I would like an answer to this question.
While there have been some notable personalities who have spoken against racism early on the church [white and black people], many of the church's staunch supporters and heroes were proponents and participants. So when I hear people talking about “the Blood (of Christ)” being the answer, or “the church” being the answer or some other "Christianical" [I just coined that term--whoomph, dey it is] I do two things: First, I agree with their belief. I believe it is Christ and His church purchased by his blood that is the answer. Second, I realize that for 400 years the same church who has preached the Bible, who was purchased by Christ blood, who believe in the Gospel have failed miserably in communicating that same gospel in regards to this sin. And third, the same church have exacerbated, supported and been complicit in maintaining racial separation, white supremacy and ethnocentrism. [Many were simply products of their culture]
Now, if what I have said is true (and it is), then church has a question to answer: If “The Gospel”, “The Church”, “The Blood” and “Christ” is the only answer to this well-acknowledged sin, then what Gospel has the Church been preaching and believing for the last 400 years that has not only caused them to be grossly complicit in aggravating race division in the church and society, but has also seemingly rendered Christ and his blood powerless in overcoming racism?
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
The Last Enemy
One of the greatest lines in a movie, ever was in the movie "Troy". King Priam bravely and secretly visits the tent of Achilles who had only a few hours earlier killed his son, Hector and then dragged the body off by his feet, behind his chariot to further humiliate Hector. Priam asks Achilles to "give him this small mercy" and return Hector's body to be properly buried. Achilles is deeply touched by Priam's bravery and sincerity. Here is his response: Achilles: "If I let you walk out of here [with the dead body of your loved one], If I let you take him; it doesn't change anything. You're still my enemy in the morning. Unphased by the swelling words of the great Achilles, Priam replies:
"You're still my enemy tonight. But even enemies can show respect for one another."
The line is prevalent to me now because 2011 has been a year that many people who I am acquainted with have gone to be with the Lord. My family has seen seven this year (since December 2010) alone. Then this past week, my godmother, 83 and two other men of God, both relatively young 53 and 44 were taken by death. Undoubtedly, the desire is for our loved ones to stay with us on this earth without suffering, and then we can all go to God together, when our lives are over. Instead, loved ones plead with death, for mercy and respect. Death doesn't give either. He is our enemy. He is not so kind as Achilles was to Priam to give back what he has taken. And we are left with a seeming hopelessness about the fate of our loved ones.
It is only seeming, however. Because the same blow that death deals us to cause our pain, is the same blow that has ushered our loved ones into the presence of God. He can not win. Death can not win. Jesus has won.
“The last enemy to be destroyed is death.”
(1 Corinthians 15:26 ESV)
"You're still my enemy tonight. But even enemies can show respect for one another."
The line is prevalent to me now because 2011 has been a year that many people who I am acquainted with have gone to be with the Lord. My family has seen seven this year (since December 2010) alone. Then this past week, my godmother, 83 and two other men of God, both relatively young 53 and 44 were taken by death. Undoubtedly, the desire is for our loved ones to stay with us on this earth without suffering, and then we can all go to God together, when our lives are over. Instead, loved ones plead with death, for mercy and respect. Death doesn't give either. He is our enemy. He is not so kind as Achilles was to Priam to give back what he has taken. And we are left with a seeming hopelessness about the fate of our loved ones.
It is only seeming, however. Because the same blow that death deals us to cause our pain, is the same blow that has ushered our loved ones into the presence of God. He can not win. Death can not win. Jesus has won.
“The last enemy to be destroyed is death.”
(1 Corinthians 15:26 ESV)
Love in the Mourning
“Just what do you want from us!” When it comes to racism I can hear that
question from the hearts of “white” people to “black” people; and vice-versa. It
is a valid question. Most of us can sense the thick, smothering gas of “race”
among us. Still, no one really wants to keep talking about it. Yet, some of us
feel we must, if there is to be authentic progress. We sound the shofar for
injustice; and raise Amos’ voice to anthemic proportions. “But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness
like an ever-flowing stream” (5:24). Some say, we are nearing a post-racial era; if we stop
talking about it, then “race” will just go away. Then others feel the guilt
because it seems to point to people like them (even though their not racists).
And still others experience mounting displeasure because the constant talk
never moves past discussion. Then there are those who are invisible to the
extreme discussion of black and white race issues because they are neither
(black nor white), or both. They too, sound an alarm of frustration that too
often goes unheard. I think Dennis Hesselbarth’s article “To my fellow Whites”
in EFCA Today offers a plausible reply. He says, “Let’s just try to Understand”. Here's the Link, take a read[http://www.efcatoday.org/site/article/to-my-fellow-whites]. But I digress
Indeed, theologians would mark understanding
as a most worthy task of any Christian’s deepening of godliness: Fides quaerens intellectum, (Faith
seeking understanding). Of course theologians intend this statement to drive us
to a deeper knowing of the incomprehensible, Triune God through pursuing the
questions in our souls. I intend for the statement to fortify Hesselbarth’s
request and encourage you to carry it out. You see, we cannot only understand
God by answering questions of scripture alone; or that reside within us. We
must also understand him through the countless image-bearers who experience
blessing and suffering on the earth as we do.
Ethno-racial issues produce floods of
suffering and mourning for all varieties of people in some form or other. To
make efforts to understand the mourning that it produces in the life of others
serves as a tactic of love. To ask questions, listen to, and respond in sorrow
for the past or present injustices instead of defending one’s self or “people”
is to progress in that love. The mourners begin to live because of understanding.Why?
Because s/he assumes that once we truly understand, we will act in aggressive
righteousness to correct the matter. This is what it means to be a Jesus
follower and “mourn with those who mourn”. Showing understanding is to
demonstrate “love in the mourning” of others. That love produces a brighter
hope for a brighter day. Dr.
Martin King, Jr said as much in his 1957 sermon, “Love Your Enemies”. He said:
“Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to
defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty
and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be
caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system”.(http://mlkkpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/documentsentry/doc_loving_your_enemies/)
Dr. Martin King’s admonition here calls us to rise to the level of love. Yet Christians know that King is not the progenitor of this call, only an avid proponent of the call. The progenitor is our gracious Lord Jesus who loved us first, and called us first: He now calls us to love (Matt 5:43-44). And indeed, he exemplified his call through understanding by stepping into our shoes (Heb. 4:15). Is this not the best expression of how we love? To step into their suffering with others and mourn with them until we are through it. When we love people in their mourning (for whatever they may mourn for) and seek to understand them, we produce hope that the mourning may cease one day. Then, we may believe the psalmist more readily as he says, “Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning. So to answer the question: “Just what do you want from us?!” Love through Understanding; indeed, Love in the Mourning.
Dr. Martin King’s admonition here calls us to rise to the level of love. Yet Christians know that King is not the progenitor of this call, only an avid proponent of the call. The progenitor is our gracious Lord Jesus who loved us first, and called us first: He now calls us to love (Matt 5:43-44). And indeed, he exemplified his call through understanding by stepping into our shoes (Heb. 4:15). Is this not the best expression of how we love? To step into their suffering with others and mourn with them until we are through it. When we love people in their mourning (for whatever they may mourn for) and seek to understand them, we produce hope that the mourning may cease one day. Then, we may believe the psalmist more readily as he says, “Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning. So to answer the question: “Just what do you want from us?!” Love through Understanding; indeed, Love in the Mourning.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Personal Jesus
“This was now the third time that Jesus was revealed to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.” (John 21:14 ESV)
What drives me to follow Christ as Lord? If nothing else, I am driven by the fact that Jesus is a "personal" Jesus. I don't mean that He is my Jesus and no one else's. Neither do I mean that Jesus is at my beck and call. But I realize that He is there when I need Him the most, even when He has every right to not be there. Even when He's extended grace upon grace already.
I think it was this same thing that drove the apostles of Jesus. After Jesus' death, the apostles were scattered and disillusioned about their future. They staked everything on Jesus and it failed, they thought. That is until He was resurrected. Rumor has it that it was the resurrection that caused the apostles to re-engage. I know that was one reason, but I don't think it was the primary reason. I believe the thing that drove the apostles was the realization of a "personal" Jesus who genuinely cared about their well-being and their discipleship. Jesus who died for them and who lived for them, yes; but even who came to rescue them from themselves and their mediocrity when they were not driven enough to do so themselves. A Jesus who not only saves the lost people, but intercedes for and "Saves the saved" people too: even after they've turned away from Him or lived in mediocrity.
This is the story of John 21. It was not simply the resurrection. John tells us that the apostles had already seen Jesus twice after He had been raised. But they still went fishing. I have hinted that it was mediocrity that caused the apostles to go fishing and be on the lake, we still haven't talked about why Jesus was on that beach. It seems that Jesus was on the beach just for Peter. They had unfinished business. Peter had denied him and it seems they had not talked about that yet, even though Peter already knew Jesus would accept Him. Jesus came just for Peter, to "save" Him from a life of mediocrity. They had a deep, heartfelt, personal conversation. Not about the church, not about the group, not about the inner circle of three (Peter, James and John); but just about Peter and Jesus. Simon...do you love me? Then feed and shepherd my sheep. But Lord, what about that guy over there? ...What does that have to do with you Peter, You follow Me. It was Jesus kindness and perseverance that continued to pursue Peter even after Peter received over extended grace from Jesus. He pursues us just the same when we need it. He is your personal Jesus.
What drives me to follow Christ as Lord? If nothing else, I am driven by the fact that Jesus is a "personal" Jesus. I don't mean that He is my Jesus and no one else's. Neither do I mean that Jesus is at my beck and call. But I realize that He is there when I need Him the most, even when He has every right to not be there. Even when He's extended grace upon grace already.
I think it was this same thing that drove the apostles of Jesus. After Jesus' death, the apostles were scattered and disillusioned about their future. They staked everything on Jesus and it failed, they thought. That is until He was resurrected. Rumor has it that it was the resurrection that caused the apostles to re-engage. I know that was one reason, but I don't think it was the primary reason. I believe the thing that drove the apostles was the realization of a "personal" Jesus who genuinely cared about their well-being and their discipleship. Jesus who died for them and who lived for them, yes; but even who came to rescue them from themselves and their mediocrity when they were not driven enough to do so themselves. A Jesus who not only saves the lost people, but intercedes for and "Saves the saved" people too: even after they've turned away from Him or lived in mediocrity.
This is the story of John 21. It was not simply the resurrection. John tells us that the apostles had already seen Jesus twice after He had been raised. But they still went fishing. I have hinted that it was mediocrity that caused the apostles to go fishing and be on the lake, we still haven't talked about why Jesus was on that beach. It seems that Jesus was on the beach just for Peter. They had unfinished business. Peter had denied him and it seems they had not talked about that yet, even though Peter already knew Jesus would accept Him. Jesus came just for Peter, to "save" Him from a life of mediocrity. They had a deep, heartfelt, personal conversation. Not about the church, not about the group, not about the inner circle of three (Peter, James and John); but just about Peter and Jesus. Simon...do you love me? Then feed and shepherd my sheep. But Lord, what about that guy over there? ...What does that have to do with you Peter, You follow Me. It was Jesus kindness and perseverance that continued to pursue Peter even after Peter received over extended grace from Jesus. He pursues us just the same when we need it. He is your personal Jesus.
Friday, July 6, 2012
White only Christian conference: Just random quick thoughts
I heard about a "white" only Christian conference at this yahoo link.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alabama-pastor-hold-whites-only-conference-162845760.html
Just some thoughts as a citizen and Christian.
1. We (Christians and Americans) absolutely must honor the freedom of speech and right to assemble of any group, even the white supremacists (provided the particular group is not gathering with intent to break the law or incite such action). (Non-white) Christians have an even greater call to love and forgive those "white" Christians who won't let them attend the conference. I, kind of, feel my own flesh rebelling against this expectation from God. So "Lord, help my unbelief".
2. We must be reminded that along with freedom of speech and right to assembly comes the responsibility of what we speak about.
3. Simply because one is "free" to do a thing as the pastor is claiming does not mean that it is the best thing to do. It does not seem best to promote "white only" Christian conference unless there is some reason for a "white" evangelism strategy with a legitimate reason to exclude other persons who are not white. The constitution (in comparison to the words of Scripture) does not seem to provide legitimacy for such an event.
4. Just because a group is not breaking the law of the land in the U.S. or elsewhere, that does not mean that they are not breaking spiritual laws or promoting sinful activity. The conference is promoting the sinful activity of partiality--in this case, racism.
5. No Christian has the right to worship how s/he "wants" or we "want". Worship has to be how God wants it. Because we are different, God (in his creative and infinite wisdom) has allowed us to utilize our ethnic, social and cultural backgrounds to provide to him outward expressions of worship. However, there are some basic internal, spiritual principles that need to guide all believers at all times: Here are two that seem to be non-negotiable (Worship must be led by the Holy Ghost/Spirit, worship venues have to be inclusive of all who would come with humility to God). Help me if I have erred in these two.
6. If indeed the Reverend and the whites at the conference are followers of Jesus Christ/Messiah then The "Reverend" is right. He and those followers are part of the chosen race. However, it is not the chosen "white" race they are a part of (because there is no such thing-biologically speaking) but they are a part of the human race. That's right, there is just ONE race. If there is a race at all.
7. In my humble logic (no sarcasm intended) it stands to reason that Jesus, nor His Spirit was at that conference; For Jesus is not white, but Jewish (religiously, culturally and if there was such a biological thing; racially; but there is not). And the Holy Spirit is not a human being, but works through human beings to bring light to Jesus the God-man.
Ultimately, I hope that God's Spirit was at that conference. I hope that he convicted the hearts of the racist/ethnocentric Christ followers who were there, and pierced the heart of the racist/ethnocentric people who think they are Christ followers but are not. Perhaps He would draw them to understand His plan for all persons to worship Him. Perhaps He would (if He did not at that conference) give them a glimpse of heaven so they realize there will be no "white" (nor "black" or other racial) Christians or churches in heaven (again, race is a socially constructed, not biologically genuine, earthly reality that no doubt will burn with other earthly ideologies when tried in the fire -- I Cor. 3). Let's assume they get there--Imagine with me. There will be African-Americans in heaven (and they won't be sitting on the back pews or use different worship centers. In fact they will stand in front of some "white" people [That is, if you picture heaven with a bunch of people standing in one place facing one focal point of God]. They will stand next to European and other Americans, and Europeans, and Africans, and Asians of every brand, and Latinos of every brand, and any other ethnic group from every tribe and nation on the face of the earth all worshipping the same and One True God. Indeed, if any of those supremacists happen to really be Christians and make it into heaven they will be standing next to some of the "black", "latino/hispanic", "asian" and other Christians who lived in their communities who they did not allow in their conference. What's more is that black/latino/asian/indian/etc. person will have forgiven them and will love them in the same way the Father forgave and loved us through Jesus Christ.
And won't they be surprised. Indeed, beautifully surprised.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alabama-pastor-hold-whites-only-conference-162845760.html
Just some thoughts as a citizen and Christian.
1. We (Christians and Americans) absolutely must honor the freedom of speech and right to assemble of any group, even the white supremacists (provided the particular group is not gathering with intent to break the law or incite such action). (Non-white) Christians have an even greater call to love and forgive those "white" Christians who won't let them attend the conference. I, kind of, feel my own flesh rebelling against this expectation from God. So "Lord, help my unbelief".
2. We must be reminded that along with freedom of speech and right to assembly comes the responsibility of what we speak about.
3. Simply because one is "free" to do a thing as the pastor is claiming does not mean that it is the best thing to do. It does not seem best to promote "white only" Christian conference unless there is some reason for a "white" evangelism strategy with a legitimate reason to exclude other persons who are not white. The constitution (in comparison to the words of Scripture) does not seem to provide legitimacy for such an event.
4. Just because a group is not breaking the law of the land in the U.S. or elsewhere, that does not mean that they are not breaking spiritual laws or promoting sinful activity. The conference is promoting the sinful activity of partiality--in this case, racism.
5. No Christian has the right to worship how s/he "wants" or we "want". Worship has to be how God wants it. Because we are different, God (in his creative and infinite wisdom) has allowed us to utilize our ethnic, social and cultural backgrounds to provide to him outward expressions of worship. However, there are some basic internal, spiritual principles that need to guide all believers at all times: Here are two that seem to be non-negotiable (Worship must be led by the Holy Ghost/Spirit, worship venues have to be inclusive of all who would come with humility to God). Help me if I have erred in these two.
6. If indeed the Reverend and the whites at the conference are followers of Jesus Christ/Messiah then The "Reverend" is right. He and those followers are part of the chosen race. However, it is not the chosen "white" race they are a part of (because there is no such thing-biologically speaking) but they are a part of the human race. That's right, there is just ONE race. If there is a race at all.
7. In my humble logic (no sarcasm intended) it stands to reason that Jesus, nor His Spirit was at that conference; For Jesus is not white, but Jewish (religiously, culturally and if there was such a biological thing; racially; but there is not). And the Holy Spirit is not a human being, but works through human beings to bring light to Jesus the God-man.
Ultimately, I hope that God's Spirit was at that conference. I hope that he convicted the hearts of the racist/ethnocentric Christ followers who were there, and pierced the heart of the racist/ethnocentric people who think they are Christ followers but are not. Perhaps He would draw them to understand His plan for all persons to worship Him. Perhaps He would (if He did not at that conference) give them a glimpse of heaven so they realize there will be no "white" (nor "black" or other racial) Christians or churches in heaven (again, race is a socially constructed, not biologically genuine, earthly reality that no doubt will burn with other earthly ideologies when tried in the fire -- I Cor. 3). Let's assume they get there--Imagine with me. There will be African-Americans in heaven (and they won't be sitting on the back pews or use different worship centers. In fact they will stand in front of some "white" people [That is, if you picture heaven with a bunch of people standing in one place facing one focal point of God]. They will stand next to European and other Americans, and Europeans, and Africans, and Asians of every brand, and Latinos of every brand, and any other ethnic group from every tribe and nation on the face of the earth all worshipping the same and One True God. Indeed, if any of those supremacists happen to really be Christians and make it into heaven they will be standing next to some of the "black", "latino/hispanic", "asian" and other Christians who lived in their communities who they did not allow in their conference. What's more is that black/latino/asian/indian/etc. person will have forgiven them and will love them in the same way the Father forgave and loved us through Jesus Christ.
And won't they be surprised. Indeed, beautifully surprised.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Relationship produces Religion
You have heard this cliche a thousand times, and maybe have said it.
"God wants a relationship, not a religion."
This is simply NOT TRUE. My prevailing thought in this is that 'Jesus does not hate religion. Jesus hates false religion.' Morality doesn't bring you close to God: Neither Sexual morality nor social morality. You can live a life where you don't do things wrong and still miss God. Or we can live a life where we help the poor, broken, hurting all day long, but don't share with them Jesus and we still miss the God.
The Bible's expression of the word 'religion' means for us to have reverent devotion to God internally, and show reverent devotion externally (that is through acts/good works). In my understanding of God, He clearly wants both. Relationship produces Religion. To put another way: Loving God always leads to Loving people.
I am not sure when it became popular or who made it so, but the church uses it ad nauseum. I think I understand why the cliche' has become so popular. There seemed to be such a strong tendency in the church to place over-weighted emphasis on things we had to do to be right with God. So, if a person went to church on Sunday, Wednesday and other days and did all those other "righteous acts" (you know--Sunday School; Bible Study; pastor outings; church choir events; singles meetings; gave their ten percent to God faithfully; read the Bible everyday; prayed everyday--sometimes all day--; did not smoke, did not chew, did not go with girls who do; did not drink; did not listen to any music but Christian radio; did not party; did not club; did not celebrate Halloween; did not like homosexuals; did not like pro-choicers; stayed "morally pure"; stayed married, wore long hair and long dresses for girls, did not wear earrings for guys, and on and on, and blah-say blah-say, yada, yada, yada and blah, blah blah--whew!!!) only then were they accepted into God's kingdom and love. I get that. I get why the cliche' may have become so popular. It was probably because someone finally thought enough to say that these things don't make God accept you. It's not that God wants things from you; It's just that God wants you. (Baggage, warts, zits, scars and all)
Now before I move on, I should say that I am not totally against all of the above mentioned items. I think we would be wise to do some of them, and more often. I just do not believe that performing or not performing any of the acts above should ever have been used to bring guilt on a person and push them away from God, or on the flip side give them the impression that doing these things somehow brought them closer to God.
Thankfully, someone told the truth and said that the God who loves all humans is more interested in a loving relationship with humans, than He is interested in humankind performing acts of sacrifice in order to get close to Him (Isaiah 1). Someone along the line must have said, "God is not interested in your religious behavior, but a real relationship with Him." And that's the truth of the story. But that is not all of the story. I mean, it is true that God does not want man's "religion" if we define religion by things we do to get close to him or to appear more holy to others. If we define religion as humankind working to earn God's favor in some way so that God might be moved to accept us, that definition does not bring us closer to God, but keeps us away from Him. Why? Because God has done all that is needed for us to be close to Him. He came close to us in the form of Jesus Christ. The only thing required now to be accepted by God is to trust in the work that Jesus has already done to bring us close to God. So, if by religion a person means following a prescribed set of activities in order to be accepted by God, then it's true, God wants a relationship, not religion. I am sure this is what people mean, but I rarely (if ever) hear anyone point out the other way that the Bible uses religion.
Let's note that the Bible, indeed, does use the negative way that we use religion today. The Bible says our religion can be self-made (this is not a good thing according to Paul (Col. 2:23) worthless (James 1:26) and in opposition to pure religion, impure (James 1:27) The pharisees were religious. The problem was not that they did ceremonial things outwardly. It was only that they thought those ceremonial things made them better than other people. In fact, they read their Bibles, prayed all the time, and went to the temple often.
But, it also should be noted that Paul used religion in a positive light (Acts 17:22) in connecting with the people on Mars Hill. He affirmed the portion of their religion that was commendable (The fact that they were seeking god/s and that they outwardly expressed their search by placing altars everywhere). In the same way some of the elements of our religion are commendable and necessary if we want to please God. James, Jesus brother, tells us specifically the outward expressions of religion that please God.
James 1:27
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
Do you see that? It is not religion that God dislikes. It is "impure" religion characterized by apathy toward the less helped, less loved, less able, less powerful. Pure religion is to help the fatherless, care for the widow, feed the hungry, care for the poor, love the down trodden. That is what your religion is for. You can be that person who has a relationship with the right kind of religion. But wait, just so we don't walk away thinking that we God is fine with me and my sin too, James says we should be morally pure. We should not do things that are sinful. Some of those things we should not do are included on the list above. There really are many other things that we should not be doing; otherwise God is unhappy with us. This does not mean that God doesn't love us unconditionally. Just because He does love us unconditionally, scars, and all; doesn't mean He approves the actions that will bring us continued scarring. To choose to live unstained lives comes from fact that we do really love Him. To visit the fatherless, and widows demonstrates His love in us to others.
One more thing. Someone might say that Jesus never really called us to be religious. But, I would look at James' definition of religion more comparatively with other words of Jesus and portions of the Old Testament. James' words to help the orphan and widow remind me of Jesus words in Matthew 25 when speaking of not just orphans and widows, but prisoners and beggars. "When you did it to the least of these, you did it to me." Jesus seems pretty serious about it there. Even though He didn't use the word, the concept of religion that James speaks of in James 1:27 is the same as what Jesus seems to be talking about in Matthew 25. The Old Testament also shows a similar hard edge in line with James' view of religion (that is, religion is to devotedly reverence God and demonstrate this by helping the less loved, less powerful, less fortunate, and less heard, and being pure from sin). In Isaiah 1and Isaiah 58 God shows that people are experiencing hardship from Him because of their apathy and treatment toward others. To say it plainly: I believe God would have you to be more religious; not less. It is only the purity of our religion that we should be careful to maintain.
Before I close, I have to say that when I see religion in this way I am actually overwhelmed. I personally have sometimes been apathetic to those around me. I am stained, not unstained by sin. Put as bluntly about my own self as I can be: I don't always care, I am not always pure from sin. While I seek to be careful to assist others when it is in my hand to do so, I have not always persistently been religious in this way (helping orphans and widows and others). I mean I believe that God has placed in me a pureness of religion. But I confess that I have religion that is self-made, worthless, and impure at times. So, I trust in the righteousness of Christ to justify me before God. His purity on my behalf will satisfy God. But in the meantime, I confess to you: I am trying to become more religious, not less. I hope that you will join me in this endeavor. Not because we need to work our way to God. Christ has reconciled those of us who trust Him to the Father God (2 Cor. 5:21; I Peter 3:18).
When a person says "I have a relationship and not a religion with God", they have essentially said, "My relationship with God is worthless". Instead, if we embrace the full biblical definiton of religion we will understand that God's will is not to keep us from being religious. No, God strongly desires both. He wants a real relationship that leads to pure religion. (An authentic) Relationship ignites (pure) Religion; (pure) Religion demonstrates (an authentic) relationship. Then we will see religion as a tool (1) to express our inner worship to God, outwardly; (2) to transform society and culture from chaos to shalom by loving the less fortunate (3) to open opportunities to touch people who are like us, who aren't like us, who don't like us and who we don't like for the sake of the Gospel as well as genuine relationships with those who reject the Gospel and (4) to demonstrate the proclamation that God loves all people in the same way He loves Jesus.
After understanding pure religion, is there any follower of Christ who does not want to become more religious?
I hope my thoughts are clear to you all. Please comment. I welcome your feedback.
"God wants a relationship, not a religion."
This is simply NOT TRUE. My prevailing thought in this is that 'Jesus does not hate religion. Jesus hates false religion.' Morality doesn't bring you close to God: Neither Sexual morality nor social morality. You can live a life where you don't do things wrong and still miss God. Or we can live a life where we help the poor, broken, hurting all day long, but don't share with them Jesus and we still miss the God.
The Bible's expression of the word 'religion' means for us to have reverent devotion to God internally, and show reverent devotion externally (that is through acts/good works). In my understanding of God, He clearly wants both. Relationship produces Religion. To put another way: Loving God always leads to Loving people.
I am not sure when it became popular or who made it so, but the church uses it ad nauseum. I think I understand why the cliche' has become so popular. There seemed to be such a strong tendency in the church to place over-weighted emphasis on things we had to do to be right with God. So, if a person went to church on Sunday, Wednesday and other days and did all those other "righteous acts" (you know--Sunday School; Bible Study; pastor outings; church choir events; singles meetings; gave their ten percent to God faithfully; read the Bible everyday; prayed everyday--sometimes all day--; did not smoke, did not chew, did not go with girls who do; did not drink; did not listen to any music but Christian radio; did not party; did not club; did not celebrate Halloween; did not like homosexuals; did not like pro-choicers; stayed "morally pure"; stayed married, wore long hair and long dresses for girls, did not wear earrings for guys, and on and on, and blah-say blah-say, yada, yada, yada and blah, blah blah--whew!!!) only then were they accepted into God's kingdom and love. I get that. I get why the cliche' may have become so popular. It was probably because someone finally thought enough to say that these things don't make God accept you. It's not that God wants things from you; It's just that God wants you. (Baggage, warts, zits, scars and all)
Now before I move on, I should say that I am not totally against all of the above mentioned items. I think we would be wise to do some of them, and more often. I just do not believe that performing or not performing any of the acts above should ever have been used to bring guilt on a person and push them away from God, or on the flip side give them the impression that doing these things somehow brought them closer to God.
Thankfully, someone told the truth and said that the God who loves all humans is more interested in a loving relationship with humans, than He is interested in humankind performing acts of sacrifice in order to get close to Him (Isaiah 1). Someone along the line must have said, "God is not interested in your religious behavior, but a real relationship with Him." And that's the truth of the story. But that is not all of the story. I mean, it is true that God does not want man's "religion" if we define religion by things we do to get close to him or to appear more holy to others. If we define religion as humankind working to earn God's favor in some way so that God might be moved to accept us, that definition does not bring us closer to God, but keeps us away from Him. Why? Because God has done all that is needed for us to be close to Him. He came close to us in the form of Jesus Christ. The only thing required now to be accepted by God is to trust in the work that Jesus has already done to bring us close to God. So, if by religion a person means following a prescribed set of activities in order to be accepted by God, then it's true, God wants a relationship, not religion. I am sure this is what people mean, but I rarely (if ever) hear anyone point out the other way that the Bible uses religion.
Let's note that the Bible, indeed, does use the negative way that we use religion today. The Bible says our religion can be self-made (this is not a good thing according to Paul (Col. 2:23) worthless (James 1:26) and in opposition to pure religion, impure (James 1:27) The pharisees were religious. The problem was not that they did ceremonial things outwardly. It was only that they thought those ceremonial things made them better than other people. In fact, they read their Bibles, prayed all the time, and went to the temple often.
But, it also should be noted that Paul used religion in a positive light (Acts 17:22) in connecting with the people on Mars Hill. He affirmed the portion of their religion that was commendable (The fact that they were seeking god/s and that they outwardly expressed their search by placing altars everywhere). In the same way some of the elements of our religion are commendable and necessary if we want to please God. James, Jesus brother, tells us specifically the outward expressions of religion that please God.
James 1:27
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
Do you see that? It is not religion that God dislikes. It is "impure" religion characterized by apathy toward the less helped, less loved, less able, less powerful. Pure religion is to help the fatherless, care for the widow, feed the hungry, care for the poor, love the down trodden. That is what your religion is for. You can be that person who has a relationship with the right kind of religion. But wait, just so we don't walk away thinking that we God is fine with me and my sin too, James says we should be morally pure. We should not do things that are sinful. Some of those things we should not do are included on the list above. There really are many other things that we should not be doing; otherwise God is unhappy with us. This does not mean that God doesn't love us unconditionally. Just because He does love us unconditionally, scars, and all; doesn't mean He approves the actions that will bring us continued scarring. To choose to live unstained lives comes from fact that we do really love Him. To visit the fatherless, and widows demonstrates His love in us to others.
One more thing. Someone might say that Jesus never really called us to be religious. But, I would look at James' definition of religion more comparatively with other words of Jesus and portions of the Old Testament. James' words to help the orphan and widow remind me of Jesus words in Matthew 25 when speaking of not just orphans and widows, but prisoners and beggars. "When you did it to the least of these, you did it to me." Jesus seems pretty serious about it there. Even though He didn't use the word, the concept of religion that James speaks of in James 1:27 is the same as what Jesus seems to be talking about in Matthew 25. The Old Testament also shows a similar hard edge in line with James' view of religion (that is, religion is to devotedly reverence God and demonstrate this by helping the less loved, less powerful, less fortunate, and less heard, and being pure from sin). In Isaiah 1and Isaiah 58 God shows that people are experiencing hardship from Him because of their apathy and treatment toward others. To say it plainly: I believe God would have you to be more religious; not less. It is only the purity of our religion that we should be careful to maintain.
Before I close, I have to say that when I see religion in this way I am actually overwhelmed. I personally have sometimes been apathetic to those around me. I am stained, not unstained by sin. Put as bluntly about my own self as I can be: I don't always care, I am not always pure from sin. While I seek to be careful to assist others when it is in my hand to do so, I have not always persistently been religious in this way (helping orphans and widows and others). I mean I believe that God has placed in me a pureness of religion. But I confess that I have religion that is self-made, worthless, and impure at times. So, I trust in the righteousness of Christ to justify me before God. His purity on my behalf will satisfy God. But in the meantime, I confess to you: I am trying to become more religious, not less. I hope that you will join me in this endeavor. Not because we need to work our way to God. Christ has reconciled those of us who trust Him to the Father God (2 Cor. 5:21; I Peter 3:18).
When a person says "I have a relationship and not a religion with God", they have essentially said, "My relationship with God is worthless". Instead, if we embrace the full biblical definiton of religion we will understand that God's will is not to keep us from being religious. No, God strongly desires both. He wants a real relationship that leads to pure religion. (An authentic) Relationship ignites (pure) Religion; (pure) Religion demonstrates (an authentic) relationship. Then we will see religion as a tool (1) to express our inner worship to God, outwardly; (2) to transform society and culture from chaos to shalom by loving the less fortunate (3) to open opportunities to touch people who are like us, who aren't like us, who don't like us and who we don't like for the sake of the Gospel as well as genuine relationships with those who reject the Gospel and (4) to demonstrate the proclamation that God loves all people in the same way He loves Jesus.
After understanding pure religion, is there any follower of Christ who does not want to become more religious?
I hope my thoughts are clear to you all. Please comment. I welcome your feedback.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Eternal Life or Else? Thoughts about the Love and Wrath of God
The fact that we attempt to hold to the idea that God is loving by dismissing the idea of eternal wrath may speak of our own mistrust in a God who is good, and too much trust in our own feelings or philosophies, or righteousness (i.e. we think we know more than God). Or perhaps it is our misunderstanding of what love really is. Is it true that to be love one has to rid himself of wrath? Sure, when you think of it for you and I that makes sense. It is humankind's anger that does not work in full righteousness. (James 1:20) Isn't God different. God can be loving, joyful, caring, committed, angry, jealous, judgmental and wrathful holding it all in right/proper perspective: Right? If not, then why do we believe in Him. Could it be that we just don't understand God's eternal wrath, not that there is not a need for God's eternal wrath. In the same way; we don't fully understand God's love, not (by any means) that there is not a need for God's love.
People who desire to dismiss God's eternal wrath clearly should know that the only reason we hate the thought of people spending eternity away from God is because God hates this thought. (cf Paul in Romans 10:1; Peter in 2 Peter 3:9)
Do we do anyone a favor by giving them assurance that there is opportunity to come to God after the final judgment if there is no opportunity?
If we question God's eternal wrath then mustn't we question whether their is eternal life/love? Many of the same writers and speakers who speak of God's love, are the same one's who speak of God's wrath. They seemed pretty clear that God is love, but that God has and will surely exercise eternal wrath. Most of us who definitively say God loves us learned of this love from the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, and John. We strongly affirm and declare the goodness and the love of God. We point to scripture, and even other contemporary appearances (people who've loved us, events) of God's love. Yet it is Jesus, Paul, Peter and John who also tell us of God's wrath. We despise or belittle those who point to scripture and cite perceived contemporary examples that God may be demonstrating anger sometimes. {though I admit, I also tend not to agree with people who assume to know that because certain events happened it was because God was judging--eg. Japan, Katrina, etc--We simply can't know that it was God's judgment and we must refrain from attaching God to tragedy because we are angry with moral, economic, or social standings. It is insensitive and unloving, in my opinion}. I digress. Many people have come to Christ because they feared the eternal flame. But they soon learned of God's love and follow Him because of it. Many others have received Christ because of His love. But they also learned to respect the wrath.
The fact that God is "unbelievably exclusive" does not relegate Him to being falsely loving, but hopefully would enact a reverence for God and the urgency of time in light of a coming wrath. And the fact that He is "fantastically inclusive" should not produce in us a false hope for eternity, as if opportunity will cycle around again somewhere in eternity.
Some have asked if we don't speak of eternal judgment what will that do for the motivation for mission. As in, "If we don't speak of hell Christians won't be motivated to share God's message" or "If we don't speak of eternal damnation, unbelievers will be less motivated to accept Christ." Christians must understand that we do God no favors by preaching eternal judgment as an impetus for Christian mission. People can be just as, if not moreso; motivated to come to God because of His kindness, as His wrath. However, both God's eternal kindness and wrath in eternity, are sure. It is the kindness/goodness of God that leads to repentance. (Rom. 2:4) We speak of eternal judgment because it is sure to come. (2 Thessalonians 1:5-12 note verse nine) We speak of eternal damnation/separation because God wants no one to experience it. (2 Peter 3:9) God does not need us to frighten people into His kingdom. However, God would take those who are frightened about eternal life and give them His assurance and hope that as they trust him, there is no need to fear the eternal judgment. (John 3:16-18)
Can we answer the questions about what will happen to people who have died before or after Christ? I don't think so; not fully. Can we shrink back, when we say to Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Bahai, nominal Christians, etc that Jesus is NOT the way, the truth, and the life because it offends them. Still, no. We believe the words of Jesus. It may offend them, but they are His words and it is our belief. It may be that they do not agree with us and do not respect our belief because it seems/is exclusive. But at least (as we ought to for them-and sadly have failed in doing so) they should respect our right to this faith/belief system without judging us, as many assume we judge them. If we shrink back to only tell people of God's love then perhaps we are not as successful at engaging culture as others might consider us to be. Perhaps they come because we preach a message of what they feel Christ should be. Hence, we preach a false Christ and false gospel. Likewise, if we preach a Christ that is full of anger and wrath, only; then we feed into both, the self-righteous morality that many of us tend to fall into and the misguided idea that God wants to strike down as many people as He can just to show He's boss, and still; we preach a false Christ and Gospel. Instead, let us all continue in loving dialogue and action with those who are outside as often as we have opportunity to; and let us preach the Christ who loves the world that He someday must judge in righteousness to bring glory to God.
Some say that we see hell on earth now. It is necessary to note that though hellish activity may be on earth, it pales in comparison to the pictures of weeping and gnashing of teeth for whatever agonies that may be behind the veil of this present life. That if we are experiencing hell on earth now, as some say; then it stands to reason that we are experiencing heaven on earth now, too. Take serious note: There is a worse day coming. But there is also a better day coming, too. There is fire and brimstone (though we may not know the literal make-up of this fire) But, there is also a city with streets of gold, and a tree with leaves to heal the nations. This present earth will NEVER see the fullness of heaven, nor the full tragedies of hell. Far be it from us that we think our activity can bring heaven on earth, or likewise hell. However, our activity can demonstrate to whom we are sons: Sons of God or sons of Hell. God, himself will destroy all of this and foster the new creation (heavens/earth) where He will come and bring heaven to earth (not us) by his activity (not ours).
The fear in having an ultimate judge who displays eternal wrath ultimately seems to be that of power, justice, fairness and of course, love. Of power, in that we want to know why the one who is judging, gets to judge. "Who is he to judge me"? and "Why does he judge me this way?" Of Justice because people have been wronged; rules have been broken; systems, unjust. And of Fairness because "At least I didn't live like her/him", "How can you judge me when I didn't know", or "Why does he get this when I worked so much harder", etc. Of love because "if He loves me how can he eternally, judge me?" I certainly don't have all the answers. These are just my thoughts.
But what Christians can say about our belief in God through Jesus is that when judgment takes place is that there will be no one who is eternally damned who does not deserve eternal damnation. Likewise, there will be no one who is eternally accepted who can say they deserve it. No child will be unjustly lost, no criminal (murderers, rapists, kidnappers, pedophiles, and all who we consider to be worse sinners than us) will be unjustly exonerated, no sin will go unpunished, no deed will be unexposed. Everything will be reconciled to its rightful place. There will be a right judgment by the right judge; for all the right reasons, with all the right desires, interest, and intentions, by THE ABSOLUTE most qualified, thorough judge to offer love, mercy, comfort, grace, justice, punishment, sentencing, and wrath who ever was. This is the Holy One in whom Christians are said to trust: Jesus the Christ. (Revelation 15:3; 19:2)
People who desire to dismiss God's eternal wrath clearly should know that the only reason we hate the thought of people spending eternity away from God is because God hates this thought. (cf Paul in Romans 10:1; Peter in 2 Peter 3:9)
Do we do anyone a favor by giving them assurance that there is opportunity to come to God after the final judgment if there is no opportunity?
If we question God's eternal wrath then mustn't we question whether their is eternal life/love? Many of the same writers and speakers who speak of God's love, are the same one's who speak of God's wrath. They seemed pretty clear that God is love, but that God has and will surely exercise eternal wrath. Most of us who definitively say God loves us learned of this love from the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul, and John. We strongly affirm and declare the goodness and the love of God. We point to scripture, and even other contemporary appearances (people who've loved us, events) of God's love. Yet it is Jesus, Paul, Peter and John who also tell us of God's wrath. We despise or belittle those who point to scripture and cite perceived contemporary examples that God may be demonstrating anger sometimes. {though I admit, I also tend not to agree with people who assume to know that because certain events happened it was because God was judging--eg. Japan, Katrina, etc--We simply can't know that it was God's judgment and we must refrain from attaching God to tragedy because we are angry with moral, economic, or social standings. It is insensitive and unloving, in my opinion}. I digress. Many people have come to Christ because they feared the eternal flame. But they soon learned of God's love and follow Him because of it. Many others have received Christ because of His love. But they also learned to respect the wrath.
The fact that God is "unbelievably exclusive" does not relegate Him to being falsely loving, but hopefully would enact a reverence for God and the urgency of time in light of a coming wrath. And the fact that He is "fantastically inclusive" should not produce in us a false hope for eternity, as if opportunity will cycle around again somewhere in eternity.
Some have asked if we don't speak of eternal judgment what will that do for the motivation for mission. As in, "If we don't speak of hell Christians won't be motivated to share God's message" or "If we don't speak of eternal damnation, unbelievers will be less motivated to accept Christ." Christians must understand that we do God no favors by preaching eternal judgment as an impetus for Christian mission. People can be just as, if not moreso; motivated to come to God because of His kindness, as His wrath. However, both God's eternal kindness and wrath in eternity, are sure. It is the kindness/goodness of God that leads to repentance. (Rom. 2:4) We speak of eternal judgment because it is sure to come. (2 Thessalonians 1:5-12 note verse nine) We speak of eternal damnation/separation because God wants no one to experience it. (2 Peter 3:9) God does not need us to frighten people into His kingdom. However, God would take those who are frightened about eternal life and give them His assurance and hope that as they trust him, there is no need to fear the eternal judgment. (John 3:16-18)
Can we answer the questions about what will happen to people who have died before or after Christ? I don't think so; not fully. Can we shrink back, when we say to Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Bahai, nominal Christians, etc that Jesus is NOT the way, the truth, and the life because it offends them. Still, no. We believe the words of Jesus. It may offend them, but they are His words and it is our belief. It may be that they do not agree with us and do not respect our belief because it seems/is exclusive. But at least (as we ought to for them-and sadly have failed in doing so) they should respect our right to this faith/belief system without judging us, as many assume we judge them. If we shrink back to only tell people of God's love then perhaps we are not as successful at engaging culture as others might consider us to be. Perhaps they come because we preach a message of what they feel Christ should be. Hence, we preach a false Christ and false gospel. Likewise, if we preach a Christ that is full of anger and wrath, only; then we feed into both, the self-righteous morality that many of us tend to fall into and the misguided idea that God wants to strike down as many people as He can just to show He's boss, and still; we preach a false Christ and Gospel. Instead, let us all continue in loving dialogue and action with those who are outside as often as we have opportunity to; and let us preach the Christ who loves the world that He someday must judge in righteousness to bring glory to God.
Some say that we see hell on earth now. It is necessary to note that though hellish activity may be on earth, it pales in comparison to the pictures of weeping and gnashing of teeth for whatever agonies that may be behind the veil of this present life. That if we are experiencing hell on earth now, as some say; then it stands to reason that we are experiencing heaven on earth now, too. Take serious note: There is a worse day coming. But there is also a better day coming, too. There is fire and brimstone (though we may not know the literal make-up of this fire) But, there is also a city with streets of gold, and a tree with leaves to heal the nations. This present earth will NEVER see the fullness of heaven, nor the full tragedies of hell. Far be it from us that we think our activity can bring heaven on earth, or likewise hell. However, our activity can demonstrate to whom we are sons: Sons of God or sons of Hell. God, himself will destroy all of this and foster the new creation (heavens/earth) where He will come and bring heaven to earth (not us) by his activity (not ours).
The fear in having an ultimate judge who displays eternal wrath ultimately seems to be that of power, justice, fairness and of course, love. Of power, in that we want to know why the one who is judging, gets to judge. "Who is he to judge me"? and "Why does he judge me this way?" Of Justice because people have been wronged; rules have been broken; systems, unjust. And of Fairness because "At least I didn't live like her/him", "How can you judge me when I didn't know", or "Why does he get this when I worked so much harder", etc. Of love because "if He loves me how can he eternally, judge me?" I certainly don't have all the answers. These are just my thoughts.
But what Christians can say about our belief in God through Jesus is that when judgment takes place is that there will be no one who is eternally damned who does not deserve eternal damnation. Likewise, there will be no one who is eternally accepted who can say they deserve it. No child will be unjustly lost, no criminal (murderers, rapists, kidnappers, pedophiles, and all who we consider to be worse sinners than us) will be unjustly exonerated, no sin will go unpunished, no deed will be unexposed. Everything will be reconciled to its rightful place. There will be a right judgment by the right judge; for all the right reasons, with all the right desires, interest, and intentions, by THE ABSOLUTE most qualified, thorough judge to offer love, mercy, comfort, grace, justice, punishment, sentencing, and wrath who ever was. This is the Holy One in whom Christians are said to trust: Jesus the Christ. (Revelation 15:3; 19:2)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)