other and almost in unison said, “that is a really good question, we don’t have an answer.”
I was shocked. I had expected an answer that would move me, inspire me and potentially change the course of my life forever. But here I was at a conference on the role of spirituality in health yet not one of the keynote speakers knew what they meant when they said the word spirituality!
I left the conference extremely disappointed. Even though I liked the idea of integrating the body, mind and spirit into a holistic approach to training, I knew that spirituality encompassed much more than an avenue to looking good and having deep conversations at coffee shops. Spirituality is based on the living God’s interaction with the physical world and how we participate in that process. On the car ride home my mind raced with questions. The Absolute Fitness Mode is my answer to those questions.
Growing up, sports were the focus of my life. I found my purpose in recess basketball games. My identity survived or came crashing down in accordance with the results of a neighborhood football game. There was no greater feeling then sitting in a baseball dugout with my best friends, spitting seeds and cheering on our teammates. There was no greater sense of accomplishment then winning a wrestling match over a childhood rival.
Sports created a simple world for me. I could understand it. I could work within its rules. I think this is why people of all ages sit in front of the television day in and day out and watch sports. There is a part of us that longs for life to make sense again. We long for purpose and an understanding of how to operate within such a purpose. Sports can offer this. But even though sporting events can mirror certain aspects of life, life asks us much bigger questions then can be found in the latest addition of Sports Illustrated, an ESPN highlight reel or through the atmosphere of a Monday night football game.
When I was younger I did not think about life’s biggest questions. I did not worry or ever cry out because of injustice. I never had regret. I was insulated.
As I grew older life became complicated. As a college wrestler athletics became a job. Life presented more questions then answers. My sense of purpose began to fade away.
After college I moved to San Diego and entered into a small theology program through Point Loma Nazarene University and tried to answer some of my questions. To pay the bills I became a certified personal trainer and a high school wrestling coach. All in all, my life revolved around training. I trained people’s bodies in my studio, I trained my wrestlers on how to win on the mat and I was getting spiritually trained in my theology program.
At first the three spheres of my life remained separate. I saw no real connection. However, I soon realized that spirituality encompasses every aspect of our lives. We live holistically. Nothing is secular. Everything is spiritual.
I then became excited about integrating spirituality into health and fitness. My sense of purpose came back. I started to feel alive again.
My excitement continued to grow as “spirituality” became a buzzword in mainstream America. Classes like Yoga and Tai Chi sprouted up everywhere as people began to realize that spirituality is integral to health and that our modern scientific culture was neglecting their spiritual needs.
I then heard about a conference in Las Vegas that dealt with the role of spirituality in health and fitness. The conference was put on by a reputable company whose goal was to inform the rest of the health and fitness community on how to integrate spirituality into their professions. So with the companionship of a good friend and fellow trainer, I packed up my bags and went to Vegas.
The conference was filled with smiling faces and charismatic speakers. Health was in the air. But a true sense of purpose and meaning was not. One speaker after another came forward and reproduced lines from watered down Hallmark cards while providing a relativistic view on life. I was about as inspired as a bachelor doing dishes alone on a Saturday night.
After one of the sessions I walked up to all the speakers who were sitting at a long table and asked them a simple question. “What do you mean when you say the word ‘spirituality?’” Silence was my first response. Which would have been better then what followed. After a long pause they all looked at each other and almost in unison said, “that is a really good question, we don’t have an answer.”
I was shocked. I had expected an answer that would move me, inspire me and potentially change the course of my life forever. But here I was at a conference on the role of spirituality in health yet not one of the keynote speakers knew what they meant when they said the word spirituality!
I left the conference extremely disappointed. Even though I liked the idea of integrating the body, mind and spirit into a holistic approach to training, I knew that spirituality encompassed much more than an avenue to looking good and having deep conversations at coffee shops. Spirituality is based on the living God’s interaction with the physical world and how we participate in that process. On the car ride home my mind raced with questions. The Absolute Fitness Mode is my answer to those questions.
9.20.2007
The Four Options...
Which best describes you?
=====================
1)
The world is full of people who want to decieve and destroy. They need to be confronted with the truth. You want to expose the lies of those in positions of cultural power. You want to remove the godless authorities from their places of power and show people the truth of God's word. You hope to see godly men and women occupy those positions of control and authority and you are willing to combat the forces working against that hope with whatever social and political means are at your disposal. Your ideal society is one where God has been placed at the top, He is publicly honored by politicians and leaders, professors and business owners. All of society is ordered by the ways of God, from schools and courtrooms, to public places and private homes; the ways of God are taught as the only right way to live.
=====================
2)
The world is a place that has nothing of value to you. You desire to stear clear of those who would corrupt you or your family with their godless ways and evil deeds. Your ideal society is a group of people who are devoted to living for God, who have removed themselves from the evil ways of the world. You would love to live somewhere in the country (living a simple, rural lifestyle) with these godly people, teaching your children the good life, and drawing closer to God.
=====================
3)
The world is a dirty place that needs cleaning up, you find yourself wanting to teach people the right way to live. If the world would only take note of what God has been saying and begin to obey, the world would be a better place. You have little patience with people who chose a life of ignorance and degradation. Your ideal society is one where everyone has comitted to living a pure and righteous life. If people would only follow your example, and listen to what you tell them, they would discover that they too can be blessed by God.
=====================
4)
The world has much to offer. If you could only attach yourself to the right people and the right insititutions, you would be able to use the power and energy and knowledge for good. You want to enlist the aid of those in power to accomplish the goals of God. Your ideal society is one where the spiritual community is on good terms with the secular authorities and those in positions of cultural influence. You don't want to 'rock the boat' unneccisarily, and are willing to find healthy and appropriate compromises to make things work and get things done.
If you read this, I would love to hear which of these viewpoints you would align yourself with. I would probably fit in the number 3 category, although I would have said number 2 a few years ago...
=====================
1)
The world is full of people who want to decieve and destroy. They need to be confronted with the truth. You want to expose the lies of those in positions of cultural power. You want to remove the godless authorities from their places of power and show people the truth of God's word. You hope to see godly men and women occupy those positions of control and authority and you are willing to combat the forces working against that hope with whatever social and political means are at your disposal. Your ideal society is one where God has been placed at the top, He is publicly honored by politicians and leaders, professors and business owners. All of society is ordered by the ways of God, from schools and courtrooms, to public places and private homes; the ways of God are taught as the only right way to live.
=====================
2)
The world is a place that has nothing of value to you. You desire to stear clear of those who would corrupt you or your family with their godless ways and evil deeds. Your ideal society is a group of people who are devoted to living for God, who have removed themselves from the evil ways of the world. You would love to live somewhere in the country (living a simple, rural lifestyle) with these godly people, teaching your children the good life, and drawing closer to God.
=====================
3)
The world is a dirty place that needs cleaning up, you find yourself wanting to teach people the right way to live. If the world would only take note of what God has been saying and begin to obey, the world would be a better place. You have little patience with people who chose a life of ignorance and degradation. Your ideal society is one where everyone has comitted to living a pure and righteous life. If people would only follow your example, and listen to what you tell them, they would discover that they too can be blessed by God.
=====================
4)
The world has much to offer. If you could only attach yourself to the right people and the right insititutions, you would be able to use the power and energy and knowledge for good. You want to enlist the aid of those in power to accomplish the goals of God. Your ideal society is one where the spiritual community is on good terms with the secular authorities and those in positions of cultural influence. You don't want to 'rock the boat' unneccisarily, and are willing to find healthy and appropriate compromises to make things work and get things done.
If you read this, I would love to hear which of these viewpoints you would align yourself with. I would probably fit in the number 3 category, although I would have said number 2 a few years ago...
9.14.2007
These words do not apply to you...
Constitution
I happened to listen to a popular radio talkshow the other day that has a Paul McCartney song as it's theme song. Here are the lyrics:
This is my right - A right given by God
To live a free life - To live in freedom
Talkin' about freedom - I'm talkin' 'bout freedom
I will fight - For the right
To live in freedom
Anyone tries to take it away
They'll have to answer
'Cause this is my right
I'm talkin' about freedom - Talkin' 'bout freedom
I will fight - For the right
To live in freedom
I was really disturbed by this, precisely because this show is overtly 'Christian.' These lyrics stand in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus. For someone to claim to follow Him and then to endorse the agenda that this song proposes as being in line with His teachings is simply irresponsible.
My pastor relayed a story to me about one of his college professors. The man read aloud to his class the famous lines from the Declaration of Independence; "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." He then instructed his class:
"If you are a follower of Jesus, then you cannot claim that you have any rights whatsoever; this Declaration does not apply to you."
I happened to listen to a popular radio talkshow the other day that has a Paul McCartney song as it's theme song. Here are the lyrics:
This is my right - A right given by God
To live a free life - To live in freedom
Talkin' about freedom - I'm talkin' 'bout freedom
I will fight - For the right
To live in freedom
Anyone tries to take it away
They'll have to answer
'Cause this is my right
I'm talkin' about freedom - Talkin' 'bout freedom
I will fight - For the right
To live in freedom
I was really disturbed by this, precisely because this show is overtly 'Christian.' These lyrics stand in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus. For someone to claim to follow Him and then to endorse the agenda that this song proposes as being in line with His teachings is simply irresponsible.
My pastor relayed a story to me about one of his college professors. The man read aloud to his class the famous lines from the Declaration of Independence; "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." He then instructed his class:
"If you are a follower of Jesus, then you cannot claim that you have any rights whatsoever; this Declaration does not apply to you."
9.10.2007
The 'Good' Book?
The following is a response to a thread elsewhere, I thought it would be profitable to post it here:
Helen asked: "...how do you know it is 'the correct version'of Christianity?"
It seems like this is an unintentionally misleading way of approaching the subject. If you asked a scientist if they were 'staying true' to Darwin's theory of evolution, or Newton's on gravitation, they would respond, "That is not the goal, the goal is to accurately describe reality." I don't really desire the correct 'Christianity,' but rather the correct version of reality!
For this reason I hope to use other 'versions' of Christianity as aids to understanding reality, but not as definitions of reality. Just as a scientist will take advantage of the work of others while simultaneously proffering her own. I don't attempt to stay true to Luther or Augustine, Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, or Benny Hinn.
Helen also stated: "I respect your opinion but with all due respect, that's all it is, right?"
Most assuredly, that is all that it is. I don't pretend to be anything other than what I am; a scientist will speak of things she doesn't begin to fully comprehend, and so too humans speak of the even greater reality that is God. However, that is not to discount all attempt to understand. I would hope to dialogue about the matter in question, how else are we to do this if not first by stating our own position?
You (and others) had stated that the Bible was full of contradiction. When I asked for a particular incidence, you offered that of Paul v Jesus on the question of 'salvation by faith.' If my response is to be discarded as 'mere personal opinion,' than what is to be the point of our dialogue? I would love to hear why you find them to be contradictory on the subject, and assume you would want to understand why I find them to be complementary.
Which gets us to the point of contradiction itself:
I fully appreciate that 'arguments between Christians who are very familiar with the Bible, over what the Bible teaches, are alive and well,' I don't think that this is problematic for what I am trying to say. There are certainly some things that are taught by Jesus and His followers that are difficult to reconcile, but many of these are intentional paradoxes akin to the article linked above. Most contradictions, however, are simply failures to aproach the text on its own terms.
You said, "...if the Bible was clear and non-contradictory, Christians who all say they believe it would not have unresolvable debates over what it says." But I think that this places to much trust in human ability to set aside personal desires and perspectives. On top of this, I think this highlights the main problem with talking about 'contradictions.' It forces one to approach the Bible in a way that was never intended. If I read Psalms as a manual for understanding the physical construction of the universe, then I am quite simply and willfully ignorant.
I did get around to the list of contradictions, some of the 388 are outright deceptive (proverbs 26:4-5), (I only looked at maybe 30) every single verse was provided in an archaic translation, without context, and without an attempt made to understand the point within the larger context of the writing. Perhaps if I spent time sorting through I could find something a little more 'intellectually cohesive' but that list is precisely the reason why I ask people for personal examples...
You referenced 'key texts,' it is exactly this that I find problematic. What are the 'key texts' to Dickens' Great Expectations? ...or Handel's Messiah? ...or the U. S. Constitution? ...or U2's Helter Skelter? ...or MLK Jr. Epistle to the Americans?
Also, I think I was unclear (it seems such a common problem for me!!) when I mentioned the author's intent...
I was not refering to God, but to the author. That is what I mean by taking something in context. If I am trying to understand what the person who wrote it meant by what they said, (instead of taking a phrase and using it as a 'key text') then I will be in a position to ask the deeper (and faith inspired) question, "What is God saying through this?" An even better example of contradiction (although on the same topic) is "justified by faith" in Galatians and "justified by works" in James; here the actual words directly contradict each other, but this 'contradiction' requires that we assume it is proper to approach these letters with an 'atomistic' dissection. My humble assertion is that this assumption is incorrect; language doesn't work that way.
(I will be the first to admit that often American Christians approach the Bible in exactly this rigid, 'reductionistic' and scientific way...)
I don't want to be seen as advocating 'special insight' but rather a different approach. Instead of approaching the Bible as a compilation of absolute truth statements, approach it on it's own terms...
Helen asked: "...how do you know it is 'the correct version'of Christianity?"
It seems like this is an unintentionally misleading way of approaching the subject. If you asked a scientist if they were 'staying true' to Darwin's theory of evolution, or Newton's on gravitation, they would respond, "That is not the goal, the goal is to accurately describe reality." I don't really desire the correct 'Christianity,' but rather the correct version of reality!
For this reason I hope to use other 'versions' of Christianity as aids to understanding reality, but not as definitions of reality. Just as a scientist will take advantage of the work of others while simultaneously proffering her own. I don't attempt to stay true to Luther or Augustine, Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, or Benny Hinn.
Helen also stated: "I respect your opinion but with all due respect, that's all it is, right?"
Most assuredly, that is all that it is. I don't pretend to be anything other than what I am; a scientist will speak of things she doesn't begin to fully comprehend, and so too humans speak of the even greater reality that is God. However, that is not to discount all attempt to understand. I would hope to dialogue about the matter in question, how else are we to do this if not first by stating our own position?
You (and others) had stated that the Bible was full of contradiction. When I asked for a particular incidence, you offered that of Paul v Jesus on the question of 'salvation by faith.' If my response is to be discarded as 'mere personal opinion,' than what is to be the point of our dialogue? I would love to hear why you find them to be contradictory on the subject, and assume you would want to understand why I find them to be complementary.
Which gets us to the point of contradiction itself:
I fully appreciate that 'arguments between Christians who are very familiar with the Bible, over what the Bible teaches, are alive and well,' I don't think that this is problematic for what I am trying to say. There are certainly some things that are taught by Jesus and His followers that are difficult to reconcile, but many of these are intentional paradoxes akin to the article linked above. Most contradictions, however, are simply failures to aproach the text on its own terms.
You said, "...if the Bible was clear and non-contradictory, Christians who all say they believe it would not have unresolvable debates over what it says." But I think that this places to much trust in human ability to set aside personal desires and perspectives. On top of this, I think this highlights the main problem with talking about 'contradictions.' It forces one to approach the Bible in a way that was never intended. If I read Psalms as a manual for understanding the physical construction of the universe, then I am quite simply and willfully ignorant.
I did get around to the list of contradictions, some of the 388 are outright deceptive (proverbs 26:4-5), (I only looked at maybe 30) every single verse was provided in an archaic translation, without context, and without an attempt made to understand the point within the larger context of the writing. Perhaps if I spent time sorting through I could find something a little more 'intellectually cohesive' but that list is precisely the reason why I ask people for personal examples...
You referenced 'key texts,' it is exactly this that I find problematic. What are the 'key texts' to Dickens' Great Expectations? ...or Handel's Messiah? ...or the U. S. Constitution? ...or U2's Helter Skelter? ...or MLK Jr. Epistle to the Americans?
Also, I think I was unclear (it seems such a common problem for me!!) when I mentioned the author's intent...
I was not refering to God, but to the author. That is what I mean by taking something in context. If I am trying to understand what the person who wrote it meant by what they said, (instead of taking a phrase and using it as a 'key text') then I will be in a position to ask the deeper (and faith inspired) question, "What is God saying through this?" An even better example of contradiction (although on the same topic) is "justified by faith" in Galatians and "justified by works" in James; here the actual words directly contradict each other, but this 'contradiction' requires that we assume it is proper to approach these letters with an 'atomistic' dissection. My humble assertion is that this assumption is incorrect; language doesn't work that way.
(I will be the first to admit that often American Christians approach the Bible in exactly this rigid, 'reductionistic' and scientific way...)
I don't want to be seen as advocating 'special insight' but rather a different approach. Instead of approaching the Bible as a compilation of absolute truth statements, approach it on it's own terms...
9.09.2007
The Love of God Demands a Life of Activism
"So the greatest of all virtues is love. It is here that we find the true meaning of the Christian faith. This is at bottom the meaning of the cross. The great event on Calvary signifies more than a meaningless drama that took place on the stage of history. It is a telescope through which we look out into the long vista of eternity and see the love of God breaking forth into time. It is an eternal reminder to a power drunk generation that love is most durable power in the world, and that it is at bottom the heartbeat of the moral cosmos. Only through achieving this love can you expect to matriculate into the university of eternal life."
Martin Luther King Jr.
Martin Luther King Jr.
9.07.2007
Conservative Politics and Conservative Lives
Why do conservative Christians also live conservative lives?
Let me explain the question...
Christians in America tend to be politically conservative, although there are plenty of liberal Christians as well, however, the typical conservative Christian (who views theology in a conservative way, and trends towards the conservative end of the political spectrum) also tends to live those political values out on the personal level.
This is not the proper time to discuss my own political views (that will only muddy the water), but suffice it to say that I have no problem with Christians aligning themselves with conservative politics. If you are convinced that the policies proffered by conservative politicians would provide for the welfare of the people then, by all means, vote your conscience. The problem arises, however, when the conservative political philosophy is brought to the personal level.
The typical conservative is against redistribution of wealth through things like Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, etc. This may very well be an innapropriate way of running a country. However, if that same posture is applied at the personal level, then we are in direct contradiction with the ethic of the Kingdom of God.
It is exactly this contradiction that I see in conservative Christianity. The emphasis on personal responsibility has led conservative Christians to eschew helping the poor in their community. Perhaps they will give a little money, even less time and energy, but only very rarely will they actually involve themselves in the lives of the needy people in the world.
The single driving force (at the personal level) behind the conservative Christian way of life (in my humble, yet accurate, opinion) is a desire to create a social bubble of safety and comfort, removed from the evils of the world; drug abuse, vulgarity, sexual perversion, etc. This force is in diametrical opposition to the mandate of the Gospel.
What this amounts to is the very thing that Jesus condemned in the Pharisees; using their status as God's elect to abuse the very people they were 'elected' to bless!!! We, like Abraham, have not been chosen by God to enjoy His blessing, but to give away His blessing.
===============================
To be a disciple is to become a child; embracing change and becoming a learner is central to being a Christian. (What else would 'born again' refer to?) This means that we can never have a condescending attitude. We are not like spiritual PhD's dispensing wisdom, rather we must be like spiritual children constantly asking, "Papa, how should I do this?"
If we approach life as a disciple we will see the glaring problem with removing ourselves from the problems of the world.; taking our spiritual blessing and 'leaving the playground.'
===============================
I propose that Christians should be orthodox in theology, ambiguous in politics, and radical in lifestyle.
Let me explain the question...
Christians in America tend to be politically conservative, although there are plenty of liberal Christians as well, however, the typical conservative Christian (who views theology in a conservative way, and trends towards the conservative end of the political spectrum) also tends to live those political values out on the personal level.
This is not the proper time to discuss my own political views (that will only muddy the water), but suffice it to say that I have no problem with Christians aligning themselves with conservative politics. If you are convinced that the policies proffered by conservative politicians would provide for the welfare of the people then, by all means, vote your conscience. The problem arises, however, when the conservative political philosophy is brought to the personal level.
The typical conservative is against redistribution of wealth through things like Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, etc. This may very well be an innapropriate way of running a country. However, if that same posture is applied at the personal level, then we are in direct contradiction with the ethic of the Kingdom of God.
It is exactly this contradiction that I see in conservative Christianity. The emphasis on personal responsibility has led conservative Christians to eschew helping the poor in their community. Perhaps they will give a little money, even less time and energy, but only very rarely will they actually involve themselves in the lives of the needy people in the world.
The single driving force (at the personal level) behind the conservative Christian way of life (in my humble, yet accurate, opinion) is a desire to create a social bubble of safety and comfort, removed from the evils of the world; drug abuse, vulgarity, sexual perversion, etc. This force is in diametrical opposition to the mandate of the Gospel.
What this amounts to is the very thing that Jesus condemned in the Pharisees; using their status as God's elect to abuse the very people they were 'elected' to bless!!! We, like Abraham, have not been chosen by God to enjoy His blessing, but to give away His blessing.
===============================
To be a disciple is to become a child; embracing change and becoming a learner is central to being a Christian. (What else would 'born again' refer to?) This means that we can never have a condescending attitude. We are not like spiritual PhD's dispensing wisdom, rather we must be like spiritual children constantly asking, "Papa, how should I do this?"
If we approach life as a disciple we will see the glaring problem with removing ourselves from the problems of the world.; taking our spiritual blessing and 'leaving the playground.'
===============================
I propose that Christians should be orthodox in theology, ambiguous in politics, and radical in lifestyle.
9.05.2007
Friends from Munich
We received an email a few months back asking if we would be willing to house a group of three Germans traveling through the area. We agreed, not thinking much about it, as we have an entire third floor that is currently empty. We thought perhaps that they would stay the night and leave the next morning, we assumed they would not have much impact on our normal routines. We did not realize what was in store for us...
They showed up after a dissapointing week of Church Planting; Ingo and his new (and newly pregnant) wife Gisela, and their friend Maryann. They ended up staying for two days. It was one of the most encouraging, and uplifting encounters with perfect strangers that I have ever had. From the very first conversation we had, till the time they left, it was like having family visit in that they were so comfortable to be around, and yet there were all sorts of interesting things to find out about them (both as people and as emmisaries from a foreign land).
We were able to have some really wonderful conversations about what God was up to in our lives and in the world, they joined us for our Sunday service to the Retirement Facility, they spent time with us praying and worshiping, and they spent time with some of the folks from our Church. They had some very encouraging observations about who we were and what we were doing, they also were an encouragement to one of the young men in our Church. I came away from the weekend with my spirits lifted and refreshed.
At one point during the weekend I was struck by something...
The authors of the letters that now make up the Christian Bible speak often of the Church in ways that highlight the intimate bond that exists among the community who have been touched by the Spirit of Jesus; 'The Family of God,' 'The Body of Christ,' etc. In my time with our visitors I discovered this bond with them.
I have relationships that are deep and commited, friends for whom I would give my life, and with whom I have labored and laughed, comforted and cried. This was unique, however, in that I realized that it was not we who had created this bond by 'joining the same club,' nor even by our long hours together, but rather the bond that I discovered was present because of God's action in our lives. I found in Ingo a kindred spirit, the Spirit of Christ.
I had a moment of illumination, a realization that this man and I had submitted our lives to the same purpose in the world. It was like finding out after the fact that someone had shared the same trench with you in battle; there was a bond that was discovered, not one that was created.
This is what God intends for all of us to have with all people; a sense of belonging to the same central reality, God and His Kingdom. God desires that we could enter into relationships with others that are easy and encouraging, that can become the foundation for a life of joy and purpose, beauty and hope.
They showed up after a dissapointing week of Church Planting; Ingo and his new (and newly pregnant) wife Gisela, and their friend Maryann. They ended up staying for two days. It was one of the most encouraging, and uplifting encounters with perfect strangers that I have ever had. From the very first conversation we had, till the time they left, it was like having family visit in that they were so comfortable to be around, and yet there were all sorts of interesting things to find out about them (both as people and as emmisaries from a foreign land).
We were able to have some really wonderful conversations about what God was up to in our lives and in the world, they joined us for our Sunday service to the Retirement Facility, they spent time with us praying and worshiping, and they spent time with some of the folks from our Church. They had some very encouraging observations about who we were and what we were doing, they also were an encouragement to one of the young men in our Church. I came away from the weekend with my spirits lifted and refreshed.
At one point during the weekend I was struck by something...
The authors of the letters that now make up the Christian Bible speak often of the Church in ways that highlight the intimate bond that exists among the community who have been touched by the Spirit of Jesus; 'The Family of God,' 'The Body of Christ,' etc. In my time with our visitors I discovered this bond with them.
I have relationships that are deep and commited, friends for whom I would give my life, and with whom I have labored and laughed, comforted and cried. This was unique, however, in that I realized that it was not we who had created this bond by 'joining the same club,' nor even by our long hours together, but rather the bond that I discovered was present because of God's action in our lives. I found in Ingo a kindred spirit, the Spirit of Christ.
I had a moment of illumination, a realization that this man and I had submitted our lives to the same purpose in the world. It was like finding out after the fact that someone had shared the same trench with you in battle; there was a bond that was discovered, not one that was created.
This is what God intends for all of us to have with all people; a sense of belonging to the same central reality, God and His Kingdom. God desires that we could enter into relationships with others that are easy and encouraging, that can become the foundation for a life of joy and purpose, beauty and hope.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)