jump to navigation

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.

Less theology, more love April 24, 2007

Posted by Alien Drums in Christianity, Islam, Jesus, Theology, Truth.
5 comments

Love God and love people.

Jesus said it. Others said it. It seems to be the core truth. Maybe this is what Plato was searching for.

I’ve been reading about Islam. My knowledge is still very basic, but I see a few things. Mohammed started out in a good direction, pretty consistent with Judaism and Christianity, pretty consistent with loving God and loving people. But along the way he became more political and then more militaristic and then he started making exceptions to his earlier teachings and he began to justify violence.

Christians have done it, too. The Crusades are a great and terrible example. Christianity started out great, pretty consistent with Jesus; but along the way he became more political and then more militaristic and then started making exceptions to Jesus’ earlier teachings and began to justify violence.

True religion for me is summed up in Christ, and His teaching is summed up in loving God and loving people. Hate, killing and hurting in the name of a good cause perverts the cause, whether it be Christianity, Islam or any ideology. It seems we may need less theology and more loving.

Putting out the light February 12, 2007

Posted by Alien Drums in Christianity, Emerging church, Religion, Spirituality, Theology, Truth.
add a comment

“John Cotton provoked bitterness, for he saw the light, considered the effect, and then deliberately helped to put it out.” (Edith Curtis, quoted in Eve LaPlante’s American Jezebel, p. 138)

Curtis is talking about John Cotton’s failure in 1637 Massachusetts Bay Colony. The minister’s theology had given rise to the unorthodox ministry of Anne Hutchinson, yet as the political and ecclesiastical power built against her, Cotton backed away. He compromised in order to keep his pulpit, while Hutchinson stuck to her theological guns and was banished from the colony.

I don’t particularly like the theology of either Cotton or Hutchinson, but I have more respect for Hutchinson because she remained true to her beliefs despite the consequences. More importantly for me personally, I don’t want to be another John Cotton. I don’t want to compromise just to keep a job. More importantly still, I don’t want to compromise and thus put out a light that might burn brightly otherwise.

I do this blog anonymously because I work for a Christian organization, and this is my means of exploring ideas without fear of retribution. I pray that if I become convinced of light that is contrary to the accepted beliefs of the organization that pays my salary that I will have the courage to stand in the light. I doubt I am alone in facing this challenge.

Forward momentum February 11, 2007

Posted by Alien Drums in Baptists, Christianity, Emerging church, Religion, Spirituality, Theology, Truth.
1 comment so far

“What if faith were more like the earth than a building? What if faith could never be stable in the way God intends it to be if it didn’t have forward momentum and if that momentum weren’t in the field of the gravity of God himself? And if you don’t like that metaphor, think of a bird in flight or a bicycle or a ship on the sea. In each case, there’s movement in relation to some larger forces and realities. Stability comes through an interplay of those factors.” (Neo says in Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian, p. 55)

So how do we maintain forward momentum in our spiritual life?

For me, reading outside my religious and theological tradition has been helpful. More than that, it has been reinvigorating.

I have been a Baptist almost all of my life, but I did some doctoral work at a Presbyterian seminary. I loved it. I didn’t agree with the professors on some key issues, but I loved hearing things from a different perspective.

My favorite author, C.S. Lewis, was an Anglican. I don’t think any of my favorite authors are Baptists.

The blog world just compounds this, and I love it.

I open to suggestions for keeping forward spiritual momentum.

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.)

Turning on lights January 20, 2007

Posted by Alien Drums in Christianity, Emerging church, Postmodern, Scripture, Theology, Truth.
Tags:
2 comments

We turn on lights so easily today that I think we fail to see the miraculous in it. Let me state the obvious. Enter a room with no light and you cannot see what is there. Flip the switch and what was there all along is now visible.

That’s how I feel in my spiritual life right now. God is helping me to turn on a light switch and see what has been in the “room” all along. The light is coming from looking at Scripture in a different way. Rather than mining it for theological truth; I’m trying to let the story speak. I find myself wondering, is systematic theology the greatest enemy of genuine godwardness?

Some years ago I began to explore Calvinism because of its growing influence in Southern Baptist circles, of which I was then a part. Calvinism, as a theological system, is very compelling; and Calvin himself is even more compelling.

I told a Calvinist friend of mine that if you’re going to be an inerrantist you almost have to be a Calvinist. I also did some doctoral work at a conservative Presbyterian seminary. In one of the papers I discussed free will regarding some target. I stated that free will, while not explicitly stated in Scripture, is inferred. I made an “A” on the paper, but the professor wrote a note indicating he didn’t buy the argument.

Calvinism makes so much systematic, logical, biblical, modern sense; but I think it’s ultimately flawed. If God had wanted us to have a systematic theology on which to build our faith, I think he would have given us one. So, you say, maybe he has in the centuries since the biblical record was written. Well that doesn’t help because there are so many variations on theology.

No, I think God wants our understanding of Him to be a bit mushy, hard to nail down. That’s why his most important revelation, Jesus, was a living story.

People who want structure in their lives, including mental and theological structure, cannot abide this. Those who want God in their lives can if that’s what God intended and intends.