Yesterday (Aug. 21) an article ran on the CNN.com website. It was about the 'crusade' against pornography among evangelical churches. If you haven't noticed the term 'evangelical' has now become the equivalent of what 'fundamentalist' meant 30-40 years ago. Now some people proudly wear the label fundamentalist, but the label of 'Evangelical' was intentionally adopted so as to avoid all the negative connotations associated with 'fundamentalist.' In my youth I was blessed by having had direct contact with some of the early founders of the 'Evangelical' movement. They were clear about what they wanted to do. They intended to help define a group of Christian believers who were faithful to reformation orthodoxy but who were willing to use their minds. They were specifically desiring to put distance between themselves and the sort of narrow minded thinking about science and religion that led to the infamous "Scopes Monkey Trial" of the 1920's.
What has happened is that the term evangelical has been co-opted by fundamentalists. Indeed, this has been so effective that in the understanding of most of the world, the two words mean exactly the same thing. This is why the article at CNN.com was so derisive in its tone. People assume that if Evangelicals adopt a position, it must be less than scientific, must somehow be simplistic, irrational and silly. Of course, the authors of the article were able to find people who fit the mold and who use the name within the so-called "crusade against pornography."
This means that once again, anything helpful that may be said about the subject from the Evangelical point of view is simply considered worthless. Now, as a church within the broad spectrum of Evangelical commitment, this affects us. We are, after all, a member congregation of the Evangelical Covenant Church. Just how this affects us depends on several things and it results in a variety of responses. Perhaps the most obvious way this affects us is with reference to our name. Most Covenant churches I know really don't use the word "Evangelical" in their name anymore. Not that we have changed our doctrine. We haven't! Jesus and faith in him is still our core and always has been (this is what the word actually means: 'committed to the good news of Jesus Christ' ). So our character hasn't changed. Our awareness has. Many of us realize that using the word 'Evangelical' only raise people's hackles. Mention the word, get shut off instantly. Don't use the word, get a hearing. It really is that simple. Faith in Jesus is still what it is all about, but we need to be heard first.
Second, how we define ourselves will either get us a hearing or not. If someone asks me what kind of church we are and I use the special word, they will be 1) confused, or 2) having heard that that group of people is weird, I get shut down again. So maybe I choose to define what sort of church we are by using different words. We come from the Lutheran wing of the great Protestant Reformation. Equally confusing to most people, this doesn't automatically turn people off (unless they are ex-Lutherans!). Then we can define ourselves any way we wish. 'Really nice theological conservatives,' 'Center-focused believers' (Jesus is the center and that is our focus), 'Really Hip Pietists' (the inner life really matters and we address it in cool contemporary ways), 'Christ-followers/Jesus-followers' (After all, it is what we do!). There are others as well. The point: our church fathers chose a word for a name that carried the idea that we were thinking, caring, intelligent, Christ focused, Jesus loving, people loving people. Today the meaning of the word has changed so much that when you use it, it turns out to mean everything opposite of what our spiritual fathers intended. So why continue to hang on to a name that only makes it harder to do what we set out to do?
Coming Next: Can a sin be an addiction? Can an addiction be a sin? And why is it so hard to admit that we sin?
Monday, August 22, 2011
Monday, August 15, 2011
Getting Things in the Right Order
The race for the White House has begun and the crowded field of Republican hopefuls has already begun to thin out. What will happen within the Democratic party is anyone's guess, as even Democrats seem not overly fond of President Obama. No, this is not going to be a political comment, at least not directly.
Recently, I was reading in Acts 22 about an event in St. Paul's life. He was on his last visit to Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit had repeatedly warned that if he went there, he would be arrested and held. And yet, he seems to have felt that this was less a warning to be heeded than a destiny to be embraced. Indeed, he was seen, a riot broke out, he was taken into custody by the Romans and was about to be flogged when he says simply: "I am a Roman."
Roman citizenship was a great blessing. Not everyone, even in Paul's day could get it. In fact, the Roman officer who was about to have Paul flogged had paid a high price to obtain his citizenship. But Paul had been born a citizen. It was a very great privilege and no one took it lightly. They immediately released Paul from his bonds, but held him for questioning before the Jewish leadership. All this eventually leads Paul to declare that, as a citizen, he will exercise his right to be tried by the Emperor himself. This is Paul's tactic, both to keep himself safe and to get the unheard of opportunity of declaring the gospel directly to the Emperor.
It is exactly at this point that I want us to notice something remarkable. Paul uses the privileges of his earthly citizenship to advance the cause of the Kingdom of God. As much as he prizes his earthly citizen status, it is only a means to a greater end for him--the advancement of the Kingdom of God. He strategically utilizes his status as a Roman citizen to position himself for the greatest impact he can make for the Kingdom of God. Now, let's compare what is happening here in our own country as the political season comes upon us.
In our situation, the host of would-be Presidents are acting in a manner that is exactly opposite to Paul. They are not using their citizen privileges/status to extend the Kingdom of God. Rather, they are using their Kingdom status (assuming that they are, in fact, real Kingdom citizens) to gain earthly power. They are engaging in a behavior that is exactly the reverse of what Paul did. The fact is that we talk all the time about this or that politician courting the 'evangelical vote' or the 'religious vote.' And we seem to be just fine with such talk. I don't think we should be. It is language that is designed to smooth over something that has no business being allowed by Kingdom citizens. We are allowing people to play on our Kingdom sympathies for an end that should make little difference to us--they wish to use us so they can gain earthly political power, which is their real desire.
I say this about all politicians. For while the Republican party has, for many years, worked the traditional 'evangelical vote', the Democratic party is discovering the new, younger, more socially liberal 'emergent/neo-evangelical' voter block and will be coming after them in short order as well. But it is all for the same purpose! The purpose: to use our faith convictions, not to establish Kingdom living, but to garner political power which will allow them to pursue their own independent agendas.
This does not mean that we have to question the religious faith of any politician. I am not called, as a Christian, to judge the validity of the faith of Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman or Barack Obama. They say they are believers. Judging them is not my job. It is God's--alone! But what I am allowed to do, encouraged to do, is to be discerning. And no matter how well-intentioned any of the candidates are, they all seem to have bought into the notion that it is perfectly OK to use their Christ-faith as a means to a political end. And that is a world away from what Paul is doing in Acts 22. Paul used his earthly citizenship as a means to a Kingdom end. He did not use his Kingdom standing to achieve a merely earthly political end. And we, as Kingdom people, should not allow ourselves to be manipulated by this political tactic. Let's make our choices, come up with our solutions, choose our leaders. But to pretend that any of them will have better served the Kingdom for having smeared each other to win an earthly political office is not a Kingdom value.
Recently, I was reading in Acts 22 about an event in St. Paul's life. He was on his last visit to Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit had repeatedly warned that if he went there, he would be arrested and held. And yet, he seems to have felt that this was less a warning to be heeded than a destiny to be embraced. Indeed, he was seen, a riot broke out, he was taken into custody by the Romans and was about to be flogged when he says simply: "I am a Roman."
Roman citizenship was a great blessing. Not everyone, even in Paul's day could get it. In fact, the Roman officer who was about to have Paul flogged had paid a high price to obtain his citizenship. But Paul had been born a citizen. It was a very great privilege and no one took it lightly. They immediately released Paul from his bonds, but held him for questioning before the Jewish leadership. All this eventually leads Paul to declare that, as a citizen, he will exercise his right to be tried by the Emperor himself. This is Paul's tactic, both to keep himself safe and to get the unheard of opportunity of declaring the gospel directly to the Emperor.
It is exactly at this point that I want us to notice something remarkable. Paul uses the privileges of his earthly citizenship to advance the cause of the Kingdom of God. As much as he prizes his earthly citizen status, it is only a means to a greater end for him--the advancement of the Kingdom of God. He strategically utilizes his status as a Roman citizen to position himself for the greatest impact he can make for the Kingdom of God. Now, let's compare what is happening here in our own country as the political season comes upon us.
In our situation, the host of would-be Presidents are acting in a manner that is exactly opposite to Paul. They are not using their citizen privileges/status to extend the Kingdom of God. Rather, they are using their Kingdom status (assuming that they are, in fact, real Kingdom citizens) to gain earthly power. They are engaging in a behavior that is exactly the reverse of what Paul did. The fact is that we talk all the time about this or that politician courting the 'evangelical vote' or the 'religious vote.' And we seem to be just fine with such talk. I don't think we should be. It is language that is designed to smooth over something that has no business being allowed by Kingdom citizens. We are allowing people to play on our Kingdom sympathies for an end that should make little difference to us--they wish to use us so they can gain earthly political power, which is their real desire.
I say this about all politicians. For while the Republican party has, for many years, worked the traditional 'evangelical vote', the Democratic party is discovering the new, younger, more socially liberal 'emergent/neo-evangelical' voter block and will be coming after them in short order as well. But it is all for the same purpose! The purpose: to use our faith convictions, not to establish Kingdom living, but to garner political power which will allow them to pursue their own independent agendas.
This does not mean that we have to question the religious faith of any politician. I am not called, as a Christian, to judge the validity of the faith of Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman or Barack Obama. They say they are believers. Judging them is not my job. It is God's--alone! But what I am allowed to do, encouraged to do, is to be discerning. And no matter how well-intentioned any of the candidates are, they all seem to have bought into the notion that it is perfectly OK to use their Christ-faith as a means to a political end. And that is a world away from what Paul is doing in Acts 22. Paul used his earthly citizenship as a means to a Kingdom end. He did not use his Kingdom standing to achieve a merely earthly political end. And we, as Kingdom people, should not allow ourselves to be manipulated by this political tactic. Let's make our choices, come up with our solutions, choose our leaders. But to pretend that any of them will have better served the Kingdom for having smeared each other to win an earthly political office is not a Kingdom value.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Listening to God, Pt. 4
This last blog on the subject of listening to God is actually the most difficult to write, simply because it doesn't involve theory, but practice. The real blessing of God is that he is faithful, and he helps us because of his faithfulness, not always because we are so spiritual ourselves. That means, among other things, that God is always trying to get through to us, even when we aren't listening specially well--even when we aren't being particularly intentional about it. This doesn't mean that we will hear what he is saying without stopping and listening, but that He is always attempting to reach us. So how does this work in real time?
Sometimes, as was the case for me this morning, reading Scripture reminds us of some one of the truths of God that He wants to apply to our lives. This is a pretty direct means. It also means that we need 1) to read the Bible, 2) be expectant and open when we. We have addressed this in previous blogs. For me, this morning, it was a word from Ps. 73 which challenged me to stop being envious of what I don't have and start realizing (for the millionth time I suppose) that God is enough. Does the text say "God is enough?" Not exactly like that, but in a very clear fashion, it makes that point. I have to realize that I am envious and admit it for me to hear what God is saying to me here. So listening requires honesty on my part.
Sometimes listening is a bit stranger. I write things in the margins of my Bible--mostly because if I don't I will forget them. Since I always go back to my Bible, they are right there. For some people a journal works better, or a diary or a personal blog that no one else sees. Really organized people would probably cross reference topically . . . You get what I mean. But I am haphazard at my best! So, as I read, I saw a note scribbled across the top of the page. It was meant to remind me of a moment God spoke to me and I listened. What was curious was that the message was a secular song lyric from the 80's that just popped into my mind one day during my quiet time. But it stuck because, in spite of its origin, it's message was not only Biblical, but perfectly aimed at me at that particular time--a time when I was feeling like all I had done for the kingdom just didn't matter all that much and my life had been pointless (Yep, pastors think stupid thoughts too!) The lyrics were from an old Chicago song: "After all that we've been through, I will make it up to you, I promise you."
The practical part of this: God can take most anything and use it as a vehicle to speak to us. And He can do it by simply dropping something into our heads. But note: this has to go through the biblical sieve. Does God owe me anything? Not at all. But the message is that He will be faithful to me, He won't forget me or how my life has unfolded. Whatever is here now, isn't all there is. My favorite music is soft rock. That is where my tastes are, my experience. It is the set of lyrics that most naturally come into my mind. That is what God uses. Whatever your natural environment is, God will use that as a medium of communication. That is part of what incarnation is all about.
Friends. God speaks to us through friends. Some of the hardest conversations I have ever had to have were with friends who, in love, spoke God's corrective words into my life. And some of the greatest moments have been when friends or family have spoken God's affirming words into my life. When a loved one comes to you to speak seriously loving words into your life, whether to correct or affirm, take the position that it may be God moving them to do that. Again, it must all go through the sieve of what the Bible tells us God's voice, values and vision are. If it fits with that, then listen carefully. And give your friends a break. God isn't always speaking affirmation to us, nor always reproof. One friend, to whom I am deeply indebted, just constantly reminded me that if I really wanted to be like God, I would have to be steadfast, faithful, constant, steady and permanent! I didn't want to hear that at the time. All I really wanted to do was go away, escape, disappear, give up. And he helped me hear God's crucial word to me at the time.
Memories. This is a most delicate area. Not all memories can be trusted to be a communication from God, as they are often filled with guilt, fear, self-condemnation and other negative aspects. But not always. God has often used memories to help me find my way back to him, to help me get my head back on straight again, especially in the context of relationships. It happened this morning. A memory from when I was 5 came and reminded me that the only thing I wanted then in my life was God. Just God. When I was 5, God was enough. It reminded me that Jesus was simply right about children. Sometimes they see much more clearly than adults. And I was called back to my true goal in life. The key here is to ask God specifically: "How shall I use this memory so that I might become more like you?" This requires us to not only 'feel' the memory again, but to view it more objectively as well--to lay it before God and ask that question thoughtfully, fearlessly and with every intention of listening. Because, invariably, a thought that looks a lot like an answer will come, if you don't push it.
One last word on seemingly random thoughts. The ones that are probably most useful and most necessary to be heard are the ones that are just a name. I cannot tell you how many times a name has come to mind and I have ignored it. But when I haven't, but have followed up on it: "Your name just came into my head--I just thought of you--and I thought I should check on you and see how things are for you today"--invariably, I have found that my presence was useful to them in some way that I simply couldn't have known about. Sometimes God just drops a name into your head. Listen to that! Go investigate, be available to serve them, to minister God's loving presence to them in whatever situation they find themselves.
This is no book on the subject, but a thoughtful blog on an important aspect of Christian living that is still in process of being worked through by the author, who continues to struggle with listening to God effectively and consistently himself. God bless you richly as you listen.
Sometimes, as was the case for me this morning, reading Scripture reminds us of some one of the truths of God that He wants to apply to our lives. This is a pretty direct means. It also means that we need 1) to read the Bible, 2) be expectant and open when we. We have addressed this in previous blogs. For me, this morning, it was a word from Ps. 73 which challenged me to stop being envious of what I don't have and start realizing (for the millionth time I suppose) that God is enough. Does the text say "God is enough?" Not exactly like that, but in a very clear fashion, it makes that point. I have to realize that I am envious and admit it for me to hear what God is saying to me here. So listening requires honesty on my part.
Sometimes listening is a bit stranger. I write things in the margins of my Bible--mostly because if I don't I will forget them. Since I always go back to my Bible, they are right there. For some people a journal works better, or a diary or a personal blog that no one else sees. Really organized people would probably cross reference topically . . . You get what I mean. But I am haphazard at my best! So, as I read, I saw a note scribbled across the top of the page. It was meant to remind me of a moment God spoke to me and I listened. What was curious was that the message was a secular song lyric from the 80's that just popped into my mind one day during my quiet time. But it stuck because, in spite of its origin, it's message was not only Biblical, but perfectly aimed at me at that particular time--a time when I was feeling like all I had done for the kingdom just didn't matter all that much and my life had been pointless (Yep, pastors think stupid thoughts too!) The lyrics were from an old Chicago song: "After all that we've been through, I will make it up to you, I promise you."
The practical part of this: God can take most anything and use it as a vehicle to speak to us. And He can do it by simply dropping something into our heads. But note: this has to go through the biblical sieve. Does God owe me anything? Not at all. But the message is that He will be faithful to me, He won't forget me or how my life has unfolded. Whatever is here now, isn't all there is. My favorite music is soft rock. That is where my tastes are, my experience. It is the set of lyrics that most naturally come into my mind. That is what God uses. Whatever your natural environment is, God will use that as a medium of communication. That is part of what incarnation is all about.
Friends. God speaks to us through friends. Some of the hardest conversations I have ever had to have were with friends who, in love, spoke God's corrective words into my life. And some of the greatest moments have been when friends or family have spoken God's affirming words into my life. When a loved one comes to you to speak seriously loving words into your life, whether to correct or affirm, take the position that it may be God moving them to do that. Again, it must all go through the sieve of what the Bible tells us God's voice, values and vision are. If it fits with that, then listen carefully. And give your friends a break. God isn't always speaking affirmation to us, nor always reproof. One friend, to whom I am deeply indebted, just constantly reminded me that if I really wanted to be like God, I would have to be steadfast, faithful, constant, steady and permanent! I didn't want to hear that at the time. All I really wanted to do was go away, escape, disappear, give up. And he helped me hear God's crucial word to me at the time.
Memories. This is a most delicate area. Not all memories can be trusted to be a communication from God, as they are often filled with guilt, fear, self-condemnation and other negative aspects. But not always. God has often used memories to help me find my way back to him, to help me get my head back on straight again, especially in the context of relationships. It happened this morning. A memory from when I was 5 came and reminded me that the only thing I wanted then in my life was God. Just God. When I was 5, God was enough. It reminded me that Jesus was simply right about children. Sometimes they see much more clearly than adults. And I was called back to my true goal in life. The key here is to ask God specifically: "How shall I use this memory so that I might become more like you?" This requires us to not only 'feel' the memory again, but to view it more objectively as well--to lay it before God and ask that question thoughtfully, fearlessly and with every intention of listening. Because, invariably, a thought that looks a lot like an answer will come, if you don't push it.
One last word on seemingly random thoughts. The ones that are probably most useful and most necessary to be heard are the ones that are just a name. I cannot tell you how many times a name has come to mind and I have ignored it. But when I haven't, but have followed up on it: "Your name just came into my head--I just thought of you--and I thought I should check on you and see how things are for you today"--invariably, I have found that my presence was useful to them in some way that I simply couldn't have known about. Sometimes God just drops a name into your head. Listen to that! Go investigate, be available to serve them, to minister God's loving presence to them in whatever situation they find themselves.
This is no book on the subject, but a thoughtful blog on an important aspect of Christian living that is still in process of being worked through by the author, who continues to struggle with listening to God effectively and consistently himself. God bless you richly as you listen.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Listening To God Pt. 3
I have been claiming that to listen to God, a person needs to "buy into" the idea that God has spoken in and through Jesus. This idea carries with it a second idea--that we must be willing to allow that God also speaks to us through the Bible. For those who question the value of the Bible in this process, allow me to give a brief reason for relying upon Scripture for a communication from God.
First, this is where we find the most all inclusive account of the life, work, personality and ideas of the person called Jesus. While there are various other references to Jesus (both implied and direct) in ancient writings, all of them are made in passing. None of them (with the exception of those mentioned below) have Jesus as their focal point. If you really want to discover Jesus, the New Testament is where you must go to do this.
Which documents we look to when we search for the Jesus we are going to listen to is extremely important. This is because, when we put ourselves in a truly listening posture, we are letting our guard down, just as we do with other human beings. When we really listen to another human being, we drop our defenses. We put down our guard, we suspend our judgment, we let what they are saying challenge us, encourage us, change our thinking, affect our behavior. When we listen to God, we allow him to do all of this. When we listen to God through Jesus, we allow all of this. When we listen to God through Jesus, as he is presented to us in a written text (like the Gospels), we are letting that text have access to the control of our lives. That is why it is so important which text we allow to speak to us this way.
This is why it is important that we understand that the New Testament Gospels are a reliable source for information about Jesus. This is a contested statement in our larger culture. Increasingly, certain groups of scholars want to suggest that all sorts of other documents are better sources for finding out about Jesus and his teachings. This is not the place to get into a detailed discussion of this phenomenon. But the following may be helpful: Only the New Testament Gospels tell similar stories about Jesus while also giving us multiple witnesses to the events. This is very important. It is like getting statements from each of 4 people who witness an accident at an intersection, each of them standing on a different corner of the intersection. They all report the same basic event, but their individual "take" on what they saw is somewhat different in detail. This is the kind of of "witness" that investigators want as they study what happened. It can be frustrating at times (just like the Gospels), but you can make sense out of it.
When we look at all the other texts that claim to be on the same level of seriousness as the Gospels, but which are not included in the New Testament, we have something quite different. Many of the scholars who wish to take this material into account do not often tell their readers that this other material . . . 1) Comes from a time much later than the 4 New Testament Gospels (which were written within living memory of Jesus himself). 2) That this material often has a distinct theological "flavor" that can be easily identified and that leads into a variety of ideas that the New Testament as a whole condemns. 3) That only rarely can the various stories in these materials be made to sound like they are talking about the same Jesus. They each present a different and often odd "Jesus." 4) The Jesus they represent almost never sounds anything like the Jesus of the New Testament Gospels, while one can easily make the connections between the Jesus of Mark and the Jesus of Luke, which are not all that far from the Jesus of John.
So, which "version" of Jesus we listen to matters a great deal. Of all the competing versions, I think the "version" offered to us in the New Testament Gospels is the most self-consistent, meaningful and helpful version. And I have looked at many of the others as well. And since I am going to end up submitting the formation of my mind and my life to one of these versions, I have to tell you that I have been pretty cautious about my conclusions.
So as not to disappoint those who hoped I would include something practical in this blog, let me close with this: We can read the Bible for information. We have all done this, some more than others. When we do this, we are looking for stories with moral points, teachings that tell us what to do about this or that situation, principles to apply, and so forth. I am not personally convinced that such reading is all that helpful in a serious walk with God. But we have all done it and we will all continue to do it at some level, myself included.
But when we are "listening" we are reading differently. It is much more like reading a letter from someone whose wisdom we seek. More than that, it is like going to spend time with a person whom you greatly respect and who has consistently opened up to you new understandings of your own life, the way the world works, what other people are like. It is like going into that person's presence, knowing that you will always walk away with something valuable, but never knowing what it might be beforehand. You go trusting that something will be said that will matter, that will make a difference, that will make you more real.
When we come to the Bible and read with that kind of attitude, it changes things. The practical side of it is that, as you read, thoughts, ideas, understandings come into one's mind that are new, challenging, profound. It is the constant practice of this kind of reading that provides an increasingly deep pool of experience by which we can and do judge what we think that we are hearing at later times. This is, of course based on the idea that God himself inhabits his people through his Holy Spirit, so that we have the means to recognize God's "voice" when we hear it. More about that in the next blog, together with some practical ideas about how we actually come to know how "speaks" to us individually.
First, this is where we find the most all inclusive account of the life, work, personality and ideas of the person called Jesus. While there are various other references to Jesus (both implied and direct) in ancient writings, all of them are made in passing. None of them (with the exception of those mentioned below) have Jesus as their focal point. If you really want to discover Jesus, the New Testament is where you must go to do this.
Which documents we look to when we search for the Jesus we are going to listen to is extremely important. This is because, when we put ourselves in a truly listening posture, we are letting our guard down, just as we do with other human beings. When we really listen to another human being, we drop our defenses. We put down our guard, we suspend our judgment, we let what they are saying challenge us, encourage us, change our thinking, affect our behavior. When we listen to God, we allow him to do all of this. When we listen to God through Jesus, we allow all of this. When we listen to God through Jesus, as he is presented to us in a written text (like the Gospels), we are letting that text have access to the control of our lives. That is why it is so important which text we allow to speak to us this way.
This is why it is important that we understand that the New Testament Gospels are a reliable source for information about Jesus. This is a contested statement in our larger culture. Increasingly, certain groups of scholars want to suggest that all sorts of other documents are better sources for finding out about Jesus and his teachings. This is not the place to get into a detailed discussion of this phenomenon. But the following may be helpful: Only the New Testament Gospels tell similar stories about Jesus while also giving us multiple witnesses to the events. This is very important. It is like getting statements from each of 4 people who witness an accident at an intersection, each of them standing on a different corner of the intersection. They all report the same basic event, but their individual "take" on what they saw is somewhat different in detail. This is the kind of of "witness" that investigators want as they study what happened. It can be frustrating at times (just like the Gospels), but you can make sense out of it.
When we look at all the other texts that claim to be on the same level of seriousness as the Gospels, but which are not included in the New Testament, we have something quite different. Many of the scholars who wish to take this material into account do not often tell their readers that this other material . . . 1) Comes from a time much later than the 4 New Testament Gospels (which were written within living memory of Jesus himself). 2) That this material often has a distinct theological "flavor" that can be easily identified and that leads into a variety of ideas that the New Testament as a whole condemns. 3) That only rarely can the various stories in these materials be made to sound like they are talking about the same Jesus. They each present a different and often odd "Jesus." 4) The Jesus they represent almost never sounds anything like the Jesus of the New Testament Gospels, while one can easily make the connections between the Jesus of Mark and the Jesus of Luke, which are not all that far from the Jesus of John.
So, which "version" of Jesus we listen to matters a great deal. Of all the competing versions, I think the "version" offered to us in the New Testament Gospels is the most self-consistent, meaningful and helpful version. And I have looked at many of the others as well. And since I am going to end up submitting the formation of my mind and my life to one of these versions, I have to tell you that I have been pretty cautious about my conclusions.
So as not to disappoint those who hoped I would include something practical in this blog, let me close with this: We can read the Bible for information. We have all done this, some more than others. When we do this, we are looking for stories with moral points, teachings that tell us what to do about this or that situation, principles to apply, and so forth. I am not personally convinced that such reading is all that helpful in a serious walk with God. But we have all done it and we will all continue to do it at some level, myself included.
But when we are "listening" we are reading differently. It is much more like reading a letter from someone whose wisdom we seek. More than that, it is like going to spend time with a person whom you greatly respect and who has consistently opened up to you new understandings of your own life, the way the world works, what other people are like. It is like going into that person's presence, knowing that you will always walk away with something valuable, but never knowing what it might be beforehand. You go trusting that something will be said that will matter, that will make a difference, that will make you more real.
When we come to the Bible and read with that kind of attitude, it changes things. The practical side of it is that, as you read, thoughts, ideas, understandings come into one's mind that are new, challenging, profound. It is the constant practice of this kind of reading that provides an increasingly deep pool of experience by which we can and do judge what we think that we are hearing at later times. This is, of course based on the idea that God himself inhabits his people through his Holy Spirit, so that we have the means to recognize God's "voice" when we hear it. More about that in the next blog, together with some practical ideas about how we actually come to know how "speaks" to us individually.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Listening to God Pt. 2
In my last blog I made a case for the idea that God seeks to communicate to human beings. This is actually a common idea amongst Christians. But for many believers, the communication from God's side is seen as having stopped. The idea is that everything God wanted to say has been said, supremely in and through Jesus. This is nearly a fair understanding of the beginning verses of the Letter to the Hebrews. There is a sense of finality about this text. "In these last days, [God] has spoken to us by his Son . . . after he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in Heaven. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." That Jesus Christ is the supreme self-expression of God to human beings is clearly the point of the text. That he supersedes all other communications is also clear. That God never speaks again is neither clear nor a necessary conclusion from the passage.
In fact, the Gospel of John suggests that while there is a finality about the essence of God's communication to us in Jesus, there is a continuing aspect as well. "The Friend, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send at my request, will make everything plain to you." (John 14.26, The Message). In the more detailed translations, the Spirit will engage in two functions that we are interested in here: teaching and reminding. In others words, the Spirit will remind us of what Jesus taught and apply the things of Jesus to our lives in fresh and original ways.
This naturally assumes that we have a record of the teachings of Jesus. And we do. Both the Gospels and the Letters of the New Testament contain the teachings of Jesus. Now it should be clear that a person cannot be reminded of something they have never known. Neither can these teachings be applied, where they have not first been learned. In our lives as believers, followers of Jesus, it is not enough to simply know "the story," the general narrative of Jesus' saving acts--his death and resurrection. If we want to be in a position of being able to live responsively to God in Christ, then we are going to have to learn his words, his general directions, the basic flow and content of his thought. We cannot do this if we never spend time exposing ourselves to it in the first place. There simply is no substitute for first hand knowledge of the words and teachings of Jesus and those of his earliest followers!
Too often people just want to hear the directions of God for their lives in terms of "do this thing over here" or "that thing over there." As if true spirituality was about God leading us by the hand all day long. This is a mistake. God wants to build us into people who can do His will when we see it needing to be done, without having to ask, even as he also wants people who can hear his voice and be instantly responsive to it, when he chooses to speak to them directly. That requires a sensitivity within our minds and spirits that few people choose to cultivate. It is also what defines true spiritual maturity (obedience to the "voice" is here assumed for the moment).
This means that the first order of business for God's people isn't to develop some sort of specialized wavelength that they can tune into whenever it suits them. "I need to hear God's voice in this situation, so I'll get in the right [insert 'posture,' 'attitude,' 'place,' 'language,' 'prayer attitude,' or whatever]." That is the self-willed person deciding when he/she needs to hear God. It isn't the mature person who is ready at all moments to hear and obey. The first order of business is to spend time--lots of time--attending to the heart of Jesus as revealed to us in the Gospels and other parts of the New Testament. It is only familiarity with this material that can sensitize us to the "voice" of God. How can we expect to "hear" the voice of God if we have never really trained our ears to recognize it?
An example or two might be helpful here. I have read The Lord of the Rings some 25 times. And though it has been a while, my guess is that if you give me a line from that book, amongst a number of other quotations, I will be able to identify it as having come from J. R. R. Tolkein's fantasy. Another example: although it has been a very long time sense I have spent great amounts of time reading C.S. Lewis, I would almost wager that I could take a random quote from him set beside any number of others, and correctly tell you who said it. I have been that familiar with the "sound" of their "voices." This is what we need to be able to do with Scripture--all of us who call ourselves followers of Jesus. The great danger here is to imagine that we are following Jesus when we are only following one of his interpreters--who may get him right and who, on the other hand, may not.
Paul said it well and Eugene Peterson translates it perfectly: " Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another--showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way. Through the Word we are put together and shaped up for the tasks God has for us." (2 Timothy 3.16) That is the first order of business--making ourselves so familiar with the voice of Jesus from the Scriptures that whenever he chooses to whisper it in our ears, we can recognize it instantly. Everything else follows from that. -PJ
In fact, the Gospel of John suggests that while there is a finality about the essence of God's communication to us in Jesus, there is a continuing aspect as well. "The Friend, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send at my request, will make everything plain to you." (John 14.26, The Message). In the more detailed translations, the Spirit will engage in two functions that we are interested in here: teaching and reminding. In others words, the Spirit will remind us of what Jesus taught and apply the things of Jesus to our lives in fresh and original ways.
This naturally assumes that we have a record of the teachings of Jesus. And we do. Both the Gospels and the Letters of the New Testament contain the teachings of Jesus. Now it should be clear that a person cannot be reminded of something they have never known. Neither can these teachings be applied, where they have not first been learned. In our lives as believers, followers of Jesus, it is not enough to simply know "the story," the general narrative of Jesus' saving acts--his death and resurrection. If we want to be in a position of being able to live responsively to God in Christ, then we are going to have to learn his words, his general directions, the basic flow and content of his thought. We cannot do this if we never spend time exposing ourselves to it in the first place. There simply is no substitute for first hand knowledge of the words and teachings of Jesus and those of his earliest followers!
Too often people just want to hear the directions of God for their lives in terms of "do this thing over here" or "that thing over there." As if true spirituality was about God leading us by the hand all day long. This is a mistake. God wants to build us into people who can do His will when we see it needing to be done, without having to ask, even as he also wants people who can hear his voice and be instantly responsive to it, when he chooses to speak to them directly. That requires a sensitivity within our minds and spirits that few people choose to cultivate. It is also what defines true spiritual maturity (obedience to the "voice" is here assumed for the moment).
This means that the first order of business for God's people isn't to develop some sort of specialized wavelength that they can tune into whenever it suits them. "I need to hear God's voice in this situation, so I'll get in the right [insert 'posture,' 'attitude,' 'place,' 'language,' 'prayer attitude,' or whatever]." That is the self-willed person deciding when he/she needs to hear God. It isn't the mature person who is ready at all moments to hear and obey. The first order of business is to spend time--lots of time--attending to the heart of Jesus as revealed to us in the Gospels and other parts of the New Testament. It is only familiarity with this material that can sensitize us to the "voice" of God. How can we expect to "hear" the voice of God if we have never really trained our ears to recognize it?
An example or two might be helpful here. I have read The Lord of the Rings some 25 times. And though it has been a while, my guess is that if you give me a line from that book, amongst a number of other quotations, I will be able to identify it as having come from J. R. R. Tolkein's fantasy. Another example: although it has been a very long time sense I have spent great amounts of time reading C.S. Lewis, I would almost wager that I could take a random quote from him set beside any number of others, and correctly tell you who said it. I have been that familiar with the "sound" of their "voices." This is what we need to be able to do with Scripture--all of us who call ourselves followers of Jesus. The great danger here is to imagine that we are following Jesus when we are only following one of his interpreters--who may get him right and who, on the other hand, may not.
Paul said it well and Eugene Peterson translates it perfectly: " Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another--showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way. Through the Word we are put together and shaped up for the tasks God has for us." (2 Timothy 3.16) That is the first order of business--making ourselves so familiar with the voice of Jesus from the Scriptures that whenever he chooses to whisper it in our ears, we can recognize it instantly. Everything else follows from that. -PJ
Monday, June 20, 2011
Listening to God
This begins a series of blog posts focusing on our listening to God. But to get to that point, we first need to set the stage.
The Bible everywhere affirms that Christians worship a God who communicates. Everyone has either used or thought of using the sarcastic remark "So, you think you have a hotline to God!" Or maybe "So God talks to you, huh?" There are even questions in the best known psychological exam which ask whether a person thinks they hear from God. Of course, if they mark the answer as "Yes, I do" the little red flag goes up. The world does not believe in a God who communicates to humans. But the Bible teaches that God is everywhere and always communicating to human beings, precisely because it is his nature to do so.
Some 9 times in Genesis 1 alone, God speaks. More than that, when he speaks, when he expresses himself, things happen in direct response. The whole creation story, as told in Genesis 1 is about the world being an example of God's self-expressive creativity. God is self-expressive.
More than that, in Genesis 1 God intends for humans to be his image. Whatever that means, and theologians still disagree about what it means, it is clear that an image is representative. God means to communicate who he is by placing his image on the earth in the form of humanity. If anybody else is looking, they were supposed to be able to look at humanity and discover something important about God. This image is, by common consent among believers, defaced. To what extent is also a matter of debate. But the vast majority of believers in all times and places have concluded that however badly the image is defaced, it still communicates something about God. God chooses to express himself through his image--human beings.
Everywhere you look in the Old Testament, God is speaking to people who will take the risk to trust him. Sometimes, as with Abraham, he does it face to face, by taking the temporary form of a human. Other times, as with Moses, he speaks from a bush, or out of cloud, smoke or fire. His very finger carves the stones upon which the law is found, which law is itself an expression of God's own heart and will. Sometimes, as with Joshua, he appears and speaks as a messenger angel. And sometimes, as with David and the prophets, his voice comes in less well defined ways. But anywhere you look in the Old Testament, God is communicating.
When we open the New Testament, this point is made with greater emphasis and power. Jesus is said to be the very Word of God. Hebrews tells us that God spoke to the fathers of old in a variety of ways, but now, at this time, he speaks by means of his Son, who is supreme above all other beings. St. Paul uses similar language as the Old Testament when he calls Jesus the eikon of the invisible God--the image of the invisible God (Col. 1.15).
What is the meaning of all this? Just what I have already suggested. Our God is a God who communicates. It is what he is--a communicating God. And his supreme effort at communication was aimed at humans and was put forward as a human. What can this mean but that God wants to communicate to humans? Indeed, Jesus, in John's Gospel is constantly telling those who will listen that he has a message from his Father. That he only communicates what his Father tells him to say and he only does what his Father tells him to do. And yet, we see in Jesus the person who is most free and most able to be authentically himself. He cannot help being God's personal communication to humanity.
That God wants to speak to us is embedded in the heart of the Scriptures. That he has done everything necessary to be heard, and heard clearly, seems obvious. Does he still mean to communicate? Has he things to say today, to us, right now? Does he intend to speak into our lives as he did once into the lives of those who lived so long ago? In the next blog I hope to demonstrate that he not only means to do so, but that he has equipped every believer with everything they need to hear the voice of God, if they only want to and will make it a priority in their lives.
The Bible everywhere affirms that Christians worship a God who communicates. Everyone has either used or thought of using the sarcastic remark "So, you think you have a hotline to God!" Or maybe "So God talks to you, huh?" There are even questions in the best known psychological exam which ask whether a person thinks they hear from God. Of course, if they mark the answer as "Yes, I do" the little red flag goes up. The world does not believe in a God who communicates to humans. But the Bible teaches that God is everywhere and always communicating to human beings, precisely because it is his nature to do so.
Some 9 times in Genesis 1 alone, God speaks. More than that, when he speaks, when he expresses himself, things happen in direct response. The whole creation story, as told in Genesis 1 is about the world being an example of God's self-expressive creativity. God is self-expressive.
More than that, in Genesis 1 God intends for humans to be his image. Whatever that means, and theologians still disagree about what it means, it is clear that an image is representative. God means to communicate who he is by placing his image on the earth in the form of humanity. If anybody else is looking, they were supposed to be able to look at humanity and discover something important about God. This image is, by common consent among believers, defaced. To what extent is also a matter of debate. But the vast majority of believers in all times and places have concluded that however badly the image is defaced, it still communicates something about God. God chooses to express himself through his image--human beings.
Everywhere you look in the Old Testament, God is speaking to people who will take the risk to trust him. Sometimes, as with Abraham, he does it face to face, by taking the temporary form of a human. Other times, as with Moses, he speaks from a bush, or out of cloud, smoke or fire. His very finger carves the stones upon which the law is found, which law is itself an expression of God's own heart and will. Sometimes, as with Joshua, he appears and speaks as a messenger angel. And sometimes, as with David and the prophets, his voice comes in less well defined ways. But anywhere you look in the Old Testament, God is communicating.
When we open the New Testament, this point is made with greater emphasis and power. Jesus is said to be the very Word of God. Hebrews tells us that God spoke to the fathers of old in a variety of ways, but now, at this time, he speaks by means of his Son, who is supreme above all other beings. St. Paul uses similar language as the Old Testament when he calls Jesus the eikon of the invisible God--the image of the invisible God (Col. 1.15).
What is the meaning of all this? Just what I have already suggested. Our God is a God who communicates. It is what he is--a communicating God. And his supreme effort at communication was aimed at humans and was put forward as a human. What can this mean but that God wants to communicate to humans? Indeed, Jesus, in John's Gospel is constantly telling those who will listen that he has a message from his Father. That he only communicates what his Father tells him to say and he only does what his Father tells him to do. And yet, we see in Jesus the person who is most free and most able to be authentically himself. He cannot help being God's personal communication to humanity.
That God wants to speak to us is embedded in the heart of the Scriptures. That he has done everything necessary to be heard, and heard clearly, seems obvious. Does he still mean to communicate? Has he things to say today, to us, right now? Does he intend to speak into our lives as he did once into the lives of those who lived so long ago? In the next blog I hope to demonstrate that he not only means to do so, but that he has equipped every believer with everything they need to hear the voice of God, if they only want to and will make it a priority in their lives.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Knowing the Difference
Sometimes, I'm not so sure I know the difference. In fact, if I was going to be honest, I'm not sure I know the difference most of the time. I am so used to making the decisions in my life for myself, so accustomed to doing what I want to do my way, when I want to do it, that I am not always clear when I am living my life the way my surroundings tell me to live and when I am living the way God has asked me to live. Honestly, how many of us are really all that conscious of which is which?
I think many of us think about life this way: we want to achieve certain things that we have always wanted to achieve and so we structure our lives to get those things. But so often, we do not critically examine whether those things are really worth getting. And when we get them, it's so strange, because we end up not being satisfied with them. We love our new home--until we begin to want something "bigger, nicer, more conveniently located, in a nicer neighborhood." We love our job, until we hit some snag--a person who is difficult to work with and we have to work with them all the time, a poor supervisor, unmanageable students, grumpy clients/customers, stupid paperwork, poor organization, etc. I could continue, but the point is made. Life lived this way creates a restlessness in us. And then we repeat the approach, hoping to get a different result this time. And instead, we get pretty much the same situation, dressed in different clothes.
Paul, in Ephesians 21-6 (The Message) talks about our being "mired in that old stagnant life," in which we "let the world, which doesn't know the first thing about living, tell [us] how to live." And we do. We let the world teach us how to live. And it really doesn't know the first thing about how to do it well. But we go to class all the same, learning from the world about how to live. It's like the line Dave Ramsay uses about taking a shop class from a shop teacher who is missing all their fingers. Why would you do that? And then we wonder why we chase fulfillment and never seem to find it. All the while, there is God, the author of life, available to teach us all we ever wanted to know about living the fulfilled life. And we let him stand in the corner, because we are too busy trying to figure it out for ourselves.
God wants to make us alive . . . in and through Jesus. It is not that there are other ways to find life. There are none. The question we have to answer is this one: do I want to be alive, or do I want to be dead? It's our choice. We can "fill our lungs with polluted unbelief, and then exhale disobedience" and death. Or, we can breathe in the breath of life and breathe out God-focused trust that gives life. Which would you prefer? More importantly, what will we do about it? Under the Mercy, PJ
I think many of us think about life this way: we want to achieve certain things that we have always wanted to achieve and so we structure our lives to get those things. But so often, we do not critically examine whether those things are really worth getting. And when we get them, it's so strange, because we end up not being satisfied with them. We love our new home--until we begin to want something "bigger, nicer, more conveniently located, in a nicer neighborhood." We love our job, until we hit some snag--a person who is difficult to work with and we have to work with them all the time, a poor supervisor, unmanageable students, grumpy clients/customers, stupid paperwork, poor organization, etc. I could continue, but the point is made. Life lived this way creates a restlessness in us. And then we repeat the approach, hoping to get a different result this time. And instead, we get pretty much the same situation, dressed in different clothes.
Paul, in Ephesians 21-6 (The Message) talks about our being "mired in that old stagnant life," in which we "let the world, which doesn't know the first thing about living, tell [us] how to live." And we do. We let the world teach us how to live. And it really doesn't know the first thing about how to do it well. But we go to class all the same, learning from the world about how to live. It's like the line Dave Ramsay uses about taking a shop class from a shop teacher who is missing all their fingers. Why would you do that? And then we wonder why we chase fulfillment and never seem to find it. All the while, there is God, the author of life, available to teach us all we ever wanted to know about living the fulfilled life. And we let him stand in the corner, because we are too busy trying to figure it out for ourselves.
God wants to make us alive . . . in and through Jesus. It is not that there are other ways to find life. There are none. The question we have to answer is this one: do I want to be alive, or do I want to be dead? It's our choice. We can "fill our lungs with polluted unbelief, and then exhale disobedience" and death. Or, we can breathe in the breath of life and breathe out God-focused trust that gives life. Which would you prefer? More importantly, what will we do about it? Under the Mercy, PJ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)