On Christian Fundamentalism’s Ongoing Effort to Win Custody of Jesus

Interesting take on responses to Reza Aslan’s Book, entitled Zealot. Her final sentences are most striking: “When a god begins to require the custodial protection of those who worship him, he is no longer a god. He becomes an idol. May we all find the courage and wisdom to never make ignorance the aim of religion, nor idolatry the replacement for faith.” There remains a careful balance between what Crystal St. Marie Lewis proposes and correcting error. Christians have a commission to proclaim the message of Christ, when this is compromised by others, correction of the message must take place. However, we many times are distracted by side-bar conversations about who retains the authority to write about Christianity. Seen in this way, Ms. Lewis has a point.

We are far too easily pleased

This C.S. Lewis quote struck me as an fascinating explanation of human desire.

We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire. If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.[1]

---

[1] Lewis, C. S. “Weight of Glory” in The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 2001, 25-26.

Messengers of the Advent

Pietro Perugino [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Many things in the Christmas season stir the soul. Christmas brings us reminders of what was given for us and what we should give to others. When we think of giving to others, most think about the item purchased or craft made as gift given to another. However, we forget that sometimes gifts come in the form of information; gifts can be intangible. For example, some wait until Christmas to announce marriage plans, life plans, or the birth of a child. Perhaps one chooses to name a child in honor of a family member. Information or good news provides joy, an incorporeal gift, to the receiver. The angels of the Christmas story create a similar condition when they announce the advent of Christ. They played a prominent role in the proclamation of Christ’s advent. The angel announced the birth of Jesus to Joseph and later directed him to Egypt and back (Mt. 2:13, 20). The angel announced Christ’s birth to Mary (Luke 1:29-34). The announcement of Christ’s birth to the shepherds remains the most prominent for most (Luke 2:9-20). In all cases, the angel’s role was that of an evangelist, as Webster defines it, an enthusiastic advocate of something. A common understanding of the term angel in the New Testament is messenger. The Messengers were enthusiastic advocates of Jesus’ birth and all that would now become a reality because of his coming. Clearly Luke’s gospel reflects this as records that,

Suddenly, an angel of the Lord appeared among them, and the radiance of the Lord’s glory surrounded them. They were terrified, but the angel reassured them. “Don’t be afraid!” he said. “I bring you good news that will bring great joy to all people. ¹¹ The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born today in Bethlehem, the city of David! And you will recognize him by this sign: You will find a baby wrapped snugly in strips of cloth, lying in a manger.” Suddenly, the angel was joined by a vast host of others—the armies of heaven—praising God and saying, “Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased.” [Luke 2:9-14] ^[1]

We have an angel’s ministry in our time, messengers as enthusiastic advocates of Christ’s coming to earth. In fulfilling our role, we, like the angels that announced Christ’s birth glorify him. Origin summarized the role of evangelists well in this respect in his commentary of the gospel of John. He points out,

Now if there are those among men who are honoured with the ministry of evangelists, and if Jesus Himself brings tidings of good things, and preaches the Gospel to the poor, surely those messengers who were made spirits by God, those who are a flame of fire, ministers of the Father of all, cannot have been excluded from being evangelists also. Hence an angel standing over the shepherds made a bright light to shine round about them, and said: “Fear not; behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all the people; for there is born to you, this day, a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David.” And at a time when there was no knowledge among men of the mystery of the Gospel, those who were greater than men and inhabitants of heaven, the army of God, praised God, saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will among men.” And having said this, the angels go away from the shepherds into heaven, leaving us to gather how the joy preached to us through the birth of Jesus Christ is glory in the highest to God; they humbled themselves even to the ground, and then returned to their place of rest, to glorify God in the highest through Jesus Christ. But the angels also wonder at the peace which is to be brought about on account of Jesus on the earth, that seat of war, on which Lucifer, star of the morning, fell from heaven, to be warred against and destroyed by Jesus.^[2]

Christmas season reminds us to proclaim the good news of Christ’s advent to earth.

---

^[1] Tyndale House Publishers, Holy Bible: New Living Translation (3rd ed.; Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2007), Lk 2:9–14.

^[2] Origen, “Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John”, trans. Allan Menzies, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume IX: The Gospel of Peter, the Diatessaron of Tatian, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Visio Pauli, the Apocalypses of the Virgil and Sedrach, the Testament of Abraham, the Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena, the Narrative of Zosimus, the Apology of Aristides, the Epistles of Clement (Complete Text), Origen’s Commentary on John, Books I-X, and Commentary on Matthew, Books I, II, and X-XIV ( ed. Allan Menzies;New York: Christian Literature Company, 1897), 304.

Walk the Talk: Ignatius – “Now I begin to be a disciple”

Ignatius of Antioch (35-98AD) reminds Christ-followers of a simple truth that is mostly hard to follow. He Says, “It is better for a man to be silent and be [a Christian], than to talk and not to be one. “The kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.” Men “believe with the heart, and confess with the mouth,” the one “unto righteousness,” the other “unto salvation.” It is good to teach, if he who speaks also acts. For he who shall both “do and teach, the same shall be great in the kingdom.” Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, first did and then taught, as Luke testifies, “whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches.” There is nothing which is hid from the Lord, but our very secrets are near to Him. Let us therefore do all things as those who have Him dwelling in us, that we may be His temples, and He may be in us as God. Let Christ speak in us, even as He did in Paul. Let the Holy Spirit teach us to speak the things of Christ in like manner as He did.”^[1]

Ignatius finished well in his journey on earth and heeded his own admonition. On his way to Rome after his arrest, he expressed that, “From Syria even unto Rome I fight with beasts, both by land and sea, both by night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean a band of soldiers, who, even when they receive benefits, show themselves all the worse. But I am the more instructed by their injuries [to act as a disciple of Christ]; “yet am I not thereby justified.” May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon me, which also I will entice to devour me speedily, and not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so. Pardon me [in this]: I know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a disciple.”^[2]

The last sentence intrigues me: “Now I begin to be a disciple.” When all the talk is done and action is required, what will we do?

---

^[1] Ignatius of Antioch, “The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians”, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I: The Apostolic Fathers With Justin Martyr and Irenaeus ( ed. Alexander Roberts et al.;Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 56.

^[2] Ignatius of Antioch, “The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans”, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I: The Apostolic Fathers With Justin Martyr and Irenaeus ( ed. Alexander Roberts et al.;Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 75-76.

---

But A Passing Moment – Nolan Price

“…my flesh that tells me that there are people who I feel just don’t deserve to die so suddenly, men who I see changing the world, men that have made the world a better place just by being put here on this earth, men like Nolan. But deep down the shaming truth that starts to sting my eyes is that we all have deserved death and it is the Lord’s intervening daily grace that atones for us all.”

Prayers to the Price family in the loss of their son. A tribute well-said by a fellow student ~Thanks Brittney

Faithfully Nomadic

View original post 744 more words

The Bible and the Dirty Projectors

The King James Bible’s ubiquitous fan base seems to be growing. In a recent interview with the New York Times, Inspiration in the Bible and the Beats, David Longstreth of the Dirty Projectors identifies one inspiration for his art as the Bible. In reference to the King James Bible, Longstreth suggests,

“I just like the stories. Clearly there are stories in there that animate some deep [stuff] in the human psyche. I don’t particularly relate to any of the superstitious aspects of it, like the religion per se, but as a collection of stories, as a collection of characters, tales, the quality of the language is beautiful.”

David Longstreth’s outlook on the Bible shouldn’t surprise anyone. He makes no claim to religion, which relegates the Bible to an apparatus for psychological exploration and a literary masterpiece. However, I’m not sure that Longstreth is that far off in his assessment of the function of the holy scriptures. First, in animating the deep stuff in the human psyche, we are attempting to answer deep questions about ourselves– questions such as why do I act the way I do or why am I here or what am I supposed to be doing. Are not these the very questions the Bible answers about humankind and God’s interaction with them? The three questions just posed can all be answered to some extent in the first book, Genesis. Why do I act the way that I do?– Moral evil entered the created world when mankind choose to listen to the words of the enemy of God instead of God himself (Genesis 3:1-7). This resulted creation being separated from God (Genesis 3:17-24). However, in the judgment of humankind, God provided a promise that would ultimately reverse the curse of humankind’s actions (Genesis 3:15). Why am I here?– Humankind was created in the image of God for relationship with other humans and with him (Genesis 2:18-25). Humankind was charged with creatively care-taking God’s creation (Genesis 1:27-31). Because of the presence of evil in the world, humankind struggles in human relationships and care-taking creation. We see this clearly in how we treat one another in this hemisphere and the carelessness toward other human beings’ plight throughout the world. We also see this in our disregard for God’s creation, many times using it as our personal trashcan. We fail in relationships and creational care.

The second function of the Bible, as defined by David Longstreth, gives us a collection of stories. Here too, it is hard to disagree with Longstreth’s assessment. The Bible was not meant to function as a set of propositions although it contains them. Propositions in the Bible are set within a story. For example the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17) do not exist apart from the context of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Exodus 1-14). God explained that Israel’s motivation for obeying the Ten Commandments is rooted in his mighty act (the story) of deliverance (Exodus 19:3-8). The Bible is a collection of wonderful stories that relate God to his creation. They re-tell how God diligently pursues relationship with humankind throughout generations of the world. These stories also re-tell how humankind continues to wreck the relationship between God and humans because of the effect of evil that results in sinful choices by humankind. In the Christian faith, all of these stories point to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, where we find God entering the story in human form, in the person of Jesus, to do for us what we cannot do for ourselves: Live a perfect life in relationship with God and restore the relational divide between humans and God (John 20). This brings us back to Genesis: curse reversed (Genesis 3:15). In time, God will completely restore creation to its perfect preeminence (Revelation 21:1-8). God will once again walk among his created in perfect relationship. All of these are stories that answer the thoughts that “animate the deep stuff in the human psyche.” So in this way, perhaps we should view the Bible similar to David Longstreth. But when we view it in this way, it becomes impossible to divorce the “religion” from the stories because the stories are the “religion” if by religion we mean relationship to God.

St. Basil: The mind and goodness, beauty, and truth

I found an interesting statement by St. Basil (330-379) about the operation of the mind. I liked how he employed the interrelatedness of beauty, goodness and truth.

The mind is a wonderful thing, and therein we possess that which is after the image of the Creator. And the operation of the mind is wonderful; in that, in its perpetual motion, it frequently forms imaginations about things non-existent as though they were existent, and is frequently carried straight to the truth. But there are in it two faculties; in accordance with the view of us who believe in God, the one evil, that of the dæmons which draws us on to their own apostasy; and the divine and the good, which brings us to the likeness of God. When, therefore, the mind remains alone and unaided, it contemplates small things, commensurate with itself. When it yields to those who deceive it, it nullifies its proper judgment, and is concerned with monstrous fancies. Then it considers wood to be no longer wood, but a god; then it looks on gold no longer as money, but as an object of worship. If on the other hand it assents to its diviner part, and accepts the boons of the Spirit, then, so air as its nature admits, it becomes perceptive of the divine. There are, as it were, three conditions of life, and three operations of the mind. Our ways may be wicked, and the movements of our mind wicked; such as adulteries, thefts, idolatries, slanders, strife, passion, sedition, vain-glory, and all that the apostle Paul enumerates among the works of the flesh. Or the soul’s operation is, as it were, in a mean, and has nothing about it either damnable or laudable, as the perception of such mechanical crafts as we commonly speak of as indifferent, and, of their own character, inclining neither towards virtue nor towards vice. For what vice is there in the craft of the helmsman or the physician? Neither are these operations in themselves virtues, but they incline in one direction or the other in accordance with the will of those who use them. But the mind which is impregnated with the Godhead of the Spirit is at once capable of viewing great objects; it beholds the divine beauty, though only so far as grace imparts and its nature receives.^[1]

---

^[1] St. Basil. “To Amphilochius in reply to certain questions” in A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series, Volume VIII: St. Basil: Letters and Select Works ( ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace;New York: Christian Literature Company, 1895), 273.

Why can’t preachers just preach the Bible?

An apologetic that requires a seminary degree to stand in a pulpit grows stronger when we see “preachers” like Charles Worley of Maiden N.C. Providence Road Baptist Church. In fact many denominations require a Master of Divinity degree to be ordained or licensed to preach which is not a bad thing. Worley’s tirade covering politics to his solution to homosexuals begs the question, why can’t preachers preach the Bible? The instructions to ministers seemed pretty clear in 2 Timothy 4:1-5.  In this passage, Paul exhorts Timothy to “Preach the Word!” He then instructs Timothy how to shepherd with the Word: “Patiently correct, rebuke, and encourage your people with good teaching.” Paul also gives Timothy the purpose for preaching the Word: “For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear. They will reject the truth and chase after myths.”  He then concludes by contrasting Timothy’s disposition with those with itching ears: “But you should keep a clear mind in every situation. Don’t be afraid of suffering for the Lord. Work at telling others the Good News, and fully carry out the ministry God has given you.” It seems that by Paul’s exhortation, Worley is the teacher that tells his people what they want to hear. These church members are perhaps people concerned that the county is headed in a morally wrong direction; or maybe, they are political conservatives eager to remove a political liberal in exchange for a political conservative. Either way, the words spoken in his church service were not the Word that God has revealed to men through the Bible.

While the Bible speaks against homosexuality, it does not suggest that we treat those who are practicing homosexuality badly. In fact, we should treat all outside the faith in the same way: tell them the good news! Show them the love that Christ showed us. Homosexuals are not in an exclusive category that Christ cannot redeem. In fact I Corinthians 6:9-11 tells a different story. Paul says that all people who are practicing sin will not inherit the Kingdom of God. He then lists some of the sins that people practice: “Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people.” He breaks any thought of exclusivity that homosexuality is unpardonable or a special sin in two ways. First, by placing it in a vice list, it is a sin like other sins such as greed or cheating. Second, Paul points out that the Corinthian church contained people who previously practiced some of these sins. He states, “Some of you were once like that [practicing things on the vice list]. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God (vs 11).

In a similar way, politics has no place in the pulpit. Jesus tells us to“give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God” (Mt. 22:21). Simply put pay your taxes and do what your government expects of you. Paul expands Jesus’ teachings by telling the church to submit to government (Rom. 13:1). Paul also exhorts the church to pray for government authorities (1 Timothy 2:2). It seems that Pastor Worley regrettably seemed unfamiliar with these passages on both homosexuality and government on Mother’s Day. For the sake of the church, he should just preach the Word. However, Worley did not preach the Word of God; he preached his own word. A word for itching ears.

Confession Booth!

Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you can live together whole and healed. The prayer of a person living right with God is something powerful to be reckoned with. Elijah, for instance, human just like us, prayed hard that it wouldn’t rain, and it didn’t—not a drop for three and a half years. Then he prayed that it would rain, and it did. The showers came and everything started growing again.
(James 5:16-18, Message)

I have been thinking about the notion of confession of sins one to another. Why don’t we do it? Maybe it is because we have acquaintances now instead of friends. By friends, I mean those who can give restorative criticism and confront. By friends, I mean those who could hear the most horrific detail come out of my mouth and want help me in spite of it. By friends, I mean people I actually spend time getting to know. Maybe we don’t do it because we think it is a “catholic thing.” Protestants have given way to much to the catholic church and this may be one them. We gave them the arts, the history, and maybe confession too. Throughout history in a effort to distinguish ourselves as Protestants, perhaps we shed too many things that remind us of our older brother. The idea or theological truth of confession to another person is often shouted down by the sound of someone quoting I Timothy 2:5. “There is one Mediator! (and it’s not the priest!)!” While theologically that is true, what do we do with James 5:16?

Maybe we just don’t confess our sins one to another, because we have “matured in the faith.” I would like to think so, in the case of myself, but I think there is one reason: Pride. We have to humble ourselves to confess our faults to another person. Aquinas said,

Those who acknowledge their evils, are beloved, not for their evils, but because they acknowledge them, for it is a good thing to acknowledge one’s faults, in so far as it excludes insincerity or hypocrisy. (Summa Theologica, Q.26.A. 2)

I think we need to return to a good thing: the confession booth. Maybe this time in Starbucks or in a favorite restaurant with a fellow Christian journeying with you through the struggles of life apart from perfection.

Resurrection: Tale of two Kingdoms

N.T. Wright in his massive work The Resurrection of the Son of God, summarizes the significance of Jesus’ resurrection and its relation to the kingdoms of this world.

The story of Jesus of Nazareth which we find in the New Testament offers itself, as Jesus himself had offered his public work and words, his boddy and blood, as the answer to this multiple problem: the arrival of God’s kingdom precisely in the world of space, time and matter, the world of injustice and tyranny, of empire and crucifixions. This world is where the kingdom must come, on earth as it is in heaven. What view of creation,, what view of justice, would be served by the offer merely of a new spirituality and a one-way ticket out of trouble, an escape from the real world?

No wonder the Herods, the Caesars and the Sadducees of this world, ancient and modern, were and are eager to rule out all possibility of actual resurrection. They are, after all, staking a counter-claim on the real world. It is the real world that the tyrants and bullies (including intellectual and cultural tyrants and bullies) try to rule by force, only to discover that in order to do so they have to quash all rumours of resurrection, rumours that would imply that their greatest weapons, death and deconstruction, are not after all omnipotent. But it is the real world, in Jewish thinking, that the real God made, and still grieves over. It is the real world that, in the earliest stories of Jesus’ resurrection, was decisively and for ever reclaimed by that event, an event which demanded to be understood, not as a bizarre miracle, but as the beginning of the new creation.