First of all, I want to point out that the list in the love chapter is pretty close to the list of the Fruits of the Spirit in Gal 5:22-23. The fruit of the Spirit IS love and love, when properly defined, is all of these things-- joy, peace, patience, etc.
Secondly, note that the context of both passages is community living, not solitary. Love is supposed to be the expression of the church, the action of the person toward the group, not something one feels within oneself.
Thirdly, both passages are dealing with conflict in the church. Galatians is dealing with doctrinal disputes and I Corinthians 12-14 is dealing with disputes regarding worship.
One last thing about the context is that Paul is correcting each church's misunderstanding of the manifestation of the Spirit. The church at Galatia assumes that one's doctrine or relation to the law is the true manifestation of the Spirit. The church at Corinth assumes that displaying great signs and miracles from God is the true manifestation of the Spirit. Paul says "no" to both of them, saying that the true manifestation of the Spirit is loving relation to one's brothers and sisters.
Okay, now let's do a verse-by-verse.
If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
In this section, Paul is basically saying that all of our religious activity, all of our zeal and devotion to God, is pointless without love of others. Everything we think is important in our Christian life is shit unless we care for others. 'Nuf said about that.
In the next section, it is assumed that Paul is defining love. Well, not really, because Jesus really defined it. Agape love is acting for the benefit of the other, no matter who they are, no matter what they've done to you. That's the definition we need to remember as we explore Paul's explanaton. He is really describing what love looks like in the context of others, especially the church.
Love is patient
The term "patience" is better translated "long suffering" as in the KJV. It means we are sticking with it no matter what difficulties arise. In the context, this doesn't mean patience in general-- it means patience with those around us. As they give us problems and difficulties and irritate us and enact sins and complain about stupid stuff-- in all that, we are still to act for their benefit. Nothing they do should change our attitude of trying to figure out how we can best do good to them.
Love is kind
The opposite of "kind" is "harsh" or a negative impact. Thus, we are to act in a benefitial way, and in gentleness.
Love is not jealous
We shouldn't look at the people around us as competitors, who are getting the things that we deserve. We should be looking at people as our allies, our mutual supporters, so a benefit to our brother or sister is a benefit to ourselves, even if not directly.
Love is not arrogant
The term is "puff up" or pride. But it is not pride in the Greek sense, hubris. It is rather the act of making ourselves significant-- one of the great sins of the Bible. We shouldn't be looking at others as an opportunity to make ourselves more important, nor should we put others less important so we can look better in comparison.
Love does not act unbecomingly
This is translated a lot of ways It really means to act in a way that is embarassing or shameful to those around one. This doesn't mean saying an uncomfortable truth, but basically acting as one acts when one is drunk. To act without regard to social norms, to act indecently, not caring how others feel about it.
It does not seek its own
This can mean one of two things in the context-- either seeing other people as just resource to get what one wants instead of people who have their own needs and concerns. Or it could mean insisting upon one's own way to the detriment of other people's way of thinking-- being demanding.
Is not provoked
When we act in love, we do not get instantly upset or angry at others, reacting harshly toward them. A good translation of this is, "It is not irritable".
Does not take account an injury
The term for "account" means to give it words, as in to write it down. It basically means, "doesn't hold a grudge".
Does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices in the truth
The term "rejoice" is often used to mean "have a party over". In this context, it means to be happy for another. So, in love, we grieve when someone else commits a sin or wrong. But when someone confesses their sin, admitting their wrong, we do get happy about that.
Bears all things
This also has two possible meanings. It could mean the opposite of "being provoked," putting up with people's irritating habits and sins. Or it could mean to take on other people's problems. When someone has a need, it is no longer their problem alone, but we take it on as our own.
Believes all things
As we said in our conversation, it does not mean that we believe every load of crap anyone gives us. But it does mean that we give them the benefit of the doubt.
Hopes all things
When we love, we don't assume that a person is destined to hell, nor that the worst will happen in their lives. Rather, we hope for the best, for repentance, for deliverance.
Endures all things
The term "endure" in a positive sense means to "hold one's ground". Not just to put up with people, but to stick with them, to not give up on them, to be faithful.
Love never fails.
This should literally be translated, "Love never falls," and it fits with the last two statements. Frankly, we don't give up on people. We remain faithful, hopeful, acting for their benefit no matter what. Looking at what Paul says in the next statement, it also means that acts of love continue on past judgment, past regime changes, past changes of cultures, past changes of mores. Acting in the benefit of others is always a positive act, no matter what context you live in.
But if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.
Paul is saying that the things that the Corinthians are focusing on-- miracles and prophecies and tongues are only significant in the time frame they are living in. Eventually, when Jesus returns, their significance will be little. When we have God before us, what need do we have of prophecy with its guessing game? And tongues will be unnecessary, because we will be able to speak to God and hear from God clearly. So these things are just temporary, insignificant in the long view. Focusing on miracles is a sign of our immaturity as humans. Only when we hear God clearly can we do away with them, but that clarity is significant.
But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Of everything we do religiously, the only three things that endure past Jesus' coming is our faith, our hope and our love. Our faith, meaning our devotion to God and Jesus, because that is the basis of everything we will do in the future. Our hope, because that's what Jesus' coming is. When He comes, then our hope is realized and all of our actions based on that coming reality will be realized. But the greatest of the three is love. Why? Because according to Jesus' word, that is how we will be judged and rewarded. Not on our devotion to Jesus, not on our hope that He is returning-- but based on our acting in benevolence to those around us. If we fail to do this, then we will be sent to hell. If we succeed in meeting people's needs, at our own inconvenience, then we will obtain life with Him. (Matthew 25:31-46). So love is most important of the qualities we need to succeed in the future.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Anne Rice on Jesus Scholarship
…The whole case for the nondivine Jesus who stumbled into Jerusalem and somehow got crucified by nobody and had nothing to do with the founding of Christianity and would be horrified if he knew about it—that whole picture which had floated in the liberal circles I frequented as an atheist for thirty years—that case was not made. Not only was it not made, I discovered in this field [of study] some of the worst and most biased scholarship I’d ever read.
I saw almost no skeptical scholarship that was convincing, and the Gospels, shredded by critics, lost all intensity when reconstructed by various theorists. They were in no way compelling when treated as composites and records of later “communities.”
I was unconvinced by the wild postulations of those who claimed to be children of the Enlightenment. And I had also sensed something else. Many of these scholars, scholars who had apparently devoted their life to New Testament scholarship, disliked Jesus Christ. Some pitied him as a hopeless failure. Others sneered at him, and some felt an outright contempt. This came between the lines of the books. This emerged in the personality of the texts.
The people who go into Elizabethan studies don’t set out to prove that Queen Elizabeth I was a fool. They don’t personally dislike her. They don’t make snickering remarks about her or spend their careers trying to pick apart her historical reputation. They approach her in other ways. They don’t even apply this sort of dislike or suspicion or contempt to other Elizabethian figures. If they do, the person is usually not the focus of the study. Occasionally a scholar studies a villain, yes. But even then, the author generally ends up arguing for the good points of a villain or for his or her place in history or for some mitigating circumstance, that redeems the study itself. People studying disasters in history may be highly critical of the rulers or the milieu at the time, yes. But in general scholars don’t spend their lives in the company of historical figures whom they openly despise.
But there are New Testament scholars who detest and despise Jesus Christ. Of course, we all benefit from freedom in the academic community; we benefit from the enormous size of biblical studies today and the great range of contributions that are being made. I’m not arguing for censorship. But maybe I’m arguing for sensitivity—on the part of those who read these books. Maybe I’m arguing for a little wariness when it comes to the field in general. What looks like solid ground may not be solid ground at all.
-Anne Rice, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt, pp.313-315
I saw almost no skeptical scholarship that was convincing, and the Gospels, shredded by critics, lost all intensity when reconstructed by various theorists. They were in no way compelling when treated as composites and records of later “communities.”
I was unconvinced by the wild postulations of those who claimed to be children of the Enlightenment. And I had also sensed something else. Many of these scholars, scholars who had apparently devoted their life to New Testament scholarship, disliked Jesus Christ. Some pitied him as a hopeless failure. Others sneered at him, and some felt an outright contempt. This came between the lines of the books. This emerged in the personality of the texts.
The people who go into Elizabethan studies don’t set out to prove that Queen Elizabeth I was a fool. They don’t personally dislike her. They don’t make snickering remarks about her or spend their careers trying to pick apart her historical reputation. They approach her in other ways. They don’t even apply this sort of dislike or suspicion or contempt to other Elizabethian figures. If they do, the person is usually not the focus of the study. Occasionally a scholar studies a villain, yes. But even then, the author generally ends up arguing for the good points of a villain or for his or her place in history or for some mitigating circumstance, that redeems the study itself. People studying disasters in history may be highly critical of the rulers or the milieu at the time, yes. But in general scholars don’t spend their lives in the company of historical figures whom they openly despise.
But there are New Testament scholars who detest and despise Jesus Christ. Of course, we all benefit from freedom in the academic community; we benefit from the enormous size of biblical studies today and the great range of contributions that are being made. I’m not arguing for censorship. But maybe I’m arguing for sensitivity—on the part of those who read these books. Maybe I’m arguing for a little wariness when it comes to the field in general. What looks like solid ground may not be solid ground at all.
-Anne Rice, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt, pp.313-315
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Women and Men in Leadership-- A Postion Paper
Issue
The church is divided about what the Biblical command is concerning the leadership of women in the church. Many churches throughout the history of the church have indicated certain Pauline passages as being normative for women and men in leadership, including, “Women must remain silent in the churches” (I Corinthians 14:34), “I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man…” (I Timothy 2:12). Other churches have focused on the passages in the New Testament that show the leadership of women in the church, such as Mary (the first preacher of Jesus’ resurrection), Priscilla, Chloe and Junias (Matthew 27:1-10; Romans 16:3, 7; Acts 18:24-27; I Corinthians 1:11). The one side seems to indicate that women should never be in leadership in the church, while the other indicates that women should always be accepted in leadership. Is biblical counsel on this divided? Below is how I understand the biblical passages.
Biblical Themes
The Practice of Women in Leadership:
At the very least, it must be admitted that women were leaders in the early church. Junias (a female name, although sometimes mistranslated) was called an apostle by Paul (Romans 16:7). Women were always accepted as prophets in the early church, which was a position in which someone spoke for God and sometimes acted with God’s authority (Acts 21:9; I Corinthians 11:5; Luke 2:36-38). While these positions weren’t as frequently filled by women, it allowed the possibility of women being in church leadership.
Sexual interdependence:
Biblically, men and women are equal in the church community, one not greater than the other, although in society it may be different (Galatians 3:28). The sexes are interdependent, each having their place of leadership and each having their place of submission to each other (I Corinthians 11:11-12).
Male headship:
However, it seems clear from a cursory reading of Scripture that men were authorities over women (I Timothy 2:12; I Corinthians 11:2-3; Ephesians 5:22-23; Colossians 3:18; I Peter 3:7). It must be noted, though, that every one of these passages are not speaking of male dominance over females, but of a husband being head over his wife. Even passages that are often translated “men” and “women” instead of “husband” and “wife” are better understood in the second manner, dealing with relationships in marriage, not about male and female relationships in general.
Yet even this “headship” is marginalized in Scripture. Yes, the husband has the responsibility of being head of the family, but this also means that he has the responsibility of being sacrificial (Ephesians 5:25-33; I Peter 3:7; Colossians 3:9). This means allowing the wife to take leadership as it is necessary, even as Aquila allowed his wife Pricilla to take leadership in most church matters (Acts 18:24-27; I Corinthians 16:19).
General position statement on Women in leadership
Women need to have positions of leadership in the congregation, in order to provide a voice and an authority that has been oppressed by both church and state for millennia. A man is not qualified to be a leader over any woman because of his maleness, even as a woman is not especially qualified to be submissive because of her femaleness. Rather, the church should celebrate the lesser, and give them a higher position, if they are qualified otherwise (I Corinthians 12:22-23). The church is supposed to be an example of the kingdom of God, in which men and women, poor and rich, slave and free, educated and uneducated are treated with equal respect and honor, even as will be the case when the Lord comes to earth. At the same time, the church will respect the God-given, but this-worldly authorities. Thus, should a wife desire to be in leadership in the church, then the church should look to the husband for permission. Should such permission be granted, then the wife is to have equal authority of anyone else in her position—including the authority of equal respect, obedience and salary as one would give anyone else in the position.
Seemingly contrary passages
Some would say that my position is in opposition to some Scriptural passages. Quickly, I will present my understanding of the original intent of these passages:
a. “Man was not created for woman’s sake, but woman for man’s” I Corinthians 11:2-16. This is a complex passage, but my understanding is this: Paul was answering a teaching that was taking place in Corinth, a summary of which he received in his letter from them (I Cor. 7:1). He offers an introductory commendation of how closely they listened to his teaching (I Cor. 11:2-3), then he quotes a passage from their letter to him, which describes their argument of why women should have their head covered when praying and prophesying and why men ought not to. (I Cor. 11:4-10) They say it is because of the inferiority of women to men. Paul, however, immediately counters their reasoning by saying that men and women are interdependent, neither one inferior to the other (11:11-12). He then speaks against the practice of head covering, saying first that it is unnecessary (11:13-15), and then offering the final argument that “we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God”—claiming that their special revelation is not shared by the church in general. (Some translations translate this “no other practice”, but this is a mistranslation of the Greek—see Zerwick, An Analysis of the Greek New Testament, as well as the New Revised Standard Version, the King James Version and the New King James Version).
b. “Women must remain silent in the churches.” I Corinthians 14:32-38. Paul here is using an example of a clearly false prophecy to make his point about chaotic prophecy in the church. A prophet should not be carried away by his spirit, but the spirit should be under his control, which means the prophet shouldn’t speak whatever and whenever a spirit encourages him or her to speak. Paul gives an example of a prophecy stated in Corinth that states that women should no longer be prophets in any of the churches throughout the world. Paul’s response to this is basically, “Who gave you the right to say this?” Paul already confirmed that women are allowed to be prophets (as the Corinthians already knew, or else why put coverings on their heads when prophesying?), and he sees this prophecy as not undermining women’s authority in the church so much as his own. Paul then affirms his own authority, which affirms the right of women to speak in the churches.
c. “I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man.” I Timothy 2. This passage is in the context of a household command list. “Men” in this passage is better translated “husbands” and “woman” is better translated “wives”. Thus, this passage is only affirming the headship of a husband over his wife. A husband’s headship responsibility, Paul says, includes praying daily for authorities—in that way they affirm those who are in authority over them (2:8). In the same way, wives show their submission to authority by being modest in clothing and demeanor. This does not mean that women cannot be teachers in the church, with their husband’s permission. It rather means that the husband should give permission, and the wife should not demand the authoritative position over her husband.
In Summary:
I hold that the seemingly contrary positions of male headship, but the practice of women leaders is the difference between the old system of practice in the world—patriarchy—and the new kingdom system—sexual and social equality. The church should allow the superficial practice of the one in the world, although that practice is marginalized by the radical, sacrificial love of the leader to those under him. But within the church, patriarchy is already overthrown, and women, slaves, the poor and the outcast are given greater honor, including positions of leadership.
To affirm patriarchy in the church, and to leave it unmarginalized in Christian marriage, is doing harm to the gospel of Jesus, who allows every person equal access to God the Father. Should we force any person because of one’s social standing to not do the work of the Spirit, to not speak the word of God given to them, or to not love as God has commanded them to love is to do irreparable harm to the ability of the whole church to follow Jesus. To force some men into a leadership role they are not equipped to handle is to harm him and everyone under him. To not allow a woman the leadership abilities granted to her by the Spirit is to take away the Spirit’s gift to her family and to the church. I pray that the church cease practicing the very teachings Paul was opposed to in the first century: the patriarchal stranglehold of leadership, which is choking the life out of the church.
The church is divided about what the Biblical command is concerning the leadership of women in the church. Many churches throughout the history of the church have indicated certain Pauline passages as being normative for women and men in leadership, including, “Women must remain silent in the churches” (I Corinthians 14:34), “I do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man…” (I Timothy 2:12). Other churches have focused on the passages in the New Testament that show the leadership of women in the church, such as Mary (the first preacher of Jesus’ resurrection), Priscilla, Chloe and Junias (Matthew 27:1-10; Romans 16:3, 7; Acts 18:24-27; I Corinthians 1:11). The one side seems to indicate that women should never be in leadership in the church, while the other indicates that women should always be accepted in leadership. Is biblical counsel on this divided? Below is how I understand the biblical passages.
Biblical Themes
The Practice of Women in Leadership:
At the very least, it must be admitted that women were leaders in the early church. Junias (a female name, although sometimes mistranslated) was called an apostle by Paul (Romans 16:7). Women were always accepted as prophets in the early church, which was a position in which someone spoke for God and sometimes acted with God’s authority (Acts 21:9; I Corinthians 11:5; Luke 2:36-38). While these positions weren’t as frequently filled by women, it allowed the possibility of women being in church leadership.
Sexual interdependence:
Biblically, men and women are equal in the church community, one not greater than the other, although in society it may be different (Galatians 3:28). The sexes are interdependent, each having their place of leadership and each having their place of submission to each other (I Corinthians 11:11-12).
Male headship:
However, it seems clear from a cursory reading of Scripture that men were authorities over women (I Timothy 2:12; I Corinthians 11:2-3; Ephesians 5:22-23; Colossians 3:18; I Peter 3:7). It must be noted, though, that every one of these passages are not speaking of male dominance over females, but of a husband being head over his wife. Even passages that are often translated “men” and “women” instead of “husband” and “wife” are better understood in the second manner, dealing with relationships in marriage, not about male and female relationships in general.
Yet even this “headship” is marginalized in Scripture. Yes, the husband has the responsibility of being head of the family, but this also means that he has the responsibility of being sacrificial (Ephesians 5:25-33; I Peter 3:7; Colossians 3:9). This means allowing the wife to take leadership as it is necessary, even as Aquila allowed his wife Pricilla to take leadership in most church matters (Acts 18:24-27; I Corinthians 16:19).
General position statement on Women in leadership
Women need to have positions of leadership in the congregation, in order to provide a voice and an authority that has been oppressed by both church and state for millennia. A man is not qualified to be a leader over any woman because of his maleness, even as a woman is not especially qualified to be submissive because of her femaleness. Rather, the church should celebrate the lesser, and give them a higher position, if they are qualified otherwise (I Corinthians 12:22-23). The church is supposed to be an example of the kingdom of God, in which men and women, poor and rich, slave and free, educated and uneducated are treated with equal respect and honor, even as will be the case when the Lord comes to earth. At the same time, the church will respect the God-given, but this-worldly authorities. Thus, should a wife desire to be in leadership in the church, then the church should look to the husband for permission. Should such permission be granted, then the wife is to have equal authority of anyone else in her position—including the authority of equal respect, obedience and salary as one would give anyone else in the position.
Seemingly contrary passages
Some would say that my position is in opposition to some Scriptural passages. Quickly, I will present my understanding of the original intent of these passages:
a. “Man was not created for woman’s sake, but woman for man’s” I Corinthians 11:2-16. This is a complex passage, but my understanding is this: Paul was answering a teaching that was taking place in Corinth, a summary of which he received in his letter from them (I Cor. 7:1). He offers an introductory commendation of how closely they listened to his teaching (I Cor. 11:2-3), then he quotes a passage from their letter to him, which describes their argument of why women should have their head covered when praying and prophesying and why men ought not to. (I Cor. 11:4-10) They say it is because of the inferiority of women to men. Paul, however, immediately counters their reasoning by saying that men and women are interdependent, neither one inferior to the other (11:11-12). He then speaks against the practice of head covering, saying first that it is unnecessary (11:13-15), and then offering the final argument that “we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God”—claiming that their special revelation is not shared by the church in general. (Some translations translate this “no other practice”, but this is a mistranslation of the Greek—see Zerwick, An Analysis of the Greek New Testament, as well as the New Revised Standard Version, the King James Version and the New King James Version).
b. “Women must remain silent in the churches.” I Corinthians 14:32-38. Paul here is using an example of a clearly false prophecy to make his point about chaotic prophecy in the church. A prophet should not be carried away by his spirit, but the spirit should be under his control, which means the prophet shouldn’t speak whatever and whenever a spirit encourages him or her to speak. Paul gives an example of a prophecy stated in Corinth that states that women should no longer be prophets in any of the churches throughout the world. Paul’s response to this is basically, “Who gave you the right to say this?” Paul already confirmed that women are allowed to be prophets (as the Corinthians already knew, or else why put coverings on their heads when prophesying?), and he sees this prophecy as not undermining women’s authority in the church so much as his own. Paul then affirms his own authority, which affirms the right of women to speak in the churches.
c. “I do not allow a woman to teach or have authority over a man.” I Timothy 2. This passage is in the context of a household command list. “Men” in this passage is better translated “husbands” and “woman” is better translated “wives”. Thus, this passage is only affirming the headship of a husband over his wife. A husband’s headship responsibility, Paul says, includes praying daily for authorities—in that way they affirm those who are in authority over them (2:8). In the same way, wives show their submission to authority by being modest in clothing and demeanor. This does not mean that women cannot be teachers in the church, with their husband’s permission. It rather means that the husband should give permission, and the wife should not demand the authoritative position over her husband.
In Summary:
I hold that the seemingly contrary positions of male headship, but the practice of women leaders is the difference between the old system of practice in the world—patriarchy—and the new kingdom system—sexual and social equality. The church should allow the superficial practice of the one in the world, although that practice is marginalized by the radical, sacrificial love of the leader to those under him. But within the church, patriarchy is already overthrown, and women, slaves, the poor and the outcast are given greater honor, including positions of leadership.
To affirm patriarchy in the church, and to leave it unmarginalized in Christian marriage, is doing harm to the gospel of Jesus, who allows every person equal access to God the Father. Should we force any person because of one’s social standing to not do the work of the Spirit, to not speak the word of God given to them, or to not love as God has commanded them to love is to do irreparable harm to the ability of the whole church to follow Jesus. To force some men into a leadership role they are not equipped to handle is to harm him and everyone under him. To not allow a woman the leadership abilities granted to her by the Spirit is to take away the Spirit’s gift to her family and to the church. I pray that the church cease practicing the very teachings Paul was opposed to in the first century: the patriarchal stranglehold of leadership, which is choking the life out of the church.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
What Is The Cross We Should Take Up?
Mark 15:12-40
The shame of Jesus
Convicted, yet innocent
Condemned by a crowd
Considered worse than a murderer and robber
Mocked
Beaten
Unable to bear his own cross
Crucified—hung in shame as a criminal
Didn’t take wine with myrrh
Crucified with robbers
Publically mocked as a false prophet, a liar and a weakling
Publically insulted
Prayer ignored and misunderstood
None of his friends would stand with him
Mark 8:34-38
This shame is what we should carry.
Yet Jesus told us not to be ashamed of the shame he bore and the shame we are to bear for him
If we are ashamed of the shame of Jesus, we will be shamed.
I Corinthians 1:17-31
The gospel is foolishness, because it teaches that Jesus is crucified
What is foolish about it?
To be hung on a cross is the ultimate act of shame
To be shamed means that one is unfit to be a leader/authority of anyone
But Christians hold to a belief of the one who was most shamed is most exalted by God
Followers of Jesus not only believe in him, but follow in these shameful acts
It is opposed to any kind of worldly “wisdom”—it doesn’t make sense!
Martyrdom and humiliation as salvation—not self-defense, not creating justice, not delivering curses, not
The cross is Humility, death, suffering, persecution, sacrifice, love, the ultimate act of faith—all for the sake of Jesus
Yet the cross is salvation. Anyone who does not take up the cross does not have salvation in Christ.
The salvation of Christ is the salvation of the cross.
You can try salvation in other ways, but that is not the way of Jesus.
Salvation by religious practices is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by intellectual belief is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by being nice is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by prayer alone is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by good worship is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by bible study or doctrine is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by going to church is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by hoping things will be okay is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by saying “praise the Lord” a lot or honoring Jesus is not the way of Jesus.
Salvation by acting crazy alone is not the way of Jesus.
Jesus calls us to the cross.
He calls us to shame
He calls us to act crazy like he acted crazy.
He calls us to do what he did.
He calls us to hope in the promises of God.
He calls us to give up everything
He calls us to be stupid in the eyes of the world
He calls us to take up his cross.
The shame of Jesus
Convicted, yet innocent
Condemned by a crowd
Considered worse than a murderer and robber
Mocked
Beaten
Unable to bear his own cross
Crucified—hung in shame as a criminal
Didn’t take wine with myrrh
Crucified with robbers
Publically mocked as a false prophet, a liar and a weakling
Publically insulted
Prayer ignored and misunderstood
None of his friends would stand with him
Mark 8:34-38
This shame is what we should carry.
Yet Jesus told us not to be ashamed of the shame he bore and the shame we are to bear for him
If we are ashamed of the shame of Jesus, we will be shamed.
I Corinthians 1:17-31
The gospel is foolishness, because it teaches that Jesus is crucified
What is foolish about it?
To be hung on a cross is the ultimate act of shame
To be shamed means that one is unfit to be a leader/authority of anyone
But Christians hold to a belief of the one who was most shamed is most exalted by God
Followers of Jesus not only believe in him, but follow in these shameful acts
It is opposed to any kind of worldly “wisdom”—it doesn’t make sense!
Martyrdom and humiliation as salvation—not self-defense, not creating justice, not delivering curses, not
The cross is Humility, death, suffering, persecution, sacrifice, love, the ultimate act of faith—all for the sake of Jesus
Yet the cross is salvation. Anyone who does not take up the cross does not have salvation in Christ.
The salvation of Christ is the salvation of the cross.
You can try salvation in other ways, but that is not the way of Jesus.
Salvation by religious practices is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by intellectual belief is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by being nice is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by prayer alone is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by good worship is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by bible study or doctrine is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by going to church is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by hoping things will be okay is not the way of Jesus
Salvation by saying “praise the Lord” a lot or honoring Jesus is not the way of Jesus.
Salvation by acting crazy alone is not the way of Jesus.
Jesus calls us to the cross.
He calls us to shame
He calls us to act crazy like he acted crazy.
He calls us to do what he did.
He calls us to hope in the promises of God.
He calls us to give up everything
He calls us to be stupid in the eyes of the world
He calls us to take up his cross.
Jesus' Faith
This is not a list of faith IN Jesus, but the faith that Jesus himself displayed when on earth. It is a basic summary of Jesus' faith as found in the Synoptic gospels:
- Act in accordance with God’s desire even if outward circumstances encourage one to do the opposite
Being baptized by John, even if it doesn’t make sense
Taking on disciples without clear sustenance or household to provide for them
Blessing to the righteous sufferer
Rejoicing in persecution
- Faith—confidence that promises of God will be fulfilled and acting consistently with that confidence
- Following the Spirit and obeying his promptings
- Looking for the Scriptures to be fulfilled—commands obeyed and promises kept by God
Answers temptations with Scriptures that must be fulfilled
Annul commands—least
Everything in the law and prophets must be fulfilled
Avoiding evil at all cost
Fulfillment of law is to love others
- Focusing on eschatalogical promises to be fulfilled
- Looking for God to fulfill promises of salvation, not other powers
-Don’t depend on money, possessions for salvation
-Don’t depend on other men for salvation
- Fulfilling commands for God’s sake, not for the sake of other people
- Prayer is for the fulfilling of God’s promises
Pray that God would fulfill his eschatalogical promises
Pray persistently for the fulfillment of promises
Pray God would love his people enough to send out laborers
- Humility: Not fulfilling self-promoting promises oneself, but allowing God to do that.
Requesting silence when true authority is shown
- Putting oneself in the position of looking foolish if God doesn’t fulfill his promise
Commanding demons to go, rebuking sicknesses
- Confidence in authority given by God
Healings and exorcisms done by authority
Centurion confident that authority spoken from afar is enough
Passing authority on to disciples
- Looking to God to provide basic sustenance, if God’s kingdom and righteousness is top priority
-Not focusing on work and farming to provide for one
- Encouraging, teaching and demanding faith in others that they too might gain the salvation of God
-Encouraging confidence in God’s promises
-Encouraging boldness that leads to suffering
-Encouraging radical obedience to love, beyond the law
-Encouraging confidence in God’s promise about Jesus—that he is God’s son
-Calling on disciples to leave everything—one’s normal labor— and follow him
-Discouraging fear
-Encouraging trust in God’s judgment (not taking judgment in one’s own hands)
-Commanding to depend on God in ministry (depend for sustenance, for ability to minister)
Summary of Jesus' faith:
Confidence in the fulfillment of the promises of the Scriptures
Boldness to proclaim such fulfillment
Confidence in God's authority/power to give salvation to his people who are in desperate need of salvation
Confidence in God's salvation, even if one needs to face distress/testing
Enduring the objections and hatred of those who did not have confidence in the gospel
Prepared to sacrifice all for the sake of the coming salvation of God
Sacrifice for others who need the salvation of God
- Act in accordance with God’s desire even if outward circumstances encourage one to do the opposite
Being baptized by John, even if it doesn’t make sense
Taking on disciples without clear sustenance or household to provide for them
Blessing to the righteous sufferer
Rejoicing in persecution
- Faith—confidence that promises of God will be fulfilled and acting consistently with that confidence
- Following the Spirit and obeying his promptings
- Looking for the Scriptures to be fulfilled—commands obeyed and promises kept by God
Answers temptations with Scriptures that must be fulfilled
Annul commands—least
Everything in the law and prophets must be fulfilled
Avoiding evil at all cost
Fulfillment of law is to love others
- Focusing on eschatalogical promises to be fulfilled
- Looking for God to fulfill promises of salvation, not other powers
-Don’t depend on money, possessions for salvation
-Don’t depend on other men for salvation
- Fulfilling commands for God’s sake, not for the sake of other people
- Prayer is for the fulfilling of God’s promises
Pray that God would fulfill his eschatalogical promises
Pray persistently for the fulfillment of promises
Pray God would love his people enough to send out laborers
- Humility: Not fulfilling self-promoting promises oneself, but allowing God to do that.
Requesting silence when true authority is shown
- Putting oneself in the position of looking foolish if God doesn’t fulfill his promise
Commanding demons to go, rebuking sicknesses
- Confidence in authority given by God
Healings and exorcisms done by authority
Centurion confident that authority spoken from afar is enough
Passing authority on to disciples
- Looking to God to provide basic sustenance, if God’s kingdom and righteousness is top priority
-Not focusing on work and farming to provide for one
- Encouraging, teaching and demanding faith in others that they too might gain the salvation of God
-Encouraging confidence in God’s promises
-Encouraging boldness that leads to suffering
-Encouraging radical obedience to love, beyond the law
-Encouraging confidence in God’s promise about Jesus—that he is God’s son
-Calling on disciples to leave everything—one’s normal labor— and follow him
-Discouraging fear
-Encouraging trust in God’s judgment (not taking judgment in one’s own hands)
-Commanding to depend on God in ministry (depend for sustenance, for ability to minister)
Summary of Jesus' faith:
Confidence in the fulfillment of the promises of the Scriptures
Boldness to proclaim such fulfillment
Confidence in God's authority/power to give salvation to his people who are in desperate need of salvation
Confidence in God's salvation, even if one needs to face distress/testing
Enduring the objections and hatred of those who did not have confidence in the gospel
Prepared to sacrifice all for the sake of the coming salvation of God
Sacrifice for others who need the salvation of God
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Suffering for Fun and Poverty for Profit
It is a fact that I do not share often that I grew up in Orange County, California. The OC. The beach, the multinational corporations, the malls. According to fictional media, the center of wealth and decedent lifestyles. Mind you, me and my friends teenage lives didn’t look much like the lives of the kids on the TV show or the movie named after my home county, but there is no doubt that I grew up privileged and a bit spoiled. Heck, I didn’t know any better, and as I became a Christian, I saw that wealth was a proper result of living a right life in Jesus. Every man and woman I knew who lived in Christ lived successful, beautiful, powerful existences. That was just to be expected if one lived in Jesus and was responsible and worked hard.
That was before I went to India. I went there to go to a mission school, and what a schooling I received. I spent six months in Calcutta and Bangladesh. Calcutta, at the time I lived there, had a population of 12 million people with a million of them living on the street, washing themselves under pumps in the street, picking through garbage heaps, holding half-dead infants. Bangladesh is considered the largest, poorest country in the world, having a mostly rural population half the size of the U.S. in a country the size of Wisconsin. I saw people in poverty, but learned from my caretakers not to give, not to even look at beggars, or else I would be taken advantage of.
I returned to Orange County on Christmas Day—a religious holiday covered in a veneer of materialism and decadence. I spent many nights awake at night, wondering how God could allow Orange County and Calcutta to both exist. It seems so unbelievably unjust when held side by side. And my own response in the midst of poverty was disgusting—selfishness, not “wanting to be taken advantage of” when poverty and death surrounded me. But what is to be my response to poverty? How should I respond to suffering and poverty, given that I have so many resources, so much?
I could have responded in guilt, and much of the time I did. I could have responded with apathy, and treat the poor as if their poverty is their own fault, or the fault of their nations. I could have responded to this contradiction in the earth by becoming an activist, to make the world a more just place. But as I looked to Jesus for my answers, I realized that what Jesus was actually asking me to do is to live the life of the cross.
We look to Jesus for our salvation and trust in God that through Jesus we will be delivered from sin, Satan and death. Praise God for the deliverance we have through his death on the cross! May the cross be proclaimed from the lowest parts of the earth to the highest point in heaven!
But in our proclamation of the salvation to be found in the cross of Jesus, we have forgotten the teaching of Jesus about the cross. The cross is not just something that we look at, believe in and admire from a distance. Rather, the cross is something for us to carry. Jesus said, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's will save it.” (Mark 8:34-35)
The gospel is not a “feel good” religion. The source of the gospel is Jesus himself, and he himself determines what the gospel consists of. And Jesus himself declared the gospel to be the accepting of suffering and poverty—not only for himself, but for everyone who wishes to receive his salvation.
If we desire to partake in the salvation of Jesus, the cross is not just an option—it is a requirement. To lose our lives, to deny ourselves is not just something for the super-powerful saint, but for the everyday disciple of Jesus. If we do not follow him, we do not have salvation.
Poverty is not just an option.
The cross of Jesus is to accept a lifestyle of what many call “inadequate living” or poverty. Poverty is not just an option. Rather, it is an essential requirement of the gospel. To accept the gospel, one must renounce ones own riches and possessions for the sake of the kingdom of God, for the sake of the needy.
What does Jesus say?
The poor of this world will receive God’s kingdom.
“Blessed are you disciples who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of heaven.” Luke 6:20
“God chose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him.” James 2:5
No one can be a disciple unless he renounces all of his possessions.
“Let’s say that a king is going to meet another king in battle. The lesser king has ten thousand men and the greater king has twenty thousand. Wouldn’t the lesser king send a delegation to the greater king for terms of surrender—giving up out of his storehouse what he has? Even so, no one can be my disciple unless he renounces all of his possessions.” Luke 14:31-33.
If you give what you have to the poor, you will have treasure in heaven.
“Do not treasure up treasure on earth, but treasure up treasure in heaven.” Matthew 6:19-20
“Sell your possessions and give to the poor and so make for yourselves a treasure in heaven.” Luke 12:33
One will gain the kingdom of heaven only by selling what he has and giving it away.
“The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in a field. A man found it and hid it again. Then he sold everything he had in order to buy that field in order to gain joy.” Matthew 13:44
He who renounces a normal life for the sake of Jesus will gain more than what he left and eternal life.
“There is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake, but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age. He will receive houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms— along with persecutions. And in the age to come he will receive eternal life.” Mark 10:29-30
The one who renounces their possessions for the sake of the gospel will have their provisions met by God.
“Do not worry about your life— what you will eat or what you will drink. Do not worry about your body—what you will put on. Look at the birds of the air, that they do not farm, nor harvest nor store up food, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they?” Matthew 6:25-26
If we are to follow Jesus, we must renounce our riches and possessions and surrender them to those who have needs. If we do not do so, we do not have the salvation of Jesus. This is a result of our faith, not just a nice thing to do. This is fulfilling the word of Jesus.
Suffering is not just an option.
The New Testament is clear about the place of suffering in the Christian life. If one is not suffering persecutions, tribulations, testings or opposition because they are following Jesus, then that one is not truly following Jesus. The one who does not suffer does not receive the kingdom of God.
What do Jesus and the apostles say?
Those who are persecuted will gain God’s kingdom.
“Blessed are you when men hate you and insult you and slander you and separate themselves from you for the sake of the Son of Man. Be glad in that day and leap for your reward will be great in heaven.” Luke 6:22-23
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:10
“But woe to you when all men speak well of you, for so did their fathers treat the false prophets.” Luke 6:26
If we are followers of Jesus, we will receive the sufferings he suffered
“A disciple is not greater than his teacher, nor is a slave greater than his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher. If they have called the head of the household “Satan,” then how much more will they slander those who live in the house!” Matthew 10:24-25
“If you patiently endure suffering for doing what is right, you have favor with God. For the purpose of suffering like this you have been called, since Christ also suffered for you, and thus he left an example for you to follow in his steps.” I Peter 2:20-21
It was Jesus’ purpose that his followers suffer opposition
“Do not think that I came to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace to you, but a sword will be held against you. I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household.” Matthew 10:34-36
The one who hates his life and suffers for Jesus will gain eternal life.
Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it to life eternal. John 12:24-25
We will not gain the benefits of the salvation of Jesus without suffering.“We will not enter the kingdom of heaven except through many trials.” Acts 14 22
“Everyone who desires to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” II Timothy 3:12
“The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.” Romans 8:16-17
Suffering is not an option. If we do not suffer for the sake of Jesus and the gospel, then it shows that we are not true followers of Jesus. If we do not truly follow Jesus, then we will not gain the kingdom of heaven or be called children of God.
In the parable of the sower, Jesus indicates two areas that we will fall away from the gospel of God: If we do not endure under suffering, and if we focus on the things and worries of this world (Mark 4:14-20). These are the two areas that have also captured the church of the United States. We want to do everything we can to avoid suffering—even if it means that we must compromise the gospel. “God will forgive me” we say, and than we move on spending our lives focused on vanquishing pain instead of loving one another. We desire comforts and pleasures, at almost any cost. If others around us do not have their needs met, that doesn’t matter. What is more important is that we have our entertainments, comforts and securities.
We have forsaken the gospel for the things of this world. How can we think that we will gain the kingdom of God? How can we think that Jesus is pleased with our lives devoid of sacrifice or love?
What kind of poverty and suffering?
Not every kind of poverty or suffering will be blessed by God. Not everyone who is poor will be welcomed into the kingdom. Nor does every poor man represent Jesus. Those who are poor because of their own laziness are not blessed. Those who are poor because of drug use or mental illness are not blessed. Not even all of those who surrender their possessions to the poor will be saved. Only certain kinds of renouncing and poverty will be blessed.
Not all of those who suffer will gain God’s kingdom. Not everyone who is sick will gain the blessing of God. Not everyone suffering from war, famine or hate crimes will gain God’s favor. Those who suffer because they are taking vengeance are suffering rightly, and gain no blessing from God. Those who suffer because they have done wrong are not to be praised. Those who suffer because they are teaching that which is apart from the teaching of Jesus gain no favor from God.
So what kind of poverty and suffering do gain favor with God?
There are three kinds of poverty or suffering that follow the way of Jesus;
1. The renouncing of all that we have for the sake of Jesus, the kingdom of God and the gospel.
If we are to follow Jesus, the Lord requires that we place everything that we have at his disposal for his use. Jesus does not just require a tithe of our income. Nor does he seek out the occasional love offering. Rather, what he wants is total surrender. Jesus wants everything we have to be put at his disposal—every relationship, every bit of our time, every possession we have, every bit of our knowledge, every authority we have, all of our money, all of our energies. All of these are to be surrendered to Jesus for use in the kingdom of God. Some of these things are to be of no use for him—some of our relationships will have to be severed, some of our possessions will have to be sold, some of our ambitions will have to be laid aside, some of us will have to quit our jobs. There is nothing left for the world. There is nothing left for sin. Other things can be transferred to his use: our money can be used for his kingdom, our goals can be for building up his people, our energies can be used for obeying him. But whatever we have, whatever we are, all goes to Jesus. Nothing left for selfish ambition. Nothing left for our pleasures. All for Jesus. In this way, we are poor. In this way, we truly suffer. For there is nothing left for ourselves.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
2. The consequences of loving others.
Jesus did not come to earth for himself, but to surrender himself for the sake of others. Even so, we are commanded to do the same (Mark 10: 43-45). We live not for ourselves, but for the sake of others. This self-giving love has consequences. For the sake of love, Jesus lost his privacy, Jesus had to run away to pray. Jesus was ostracized and slandered because he wanted to seek those who were lost. And finally, he suffered shame and loss of his life for the sake of his love for the world. We are to act as Jesus did. We are to surrender our possessions and money for the needy. We are to lower ourselves and make as nothing our worldly ambitions so we can life others up. We are to attach ourselves to the undesirables of the world in order to draw them to Jesus. We are to not do harm to anyone, not even to those who harm us. The result of love is suffering. The result of giving for the sake of love is having nothing left.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
3. Opposition because of holding to the gospel of Jesus.
When we understand what the gospel really says and teach that gospel to others, there will be opposition. Few want to hear that Jesus is the only way. Few want to hear that their sin leads to death. Few can abide the way of the cross. The way of the gospel is narrow—few there are that can follow it. And those who chose not to follow the whole gospel will be opposed to those who proclaim it as the only way of salvation. In some cases, the advocates of the gospel will be hated by those who reject the gospel. Sometimes they will be called heretics or servants of Satan. Sometimes they will be sued or have their possessions taken from them. Sometimes they will have violence done against them. Nevertheless, the follower of Jesus will boldly proclaim the gospel, neglecting their own care or well-being for the sake of the kingdom of God. The result of proclaiming the gospel is suffering. The result of living for Jesus is the stripping away of all that we have.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
How do we enter into Jesus’ salvation?
We must be practical and realistic. The salvation of Jesus is not just something to think about, something to debate. It is something one lives—fully and completely or not at all. Jesus didn’t tell his disciples to debate the merits of the gospel or to argue on the finer points of it. He told them, “follow me.” He told them, “Deny yourself and take up your cross.” This is not just in the mind, in the attitude—it is lived or it is nothing. Here are some steps to help you live out the way of Jesus as a lifestyle of salvation:
1. Confess Jesus as your Lord and example
Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 10:24-25,32-34
Publicly confess Jesus as your Lord. As Lord, you will do all you can to obey him and he will be your Teacher, Master and Model. In all ways give him priority in your life.
2. Ask for the Spirit to assist you in the way of the cross.
Luke 11:11-13; Mark 14:38; Romans 8:26
We cannot accept the cross on our own. Rather, our desires reject the idea of the cross; our lives find the path of poverty and salvation repugnant. Seek the Lord for the Spirit of God, who will help us in our weaknesses. If we ask persistantly for the Spirit, God will give him to us, who desires only to give us that which is good.
3. Place God’s kingdom and righteousness first in your life
Matthew 6:33
Jesus’ priority is to have more people following his gospel and living out his righteousness. Dedicate yourself to desiring what Jesus desires and to dedicate yourself to living out the gospel of Jesus.
4. Renounce anything that is blocking you doing God’s will.
Matthew 18:7-9
If there is anything you have control of that is obviously standing in the way of you obeying Jesus, be rid of it as quickly as possible. It could be a person, it could be an item, it could be a habit you have. Whatever it is—be rid of it as soon as possible. Allow Jesus to rule you completely. Let nothing in that will interrupt your devotion to him.
5. Consider others’ and their needs as more important than yourself
Philippians 2:3-4; Matthew 7:12
Jesus said that to fulfill his commands, you need to place yourself at other’s disposal. If someone is in need, look to see if you can meet that need. Their need might just be to have someone to listen to, it might be to guide them to Jesus, or it might be to give them some food or clothing. Be open to the opportunities circumstances allow you to be loving to others, To give to their needs.
6. Make of list of all of your resources and surrender them to your Lord, Jesus.
Luke 14:26-33
Jesus warned us that we ought to recognize what the cost of following him would be if we were to follow him. Let us literally “count the cost”—make a list of everything you have, including relationships, time, income, possessions, etc. For some of us this might take some time. Then, for every item on the list, surrender it to your Lord, Jesus and ask him what he would have you do with that resource.
7. Listen to the Spirit to determine what to do with each item on the list.
John 14:26; Matthew 6:33
The Spirit will remind you of the teaching of Jesus and give you help in applying it to your life in every case. Allow the Lord to guide you to use your resources in accordance with placing the kingdom of God first.
8. Be bold in proclaiming the full gospel of Jesus
Mark 8:38; Acts 4:29-31
Do not be ashamed of God’s true gospel as taught and lived by Jesus. Pray that the Lord might give you boldness to speak of Jesus alone—with no one else beside him. Pray that you may stand with Paul to proclaim the foolishness of the cross—both the cross that Jesus bore himself and the cross that we need to bear for his sake.
What are the benefits of suffering in the way of Jesus?
Approval of God
We will be allowed in God’s presence, like the prophets of old who had approval of God. Our prayers will be heard and we will be God’s children. (Luke 6:22-23; Romans 8:16-17)
Moral Strength
To suffer is not only profit for us, but it builds up godly character in us, if we accept it as a positive thing from God, in faith, and we will gain more future reward. (James 1:2-4; Romans 5:3-4; Hebrews 10:32-12:11)
Kingdom of God
God will give us rulership in the coming kingdom, he will give us his Spirit, he will give us authority, he will give us the whole earth. (Matthew 5:3, 5-6, 11-12; Luke 11:13)
Deliverance by God
God only gives deliverance to those who need it—this is the secret of the cross. If we suffer, we need deliverance by God, and he will deliver us personally. (Luke 18:1-8; Mark 8:34-36; Mark 13:13)
Ministry of God
The true teachers of God have suffered and sacrificed and will deliver the people of God. The false teachers are in it for themselves, for the money, for what they can get out of it. (Matthew 10; I Timothy 6:3-5; II Timothy 3:1-12; Colossians 1:14)
Riches in God
The ones who sacrifice everything for Jesus will receive everything they need in this world, and in the next they will have great wealth. (Mark 10:20-30; Luke 12:22-34; Proverbs 28:27; 19:17)
Joy
Even as Jesus died for the joy he would receive, everyone who suffers or mourns in Jesus will laugh and have great joy, both now and in the next life. (Hebrews 12:2-11; Luke 6:21-23; Matthew 5:4)
Jesus’ Solution
In the end, Jesus’ way of defeating poverty and suffering is to suffer and be poor. If we do so, then God will grant us the benefits of the righteous who are poor. In this way, the world will change. Only through incarnational suffering and poverty will God cause the world to be a different place. But we must accept this on ourselves. We must accept the suffering of the unjust, give our prized possessions to the poor—even if they don’t deserve it, or are taking advantage of us. If we live out poverty in Jesus, we can show Jesus to the poor. If we live out suffering in Jesus, we can show the world what Jesus’ suffering is like. We must surrender our lives and take on the sacrifice of Jesus. In this way, justice will be done by the only One who can create justice.
“Take, Lord, all my liberty. Receive my memory, my understanding and my whole will. Whatever I have and possess, you have given to me; to you I will restore it wholly and to your will I surrender it for my direction. Give me the love of you only, with your grace am I rich enough, nor do I ask for anything beside. Dearest Lord, teach me to be generous. Teach me to serve thee as thou deservest: to give and not count the cost; to struggle and not to heed the wounds; to toil and not to seek reward save that of knowing that I do thy will, O God." -Ignatius Loyola
That was before I went to India. I went there to go to a mission school, and what a schooling I received. I spent six months in Calcutta and Bangladesh. Calcutta, at the time I lived there, had a population of 12 million people with a million of them living on the street, washing themselves under pumps in the street, picking through garbage heaps, holding half-dead infants. Bangladesh is considered the largest, poorest country in the world, having a mostly rural population half the size of the U.S. in a country the size of Wisconsin. I saw people in poverty, but learned from my caretakers not to give, not to even look at beggars, or else I would be taken advantage of.
I returned to Orange County on Christmas Day—a religious holiday covered in a veneer of materialism and decadence. I spent many nights awake at night, wondering how God could allow Orange County and Calcutta to both exist. It seems so unbelievably unjust when held side by side. And my own response in the midst of poverty was disgusting—selfishness, not “wanting to be taken advantage of” when poverty and death surrounded me. But what is to be my response to poverty? How should I respond to suffering and poverty, given that I have so many resources, so much?
I could have responded in guilt, and much of the time I did. I could have responded with apathy, and treat the poor as if their poverty is their own fault, or the fault of their nations. I could have responded to this contradiction in the earth by becoming an activist, to make the world a more just place. But as I looked to Jesus for my answers, I realized that what Jesus was actually asking me to do is to live the life of the cross.
We look to Jesus for our salvation and trust in God that through Jesus we will be delivered from sin, Satan and death. Praise God for the deliverance we have through his death on the cross! May the cross be proclaimed from the lowest parts of the earth to the highest point in heaven!
But in our proclamation of the salvation to be found in the cross of Jesus, we have forgotten the teaching of Jesus about the cross. The cross is not just something that we look at, believe in and admire from a distance. Rather, the cross is something for us to carry. Jesus said, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's will save it.” (Mark 8:34-35)
The gospel is not a “feel good” religion. The source of the gospel is Jesus himself, and he himself determines what the gospel consists of. And Jesus himself declared the gospel to be the accepting of suffering and poverty—not only for himself, but for everyone who wishes to receive his salvation.
If we desire to partake in the salvation of Jesus, the cross is not just an option—it is a requirement. To lose our lives, to deny ourselves is not just something for the super-powerful saint, but for the everyday disciple of Jesus. If we do not follow him, we do not have salvation.
Poverty is not just an option.
The cross of Jesus is to accept a lifestyle of what many call “inadequate living” or poverty. Poverty is not just an option. Rather, it is an essential requirement of the gospel. To accept the gospel, one must renounce ones own riches and possessions for the sake of the kingdom of God, for the sake of the needy.
What does Jesus say?
The poor of this world will receive God’s kingdom.
“Blessed are you disciples who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of heaven.” Luke 6:20
“God chose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him.” James 2:5
No one can be a disciple unless he renounces all of his possessions.
“Let’s say that a king is going to meet another king in battle. The lesser king has ten thousand men and the greater king has twenty thousand. Wouldn’t the lesser king send a delegation to the greater king for terms of surrender—giving up out of his storehouse what he has? Even so, no one can be my disciple unless he renounces all of his possessions.” Luke 14:31-33.
If you give what you have to the poor, you will have treasure in heaven.
“Do not treasure up treasure on earth, but treasure up treasure in heaven.” Matthew 6:19-20
“Sell your possessions and give to the poor and so make for yourselves a treasure in heaven.” Luke 12:33
One will gain the kingdom of heaven only by selling what he has and giving it away.
“The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in a field. A man found it and hid it again. Then he sold everything he had in order to buy that field in order to gain joy.” Matthew 13:44
He who renounces a normal life for the sake of Jesus will gain more than what he left and eternal life.
“There is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake, but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age. He will receive houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms— along with persecutions. And in the age to come he will receive eternal life.” Mark 10:29-30
The one who renounces their possessions for the sake of the gospel will have their provisions met by God.
“Do not worry about your life— what you will eat or what you will drink. Do not worry about your body—what you will put on. Look at the birds of the air, that they do not farm, nor harvest nor store up food, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they?” Matthew 6:25-26
If we are to follow Jesus, we must renounce our riches and possessions and surrender them to those who have needs. If we do not do so, we do not have the salvation of Jesus. This is a result of our faith, not just a nice thing to do. This is fulfilling the word of Jesus.
Suffering is not just an option.
The New Testament is clear about the place of suffering in the Christian life. If one is not suffering persecutions, tribulations, testings or opposition because they are following Jesus, then that one is not truly following Jesus. The one who does not suffer does not receive the kingdom of God.
What do Jesus and the apostles say?
Those who are persecuted will gain God’s kingdom.
“Blessed are you when men hate you and insult you and slander you and separate themselves from you for the sake of the Son of Man. Be glad in that day and leap for your reward will be great in heaven.” Luke 6:22-23
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:10
“But woe to you when all men speak well of you, for so did their fathers treat the false prophets.” Luke 6:26
If we are followers of Jesus, we will receive the sufferings he suffered
“A disciple is not greater than his teacher, nor is a slave greater than his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher. If they have called the head of the household “Satan,” then how much more will they slander those who live in the house!” Matthew 10:24-25
“If you patiently endure suffering for doing what is right, you have favor with God. For the purpose of suffering like this you have been called, since Christ also suffered for you, and thus he left an example for you to follow in his steps.” I Peter 2:20-21
It was Jesus’ purpose that his followers suffer opposition
“Do not think that I came to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace to you, but a sword will be held against you. I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household.” Matthew 10:34-36
The one who hates his life and suffers for Jesus will gain eternal life.
Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it to life eternal. John 12:24-25
We will not gain the benefits of the salvation of Jesus without suffering.“We will not enter the kingdom of heaven except through many trials.” Acts 14 22
“Everyone who desires to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” II Timothy 3:12
“The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.” Romans 8:16-17
Suffering is not an option. If we do not suffer for the sake of Jesus and the gospel, then it shows that we are not true followers of Jesus. If we do not truly follow Jesus, then we will not gain the kingdom of heaven or be called children of God.
In the parable of the sower, Jesus indicates two areas that we will fall away from the gospel of God: If we do not endure under suffering, and if we focus on the things and worries of this world (Mark 4:14-20). These are the two areas that have also captured the church of the United States. We want to do everything we can to avoid suffering—even if it means that we must compromise the gospel. “God will forgive me” we say, and than we move on spending our lives focused on vanquishing pain instead of loving one another. We desire comforts and pleasures, at almost any cost. If others around us do not have their needs met, that doesn’t matter. What is more important is that we have our entertainments, comforts and securities.
We have forsaken the gospel for the things of this world. How can we think that we will gain the kingdom of God? How can we think that Jesus is pleased with our lives devoid of sacrifice or love?
What kind of poverty and suffering?
Not every kind of poverty or suffering will be blessed by God. Not everyone who is poor will be welcomed into the kingdom. Nor does every poor man represent Jesus. Those who are poor because of their own laziness are not blessed. Those who are poor because of drug use or mental illness are not blessed. Not even all of those who surrender their possessions to the poor will be saved. Only certain kinds of renouncing and poverty will be blessed.
Not all of those who suffer will gain God’s kingdom. Not everyone who is sick will gain the blessing of God. Not everyone suffering from war, famine or hate crimes will gain God’s favor. Those who suffer because they are taking vengeance are suffering rightly, and gain no blessing from God. Those who suffer because they have done wrong are not to be praised. Those who suffer because they are teaching that which is apart from the teaching of Jesus gain no favor from God.
So what kind of poverty and suffering do gain favor with God?
There are three kinds of poverty or suffering that follow the way of Jesus;
1. The renouncing of all that we have for the sake of Jesus, the kingdom of God and the gospel.
If we are to follow Jesus, the Lord requires that we place everything that we have at his disposal for his use. Jesus does not just require a tithe of our income. Nor does he seek out the occasional love offering. Rather, what he wants is total surrender. Jesus wants everything we have to be put at his disposal—every relationship, every bit of our time, every possession we have, every bit of our knowledge, every authority we have, all of our money, all of our energies. All of these are to be surrendered to Jesus for use in the kingdom of God. Some of these things are to be of no use for him—some of our relationships will have to be severed, some of our possessions will have to be sold, some of our ambitions will have to be laid aside, some of us will have to quit our jobs. There is nothing left for the world. There is nothing left for sin. Other things can be transferred to his use: our money can be used for his kingdom, our goals can be for building up his people, our energies can be used for obeying him. But whatever we have, whatever we are, all goes to Jesus. Nothing left for selfish ambition. Nothing left for our pleasures. All for Jesus. In this way, we are poor. In this way, we truly suffer. For there is nothing left for ourselves.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
2. The consequences of loving others.
Jesus did not come to earth for himself, but to surrender himself for the sake of others. Even so, we are commanded to do the same (Mark 10: 43-45). We live not for ourselves, but for the sake of others. This self-giving love has consequences. For the sake of love, Jesus lost his privacy, Jesus had to run away to pray. Jesus was ostracized and slandered because he wanted to seek those who were lost. And finally, he suffered shame and loss of his life for the sake of his love for the world. We are to act as Jesus did. We are to surrender our possessions and money for the needy. We are to lower ourselves and make as nothing our worldly ambitions so we can life others up. We are to attach ourselves to the undesirables of the world in order to draw them to Jesus. We are to not do harm to anyone, not even to those who harm us. The result of love is suffering. The result of giving for the sake of love is having nothing left.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
3. Opposition because of holding to the gospel of Jesus.
When we understand what the gospel really says and teach that gospel to others, there will be opposition. Few want to hear that Jesus is the only way. Few want to hear that their sin leads to death. Few can abide the way of the cross. The way of the gospel is narrow—few there are that can follow it. And those who chose not to follow the whole gospel will be opposed to those who proclaim it as the only way of salvation. In some cases, the advocates of the gospel will be hated by those who reject the gospel. Sometimes they will be called heretics or servants of Satan. Sometimes they will be sued or have their possessions taken from them. Sometimes they will have violence done against them. Nevertheless, the follower of Jesus will boldly proclaim the gospel, neglecting their own care or well-being for the sake of the kingdom of God. The result of proclaiming the gospel is suffering. The result of living for Jesus is the stripping away of all that we have.
This is the way of salvation. This is the way of the cross.
How do we enter into Jesus’ salvation?
We must be practical and realistic. The salvation of Jesus is not just something to think about, something to debate. It is something one lives—fully and completely or not at all. Jesus didn’t tell his disciples to debate the merits of the gospel or to argue on the finer points of it. He told them, “follow me.” He told them, “Deny yourself and take up your cross.” This is not just in the mind, in the attitude—it is lived or it is nothing. Here are some steps to help you live out the way of Jesus as a lifestyle of salvation:
1. Confess Jesus as your Lord and example
Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 10:24-25,32-34
Publicly confess Jesus as your Lord. As Lord, you will do all you can to obey him and he will be your Teacher, Master and Model. In all ways give him priority in your life.
2. Ask for the Spirit to assist you in the way of the cross.
Luke 11:11-13; Mark 14:38; Romans 8:26
We cannot accept the cross on our own. Rather, our desires reject the idea of the cross; our lives find the path of poverty and salvation repugnant. Seek the Lord for the Spirit of God, who will help us in our weaknesses. If we ask persistantly for the Spirit, God will give him to us, who desires only to give us that which is good.
3. Place God’s kingdom and righteousness first in your life
Matthew 6:33
Jesus’ priority is to have more people following his gospel and living out his righteousness. Dedicate yourself to desiring what Jesus desires and to dedicate yourself to living out the gospel of Jesus.
4. Renounce anything that is blocking you doing God’s will.
Matthew 18:7-9
If there is anything you have control of that is obviously standing in the way of you obeying Jesus, be rid of it as quickly as possible. It could be a person, it could be an item, it could be a habit you have. Whatever it is—be rid of it as soon as possible. Allow Jesus to rule you completely. Let nothing in that will interrupt your devotion to him.
5. Consider others’ and their needs as more important than yourself
Philippians 2:3-4; Matthew 7:12
Jesus said that to fulfill his commands, you need to place yourself at other’s disposal. If someone is in need, look to see if you can meet that need. Their need might just be to have someone to listen to, it might be to guide them to Jesus, or it might be to give them some food or clothing. Be open to the opportunities circumstances allow you to be loving to others, To give to their needs.
6. Make of list of all of your resources and surrender them to your Lord, Jesus.
Luke 14:26-33
Jesus warned us that we ought to recognize what the cost of following him would be if we were to follow him. Let us literally “count the cost”—make a list of everything you have, including relationships, time, income, possessions, etc. For some of us this might take some time. Then, for every item on the list, surrender it to your Lord, Jesus and ask him what he would have you do with that resource.
7. Listen to the Spirit to determine what to do with each item on the list.
John 14:26; Matthew 6:33
The Spirit will remind you of the teaching of Jesus and give you help in applying it to your life in every case. Allow the Lord to guide you to use your resources in accordance with placing the kingdom of God first.
8. Be bold in proclaiming the full gospel of Jesus
Mark 8:38; Acts 4:29-31
Do not be ashamed of God’s true gospel as taught and lived by Jesus. Pray that the Lord might give you boldness to speak of Jesus alone—with no one else beside him. Pray that you may stand with Paul to proclaim the foolishness of the cross—both the cross that Jesus bore himself and the cross that we need to bear for his sake.
What are the benefits of suffering in the way of Jesus?
Approval of God
We will be allowed in God’s presence, like the prophets of old who had approval of God. Our prayers will be heard and we will be God’s children. (Luke 6:22-23; Romans 8:16-17)
Moral Strength
To suffer is not only profit for us, but it builds up godly character in us, if we accept it as a positive thing from God, in faith, and we will gain more future reward. (James 1:2-4; Romans 5:3-4; Hebrews 10:32-12:11)
Kingdom of God
God will give us rulership in the coming kingdom, he will give us his Spirit, he will give us authority, he will give us the whole earth. (Matthew 5:3, 5-6, 11-12; Luke 11:13)
Deliverance by God
God only gives deliverance to those who need it—this is the secret of the cross. If we suffer, we need deliverance by God, and he will deliver us personally. (Luke 18:1-8; Mark 8:34-36; Mark 13:13)
Ministry of God
The true teachers of God have suffered and sacrificed and will deliver the people of God. The false teachers are in it for themselves, for the money, for what they can get out of it. (Matthew 10; I Timothy 6:3-5; II Timothy 3:1-12; Colossians 1:14)
Riches in God
The ones who sacrifice everything for Jesus will receive everything they need in this world, and in the next they will have great wealth. (Mark 10:20-30; Luke 12:22-34; Proverbs 28:27; 19:17)
Joy
Even as Jesus died for the joy he would receive, everyone who suffers or mourns in Jesus will laugh and have great joy, both now and in the next life. (Hebrews 12:2-11; Luke 6:21-23; Matthew 5:4)
Jesus’ Solution
In the end, Jesus’ way of defeating poverty and suffering is to suffer and be poor. If we do so, then God will grant us the benefits of the righteous who are poor. In this way, the world will change. Only through incarnational suffering and poverty will God cause the world to be a different place. But we must accept this on ourselves. We must accept the suffering of the unjust, give our prized possessions to the poor—even if they don’t deserve it, or are taking advantage of us. If we live out poverty in Jesus, we can show Jesus to the poor. If we live out suffering in Jesus, we can show the world what Jesus’ suffering is like. We must surrender our lives and take on the sacrifice of Jesus. In this way, justice will be done by the only One who can create justice.
“Take, Lord, all my liberty. Receive my memory, my understanding and my whole will. Whatever I have and possess, you have given to me; to you I will restore it wholly and to your will I surrender it for my direction. Give me the love of you only, with your grace am I rich enough, nor do I ask for anything beside. Dearest Lord, teach me to be generous. Teach me to serve thee as thou deservest: to give and not count the cost; to struggle and not to heed the wounds; to toil and not to seek reward save that of knowing that I do thy will, O God." -Ignatius Loyola
Monday, April 06, 2009
A Third Way on Homosexuality
This is one of the best statements I have read on the issue of discussing homosexuality in the church. It is by Scot McKnight, an anabaptist evangelical. You can find it here:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/04/a-letter-my-response.html
Every discussion about homosexuality is fraught with a singular challenge. It is the challenge of civility. I believe civility is the Third Way in this moral debate. On this blog last week we published "A Letter" and then Andrew Marin, a Christian friend and advocate for Christian civility, posted a response (we will be posting about his new book Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation With the Gay Community soon). Today I'd like to post my own challenge to all of us.
How can we learn to be more civil with each other in this discussion/debate? What can each ask of the other?
I want to begin with something I read in Richard Mouw's book, Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility in an Uncivil World : referring to something said by Martin Marty, Mouw says "one of the real problems in modern life is that the people who are good at being civil often lack strong convictions and people who have strong convictions often lack civility."
Right here is where we need to begin: I cannot understand why strong-convicted Christians, on either side of this debate by the way, refuse to act with civility. Perhaps it is because they are so passionate about this issue, so convinced it is a matter of ultimate justice or ultimate fidelity, that they think they must become strident and fight this issue to the ground until it gives up the ghost. Perhaps it is because they think they are called to play the role of prophet, and that means for some the use of prophetic, denunciatory rhetoric. Plenty of examples are available; I see no need to point fingers. We need to move on.
Mouw is right, civil folks often lack conviction and conviction folks often lack civility. He's right about something else:
What we are in most need of today is "convicted civility" (p. 12) or what we might call compassionate conviction or principled passion. It is the rare combination of civility and conviction, tempered as it must be by anyone who lives the Jesus Creed, by faithful compassion. This is the Third Way and we need it today. One who is fully dedicated to this today is Andrew Marin, and his new book from IVP is an exceptional attempt to foster civility with a traditionalist viewpoint on homosexuality. His book is just now available. Buy it now because we'll be discussing it in the month of May (Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation With the Gay Community ).
Today I'd like to speak to two issues: the bottom line in civility and the intent of our convictions.
The bottom line in civility issue is this: For pro-gay-as-Christian or pro-gay marriage/civil union folks: Christians who differ from you are entitled to take their stand on what they think the Bible says and say they think such views are contrary to God's order as revealed in the Bible and as taught in the history of the Church. They deserve, even must, be respected for that view. If you label such persons as dinosaurs or bigots in order to brand them and exclude them, you fail in love and you fail our society.
For anti-gay-as-Christian or anti-gay marriage/civil union folks: Those who affirm civil unions, gay marriage, etc, are entitled to form their own viewpoint in believing that they think these relations are justifiable for Christians and they must be respected for their viewpoint. If you label such persons as morally bankrupt in order to brand and exclude them, you fail in love and you fail our society.
The issue here is entitlement. I contend that folks must be given the freedom to believe what they want. When we refuse to let others think what they want, we break down a civil society. This has nothing to do with whether we think the other person is right. We may well think they are not.
Until we get to positions of mutual respect, we cannot have a conversation and cannot make progress. Until we get let the other person say "I think you are wrong and I have legitimate grounds for thinking so" we cannot genuinely sit at the table. When the other person's viewpoint is grounds for exclusion -- and I see this from both sides of this debate -- we haven't even achieved a tolerant society. In fact, we strain the tethers of a tolerant society. And this doesn't even bring up the Christian virtue of charity or love: those who love others will never exclude from the table those who differ from them simply because they have a view that they think wrong.
And, yes, this must be done while holding to what Mouw calls convicted civility or what can be called principled passion. Hold your views with clarity and with conviction, but we dare not let ourselves become so committed to our views that we cannot engage the person as a person. It is too easy to convert the Bible into a lawbook or into irrelevant antiquity. We hope for a Third Way in reading the Bible, too (see my The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible ).
This leads me to the issue of intent in conviction. What is the intent, I want to ask, of declaring -- and again this is about both sides of this issue -- the other person wrong? Is the decision of what is "right" vs. what is "wrong" the final goal? I sense for many it is. Once one has determined one's views and then declared that view, some folks think the job is done. "There," they might say as they wash their hands with the conviction of fidelity and purity, "I've held my own and taken my stand."
No, I would argue: the ultimate aim is not to declare one's view but to live a life of love of God and love of others, with convicted civility, and to live with others in the hope of bringing all to the goal God has in his redemptive designs. Love and convicted civility can co-exist for the Third Way. For one side, this will mean living with those who are gay or lesbian with a view toward transformation. My contention: those persons are entitled to believe that and to hope for that and to work for that. For the other side, this will mean living with those who think gay marriage/civil unions are "contrary to God's order" with a view to their transformation. Those persons can believe that and hope for that and work for their view, too.
This is hardly compromise; this is convicted civility at work. May God's grace be at work.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/04/a-letter-my-response.html
Every discussion about homosexuality is fraught with a singular challenge. It is the challenge of civility. I believe civility is the Third Way in this moral debate. On this blog last week we published "A Letter" and then Andrew Marin, a Christian friend and advocate for Christian civility, posted a response (we will be posting about his new book Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation With the Gay Community soon). Today I'd like to post my own challenge to all of us.
How can we learn to be more civil with each other in this discussion/debate? What can each ask of the other?
I want to begin with something I read in Richard Mouw's book, Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility in an Uncivil World : referring to something said by Martin Marty, Mouw says "one of the real problems in modern life is that the people who are good at being civil often lack strong convictions and people who have strong convictions often lack civility."
Right here is where we need to begin: I cannot understand why strong-convicted Christians, on either side of this debate by the way, refuse to act with civility. Perhaps it is because they are so passionate about this issue, so convinced it is a matter of ultimate justice or ultimate fidelity, that they think they must become strident and fight this issue to the ground until it gives up the ghost. Perhaps it is because they think they are called to play the role of prophet, and that means for some the use of prophetic, denunciatory rhetoric. Plenty of examples are available; I see no need to point fingers. We need to move on.
Mouw is right, civil folks often lack conviction and conviction folks often lack civility. He's right about something else:
What we are in most need of today is "convicted civility" (p. 12) or what we might call compassionate conviction or principled passion. It is the rare combination of civility and conviction, tempered as it must be by anyone who lives the Jesus Creed, by faithful compassion. This is the Third Way and we need it today. One who is fully dedicated to this today is Andrew Marin, and his new book from IVP is an exceptional attempt to foster civility with a traditionalist viewpoint on homosexuality. His book is just now available. Buy it now because we'll be discussing it in the month of May (Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation With the Gay Community ).
Today I'd like to speak to two issues: the bottom line in civility and the intent of our convictions.
The bottom line in civility issue is this: For pro-gay-as-Christian or pro-gay marriage/civil union folks: Christians who differ from you are entitled to take their stand on what they think the Bible says and say they think such views are contrary to God's order as revealed in the Bible and as taught in the history of the Church. They deserve, even must, be respected for that view. If you label such persons as dinosaurs or bigots in order to brand them and exclude them, you fail in love and you fail our society.
For anti-gay-as-Christian or anti-gay marriage/civil union folks: Those who affirm civil unions, gay marriage, etc, are entitled to form their own viewpoint in believing that they think these relations are justifiable for Christians and they must be respected for their viewpoint. If you label such persons as morally bankrupt in order to brand and exclude them, you fail in love and you fail our society.
The issue here is entitlement. I contend that folks must be given the freedom to believe what they want. When we refuse to let others think what they want, we break down a civil society. This has nothing to do with whether we think the other person is right. We may well think they are not.
Until we get to positions of mutual respect, we cannot have a conversation and cannot make progress. Until we get let the other person say "I think you are wrong and I have legitimate grounds for thinking so" we cannot genuinely sit at the table. When the other person's viewpoint is grounds for exclusion -- and I see this from both sides of this debate -- we haven't even achieved a tolerant society. In fact, we strain the tethers of a tolerant society. And this doesn't even bring up the Christian virtue of charity or love: those who love others will never exclude from the table those who differ from them simply because they have a view that they think wrong.
And, yes, this must be done while holding to what Mouw calls convicted civility or what can be called principled passion. Hold your views with clarity and with conviction, but we dare not let ourselves become so committed to our views that we cannot engage the person as a person. It is too easy to convert the Bible into a lawbook or into irrelevant antiquity. We hope for a Third Way in reading the Bible, too (see my The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible ).
This leads me to the issue of intent in conviction. What is the intent, I want to ask, of declaring -- and again this is about both sides of this issue -- the other person wrong? Is the decision of what is "right" vs. what is "wrong" the final goal? I sense for many it is. Once one has determined one's views and then declared that view, some folks think the job is done. "There," they might say as they wash their hands with the conviction of fidelity and purity, "I've held my own and taken my stand."
No, I would argue: the ultimate aim is not to declare one's view but to live a life of love of God and love of others, with convicted civility, and to live with others in the hope of bringing all to the goal God has in his redemptive designs. Love and convicted civility can co-exist for the Third Way. For one side, this will mean living with those who are gay or lesbian with a view toward transformation. My contention: those persons are entitled to believe that and to hope for that and to work for that. For the other side, this will mean living with those who think gay marriage/civil unions are "contrary to God's order" with a view to their transformation. Those persons can believe that and hope for that and work for their view, too.
This is hardly compromise; this is convicted civility at work. May God's grace be at work.
Friday, April 03, 2009
Two Dangers of Wealth
Wealth as idolatry
Deuteronomy 6:10-15—When the children of Israel receive the wealth of the land they did not earn themselves, they should not forget the Lord and go to worship other gods.
Matthew 6:24—You can either serve God or mammon
Matthew 6:19-21—Do not store treasures on earth, for where your treasure is, your heart will follow.
Ephesians 5:3—Greed must not be named among the saints
Colossians 3:5—Greed is idolatry.
I Timothy 6::17—Tell the rich not to set their hope on uncertain riches, but on God.
James 4:3-5—Those who use what God gives them for their own pleasures are adulterers, whom God yearns for earnestly
Those who use wealth for pleasure being judged
Amos 6:4-7—Those who please themselves with their wealth will be the first who go into exile
Ezekiel 7:19-20—Their riches they will throw into the street when they are punished for their sin—using what God gave for their idols.
Deuteronomy 6:10-15—When the children of Israel receive the wealth of the land they did not earn themselves, they should not forget the Lord and go to worship other gods.
Matthew 6:24—You can either serve God or mammon
Matthew 6:19-21—Do not store treasures on earth, for where your treasure is, your heart will follow.
Ephesians 5:3—Greed must not be named among the saints
Colossians 3:5—Greed is idolatry.
I Timothy 6::17—Tell the rich not to set their hope on uncertain riches, but on God.
James 4:3-5—Those who use what God gives them for their own pleasures are adulterers, whom God yearns for earnestly
Those who use wealth for pleasure being judged
Amos 6:4-7—Those who please themselves with their wealth will be the first who go into exile
Ezekiel 7:19-20—Their riches they will throw into the street when they are punished for their sin—using what God gave for their idols.
Paul and the Trinity
Somehow, Paul—the first century missionary and apostle of Jesus—appeared on a university campus in the 21st century. Paul has stayed with Don, a university professor of Hebrew literature, who invited him to lecture and answer student’s questions.
Joe: (A student of theology at the university) Alright, let me get straight to the point.
Paul: That is fine.
Joe: Is Jesus God?
Paul: Yes, he is.
Joe: (A smug smile appears on his face and he response with a sarcastic tone.) Fine, Paul. Since you affirm Jesus to be the second person of the Trinity, equal to God in every way, then let me ask you, why does your writings have no indications whatsoever of the trinity or even of Jesus’ deity?
Paul: You are jumping ahead of yourself, son. I said nothing of the Trinity.
Joe: No? Didn’t you declare that Jesus is God?
Paul: Yes. But this is not the same as most statements made of the Trinity, in its traditional form.
Joe: Explain the difference to me.
Paul: The classic form of the Trinity is an expansion of the statement made at the council of Nicene?. That statement is that Jesus is of the essence of the Father. The Father, as Jesus stated, is God. Jesus is the son of God. However, we have no clear evidence that Jesus is of the same essence of the Father. The same power, yes. The same authority on earth, yes. But not the same essence.
Joe: Excuse me, but how would Paul the apostle know of the council of Nicene?
Paul: The same as you: I read. Frankly, I probably know it better for I read it in Greek and then discussed the implications and history of it with my friend, Professor Don.
Joe: (Smirking) Oh, right. Of course. So what is the difference between the Nicene statement of “essence” with statements made in the New Testament?
Paul: To claim that Jesus is “God” is a very general statement, which could mean a number of things. In my experience, I saw Jesus as the powerful Lord, having all the glory of God.
Joe: How can your vision really rate as evidence?
Paul: How can you rate that you are seeing me as evidence? You can say to your friends, “I saw Paul today” and they might say, “Prove it, we don’t think you really did.” And you would stammer, because you expected to have your word taken as truth. Even so, my word represents my experience and so how can you call it a lie?
Joe: But if you had a dream, you wouldn’t necessarily try to pass that off as reality.
Paul: I saw Jesus face-to-face, just as you are seeing me. It wasn’t a vision, it was a real-life event. I wasn’t asleep, nor was it a dream…
Joe: But couldn’t it have been? After all, you fell off your horse…
Paul: (Irritated) What horse? Who was there, you or I? You think I was some general, that I could afford a horse? I was walking with my servants and Jesus just appeared in front of me, all light as a glowing presence—no question, he was divine. This was no dream.
Joe: (Putting up his hands) Sorry, I suppose I have no right to question your experience…
Paul: Quite right.
Joe: But you saw Jesus appear and glow in front of you, is there some other explanation than that he was divine?
Paul: Like what?
Joe: Ummm… couldn’t he have been sent from God? Given the glowing and the appearing?
Paul: (Confused) Of course he was sent.
Joe: But… to say Jesus is divine… is to say he is the only God.
Paul: The problem, I think, is many people’s limited understanding of the English language. To say someone is “divine” certainly does not mean that someone is of the same being or essence as God the Father. Yes, that is one explanation, although a complicated one…
Joe: Complicated? Isn’t it just saying that God is one and three?
Paul: Yes, and the math is certainly confusing. I am not saying that the theologians are wrong. But I am saying that it isn’t the only option of what the apostles were saying.
Joe: What other explanations are there?
Paul: Well, the language we used is that after his resurrection, Jesus sat at the right hand of the Father. We did not think so much in the concepts of being as of authority. An emperor might have one “sitting on his right hand.” Like your namesake of old.
Joe: Namesake?
Paul: Joseph. He was made a prime minister at the right hand of pharaoh. He did not sit in pharaoh’s throne, but in whatever he did, he spoke and acted as the pharaoh. Both pharaoh and Joseph were called, properly, “king”, but, ultimately Joseph was under the authority of the emperor. Even so, the Father and Jesus are both “God”, meaning that they both have the authority of ruling the universe, but Jesus is in full submission to the Father. In this understanding, the question of essence never comes up.
Joe: So you are saying that the Nicene Creed is wrong.
Paul: No, no, NO! I am saying no such thing. I am saying that the apostles never asked the question of essence. It is an interesting question that we never thought of and so never addressed. The trinity is a possible truth. Or Arius’ idea is possible—that Jesus was a powerful angel who came to earth. Other ideas are also possible. And it is all speculation.
Joe: So the essence of modern orthodoxy is speculation?
Paul: If you are saying that the essence of modern orthodoxy is the trinity, then yes. I would say, however, that the essence of all Christian orthodoxy is that Jesus is the risen Lord, seated at the right hand of the Father.
Joe: But every Christian believes in the trinity, which you claim to be speculation!
Paul: (Laughing) You have a rather myopic gaze at Christianity, don’t you? Many believe in Arius’ speculation. And I would say that most Christians who belong to a Trinitarian church leave the question of the trinity out of their theology.
Joe: So why did the Nicene council determine that essence is the foundation of Jesus’ divinity?
Paul: Don, do you wish to express an opinion here?
Don: Well, Christian theology isn’t my expertise. However, in my reading, I understand that the whole argument came out of a theological debate between Arius and his bishop. But it seems to me that the real issue wasn’t so much about Jesus essence as much as whether a priest could disagree theologically with his bishop when his bishop—Alexander of Alexandria— commanded him to teach and believe something other than his opinion. Arius rebelled against his bishop, and so it seems that the council was basically rebuking Arius for his unethical behavior.
Joe: So the exiles and wars fought over this issue was all about…
Don: A teaching priest’s rebellion. That’s my opinion. Others would have different opinions.
Joe: So, Paul, since you are the apostle, what should we do about the trinity? Ignore it?
Paul: If some believe in the trinity, that is all for the good. Jesus is honored. And others who glorify Jesus but hold to a different speculation as to the being of Jesus, that is all for the good as well—Jesus is still honored. However, Jesus is not honored by his people, whatever their opinion on this matter, if they destroy each other or accuse each other on this subject. The only problem is if someone says or acts like Jesus is not Lord over themselves. Jesus is your God? Then act like it and love all those who glorify Jesus and live in Him. If you do not live in Jesus, it doesn’t matter how much honor you give him on your lips. You are condemned—not for your theology, but for your lack of Jesus in your life.
Joe: It seems so sad, Paul, that although you make so much sense, that you are willing to land in the midst of heresy, being a reject of the church.
Paul: It wouldn’t be the first time. The sad thing is that the church thinks so much of themselves that if someone decides to remain to just the teaching of the apostles that they are called a heretic. You ever read “The Inquisitor” by the Russian author, Dostoyevsky? Read it sometime. The basic accusation there is if Jesus came to earth today, the church would have to kill him again in order to maintain its authority and “ministry”. This is happening again and again.
Joe: (A student of theology at the university) Alright, let me get straight to the point.
Paul: That is fine.
Joe: Is Jesus God?
Paul: Yes, he is.
Joe: (A smug smile appears on his face and he response with a sarcastic tone.) Fine, Paul. Since you affirm Jesus to be the second person of the Trinity, equal to God in every way, then let me ask you, why does your writings have no indications whatsoever of the trinity or even of Jesus’ deity?
Paul: You are jumping ahead of yourself, son. I said nothing of the Trinity.
Joe: No? Didn’t you declare that Jesus is God?
Paul: Yes. But this is not the same as most statements made of the Trinity, in its traditional form.
Joe: Explain the difference to me.
Paul: The classic form of the Trinity is an expansion of the statement made at the council of Nicene?. That statement is that Jesus is of the essence of the Father. The Father, as Jesus stated, is God. Jesus is the son of God. However, we have no clear evidence that Jesus is of the same essence of the Father. The same power, yes. The same authority on earth, yes. But not the same essence.
Joe: Excuse me, but how would Paul the apostle know of the council of Nicene?
Paul: The same as you: I read. Frankly, I probably know it better for I read it in Greek and then discussed the implications and history of it with my friend, Professor Don.
Joe: (Smirking) Oh, right. Of course. So what is the difference between the Nicene statement of “essence” with statements made in the New Testament?
Paul: To claim that Jesus is “God” is a very general statement, which could mean a number of things. In my experience, I saw Jesus as the powerful Lord, having all the glory of God.
Joe: How can your vision really rate as evidence?
Paul: How can you rate that you are seeing me as evidence? You can say to your friends, “I saw Paul today” and they might say, “Prove it, we don’t think you really did.” And you would stammer, because you expected to have your word taken as truth. Even so, my word represents my experience and so how can you call it a lie?
Joe: But if you had a dream, you wouldn’t necessarily try to pass that off as reality.
Paul: I saw Jesus face-to-face, just as you are seeing me. It wasn’t a vision, it was a real-life event. I wasn’t asleep, nor was it a dream…
Joe: But couldn’t it have been? After all, you fell off your horse…
Paul: (Irritated) What horse? Who was there, you or I? You think I was some general, that I could afford a horse? I was walking with my servants and Jesus just appeared in front of me, all light as a glowing presence—no question, he was divine. This was no dream.
Joe: (Putting up his hands) Sorry, I suppose I have no right to question your experience…
Paul: Quite right.
Joe: But you saw Jesus appear and glow in front of you, is there some other explanation than that he was divine?
Paul: Like what?
Joe: Ummm… couldn’t he have been sent from God? Given the glowing and the appearing?
Paul: (Confused) Of course he was sent.
Joe: But… to say Jesus is divine… is to say he is the only God.
Paul: The problem, I think, is many people’s limited understanding of the English language. To say someone is “divine” certainly does not mean that someone is of the same being or essence as God the Father. Yes, that is one explanation, although a complicated one…
Joe: Complicated? Isn’t it just saying that God is one and three?
Paul: Yes, and the math is certainly confusing. I am not saying that the theologians are wrong. But I am saying that it isn’t the only option of what the apostles were saying.
Joe: What other explanations are there?
Paul: Well, the language we used is that after his resurrection, Jesus sat at the right hand of the Father. We did not think so much in the concepts of being as of authority. An emperor might have one “sitting on his right hand.” Like your namesake of old.
Joe: Namesake?
Paul: Joseph. He was made a prime minister at the right hand of pharaoh. He did not sit in pharaoh’s throne, but in whatever he did, he spoke and acted as the pharaoh. Both pharaoh and Joseph were called, properly, “king”, but, ultimately Joseph was under the authority of the emperor. Even so, the Father and Jesus are both “God”, meaning that they both have the authority of ruling the universe, but Jesus is in full submission to the Father. In this understanding, the question of essence never comes up.
Joe: So you are saying that the Nicene Creed is wrong.
Paul: No, no, NO! I am saying no such thing. I am saying that the apostles never asked the question of essence. It is an interesting question that we never thought of and so never addressed. The trinity is a possible truth. Or Arius’ idea is possible—that Jesus was a powerful angel who came to earth. Other ideas are also possible. And it is all speculation.
Joe: So the essence of modern orthodoxy is speculation?
Paul: If you are saying that the essence of modern orthodoxy is the trinity, then yes. I would say, however, that the essence of all Christian orthodoxy is that Jesus is the risen Lord, seated at the right hand of the Father.
Joe: But every Christian believes in the trinity, which you claim to be speculation!
Paul: (Laughing) You have a rather myopic gaze at Christianity, don’t you? Many believe in Arius’ speculation. And I would say that most Christians who belong to a Trinitarian church leave the question of the trinity out of their theology.
Joe: So why did the Nicene council determine that essence is the foundation of Jesus’ divinity?
Paul: Don, do you wish to express an opinion here?
Don: Well, Christian theology isn’t my expertise. However, in my reading, I understand that the whole argument came out of a theological debate between Arius and his bishop. But it seems to me that the real issue wasn’t so much about Jesus essence as much as whether a priest could disagree theologically with his bishop when his bishop—Alexander of Alexandria— commanded him to teach and believe something other than his opinion. Arius rebelled against his bishop, and so it seems that the council was basically rebuking Arius for his unethical behavior.
Joe: So the exiles and wars fought over this issue was all about…
Don: A teaching priest’s rebellion. That’s my opinion. Others would have different opinions.
Joe: So, Paul, since you are the apostle, what should we do about the trinity? Ignore it?
Paul: If some believe in the trinity, that is all for the good. Jesus is honored. And others who glorify Jesus but hold to a different speculation as to the being of Jesus, that is all for the good as well—Jesus is still honored. However, Jesus is not honored by his people, whatever their opinion on this matter, if they destroy each other or accuse each other on this subject. The only problem is if someone says or acts like Jesus is not Lord over themselves. Jesus is your God? Then act like it and love all those who glorify Jesus and live in Him. If you do not live in Jesus, it doesn’t matter how much honor you give him on your lips. You are condemned—not for your theology, but for your lack of Jesus in your life.
Joe: It seems so sad, Paul, that although you make so much sense, that you are willing to land in the midst of heresy, being a reject of the church.
Paul: It wouldn’t be the first time. The sad thing is that the church thinks so much of themselves that if someone decides to remain to just the teaching of the apostles that they are called a heretic. You ever read “The Inquisitor” by the Russian author, Dostoyevsky? Read it sometime. The basic accusation there is if Jesus came to earth today, the church would have to kill him again in order to maintain its authority and “ministry”. This is happening again and again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)