I read this interview in the newest Leadership magazine. It is an interview of Don Miller, authoro of "Blue Like Jazz". I highly recommend this book to anyone interested.
This is a part of the interview that I can't get out of my head. So tell me what you think.
I - "So, (Don), you've said that the church uses love as a commodity. What does that mean?"
D - "We sometimes take a Darwinian approach with love - if we are gainst somebody's ideas, we starve them out. I fwe disagree with somebody's political ideas, or sexual identity, we just don't pay them. We refuse to "condone the behavior" by offering any love. This approach has created a Christian culture that is completely unaware what the greater culture thinks of us. We don't interact with people who don't validate our ideas. There is nothing revolutionary here. This mindset is hardly a breath of fresh air to a world that uses the exact kinds of techniques. "
I - "So what's the alternative?"
D - "The opposite is Biblical Love, which loves even enemies, loves unconditionally, and loves liberally. Loving selectively is worldly; giving it freely is miraculous."
I - "If love isn't a commodity, then what is it?"
D - "I think of love like a magnent. When people see it given in the name of God, they're drawn to it. If I withold love, then people believe I have met a God that makes me a hateful and vicious person. And they're repelled..."
So what do you think? Is Love a commodity or a magnent?
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
The example of the Fathers
I found this in the introduction (page 1) of Rowan Greer's "Broken Lights and Mended Lives: Theology and Common Life in the Early Church"
Tell me what you think:
"(In studying the Fathers of the church) what has increasingly impressed itself on me is that a constant dialogue was maintained between theology and the life of the church. Even those who elaborated a technical theology were also preachers in the Church , and their aim was to articulate and to shape the experience of ordinary Christians. In general terms, this dialogue seems to me one that has been lost in the Church and that very much needs to be restored. In the acadamy the seperate disciplines of history, biblical studies, theology, and liturgy have tended to make theology not only a school discipline but one discipline among others. In the parish church what I have found is a broad loss of theological awareness and a tendency to focus upon the moral demands of Christianity rather than upon the promises of the Gospel. What seems to me to have been a unity in the early Church has become fragmented in our own time. The reading and study of Scripture, the liturgy, preaching, and the arts have tended to go seperate ways. Theology and life have been divided from one another. "
Tell me what you think:
"(In studying the Fathers of the church) what has increasingly impressed itself on me is that a constant dialogue was maintained between theology and the life of the church. Even those who elaborated a technical theology were also preachers in the Church , and their aim was to articulate and to shape the experience of ordinary Christians. In general terms, this dialogue seems to me one that has been lost in the Church and that very much needs to be restored. In the acadamy the seperate disciplines of history, biblical studies, theology, and liturgy have tended to make theology not only a school discipline but one discipline among others. In the parish church what I have found is a broad loss of theological awareness and a tendency to focus upon the moral demands of Christianity rather than upon the promises of the Gospel. What seems to me to have been a unity in the early Church has become fragmented in our own time. The reading and study of Scripture, the liturgy, preaching, and the arts have tended to go seperate ways. Theology and life have been divided from one another. "
Jesus the Leader
In seminary we were required to take a group of classes that were called "servant" classes. For example, "Servant as Preacher", "Servant as Counselor", and "Servant as Leader". All of these classes were good, and most of them met my expectations, except for the "servant as leader" class.
Coming into it, having thought about the title, I was trying to hold in my head the two concepts mentioned there; servant hood and leadership. I was expecting I guess an explanation of how these two concepts come together; how they form a pastor into being a servant leader.
Unfortunately, the majority of what I learned from this class was the basic leadership principles that I believe are being taught in any leadership class, in any university, across this country. It would have been true that I could have left that class feeling as much, or maybe more, prepared to lead a business than a church, and I wondered if I was wrong in feeling this way.
Many of our texts were written by successful business men and women, who through their experience, learned what it meant to lead individuals. And, many of their principles were helpful. However, I never felt comfortable with using corporate America models of leadership to train leaders of faith communities. And I don't know why? I know that there is a business side to a church; i.e. finances, a type of marketing, and so forth, but the church is not a business or a corporation, but a faith community; a family of believers. Should we lead a family the same way we would lead a pharmaceutical company?
In evangelical America and the land of the mega-church, the CEO pastor is the leader selling all the leadership books, holding all the conferences, and spreading the "management magic" to other pastors. Well, I am not comfortable with it. I do not question the intent or the heart of these churches or their pastors. I don't question that they are making an impact for the kingdom of God. Yet, I do question the type of leadership being proposed, whether implicitly or not.
I wonder what kind of leader John Chrysostom was. I wonder if he would have made a good CEO of a major company. I wonder what type of leader St. Ignatius was. Would he have searched the likes of Tom Peters and Zig Ziglar for principles to build his leadership? I think he would have done something different. He would have delved into the leadership of someone else. Jesus.
I have decided in writing these ramblings, that I need to re-read the gospels, and take note what a true "servant leader" is.
Coming into it, having thought about the title, I was trying to hold in my head the two concepts mentioned there; servant hood and leadership. I was expecting I guess an explanation of how these two concepts come together; how they form a pastor into being a servant leader.
Unfortunately, the majority of what I learned from this class was the basic leadership principles that I believe are being taught in any leadership class, in any university, across this country. It would have been true that I could have left that class feeling as much, or maybe more, prepared to lead a business than a church, and I wondered if I was wrong in feeling this way.
Many of our texts were written by successful business men and women, who through their experience, learned what it meant to lead individuals. And, many of their principles were helpful. However, I never felt comfortable with using corporate America models of leadership to train leaders of faith communities. And I don't know why? I know that there is a business side to a church; i.e. finances, a type of marketing, and so forth, but the church is not a business or a corporation, but a faith community; a family of believers. Should we lead a family the same way we would lead a pharmaceutical company?
In evangelical America and the land of the mega-church, the CEO pastor is the leader selling all the leadership books, holding all the conferences, and spreading the "management magic" to other pastors. Well, I am not comfortable with it. I do not question the intent or the heart of these churches or their pastors. I don't question that they are making an impact for the kingdom of God. Yet, I do question the type of leadership being proposed, whether implicitly or not.
I wonder what kind of leader John Chrysostom was. I wonder if he would have made a good CEO of a major company. I wonder what type of leader St. Ignatius was. Would he have searched the likes of Tom Peters and Zig Ziglar for principles to build his leadership? I think he would have done something different. He would have delved into the leadership of someone else. Jesus.
I have decided in writing these ramblings, that I need to re-read the gospels, and take note what a true "servant leader" is.
Friday, July 22, 2005
Evangelicalism, Enviromentalism, and Eschatology
Wow! Now that is a title. If that doesn't suck you in then nothing will.
We have been going through the Book of Romans in our church. I preach out of the passage on Sunday Mornings, and then our small groups meet and discuss the passage in community, on Sunday nights. I have been pleased with the communal trek through Paul's gospel. We have been led by the Spirit, and he continues to further us in our discipleship.
The passage I am preaching from Sunday, is Romans 8:18-21, which talks of God's plan to not only redeem us, but all of creation. And I find that as I study this passage and others, that we are undoubtedly tied to the redemption of the earth. What I mean is that we are connected, not only to God through Jesus, but to the earth he created for us to dwell on. Yet we don't believe it.
In the church tradition I grew up in, much of the focus of the participants was heaven. The favorite songs to sing were about heaven. The favorite sermons that everyone wanted a copy of were about heaven. And it was an unspoken requirement of every elementary Sunday School teacher that they had to teach on heaven once a month. Heaven was one of, if not the, central topic of the faith.
Of course, this is not all bad. I do believe what Paul said that to be "absent from the body is to be present with Christ". So we must live our lives with our tunics tucked into our belts and our walking sticks ready for Christs return. But what will it look like when he does return? Are we going to float off with angel's wings to a place filled with golden houses, harps, and cream cheese? Or, is God's initial intent his final intent?
It is amazing the simalarities between the Garden of Eden in Genesis 1-2, and John the Revelator's vision of the new Earth in Rev. 21-22. I believe it is clear in reading the redemption story of the Bible, that we will eternally dwell where he first intended us to dwell; here on a redeemed earth. For he created us to be stewards of this earth, and it is our inheritance.
Right before vv.18-21, Paul talks about our positions as co-heirs with Christ. We were created to be stewards of what God had created. We are deeply connected with the earth we live on, and all of its creatures. We are a part of creation, yet we are co-heirs over what God has created for us. Yet, creation itself groans, as if it is pregnant, waiting for the redemption promise to be born out.
N.T. Wright drew this conclusion for our present challenge; "The fact that God's people will inherit the newly liberated creation (someday) ought to energize a proper concern for the created order (now)."
I know, now you are just waiting to see a link to PETA, or Greenpeace. Well, that is not what I am leading too. I am just beginning to believe that we as Christians need to take a look at how we treat the earth and why. Do we believe enviromental issues are useless, because Jesus is returning and we are all going to heaven? If you do believe that our eternal destination will be in a cloud city, than there is no wonder you have no regard for this earth. Why should you. But, if you believe that God's original intent is his final intent, and he made this earth for us, and us for this earth (I am sounding very native American by the way, which is not a bad thing); and you believe that Jesus's life death and resurrection were the culmination and cosmic breakthrough of his kingdom; and you believe that when Jesus prayed "thy kingdom come...on earth as it is in heaven"; and you believe that he wasn't lying when he preached "the kingdom of God is here"; and you believe that the church is the present glimpse of an eschatological reality; and you believe this sentence is way too long; than believe with me the need for us too take the lead on environmental issues. There...I said it.
We have been going through the Book of Romans in our church. I preach out of the passage on Sunday Mornings, and then our small groups meet and discuss the passage in community, on Sunday nights. I have been pleased with the communal trek through Paul's gospel. We have been led by the Spirit, and he continues to further us in our discipleship.
The passage I am preaching from Sunday, is Romans 8:18-21, which talks of God's plan to not only redeem us, but all of creation. And I find that as I study this passage and others, that we are undoubtedly tied to the redemption of the earth. What I mean is that we are connected, not only to God through Jesus, but to the earth he created for us to dwell on. Yet we don't believe it.
In the church tradition I grew up in, much of the focus of the participants was heaven. The favorite songs to sing were about heaven. The favorite sermons that everyone wanted a copy of were about heaven. And it was an unspoken requirement of every elementary Sunday School teacher that they had to teach on heaven once a month. Heaven was one of, if not the, central topic of the faith.
Of course, this is not all bad. I do believe what Paul said that to be "absent from the body is to be present with Christ". So we must live our lives with our tunics tucked into our belts and our walking sticks ready for Christs return. But what will it look like when he does return? Are we going to float off with angel's wings to a place filled with golden houses, harps, and cream cheese? Or, is God's initial intent his final intent?
It is amazing the simalarities between the Garden of Eden in Genesis 1-2, and John the Revelator's vision of the new Earth in Rev. 21-22. I believe it is clear in reading the redemption story of the Bible, that we will eternally dwell where he first intended us to dwell; here on a redeemed earth. For he created us to be stewards of this earth, and it is our inheritance.
Right before vv.18-21, Paul talks about our positions as co-heirs with Christ. We were created to be stewards of what God had created. We are deeply connected with the earth we live on, and all of its creatures. We are a part of creation, yet we are co-heirs over what God has created for us. Yet, creation itself groans, as if it is pregnant, waiting for the redemption promise to be born out.
N.T. Wright drew this conclusion for our present challenge; "The fact that God's people will inherit the newly liberated creation (someday) ought to energize a proper concern for the created order (now)."
I know, now you are just waiting to see a link to PETA, or Greenpeace. Well, that is not what I am leading too. I am just beginning to believe that we as Christians need to take a look at how we treat the earth and why. Do we believe enviromental issues are useless, because Jesus is returning and we are all going to heaven? If you do believe that our eternal destination will be in a cloud city, than there is no wonder you have no regard for this earth. Why should you. But, if you believe that God's original intent is his final intent, and he made this earth for us, and us for this earth (I am sounding very native American by the way, which is not a bad thing); and you believe that Jesus's life death and resurrection were the culmination and cosmic breakthrough of his kingdom; and you believe that when Jesus prayed "thy kingdom come...on earth as it is in heaven"; and you believe that he wasn't lying when he preached "the kingdom of God is here"; and you believe that the church is the present glimpse of an eschatological reality; and you believe this sentence is way too long; than believe with me the need for us too take the lead on environmental issues. There...I said it.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
The Irreplaceable Resource
Time. I don't have much of it. I waste entirely too much of what I have, and yet I continue to pray for more. I am continually fighting against it. Yet, it is what keeps things going in my life. What would it be like to be outside of time? I wonder about what Paul meant when he said "to be absent from the body is to be present with Christ". Does that mean we take a step outside of the time space continuum? Are we able to see time as an object, like I am looking at the box of kleenexes on my desk right now? What would it feel like to be outside of time? We can't imagine it, because we are so wrapped up in it. It directs us, drives us. It tells us when we are supposed to leave the house, eat lunch, come home. It tells us what we are supposed to do and when. I think I need a break from time. Is that what Jesus was doing when he stepped away from the crowds? Taking a break from time? I don't know, but I have to stop typing. I am out of time.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Prayer from Thomas Merton
I saw this prayer on my friends blog, Monastic Mumblings, a friar's journey and thought it was awesome. So, I shamelessly copied it to post it on my blog. Good stuff.
Prayer by Br.Thomas Merton
My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going. I do not see the road ahead of me. I cannot know for certain where it will end. Nor do I really know myself, and the fact that I think that I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you. And I hope I have that desire in all that I am doing. I hope that I will never do anything apart form that desire. And I know that if I do this you will lead me by the right road though I may know nothing about it. Therefore will I trust you always though I may seem to be lost and in the shadow of death. I will not fear, for you are ever with me, and you will never leave me to face my perils alone. -- Thoughts in Solitude
Prayer by Br.Thomas Merton
My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going. I do not see the road ahead of me. I cannot know for certain where it will end. Nor do I really know myself, and the fact that I think that I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you. And I hope I have that desire in all that I am doing. I hope that I will never do anything apart form that desire. And I know that if I do this you will lead me by the right road though I may know nothing about it. Therefore will I trust you always though I may seem to be lost and in the shadow of death. I will not fear, for you are ever with me, and you will never leave me to face my perils alone. -- Thoughts in Solitude
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Mystery (Part three)
Ok, I know...this is the third post on mystery. Well, nothing like running with a winner. I only continue because maybe I am learning myself. I learn best through writing, interacting, and thinking outside my "noggin". So, I keep forcing you to read my thoughts. Wait...I didn't make you come here, but I am glad you did.
John made a good comment to the first post on the subject of mystery and the faith, reminding us that when mystery is held as the focus, it can become detrimental to our faith. I agree wholeheartedly. Yet, we are all living in a context where mystery has not only not been the focus, it has been forgotten. Coming from the enlightenment, the modern age focused on the ability to "know", making faith a scientific experiment.
For example...throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries we see the training of ministers/priests/clergy as primarily one of academics. I don't have any problem with academics, but why is it the most important, and primarily the sole makeup of clergy training? In contrast, in the first few centuries to become a clergy member meant you would live with and learn under another clergy, or in a community of clergy. You would "experience" the ministry and it would be the main vehicle for which you came to "know" God's call in your life. Why the shift? What happened? I believe the enlightenment, and the raising of the human intellect had a profound effect.
In the first few centuries there was no underlying belief that the most important thing was head knowledge, for I believe they understood that our head knowledge was limited. They understood the mystery of the faith. That one might come closer to feeling the care of God while caring for the needy, rather than studying a book about his care.
This is why the Eucharist is becoming so important to me. I believe that there is something I learn/receive from God in the Eucharist that I can not explain with my brain. I am submitting myself to an act that makes no "logical" sense because I am humbly admitting that I can't understand God, he understands me. And through this action of recognized limitations, I come to know him better.
Am I making any sense here? Or am I way off?
John made a good comment to the first post on the subject of mystery and the faith, reminding us that when mystery is held as the focus, it can become detrimental to our faith. I agree wholeheartedly. Yet, we are all living in a context where mystery has not only not been the focus, it has been forgotten. Coming from the enlightenment, the modern age focused on the ability to "know", making faith a scientific experiment.
For example...throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries we see the training of ministers/priests/clergy as primarily one of academics. I don't have any problem with academics, but why is it the most important, and primarily the sole makeup of clergy training? In contrast, in the first few centuries to become a clergy member meant you would live with and learn under another clergy, or in a community of clergy. You would "experience" the ministry and it would be the main vehicle for which you came to "know" God's call in your life. Why the shift? What happened? I believe the enlightenment, and the raising of the human intellect had a profound effect.
In the first few centuries there was no underlying belief that the most important thing was head knowledge, for I believe they understood that our head knowledge was limited. They understood the mystery of the faith. That one might come closer to feeling the care of God while caring for the needy, rather than studying a book about his care.
This is why the Eucharist is becoming so important to me. I believe that there is something I learn/receive from God in the Eucharist that I can not explain with my brain. I am submitting myself to an act that makes no "logical" sense because I am humbly admitting that I can't understand God, he understands me. And through this action of recognized limitations, I come to know him better.
Am I making any sense here? Or am I way off?
I am stuck on the Mystery...
I am stuck on the mystery of the faith. Not systematic theology, or doctrine, or dogma, but the mystery. What I don't know, and what we will never know.
It could very easily be thought now that I am a deconstructionist; that I take all formal doctrines of the church, and in good postmodern style, deconstruct them so that there is nothing to "know" for sure,(which is a question in and of itself, "what does it mean to "know" something?") and all we are left with is uncertainty. But this is not true. I believe there are things that we can "know" with certainty. However, I also understand our inability to "know" other things. And maybe I am beginning to realize that our inability to "know" is larger than our ability to "know". This is where mystery comes in. Yet, we are not certain about mystery, because it is so "mysterious". And we like to know stuff.
I am picturing the people of Israel at the bottom of the mountain. Moses has been gone for some time now, and there they are, in the wilderness, wondering and wandering. Is it any surprise they asked Aaron to give them something to "know" for certain? Isn't that what they were really asking. I wonder if we would have been any different? We would have asked for Aaron to please give us a sermon on the tenants of faith that we are to follow, which would have been followed by a formal committee to edit this doctrine, as well as add to it, and then it would have been put into some sort of list of membership requirements so as to be able to "know" what it meant to be a part of the group, and a follower of God. It wouldn't have been golden, but it still would have been an idle. But we would have felt more secure, for we had something to "know" for certain; something to hold on to; something void of mystery.
But where is the faith when it is all explained? Where is the humility when we have it all figured out? Where is the dependence on God when we colored his picture in our theology books?
There I go again, sounding like a deconstructionist. I am not. As I write this, I have a shelf full of theology books behind me. I am a pastor of a church with membership requirements. And, I went to seminary to "know" as much stuff as I can. I am not against learning and knowing. I am just beginning to celebrate what I will never know. The Mystery of an Amazing and Unexplainable God.
It could very easily be thought now that I am a deconstructionist; that I take all formal doctrines of the church, and in good postmodern style, deconstruct them so that there is nothing to "know" for sure,(which is a question in and of itself, "what does it mean to "know" something?") and all we are left with is uncertainty. But this is not true. I believe there are things that we can "know" with certainty. However, I also understand our inability to "know" other things. And maybe I am beginning to realize that our inability to "know" is larger than our ability to "know". This is where mystery comes in. Yet, we are not certain about mystery, because it is so "mysterious". And we like to know stuff.
I am picturing the people of Israel at the bottom of the mountain. Moses has been gone for some time now, and there they are, in the wilderness, wondering and wandering. Is it any surprise they asked Aaron to give them something to "know" for certain? Isn't that what they were really asking. I wonder if we would have been any different? We would have asked for Aaron to please give us a sermon on the tenants of faith that we are to follow, which would have been followed by a formal committee to edit this doctrine, as well as add to it, and then it would have been put into some sort of list of membership requirements so as to be able to "know" what it meant to be a part of the group, and a follower of God. It wouldn't have been golden, but it still would have been an idle. But we would have felt more secure, for we had something to "know" for certain; something to hold on to; something void of mystery.
But where is the faith when it is all explained? Where is the humility when we have it all figured out? Where is the dependence on God when we colored his picture in our theology books?
There I go again, sounding like a deconstructionist. I am not. As I write this, I have a shelf full of theology books behind me. I am a pastor of a church with membership requirements. And, I went to seminary to "know" as much stuff as I can. I am not against learning and knowing. I am just beginning to celebrate what I will never know. The Mystery of an Amazing and Unexplainable God.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
I have been thinking about the mystery of the faith lately. As most of our churches are still living in a hangover from the enlightenment, we are still enamored with what we can "explain", "categorize", or "systematize". Yet we don't embrace mystery. Why is this? Why do we feel uncomfortable when we don't know why? I think we need to celebrate mystery more. What did Paul say, "We see now through a glass faintly"?
Friday, July 15, 2005
Rearranging
I decided to pick a new Blog template. Blogger only gives you so many to choose from, so I wasn't terribly pleased with my choice, but it is better than the others I guess. I switched not because I didn't like the other, but this one is easier to add links to other blogs and websites. And sometimes you just need change.
I am one of those people who am always looking for the "new", "better", and "rearranged". I am fascinated by those that are out on the edge, flirting with radical. Sometimes this is to my own detriment for everything "edgy" and "new" is not good. Lately, God is showing me the blessing of the historic. Christianity is historic. Like a good Wesleyan, I know the Wesleyan quadrilateral, or the four foundations for our Christian faith, and one of them is tradition. We stand on the shoulders of those that came before us, and their lessons teach us what it means to be a follower of Jesus.
Unfortunately, many of us have a mistaken view of time. We believe that as time "progresses", everything else "progresses" or gets better. Of course our technology has increase, as well as our economies, but this for the most part is a mistake. King Solomon said, "there is nothing new under the sun", and yet many of us believe that we are going through a time when everything is "fresh" and "new" and there is nothing the past can teach us. Of course, this is fictional, and I am beginning to reconnect with the historic. Don't know where I am going with all of this, just letting the brain guide the keys until they have reached their destination. End of post.
I am one of those people who am always looking for the "new", "better", and "rearranged". I am fascinated by those that are out on the edge, flirting with radical. Sometimes this is to my own detriment for everything "edgy" and "new" is not good. Lately, God is showing me the blessing of the historic. Christianity is historic. Like a good Wesleyan, I know the Wesleyan quadrilateral, or the four foundations for our Christian faith, and one of them is tradition. We stand on the shoulders of those that came before us, and their lessons teach us what it means to be a follower of Jesus.
Unfortunately, many of us have a mistaken view of time. We believe that as time "progresses", everything else "progresses" or gets better. Of course our technology has increase, as well as our economies, but this for the most part is a mistake. King Solomon said, "there is nothing new under the sun", and yet many of us believe that we are going through a time when everything is "fresh" and "new" and there is nothing the past can teach us. Of course, this is fictional, and I am beginning to reconnect with the historic. Don't know where I am going with all of this, just letting the brain guide the keys until they have reached their destination. End of post.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
The Image Behind the Cover
This is the introduction to my sermon for Sunday on Romans 8:1-4. It is a work in progress but I felt for some reason I needed to post this. This not the whole sermon, so there is no resolution. I guess you will have to show up and here the rest to know the resolution. :)
I often wonder what it would have been like after taking a bite of that fruit. Standing there naked, without clothes, and suddenly your heart is flooded with things that are new feelings to you. First shame hits you. It might be the shame you are feeling from the sudden realization that you had allowed yourself to be tricked. You knew what God had said, to not eat from the tree, but yet there you are standing with a mouth full of fruit, juice dripping down the sides of your mouth and you are beginning to be overcome with the grief that comes from realizing something beautiful is dying.
The bible says that Adam and Eve’s eyes were opened. What were they opened to? Even though God had not yet spelled out the curse of sin that would be the result of their actions, I wonder if they knew deep down the horrible changes that would be made due to their sin. They immediately recognized that they were naked, a fact that had no reason to bother them before, but now, insecurity swelled within them. Yes they were created in God’s image but now the presence of sin began to twist, deform, and pervert their view of themselves, so much so that they sought to cover themselves with leaves.
I wonder what they were truly covering. Were they covering their bodies because they didn’t like to see themselves naked, or they didn’t want anyone else to see them naked? Were they covering their actions, hoping to hide the fact that they were sinful people who disobeyed God’s will for them? I find it interesting that God hadn’t already found coverings for them, but instead he had allowed and apparently desired for them to be naked. I believe he did this because he saw what he had created was good and was in his image. But now, with the presence of sin, disobedience, humanity begins to see themselves as in need of covering. This is the beginning of condemnation, for in the actions of Adam and Eve, they brought upon themselves the condemning reality of disobedience. And because of this they took cover.
We know what this is like, for ever since we humans have been taking cover. When we see ourselves we see reason to hide, or cover who we truly are. We know better than most the intricacies and depths of our hearts. We see the selfishness that fuels the motor of our motives, working for ourselves and no one else. We see the thoughts that run through our heads, whether they be lustful, dishonest, or hateful, and in the face of these we feel the need to cover them. We know what it means to take cover, for we know what it means to feel condemned by our own sin.
I often wonder what it would have been like after taking a bite of that fruit. Standing there naked, without clothes, and suddenly your heart is flooded with things that are new feelings to you. First shame hits you. It might be the shame you are feeling from the sudden realization that you had allowed yourself to be tricked. You knew what God had said, to not eat from the tree, but yet there you are standing with a mouth full of fruit, juice dripping down the sides of your mouth and you are beginning to be overcome with the grief that comes from realizing something beautiful is dying.
The bible says that Adam and Eve’s eyes were opened. What were they opened to? Even though God had not yet spelled out the curse of sin that would be the result of their actions, I wonder if they knew deep down the horrible changes that would be made due to their sin. They immediately recognized that they were naked, a fact that had no reason to bother them before, but now, insecurity swelled within them. Yes they were created in God’s image but now the presence of sin began to twist, deform, and pervert their view of themselves, so much so that they sought to cover themselves with leaves.
I wonder what they were truly covering. Were they covering their bodies because they didn’t like to see themselves naked, or they didn’t want anyone else to see them naked? Were they covering their actions, hoping to hide the fact that they were sinful people who disobeyed God’s will for them? I find it interesting that God hadn’t already found coverings for them, but instead he had allowed and apparently desired for them to be naked. I believe he did this because he saw what he had created was good and was in his image. But now, with the presence of sin, disobedience, humanity begins to see themselves as in need of covering. This is the beginning of condemnation, for in the actions of Adam and Eve, they brought upon themselves the condemning reality of disobedience. And because of this they took cover.
We know what this is like, for ever since we humans have been taking cover. When we see ourselves we see reason to hide, or cover who we truly are. We know better than most the intricacies and depths of our hearts. We see the selfishness that fuels the motor of our motives, working for ourselves and no one else. We see the thoughts that run through our heads, whether they be lustful, dishonest, or hateful, and in the face of these we feel the need to cover them. We know what it means to take cover, for we know what it means to feel condemned by our own sin.
Weights, Cocoons, and struggles.
I just started working out today. I married a couple in our church and rather than paying me money he offered Tif and I a lifetime membership to the health club that he owns. It was very generous of him and we took him up on it. Of course this means that I had to use it. I have horrible will power when it comes to working out. I think because of the "work" in the word "workout". It is alot of work. You are in pain most of the time, and yet it is good for you. You do bicep curls and by the 4th one your arm feels like it is on fire, yet it is good for you. You do the stair master and ask yourself "how quick can I get off of this thing without the people around me thinking I am a wimp?" And yet, it too is good for you. I hope I start to become that one type of person, you know, that actually means it when they say, "working out is the best part of my day, if I don't do it, I feel horrible". I respect those people. I am not one of them.
I was watching a show last night, (on the one channel we get with rabbit ears) called "lost". It is about a plane that crashes and strands a group of people on an island in the middle of nowhere. This episode featured a character that was a drug addict and was detoxing. His friend had his drugs and would not give them to him unless he asked him three times. He was trying to build this guys character by making it attainable, but hard to say no. He used an illustration of a moth in a cocoon to encourage this guy. He said, "see this cocoon, it is a moth's cocoon. It is about to hatch, you can see the little hole at the top." He said, "I could take my knife and help this moth out by cutting a bigger hole so that he could get our right now. But you know what would happen? He would be too weak to survive or fly as he should. You see, the turmoil and struggle that the moth goes through in getting through the tough cocoon is what makes him strong. On the other side of the cocoon he is what he was intended to be."
I guess struggles are like working out and cocoons, they are good for us. That doesn't make me like them anymore. I wonder if the moth is continually cussing the cocoon while he is trying to get out? Or I wonder if he has thoughts of giving up, and not working on the hole today? Jesus' brother James in the first chapter of his letter said that we should rejoice in our sufferings. I guess James knew about working out and cocoons too.
I was watching a show last night, (on the one channel we get with rabbit ears) called "lost". It is about a plane that crashes and strands a group of people on an island in the middle of nowhere. This episode featured a character that was a drug addict and was detoxing. His friend had his drugs and would not give them to him unless he asked him three times. He was trying to build this guys character by making it attainable, but hard to say no. He used an illustration of a moth in a cocoon to encourage this guy. He said, "see this cocoon, it is a moth's cocoon. It is about to hatch, you can see the little hole at the top." He said, "I could take my knife and help this moth out by cutting a bigger hole so that he could get our right now. But you know what would happen? He would be too weak to survive or fly as he should. You see, the turmoil and struggle that the moth goes through in getting through the tough cocoon is what makes him strong. On the other side of the cocoon he is what he was intended to be."
I guess struggles are like working out and cocoons, they are good for us. That doesn't make me like them anymore. I wonder if the moth is continually cussing the cocoon while he is trying to get out? Or I wonder if he has thoughts of giving up, and not working on the hole today? Jesus' brother James in the first chapter of his letter said that we should rejoice in our sufferings. I guess James knew about working out and cocoons too.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
The 10 Commandments and life.
I am sitting in my office, the rain is pouring down outside my windows. I am sleepy. I always get sleepy this time of day. I think it is because I don't exercise and my body is out of shape. Or, it could all the junk I eat. Anyways, the rain, combined with Amos Lee's serenades flowing from my stereo, are making me drowsy. I will snap out of it.
I have been waist deep in the 10 Commandments today. In our Wednesday night bible studies, called Solomon's Porch, we are going through a class called "Introduction to the Old Testament"(unfortunately named by the way; it should be called the Hebrew Bible). I love teaching. I get a rush from it. It definitely fits within my gifting.
I stop now not to talk about the historical or theological makeup of the 10 commandments, but of our recent public debate over their place in the public courthouses of our country. I am not your normal conservative evangelical; I am not up in arms about the statues of these commandments not being allowed to be in the courthouses. What good does a statue do? I have no problem with it being taken out, and as a matter of fact, I think it might be a good thing.
I know, I know, you think I am crazy. Here I am a pastor, and I am saying that the 10 commandments shouldn't be in the courthouse. Well, let me explain. First, I think we are getting the cart before the horse. We as Christians have fought tooth and nail to keep these granite morality stones in place, when if we would be half as passionate about living out the divine morality shown within the 10C we would not be worried about whether the statues were in the courthouses and public places. I ask you, what is more transformative? A statue in a public place for all to see and read the 10C, or, a group of people dedicated to living out the purpose of the 10C and its author in the world?
Also, why do we expect to hold those that don't know Jesus to the 10C ? In placing the statues in these public places, we are in a sense stating that this is what we as a country are all about. Is this true? Of course not. Commandment no. 1 "Do not worship any other gods besides me". This nation was built on the freedom of religion, meaning that no one can be persecuted for their religious observances. This is the reason for the separation of church and state, (which I am in favor of by the way), to protect religious freedom. A climate of religious freedom is what makes this country special, and we need it. For if one religion, including Christianity, were in power, our government would be corrupt, intolerant, and cruel to others. Don't believe me? Check into history. Every time the church had a major role in governing or government, we had such events as "the crusades", or "the Spanish inquisition". We need to allow people to freely choose God. That is what he did, he gave us free will, and the context of freedom to freely choose him, or not. Without that, there is no love. We should not be worried about legislating worship of God, but truly worshipping God with our lives and pointing others to him, and they will freely choose him.
I am pro 10C. However, if we were more focused on living these out in this country we would have a larger impact.
I know this is going to be controversial, but at least I am not sleepy anymore.
I have been waist deep in the 10 Commandments today. In our Wednesday night bible studies, called Solomon's Porch, we are going through a class called "Introduction to the Old Testament"(unfortunately named by the way; it should be called the Hebrew Bible). I love teaching. I get a rush from it. It definitely fits within my gifting.
I stop now not to talk about the historical or theological makeup of the 10 commandments, but of our recent public debate over their place in the public courthouses of our country. I am not your normal conservative evangelical; I am not up in arms about the statues of these commandments not being allowed to be in the courthouses. What good does a statue do? I have no problem with it being taken out, and as a matter of fact, I think it might be a good thing.
I know, I know, you think I am crazy. Here I am a pastor, and I am saying that the 10 commandments shouldn't be in the courthouse. Well, let me explain. First, I think we are getting the cart before the horse. We as Christians have fought tooth and nail to keep these granite morality stones in place, when if we would be half as passionate about living out the divine morality shown within the 10C we would not be worried about whether the statues were in the courthouses and public places. I ask you, what is more transformative? A statue in a public place for all to see and read the 10C, or, a group of people dedicated to living out the purpose of the 10C and its author in the world?
Also, why do we expect to hold those that don't know Jesus to the 10C ? In placing the statues in these public places, we are in a sense stating that this is what we as a country are all about. Is this true? Of course not. Commandment no. 1 "Do not worship any other gods besides me". This nation was built on the freedom of religion, meaning that no one can be persecuted for their religious observances. This is the reason for the separation of church and state, (which I am in favor of by the way), to protect religious freedom. A climate of religious freedom is what makes this country special, and we need it. For if one religion, including Christianity, were in power, our government would be corrupt, intolerant, and cruel to others. Don't believe me? Check into history. Every time the church had a major role in governing or government, we had such events as "the crusades", or "the Spanish inquisition". We need to allow people to freely choose God. That is what he did, he gave us free will, and the context of freedom to freely choose him, or not. Without that, there is no love. We should not be worried about legislating worship of God, but truly worshipping God with our lives and pointing others to him, and they will freely choose him.
I am pro 10C. However, if we were more focused on living these out in this country we would have a larger impact.
I know this is going to be controversial, but at least I am not sleepy anymore.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
The ONE Campaign
The G8 summitt was a success. Thanks to all who joined with the ONE campaign to give a unified voice for ending poverty in Africa. I have posted a note from Bono, lead singer of U2, and coordinator for the ONE Campaign, on the success of the G8 summitt.
BONO, GELDOF REACTION TO G8 AFRICA COMMUNIQUE
Reaction from Bono, lead singer of U2 and co-founder of DATA
(Debt AIDS Trade Africa):
"A mountain has been climbed only to reveal high peaks north of us. But for this moment, let's stop and look back at just how far we've come. The world around us has changed. What does $50 billion mean to the poorest of the poor, $25 billion of which is going to Africa? As examples, it means the financing is in place to halve deaths from malaria by 2010. Six hundred thousand people will be alive to remember this G8 in Gleneagles who would have lost their lives to a mosquito bite. Three thousand Africans -- mostly children -- die every day from malaria. Every country who delivers a credible plan to put their children in school will have the money to do so. If the words are followed through, 9 million people across the globe will have access to lifesaving AIDS drugs, which brings us to the most important lesson learnt over the past weeks. The world spoke, and the politicians listened. Now, if the world keeps an eye out, they will keep their promises. It is down to the hundreds of thousands -- indeed millions -- who have assembled on this issue to make sure they don't just sign the cheque, but that they cash it. If an Irish rock star can quote Churchill, this is
not the end of extreme poverty, but it is the beginning of the end."
On the US:
"We always want more on the numbers but there's no questioning the man's commitment to Africa. His money on malaria has been matched leaving this President in the enviable position of leading the charge against the world's most wanted killer diseases--HIV and malaria. I wish he would have matched the European challenge on overall assistance. He has a great idea for every country with a credible plan to put African children in school but by today's numbers, the Europeans are mostly paying for it."
BONO, GELDOF REACTION TO G8 AFRICA COMMUNIQUE
Reaction from Bono, lead singer of U2 and co-founder of DATA
(Debt AIDS Trade Africa):
"A mountain has been climbed only to reveal high peaks north of us. But for this moment, let's stop and look back at just how far we've come. The world around us has changed. What does $50 billion mean to the poorest of the poor, $25 billion of which is going to Africa? As examples, it means the financing is in place to halve deaths from malaria by 2010. Six hundred thousand people will be alive to remember this G8 in Gleneagles who would have lost their lives to a mosquito bite. Three thousand Africans -- mostly children -- die every day from malaria. Every country who delivers a credible plan to put their children in school will have the money to do so. If the words are followed through, 9 million people across the globe will have access to lifesaving AIDS drugs, which brings us to the most important lesson learnt over the past weeks. The world spoke, and the politicians listened. Now, if the world keeps an eye out, they will keep their promises. It is down to the hundreds of thousands -- indeed millions -- who have assembled on this issue to make sure they don't just sign the cheque, but that they cash it. If an Irish rock star can quote Churchill, this is
not the end of extreme poverty, but it is the beginning of the end."
On the US:
"We always want more on the numbers but there's no questioning the man's commitment to Africa. His money on malaria has been matched leaving this President in the enviable position of leading the charge against the world's most wanted killer diseases--HIV and malaria. I wish he would have matched the European challenge on overall assistance. He has a great idea for every country with a credible plan to put African children in school but by today's numbers, the Europeans are mostly paying for it."
Self Evaluation
We had a board meeting last night, and for me it was tough. In our denomination a church is run essentially by a board of lay people, elected by their fellow church members, that meet once a month. As pastor, I chair this committee, but I don't have much say over the decisions. Yes, of course, I do have the ability to give my opinion as the pastor, but other than that, when it comes to a vote, I am out of it. We have a good board. They are people that are passionate about their church, and they are not scared to make suggestions, notice problems, and take action.
For the last few months our board has recognized the lack of something in our church, and it is evident. Our tithing is at an all time low. We are lacking in volunteers to do the ministry. And there is a general low morale. As a pastor, when these things are brought up, I immediately take responsibility. For one, it has been mentioned in the meetings that this church had been pumped up for three years (before I came), and now we have nothing to be excited for. I try not to take things too personal, but that caught me square. What if that is right? What if morale and excitement comes back to me? I think it does; which sends me into self evaluation mode.
Evaluating yourself stinks. It stinks because you usually don't like what you see when you begin to evaluate yourself. Of course, we all do it on some level all the time, for if we didn't we would be a mess. But from time to time there comes a need for a pause, and a deep look into your performance, skills, and leadership qualities. You have to ask the questions that you don't want to hear the answers to. Have I been doing my job to the best of my abilities? Have I put all my effort in to the tasks of my job? And for a pastor, (an extremely unigue vocation by the way), there is a whole set of different questions. Have I been a good spiritual leader to this group of people? Have I prayed regularly for the church and for the people? Have I visited, and cared for the people? Has my leadership helped our hindered the church and its vision? Am I the leader for this community of faith?
These are tough questions. But they have to be asked. My tendency is to just keep going, because I don't want the discomfort of answering them. But if I am going to grow to be the pastor I need to be, and if this church is going to be the church it needs to be, we need self evaluation.
God, help me to not get in the way of your work in my life and in the life of this church. I pray that you would help me to lean on you and your spirit as I ask tough questions and seek honest answers. Help Mt. Moriah to pray for their future as well. And help us to follow your perfect will in all that we do. Amen.
For the last few months our board has recognized the lack of something in our church, and it is evident. Our tithing is at an all time low. We are lacking in volunteers to do the ministry. And there is a general low morale. As a pastor, when these things are brought up, I immediately take responsibility. For one, it has been mentioned in the meetings that this church had been pumped up for three years (before I came), and now we have nothing to be excited for. I try not to take things too personal, but that caught me square. What if that is right? What if morale and excitement comes back to me? I think it does; which sends me into self evaluation mode.
Evaluating yourself stinks. It stinks because you usually don't like what you see when you begin to evaluate yourself. Of course, we all do it on some level all the time, for if we didn't we would be a mess. But from time to time there comes a need for a pause, and a deep look into your performance, skills, and leadership qualities. You have to ask the questions that you don't want to hear the answers to. Have I been doing my job to the best of my abilities? Have I put all my effort in to the tasks of my job? And for a pastor, (an extremely unigue vocation by the way), there is a whole set of different questions. Have I been a good spiritual leader to this group of people? Have I prayed regularly for the church and for the people? Have I visited, and cared for the people? Has my leadership helped our hindered the church and its vision? Am I the leader for this community of faith?
These are tough questions. But they have to be asked. My tendency is to just keep going, because I don't want the discomfort of answering them. But if I am going to grow to be the pastor I need to be, and if this church is going to be the church it needs to be, we need self evaluation.
God, help me to not get in the way of your work in my life and in the life of this church. I pray that you would help me to lean on you and your spirit as I ask tough questions and seek honest answers. Help Mt. Moriah to pray for their future as well. And help us to follow your perfect will in all that we do. Amen.
Monday, July 11, 2005
monday, monday
It is monday morning and my day off. My Mondays are special because I get to spend the day with my son Cole. He is very cool, and growing like a weed. He is about 7 months old, and is learning new stuff every day.
I am feeling kind of weird lately, ever since the bombings in London. I know that these bombings were not here, but it is a reminder of our own vulnerability. Yesterday, as I was shaking hands at the front door of the churhc after service, one of the church members told me an amazing story related to the bombings. His daughter is in school at Oxford and was to take a bus into the city that morning, but for some reason the bus's schedule got messed up and was late and they missed it. God's hand is evident in the world.
He also made the comment, that we just don't know what it is like to live in a place that suffers bombings so frequently. He was referring to London in the 70's and 80's with all of the IRA bombings, but he is right, we don't know what it is like.
We don't understand violence like they do in Sierra Leone, or Rwanda. We don't understand poverty like they do in Haiti. We don't understand persecution of Christians like they do in China and Egypt. Sometimes I think we are blessed, but other times I think we are ignorant. What if we understood it better, would we do more with the blessings of resources we have to help in these different areas?
Well, my son is getting restless in his stroller, better go.
God, help me and the community of believers I am a part of to realize the responsibility we have to care for the hurting, reach out to the outcasts, and love the unloveable. Help us to see how we are selfish with our blessings, and how we can be used to bless others.
I am feeling kind of weird lately, ever since the bombings in London. I know that these bombings were not here, but it is a reminder of our own vulnerability. Yesterday, as I was shaking hands at the front door of the churhc after service, one of the church members told me an amazing story related to the bombings. His daughter is in school at Oxford and was to take a bus into the city that morning, but for some reason the bus's schedule got messed up and was late and they missed it. God's hand is evident in the world.
He also made the comment, that we just don't know what it is like to live in a place that suffers bombings so frequently. He was referring to London in the 70's and 80's with all of the IRA bombings, but he is right, we don't know what it is like.
We don't understand violence like they do in Sierra Leone, or Rwanda. We don't understand poverty like they do in Haiti. We don't understand persecution of Christians like they do in China and Egypt. Sometimes I think we are blessed, but other times I think we are ignorant. What if we understood it better, would we do more with the blessings of resources we have to help in these different areas?
Well, my son is getting restless in his stroller, better go.
God, help me and the community of believers I am a part of to realize the responsibility we have to care for the hurting, reach out to the outcasts, and love the unloveable. Help us to see how we are selfish with our blessings, and how we can be used to bless others.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
the human condition
I am preaching a message on sin tomorrow. I don't know about other ministers, but I don't like to preach about sin. As a matter of fact, I don't like the subject altogether. But the reality is, we can't get away from it. There have many in our world who just choose to ignore it, believing that if they close their eyes to sin it will go away. They are the ones that are usually surprised by its pain, wishing then they had their eyes open. Then there are those who like to say it doesn't exist all together. Your OK, I'm Ok, no one does anything wrong, for if you do something that is wrong for me, it doesn't mean it is wrong, it just means that it is wrong for me. Well, I am quite amazed to believe that anyone can still hold to this idea, coming out of a century that gave us 2 world wars, and the evils of Hitler and Stalin. There is such a thing as wrong, and 9/11 reminded us of this again. Now we just have to see in our life where we are wrong.
Then there are those that never see wrong in themselves, but always in others. I feel as a nation we have a problem with this. If you listen to the American Conservative Radio Waves, (no particular host in mind), you will never hear the mistakes of this nation, only that we are the "greatest nation on earth". The reality is, we have been a part of many wrong decsions, and have made many disasterous mistakes.
Don't know where I am going with this, just rambling I guess. The good news, which I am preaching tomorrow, is that there is a remedy for sin in our personal life. ANd a bunch of personal lives together make a community which can transform the world. Thats God's plan anyways.
Then there are those that never see wrong in themselves, but always in others. I feel as a nation we have a problem with this. If you listen to the American Conservative Radio Waves, (no particular host in mind), you will never hear the mistakes of this nation, only that we are the "greatest nation on earth". The reality is, we have been a part of many wrong decsions, and have made many disasterous mistakes.
Don't know where I am going with this, just rambling I guess. The good news, which I am preaching tomorrow, is that there is a remedy for sin in our personal life. ANd a bunch of personal lives together make a community which can transform the world. Thats God's plan anyways.
Friday, July 08, 2005
War and the Kingdom of God
Ok I have been a bad blogger lately. I admit it, and that is the the first step to recovery.
On behalf of all of my blog readers (the two of you), I am sorry, and I will promise to do better.
Pheew, I feel better now that is off my shoulders.
Live 8 was just the other day. I didn't get to see any of it. We don't have cable anymore, so I missed it. But, I did hear U2 and Paul McCartney sing "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" on Rhapsody. AWESOME! I hear that the concerts were cool as well. I wish I could have seen the lead singer of the Verve play with Coldplay, that would have been cool.
Anywhoo.
Not long ago I wrote a post called, "I don't know stuff" or something like that. Within that post I mentioned I am not sure if war is ever the right answer. Since then I have had a few friends and readers of my BLOG want me to talk more about what I mean, or at least what I am thinking. Donald Miller states in his book "Searching for God Knows What", that if you were to take a timeline of all of history, and place a red dot on every century that a major war occured somewhere on earth, you would not be able to find a spot where there wasn't a dot. War is something that sadly enough has been prevelant for many of years.
And even more sad is that most of those red dots were justified by its participants as being divinely ordained. From the crusades, to spanish inquisition, from the civil war to Operation Freedom, we like to have God on our side when we choose to fight. I wonder though, how many times God actually ordained a war.
I know there will be people who answer this question by pointing us back to the Old Testament. I know that God told the people of Israel to go to war at times, and that he told them to totally anihilate the Canaanites. (Women, children, and all...which always kind of bothered me to tell you the truth). I can hear you now, "SEE, God isn't against war, he ordains it at times." Well, before you go any further, let me say a few things. First, those stories all come from a time period when Israel was a theocracy. That means that they were a state run by God. From the time of the nation of Israel's inception to the time his spirit left the Temple in Ezekiel, they were a nation run by God. (Although they didn't accept that many times). When God told them to go and destroy the people of Canaan and take the land, they were actually ordained to do so. I will never understand the brutality in light of God's goodness, but I trust God and believe that he ordained their actions. As a side, I do believe that the Canaanite destruciton points towards the final judgement of those who reject God. Anyways, they were acting out of direct orders from God, for they were his nation.
There are no more theocracies, and there hasn't been since the people of Israel's disobedience caused God's spirit to leave their presence. Let me say that again. There are no God ordained nations. I know, that is hard for us "American-Conservative-Evangelicals" to handle, for we have bumper stickers that say, "God Bless America", and we hold to "One nation Under God." Many of us believe that we are "God's Nation", bringing freedom and the "American way to the world" in the name of God.
Not long ago I recieved a flyer in the mail from my denomination advertising district camp meeting. As a promotion they are having a singing group open the camp meeting schedule. This singing group added their bio to the information and in it had this statement about what they saw their purpose as. "We are group of who love God, and love our country and travel all around the world, not afraid to let others know." I don't know why, but that bothers me. Why are we travelling all around the world to tell others about America? Why do we so closely relate our relationship with God with being an American. Did you know that for a middle easterner, the words American and Christian are the same? We should be doing things to help people see that you can be citizen of any nation and be a follower of Jesus. That to be a follower of Jesus superseded any national citizenship.
God is no respector of nations, and through Jesus Christ, his revelation and redemption spread from being through one nation (Israel), to being offered to peoples of all nations. God's kingdom has no boundaries and no geographical limitations, and is made up not of "nations under God" but of people who have placed faith in Jesus of Nazareth. We are citizens first of God's kingdom which transcends borders.
I am getting a little of subject here, but it is important to know that our nation is not ordained by God, and run by God. We are no more special in his eyes than any other nation on earth. So we can't hold to the fact that the wars we decide to invent or participate in are God's plan. That is not a valid argument.
With that said comes the question, "Are there any wars that are right, and that we should support?" I don't know. You have our brothers and sisters in the Anabaptist movement that will say no. That war is never in God's will for this world being redeemed by Christ through the church. I still am wrestling with this, and it is very attractive to me. It fits my understanding of God's love and grace.
Then you will have those who like Martin Luther, seperate the present existence into two seperate spheres. The Sphere of the world and the Sphere of the Kingdom of God. Luther went so far to say that these spheres don't connect and should be kept seperate and he ordained wars that were totally unjust. I have come to see that this is mindset of many of our evangelical christians today, whether they want to believe it or not. They might in their morning devotions read the sermon on the mount, hearing Jesus talk about love of enemies, and at lunch time discuss the need for more troops in Iraq. Seperation is there.
There are also those who consider the idea of Just war. This theory proposes that war is just and needed at times, but only when the effects will be worse if war is not entered into, than if it is. This is the theory held to be by propopents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I have a hard time with. I don't believe that the killing of innocent women and children at anytime is just. However, there is a case for WWII being just. When looking at what Hitler and the third reich did, it is hard for me to say that we didn't need to intervene. So, I have a reluctant connection with this theory.
In the end I believe I want to be a pacifist, but don't know if it is possible. If someone was hurting my wife or child, I would defend them and hurt back. Most would do the same. So is true pacifism atainable. I don't know. I do know that I hate war. And the present war we are in is a good example of a war that is not just.
This didn't clear anything up, I know, but maybe it spurred a conversation among some of you.
I am open to your thoughts, and actually look forward to them.
On behalf of all of my blog readers (the two of you), I am sorry, and I will promise to do better.
Pheew, I feel better now that is off my shoulders.
Live 8 was just the other day. I didn't get to see any of it. We don't have cable anymore, so I missed it. But, I did hear U2 and Paul McCartney sing "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" on Rhapsody. AWESOME! I hear that the concerts were cool as well. I wish I could have seen the lead singer of the Verve play with Coldplay, that would have been cool.
Anywhoo.
Not long ago I wrote a post called, "I don't know stuff" or something like that. Within that post I mentioned I am not sure if war is ever the right answer. Since then I have had a few friends and readers of my BLOG want me to talk more about what I mean, or at least what I am thinking. Donald Miller states in his book "Searching for God Knows What", that if you were to take a timeline of all of history, and place a red dot on every century that a major war occured somewhere on earth, you would not be able to find a spot where there wasn't a dot. War is something that sadly enough has been prevelant for many of years.
And even more sad is that most of those red dots were justified by its participants as being divinely ordained. From the crusades, to spanish inquisition, from the civil war to Operation Freedom, we like to have God on our side when we choose to fight. I wonder though, how many times God actually ordained a war.
I know there will be people who answer this question by pointing us back to the Old Testament. I know that God told the people of Israel to go to war at times, and that he told them to totally anihilate the Canaanites. (Women, children, and all...which always kind of bothered me to tell you the truth). I can hear you now, "SEE, God isn't against war, he ordains it at times." Well, before you go any further, let me say a few things. First, those stories all come from a time period when Israel was a theocracy. That means that they were a state run by God. From the time of the nation of Israel's inception to the time his spirit left the Temple in Ezekiel, they were a nation run by God. (Although they didn't accept that many times). When God told them to go and destroy the people of Canaan and take the land, they were actually ordained to do so. I will never understand the brutality in light of God's goodness, but I trust God and believe that he ordained their actions. As a side, I do believe that the Canaanite destruciton points towards the final judgement of those who reject God. Anyways, they were acting out of direct orders from God, for they were his nation.
There are no more theocracies, and there hasn't been since the people of Israel's disobedience caused God's spirit to leave their presence. Let me say that again. There are no God ordained nations. I know, that is hard for us "American-Conservative-Evangelicals" to handle, for we have bumper stickers that say, "God Bless America", and we hold to "One nation Under God." Many of us believe that we are "God's Nation", bringing freedom and the "American way to the world" in the name of God.
Not long ago I recieved a flyer in the mail from my denomination advertising district camp meeting. As a promotion they are having a singing group open the camp meeting schedule. This singing group added their bio to the information and in it had this statement about what they saw their purpose as. "We are group of who love God, and love our country and travel all around the world, not afraid to let others know." I don't know why, but that bothers me. Why are we travelling all around the world to tell others about America? Why do we so closely relate our relationship with God with being an American. Did you know that for a middle easterner, the words American and Christian are the same? We should be doing things to help people see that you can be citizen of any nation and be a follower of Jesus. That to be a follower of Jesus superseded any national citizenship.
God is no respector of nations, and through Jesus Christ, his revelation and redemption spread from being through one nation (Israel), to being offered to peoples of all nations. God's kingdom has no boundaries and no geographical limitations, and is made up not of "nations under God" but of people who have placed faith in Jesus of Nazareth. We are citizens first of God's kingdom which transcends borders.
I am getting a little of subject here, but it is important to know that our nation is not ordained by God, and run by God. We are no more special in his eyes than any other nation on earth. So we can't hold to the fact that the wars we decide to invent or participate in are God's plan. That is not a valid argument.
With that said comes the question, "Are there any wars that are right, and that we should support?" I don't know. You have our brothers and sisters in the Anabaptist movement that will say no. That war is never in God's will for this world being redeemed by Christ through the church. I still am wrestling with this, and it is very attractive to me. It fits my understanding of God's love and grace.
Then you will have those who like Martin Luther, seperate the present existence into two seperate spheres. The Sphere of the world and the Sphere of the Kingdom of God. Luther went so far to say that these spheres don't connect and should be kept seperate and he ordained wars that were totally unjust. I have come to see that this is mindset of many of our evangelical christians today, whether they want to believe it or not. They might in their morning devotions read the sermon on the mount, hearing Jesus talk about love of enemies, and at lunch time discuss the need for more troops in Iraq. Seperation is there.
There are also those who consider the idea of Just war. This theory proposes that war is just and needed at times, but only when the effects will be worse if war is not entered into, than if it is. This is the theory held to be by propopents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I have a hard time with. I don't believe that the killing of innocent women and children at anytime is just. However, there is a case for WWII being just. When looking at what Hitler and the third reich did, it is hard for me to say that we didn't need to intervene. So, I have a reluctant connection with this theory.
In the end I believe I want to be a pacifist, but don't know if it is possible. If someone was hurting my wife or child, I would defend them and hurt back. Most would do the same. So is true pacifism atainable. I don't know. I do know that I hate war. And the present war we are in is a good example of a war that is not just.
This didn't clear anything up, I know, but maybe it spurred a conversation among some of you.
I am open to your thoughts, and actually look forward to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)