"Growing up in church, we were taught that Jesus was the answer to all our problems. We were taught that there was a circle-shaped hole in our heart and that we had tried to fill it with the square pegs of sex, drugs, and rock and roll; but only the circle peg of Jesus could fill our hole. I became a Christian based, in part, on this promise, but the hole never really went away. To be sure, I like Jesus, and I still follow him, but the idea that Jesus will make everything better is a lie. It’s basically biblical theology translated into the language of infomercials. The truth is, the apostles never really promise Jesus is going to make everything better here on earth."
DonaldMiller
"The main challenge does not come from the nonbeliever but from the nonhuman—that is, the human being who is not recognized as such by the prevailing social order. These are the poor and exploited people, the ones who are systematically and legally despoiled of their being human, those who scarcely know what a human being might be. These nonhumans do not call into question our religious world so much as they call into question our economic, social, political, and cultural world. Their challenge impels us toward a revolutionary transformation of the very bases of what is now a dehumanizing society."
GustavoGutiérrez
Sometimes we want to play the victim and enroll God as a passive watcher if he doesn’t rescue us the way we want, when we want, and how we want.
But maybe He’s suffering as well.
Maybe avoiding pain isn’t the point, and we learn that from what God/Jesus endures on the cross.
What does it mean for the World—this global community experiencing injustice, suffering, brokenness, poverty, narcissism, and loneliness—that the Creator and sustainer of the Universe is in the midst of suffering, experiencing it himself, not to be found standing from afar only concerned to make observations, comments, and judgments?
Maybe suffering or not suffering isn’t the point.
If you want to ask, “Why do bad things happen to (good) people?” then maybe you have to ask “Why do bad things happen to God?”
I can’t recall ever hearing anyone empathize with God.
What if ‘making things right’ means that God can’t let the injustice, inhumanity, and sin continue because of how much it’s hurting HIm?
Sometimes when I read the Text it feels like God has a breaking point.
When there’s movement so far askew one direction that God can’t allow it.
The suffering must end.
And God acts mightily.
Or softly.
What if God has a breaking point not because he’s drawn some arbitrary line in the sand,
but because
it
weighs
so
heavy
on
His
Divine
Soul?
If God feels it, why do we feel like we need/deserve/get a free pass?
Why do we think we need to isolate ourselves from the pain?
Maybe God/Christ/The_Spirit suffers not so that we can miss out on the suffering but so that we understand it.
So that we get it.
So that when we see suffering and broken shalom and injustice, we know it’s a Divine, Cosmic, violent interaction between something that’s deeper than our shallow needs and wants.
It doesn’t mean the pain will ever go down smoother.
But reconciliation is the renewal of the painful breakdown. And as agents of reconciliation, we are called to step into the pain and help others until they understand it.
Understand it, and learn to live in light of it.
We may find that living Correctly in light of the pain is the point.
As followers of Jesus and agents of reconciliation, we may find that our Calling is to become Interpreters of pain.
Those who help others make sense of a broken reality.
And then lead them to experience functionality, contemntment, and even Joy in the pain.
Jesus turned death on its head, and in the process he gave us what we need to interpret pain, despair, grief, loneliness, and overwhelming defeat.
Go.
Go experience life/pain/joy and live in such a way that makes sense of a reality defined by God’s goodness & grace.
Live as an interpreter of Life.
Several years ago when I was working a children’s camp in the summer as a Bible Study leader, I began to struggle with what it meant to “lead someone to Christ.”
We had routines ingrained into our heads during our pre-camp training, having information downloaded into our memories about everything from “what to do if a kid wants to give you a hug” to “how to steer the conversation towards ‘acceptance of Jesus’ even if that’s not what they want to talk about.”
We were told to keep it simple, make sure we induced the right words (and wording), and don’t forget to fill out the commitment card afterwards! After all, years down the road those kids could point to that decision card they filled out after committing to follow Jesus as evidence they were truly “saved.” I wonder how many of those cards are wedged in Bibles that haven’t been opened in years?
Aside from all of the problems evident in such a system of getting converts, something else deeply troubled me: We assumed a Judeo-Christian worldview and notion of God.
Not many of these kids, if any at all, were being taught to think critically about the existence of a Creator and his work in the world. We, along with their home church leaders, assumed belief in God was a given. We just needed them to “accept Jesus.”
And when those kids are children, especially those living in churched households, this wasn’t an issue.
But then those kids went to college. And because we cared far more during their childhood (they are the “formative years,” and we are constantly fed statistics about children and young teens being most likely to convert) about making sure they were “saved” and neglected to teach them to think critically about the existence of God, they were in for a rude awakening.
Most of these kids don’t walk away from Jesus. They walk away from a Christian, churchy worldview. And you could argue that they walk away from Jesus in the process, but they ultimately walk away because their understanding of God no longer fits the world in which they live.
When I think about raising Emery, I definitely want her to know Jesus. But I also want her to learn to think for herself, to explore the realities of God and his existence in the world. I want her to know about a Creator who is full of love and hates injustice.
Late in that summer, it struck me that we were getting people to “accept Jesus” who didn’t necessarily understand God. And then I began to wonder if it matter where we started with our teachings on Jesus, Christianity, and salvation.
I think it’s important that we start with God—a multifaceted endeavor to say the least. Not simple facts about God or Bible verses to be drilled into someone’s head, but a process that helps us understand the unfathomable in such a way that orients us towards the proper character, posture, and direction in the world that the Creator is calling us to.
Warning: I’m not going to do the title justice. In fact, I’m going to leave a lot of loose ends untouched. I just want to explore it for a second and see if I can get you thinking about something…
The theology of the poor should be to cultivate beauty, not tear down the rich.
What’s more valuable? Deconstruction or construction?
Now, I agree that sometimes deconstruction needs to happen so that construction can occur.
I think deconstruction, as a sort of conquering and self-preservation, comes pretty natural for us. And yet the Apostle Paul teaches that the goal of Christ-followers should be more than conquering. It should be the cultivation and flowering of Love.
Something about the very nature of what it means to follow Christ means that we are attempting to deny (maybe through a power bigger than us) the desire to conquer and deconstruct. Our desires are transformed to a place that’s stronger than self-preservation. We are now called to others-preservation. That is the truth about Love.
The theology of the marginalized should be to cultivate love, not tear down the powerful.
This is the heartbeat of what Jesus did. He didn’t need to depose of any king or ruler. He didn’t need to lead a revolt. As far as we know and have confidence in, he never sat on a throne.
The theology of the Christian should be to cultivate the presence of God, not defeat evil.
We can get so caught up in eliminating evil that we never seek the Kingdom of God. Seeking and cultivating God’s Kingdom is not an act of conquering or eliminating or defeating, but an act of loving.
Christ taught us, in word and deed, that the way forward is not in domination, judgment, and elimination—but in compassion, caring, and self-denial.
While the poor or the marginalized may be closer to some values than the rich and powerful, and vice-versa, we have to realize that neither end of the spectrum nor any set of earthly circumstances is the complete (or literal) embodiment of the Kingdom values.
As we move towards the right things, we’ll see the Kingdom of God breaking through. It may never mean we’re rich, and it may never mean we’re poor. It will mean that those things are ultimately not the point.
Do you?
I see all the time where people relate certain things to prayer, God, and his blessings.
A first date gone well, a new house, an A on a Calculus test, or a promotion at work.
I tend to thumb my nose at this stuff. Do you? I think: is God really interested in getting that upper-middle class family “the perfect home” so they can live peaceful lives in suburbia? Is God concerned over whether or not that sophomore at that private university gets an A or a B on her Calculus final? Are the things impressed upon the heart of God excitement when 30 year old Robert is on the fast-track and gets that promotion that earns him 6 figures?
Is this what God spends his time on?
But what if that “first date gone well” is for a struggling single mother who’s been lied to, cheated on, abused, and desperately desires a companion both for herself and to help raise her child?
And what if that new house is the first thing of value and substance the family with a poverty stricken history has ever owned?
What if that student with the A on the Calculus exam has poured her life into getting out of “the hood” and overcome numerous unthinkable circumstances to be in college anyways, much less succeeding at a difficult subject?
And what if that promotion was for a man living below the poverty line that can finally provide for his family?
Maybe this is what happens when we don’t consider all the angles…
What does it mean for the Gospel to interact with culture?
Example: Facebook.
Should Christians:
a. Condemn Facebook
b. Create a “Christian” Facebook
c. Critique Facebook (by giving feedback, good or bad, to the creators and users)
d. Use Facebook for something different…
?????
Give me some feedback, and I’ll give you my ideas in another post.
I love seeing the Gospel message framed as peace and reconciliation. And that’s natural, right? Jesus, the Prophets, and the NT writers all saw the same thing. But occasionally things pop up and challenge your assumptions…
This morning I received an email asking about my thoughts on Luke 12:49-53. Read it and you’ll see why:
“I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed!Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”
My friend was essentially saying “this doesn’t sound like peace! That doesn’t sound consistent with the message I believe Jesus brought.” Admittedly, it made me a little uneasy at first. I hadn’t given the passage much thought. So I spent some time this morning unpacking it. Here’s my response:
First, it’s important to realize that the passage is in a context of passages that are talking about urgency v. complacency. The Jewish idea of peace is shalom. It indicates a lot of things, but primarily a sense of wholeness and well-being. Unfortunately, the ideal of “rest” can lead to just settling back in with your family and going about life as usual.. (after they had dedicated years to follow Jesus)
This is perhaps one of the biggest “sins” of the Old Testament Israelites — complacency. In the writings of Scripture, we mainly get the stories about how the big guys failed—Kings, leaders, etc.. But the common people were just as complicit in hardening their hearts and living in a sort of sublime ignorance, resting on God’s past work and not progressively seeking the justice God was calling for on earth.
So I think Jesus is not contradicting his message of peace and reconciliation, but rather challenging the Jewish notion of shalom that had led them to finding “personal peace” and becoming numb to the world around them.
If I could paraphrase Jesus, “Don’t think that I came to get the Jewish leaders and sinners (most of Jesus’ followers had been ostracized by the Jewish religious establishment) off your back by declaring your personally holy, so that you can rest in a glorified status among your peers. And don’t think I came to get the Roman Empire off your back, just so that you could go home to your families and live a life of peace, comfort, and prosperity.”
Real peace, the peace that’s valuable to the whole earth, will be very messy. .
Sorry, more Q content being uploaded.
As a follow up to the conference and the presentation “The Spirituality of the Cell Phone,” I’m reading Shane Hipps’ book, Flickering Pixels.
It’s making me think critically about technology and media. The awesome thing is that Shane is much deeper than reflecting on Twitter and Facebook, he’s spent more than ample time exploring the major technological shifts of history(print—radio—television—digital—beyond).
If there’s one thing I walked away from Shane’s presentation with, it’s that technology divides us. It doesn’t multiply us and (always) make us more efficient, it compartmentalizes us and pulls us in several directions.
He said that God is a God of the present. He won’t primarily be found in “the figment of the past or the fantasy of the future.”
And when we’re sitting in a room with our wives and kids but we are Twittering on our iPhones, we are somehow insanely absent.
When I’m sitting at a restaurant with a friend and I’m texting my wife or taking a phone call, I’ve mentally and spiritually vacated the place. He/she is now eating alone.
The saddest thing is that, walking away from that presentation, I kept hearing things like “that was cool and all, but I’m glad to have my cell phone back.” (oh yeah, they took our cell phones for the evening)
Or, “but this stuff does amazing things in our ministry.”
And that’s how the banter continued. Everyone was ready to concede some truth to Shane, but ready to take the defensive position on media/technology and its usefulness in their ministries.
I wanted to grab someone and shake them.
People, he’s not talking about effectiveness in your ministries. He’s talking about the fact that it’s killing your soul.
HE’S TALKING ABOUT YOUR SOULS, PEOPLE!
How obtuse are we?
Now, Shane does spend time in his book talking on critically thinking about how we use technology and media as Christians. And he acknowledges that there is a good way to use it. He’s not against using media in churches.
Are we so pragmatic that we can’t see the big picture? We’re losing our souls.
Our souls are dying.
Dying to productivity.
And obsessive self-images.
And addiction.
Our souls are dying and all we can do is squabble about what “works.”
I love my iPhone. It can make me great at my job. And terrible at interacting with God’s presence around me.
Here’s to choosing my soul. Who’s with me?
Late this morning I took a run on the Katy Trail, a 3.5 mile one-way paved trail that runs from Highland Park (where my church is) into uptown. It’s cool because it actually ends at the American Airlines Center, on the west side of a posh area of town.
Because of the location of the trail, you’re more likely than not to be passing young, white, middle-to-upper class people out for a walk, jog, or bike ride.
The more and more I run on the Katy Trail (and generally spend time in Dallas), the more and more I notice something strange…
If Chicago is the Windy City…
and Detroit is the Motor City…
and Philadelphia is the City of Brotherly Love…
LA is the City of Angels…
Maybe Dallas is the Plastic City?
Even in the midst of a recession, I can tell you it looks like there’s no shortage of work for plastic surgeons in the area.
Which reminds me of how superficial this town can be. On Valentine’s night, Ashley and I went to the Hilton Anatole close to downtown and spent the night away from parenting responsibilities. In our room was one of those typical magazines that describes the local flavor and entices visitors to partake in the local culture. By reading that magazine, you’d conclude one thing: the only thing there is to do in Dallas is shop and impress people.
Dallas may be the heartbeat of Texas, but it’s also a place where superficial lifestyles and elitism is pervasive. Everyone is trying to get ahead in every respect—money, family, appearances, cars, clothing, bodies, education, sports.
Which brings me back to something that kept being brought up at the Q Conference—the idea of being countercultural for the common good. What this looks like is for small groups of people, maybe 2-3, to start to put their privilege at risk to create cultural “beachheads.”
A beachhead is a clog in the system. It stakes a small claim on an area (not necessarily physical) and says “this is mine,” and you’ll have to pay attention. The point of a cultural beachhead is to make you think differently about things. To disrupt the rhythm of your routine and make you reflect critically on the way you’re living.
What will it mean to create a cultural beachhead in Highland Park? in Dallas? What will it look like?
And more importantly, who will try it with me?
|
|
|
