Missing in Sunday School August 26, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Church, Spirituality.Tags: Sunday School
1 comment so far
This morning I taught my Sunday School class like I do almost every week of the year. It’s a wonderful group of people, and I’ve had the privilege to teach the class for more than six years. The average age of the class is probably a little older than me, about 58-60 probably — men and women.
Usually we have about 30 people in our class but sometimes we reach as high as 40 or more. Earlier this year, the church finally moved us into a larger room that was more fitting to our size, and the attendance promptly decreased. We had about 20 this morning, only 12 last week. Some would say it’s just a summer slump, but I wonder.
I know I shouldn’t care how many people I teach, but I do. It’s not, however, just the numbers that bother me. I get the sneaking suspicion that nothing that Scripture is saying is making a difference — that all of us middle-agers are already pretty set in our ways — and even when we learn something new, it doesn’t matter in how we live.
As in most things spiritual, I do not have a firm and easy answer. I will continue on for now, but I do not want to just say that’s the way it is, get used to it. I don’t want to get used to low living; I want to pursue high living, and I don’t mean what the Miller High Life commercials put forth.
System of belief vs. redemptive life July 26, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Emerging church, Postmodern, Scripture, Theology.7 comments
I sent this quote to a family member recently:
Brian McLaren:
“When Christian faith presents itself as a system of belief, postmodern people are often skeptical. But when it presents itself as a redemptive way of life within human history, they see something unique and hopeful.”
He responded with the following:
“Our Christian faith is both a system of beliefs and a way of life. My question for Maclaren is this: Is it not our beliefs that determine how we live and think and act? Postmodern people, including myself at times, tend to believe in all sorts of things that are contrary to the word of God. And at the same time they (we) try to live a “redemptive life” that will hopefully, in the end, outweigh a life of unbelief. Redemptive living cannot be a substitue for a right believing in, and knowing of, God.
“Redemptive living is a necessary result of walking and talking and trusting Jesus and His word.”
And here’s my response:
I think the problem is not “belief,” it’s “system.” Modern, rationalistic man has done something that Christ, a premodern, did not seek to do; modern man sought to systematize belief, to construct a logical system of A+B=C. This systematizing effort actually began much before modernity but Jesus did not do it. He almost completely used story (his own and the one’s he told). Story is a great way to convey truth but it is not a systematized way of conveying truth. When you start to try to organize and systematize you almost invariably change it because you are trying to connect dots that previously were not connected. Not systemization can be helpful because it helps us organize our thinking, but we need to recognize that the act of putting it into a system changes the message.
Regarding your question: “Is it not our beliefs that determine how we live and think and act?” Here’s how I would approach it: Some would say how you live and think and act actually reflect what you believe. That is true in a sense, but I’m reminded of Paul in Romans saying that he did what he did not want to do and didn’t do the things he wanted to. I believe the Fall has produced an inconsistency within men and women that distorts the easy connection between beliefs and actions. Most believers would affirm that believers do in fact still sin. In other words, even though they believe it’s wrong to sin, they (we) still sin. If their actions reflect what they truly believe, then they’re not a Christian because they did not trust Christ in that circumstance. As a result, you cannot be absolute about that. I think you can say that the difference between your beliefs and your actions create a discontinuity in life that causes great spiritual and mental discomfort. Which reminds me of the old quote about not resting until we rest in Thee.
You said postmodern people tend to believe in all sorts of things that are contrary to the Word of God. Of course, that is not isolated to postmodern people; modernists are just as contrary. But the difficulty is the “contrary to the Word of God” part. That is stated as if it is an established fact. The reality is not so simple. Many believing modernists and postmodernists disagree on what the Word of God teaches. For instance, people used to use that very phrase to justify slavery and then racial discrimination. Now, we think that is ridiculous, but those Christians who once believed that thought Scripture was clear in that regard. It’s because they looked at Scripture through a cultural window and found what they wanted to find. That tendency has been there throughout the history of the church, and so I suspect that you and I are susceptible to that same tendency. What seems obvious to us is not so obvious to people of other times, places or cultural perspectives.
Now, we can take Jesus’ words to the bank: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son. …” But we still have to interpret what that means to us today. That may seem easy, but it’s not. The first step is trying to understand what the original Greek words that were written down mean because, as you know, every translation is an interpretation. (Plus there’s another translation that has taken place — Aramaic to Greek — that scholars can only speculate about.) To understand the words requires comparisons to other texts, biblical and non-bibilical, that use the words. Once you have a pretty good grasp of what the words and phrases and sentences mean, then you start having to compare them with the other words of Christ to see how they might work together; then you compare them with other scriptural teachings on the same topic and again try to understand how they relate. Of course, there are seeming contradictions. Well, in fact, there are some genuine contradictions but they are not that critical. In trying to deal with the seeming contradictions you must employ another level of interpretation. And then you look at what other Christians have said through history and how they have interpreted those passages. More interpretation.
So, while it’s easy to say “contrary to the Word of God,” that’s a really fuzzy statement; and well-meaning, “orthodox,” believing experts and spiritual giants through the years have interpreted Scripture differently. While I might say that some things McLaren and other postmodernists might believe appear to be contrary to Scripture, I could say the same thing about any Christian thinker. I am using my interpretation of Scripture to say that.
Of course, this doesn’t even begin to deal with one’s basic approach to Scripture. Everything I just said can be said about people who approach Scripture as God’s unique, authoritative, even inerrant Word of God. If you don’t say any or all of those things then you open yourself to even more possible interpretations.
I don’t think McLaren is saying that redemptive living is a substitute for belief; he’s saying that redemptive living is what attracts others to our Savior. If faith in Christ has changed us, redeemed our lives, then others have hope that it can redeem their lives, as well. As in the early church, what really attracted people to Christ was the fact that believers loved one another and that it showed itself in outward ways.
Short question, long response. Great to hear from you. I pray for you every day because, like Christ, I love you. Blessings.
The challenge of studying Jesus April 7, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Church, Emerging church, Jesus, Scripture, Truth.1 comment so far
Since our understanding of the time of Jesus is growing, then we need to keep an open mind in our interpreting of Scripture. Some of our long-held assumptions may be incorrect. Some things we have thought of as literal may need to be seen as metaphorical.
That’s my paraphrase of a section from the first chapter of N.T. Wright’s The Challenge of Jesus (p. 17). He, of course, would not want to take credit for those exact words and might even question the accuracy of them; but it’s what I think he’s saying. The first chapter is titled “The Challenge of Studying Jesus.” I would like to unpack its meaning a little.
Another paraphrase:
Post-Reformation theology created a new set of dogmas that have been sustained as institutionalized beliefs, and these have created people with interests at stake in maintaining these dogmas. (p. 20)
I’m involved in this exercise of paraphrasing because I believe Wright has a great deal to say to believers today. I put parts of his book into my words in order to try to better internalize it.
Paraphrase again:
When the church stops trying to understand, it begins to slip into idolatry and idealogy. (p. 21)
Why does the church stop trying to understand? Fear, I think; at least that has impacted me. I have, at times, been afraid that my faith would be shaken, that the theological ground would fall out from under me if I explored too much outside the safe havens of my faith group. By the grace of God, I have been able to overcome those fears and explore. My fears have never been realized. Whenever I read outside of my own Christian tradition or outside of Christianity, I find my faith strengthened. Of course, the content of my faith or my theology has changed, but I feel more firmly rooted in the truth. Despite this experience of growth, there is still fear at times.
Another paraphrase:
The Enlightenment created a divide between faith and reason. This is an unnatural divide but it has shaped much of the discussion for 200 years. (p. 21)
I have been aware of this divide but have always thought it unhelpful, probably because I have been a person who valued both faith and reason and the interplay of the two. Apparently, I should be thankful, and I am.
Three more paraphrases:
There are many misunderstandings of Scripture that have been enshrined as church tradition. (p. 27)
And he’s not just talking about Catholic Church traditions. We Protestants have ours, as well.
It takes courage to read the Bible in new ways. (p. 28)
The community of Christ is called to tell the story of Jesus and model it. (p. 32)
Now a quote:
“Do not be afraid of the Quest. It may be part of the means whereby the church in our own day will be granted a new vision, not just of Jesus, but of God.” (p. 32)
Back from Terabithia February 20, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Books, Christianity, Movies, Religion, Salvation, Scripture, Spirituality, Truth.add a comment
The fam and I just arrived home from seeing the movie, “The Bridge to Terabithia”. Very good. My 12-year-old daughter said she liked it but that it was different from the book.
I am not as literate as my daughter at this level of reading, so the movie was my first exposure to the story. I loved one conversation between the primary boy and girl (Jess and Leslie) and and his younger sister (May Belle). The youngest girl said something like you have to believe the Bible or you’ll be damned to hell. The older girl didn’t believe it, and I agree with her. You don’t have to believe in the Bible, you have to believe in Jesus.
Now I know that last sentence is a rather elementery description, but sometimes I just like to keep it really, really simple. Some of you want to expand that last clause into a full-length book, while others of you are a little uncomfortable with such things being said about the Bible, and still others of you are really hung up on that last “have to”.
I leave you in that discomfort and end with a quote from book during that same conversation. (My wife found it for me.)
Leslie, the one who had never been to church, says: “It’s crazy, isn’t it? … You [Jess and May Belle] have to believe it, but you hate it. I don’t have to believe it, and I think it’s beautiful.”
Under a spell February 17, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Scripture.3 comments
“You’re saying we need to approach the Bible more that way. You’re saying we need to flirt with it, romance it–or maybe let its message romance us,” the pastor says in Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian. (p. 57)
I’ve known some people who seem to approach Scripture that way. They love being “with” it. I can’t say that I am one of them. I have not really enjoyed reading the Bible. I have such an insatiable curiosity that I’m always wanting to read something new. I know the old thing about always finding something new in Scripture, but it seldom happens for me.
Now, I think I may know why. I surely do not romance Scripture and let its message romance me. I must try this, if I can.
In McLaren’s book, Neo says to the pastor: “I wonder … what would happen if we approached the text less aggressively but even more energetically and passionately. I wonder what would happen if we honestly listened to the story and put ourselves under its spell, so to speak, not using it to get all of our questions about God answered but instead trusting God to use it to pose questions to us about us.” (pp. 57-58)
Beyond the answer book February 7, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Community, Emerging church, Religion, Scripture.4 comments
“… [W]hen you let go of the Bible as God’s answer book, you get it back as something so much better,” Neo says in Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian. (p. 52)
I suspect this may be the biggest key to evangelical Christians becoming the type of people God created us to be. I will speak for myself. It is hard to jettison the answer book habit.
More McLaren: “When we let it go as a modern answer book, we get to rediscover it for what it really is: an ancient book of incredible spiritual value for us. …” (p. 52) And more, “It’s a book that calls together and helps create a community, a community that is a catalyst for God’s work in the world.” (p. 53)
The difficult thing is that to move beyond the Bible as answer book means that some people in the Answer Book Community will banish you. I think that’s why the broad Missional Community that is developing is so important. I can say that because I’m just now discovering it. Prior to reading on this topic and blogging, I thought I was alone. Boy, was I wrong.
A little jarring. Is it true? January 30, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Emerging church, Holy Spirit, Religion, Salvation, Scripture, Spirituality, Theology.2 comments
“There is need of greater light than the word [Bible] of itself is able to give; for it is not all the promises in Scripture that have … wrought any gracious changes in my soul.” — John Cotton, 17th century
Cotton, a Puritan who was a pastor in early Boston, was emphasizing the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation and sanctification.
The Bible, we often say, has an amazing power to speak to our lives today. I think John Cotton would say that the Holy Spirit has an amazing power to speak to our lives today and that the Spirit often uses Scripture. I think this is correct. And by attributing the real power to the Spirit, we are really attributing it to God.
I think it also is true that we are in need of greater light than the word alone can give. God’s Word is greater than the words on the pages of the book we call the Bible. We all may know that, but we don’t act like it.
Cotton’s theology differed from most of the other ministers in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. It was more centered on the work of the Spirit and on grace, as opposed to law. It is, in short, a scarier way to do faith.
“Without the work of the Spirit, there is no faith,” Cotton said.
(Cotton quotes come from American Jezebel: The Uncommon Life of Anne Hutchinson, by Eve LaPlante.)
Scripture and reason January 15, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Emerging church, Philosophy, Religion, Scripture.1 comment so far
“… [N]othing taught in Scripture would work, could possibly be effective, except on the assumption that those to whom these words are directed over the ages have sufficient rationality to match up Scripture with the actual affiars of life.”
That is Daniel N. Robinson’s paraphrase of what Richard Hooker had to say in his Laws of Ecclesiastical Politie (1593). Robinson references Hooker in The Teaching Company’s Great Course titled American Ideals: Founding a “Republic of Virtue” (lecture 2). To continue the paraphrase:
“A providential God must have equipped us intuitively with sufficient rational power to comprehend our relationship to God, our relationship to each other, what the terms of political and social associations should be, etc. So, what we have Hooker appealing to first is the requirement that Scriptural interpretation not fly in the face of reason itself.” (p. 28)
Hooker was a “devout Christian writer, but he distinguishes between extreme literalism in the matter of Scripture and what a reasonable person’s understanding would be of what Scripture claims and means and requires of us all,” says Robinson, who is on the philosophy faculty of Oxford University.
One more quote from Robinson: Hooker was “trying to remove religion as the grounds of political upheaval, and revolutionary zeal, and one man turned against another.”
I think many of us would like to remove religion as “the ground for one man turned against another.” Religion need not be that way. Bad religion does so, but good religion does not. It is one thing to disagree with someone; it is another to demonize him.
Where’s the authority? January 13, 2007
Posted by Alien Drums in Bible, Christianity, Emerging church, Postmodern, Scripture, Uncategorized.16 comments
“What if the real issue is not the authority of the text … but rather the authority of God? …”
Now Brian McLaren is challenging me, not speaking for me. I have been rather proud of stressing the authority of Scripture as opposed to those who stress its supposed inerrancy. But McLaren’s words didn’t remain a challenge long. The truth was instantly apparent.
Of course, by moving authority away from real words on real paper, belief can and will get more mushy, more pliable. Those who are personally wired to need concrete theological handles to hold onto will find this mushiness untenable. It’s much harder to “win” an argument when one views authority as resting beyond the wholly tangible.
This, my inerrantist friends would argue, is a slippery slope on which there is no solid theological footing, that relativism lies at the foot of that slope. They are probably right about the slippery slope, but what will one slide into — falsehood or truth. History is rife with people “climbing” toward the wrong goal. What if most of the Christian church has been “climbing” away from God instead of toward him.
Or to change the metaphor, what if we’ve been heading along a slope that heads downward instead of upward, that by slipping we will turn around and grab the lifeline that is being thrown to us from on high and behind. Instead of walking away from God down our own slope of comfortable religion we allow God to pull us up to him.
I’m not sure if that metaphor works. I need to think.
I end with a quote from the rest of McLaren’s paragraph in A New Kind of Christian, with Neo speaking.
“What if the issue isn’t a book that we can misinterpret with amazing creativity but rather the will of God, the intent of God, the desire of God, the wisdom of God–maybe we could say the kingdom of God?” (p. 51)