The Bible as Sacrament

When one reads the sentiments of some Evangelicals these days, one cannot help but notice that beastly concepts such as "subjectivity" and "relativism" are still firmly attached (at the hip) to postmodernism. Indeed many people still assume that postmodernism is relativism. In a newish book titled The Next Reformation: Why Evangelicals Must Embrace Postmodernity, Carl Raschke does a standup job of explaining (in incredible philosophical and historical detail) why this is at root a false association.

In reference to the Church in particular, Raschke explains, to the contrary, that it is hyper-modernistic thinking that "relativizes" the Truth; that is- the self-attesting Logos, Jesus of Nazareth. Raschke writes:

"...postmodernism challenges evangelical thought to acknowledge that it is guilty of what from the biblical perspective is considered the greatest of sins - the sin of idol-worship. Because evangelical thinking has adopted by its own means and measure the criteria for conceptual adequacy that were put forth centuries ago by modern philosophy, it has ingested that unique fashion of idolatry."

Raschke goes on to point out that while many Evangelicals talk about having faith in "the Bible alone" (i.e. sola scriptura), the reality of the situation is that, beneath this lies a presumption about the nature of reason and a human being's ability to "objectively" discern and apply it. Raschke argues that this amounts to an underlying faith in "the pure 'objective' character of reason itself".

So what is the alternative to an "axiomatic" approach to the Bible? Well, a sacramental approach seems appropriate. In that sense we highly value the truths revealed in the Scriptures, but we do so while remembering that the ultimate purpose of the Bible is to lead us to a dynamic, real-time relationship with the Lord- who not only is spoken of in the Bible- but also speaks through it even now. His Spirit makes the ancient text as ever-vibrant as wet ink on the fresh papyrus of our hearts.




Dallas Willard and Down to Earth Spirituality

One of the figures in contemporary Western Christendom who I think is under-rated in terms of his impact on movements such as the Vineyard and Emergent, is Dallas Willard. I remember coming across Willard's work around the time that "The Divine Conspiracy" first came out.

What I found so appealing about Willard's approach was that not only was he a "master of philosophy", but that he possessed an uncanny ability to bring theology and spiritual teaching "down to earth".

One of the freshest things I remember coming across a few years ago was Willard's suggestion that churches should actually offer courses on "How to turn the other cheek". What a brilliant idea! Rather than a more traditional Protestant approach where we shame people into appealing to the Holy Spirit for more grace, we actually equip people with the life skills to live like Jesus did. His main point is that Christian character is not automatic.

I recently came across an interview with Dallas in Relevant Magazine where he had some thought-provoking things to say about our society's tendency to confuse science's ability to demonstrate a very few human biological, cognitive connections with real explanation for the complex moral/spiritual nature of human beings. He says of people who have such "faith" that:

"You should challenge them to explain life on the basis of physics and chemistry... But we haven’t remotely done that. All we have done is correlated certain brain states to certain mental states. The main thing to say here is this idea that somehow we’ve made great progress to understanding the mind or soul by what we know about the brain is pure illusion! We have not done any such thing."

Well said.

Illusion is the same old, same old in terms of the familiar tactics of the Enemy. One of the most productive things we can do as Christians is identity them when we see them. In doing so we cast light where there was only "sophisticated darkness".




Evolution and Intelligent Design: The Wrong Debate

Interestingly enough, no sooner had some conservative school board members in Dover, Pennsylvania voted in the "Intelligent Design" theory, than voters took the opportunity to oust them in recent elections. Therefore, it's pretty safe to say that the Intelligent Design theory of history, will itself soon be history- once newly elected officials have their say.

What I find interesting in this whole debate is how often people still seem to talk in absolutes. Many people act like a vote for Evolution is a vote for atheism- full stop. That kind of either/or talk is not terribly helpful; nor is it really in alignment with the reality of the situation.

It seems to me that for Christians, the most essential aspect of our perspective is that when it comes to the creation of the cosmos- God did it. It's of far less importance how He did it.

There are many conservative Christians who think it is a betrayal of the authority of the Bible to allow for the possibility of Evolution over a more literal 6 day creation account. The thing is though, if we are to understand the Genesis Creation account in its original context, as the original hearers would have heard it, we need to be cognizant of the fact that this kind of hyper-literal interpretation is at best- weak exegesis, and at worst- a prideful resistance to genre awareness in reference to Scripture.

And what I find most troubling of all about this move to make the Evolution debate the "hill that we will die on" is that it completely shuts down an avenue by which some seekers often come to God. If we make the issue one of how the Universe was formed, rather than whether or not there is a God, then we will have seriously missed the intent of the Great Commission. Even for those who see the theory of Evolution as full of holes, there needs to be a prayerful reconsidering of our priorities.




Anne Rice: 360 Degrees to Home

I admit that I am always interested to hear about well known personalities who come to confess a faith in Jesus. First of all, it's exciting to hear that another soul has found God. Secondly, because of the very fact that these people are celebrities, one knows that such a "defection" is going to have an enormous ripple effect on others.

Anne Rice's personal journey certainly qualifies as one of these types of conversions. Not only has she gone from writing about vampires and other such ghastly ghouls, to writing about Jesus, but this shift parallels a real transformation in her own life.

Rice confesses that while being raised a Catholic, she left the church in early adulthood. She recalls being a "proud atheist" during much of her life. But in more recent years she gradually returned to her Christian roots. By the time 1998 rolled around her journey had taken her 360 degrees- back to the feet of Jesus. And this change most definitely shows up in her writing- which is now a vocation- in the truest sense of the word.

Her journey has culminated in the penning of her latest novel, "Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt". This is a fictional account (inspired by the four gospels and the latest in New Testament scholarship) of the early life of Jesus.

I have yet to read the book, but it's definitely been added to my "to do" list. I think that enormous good can come when we use the craft of story-telling to bring the Gospel to life. Often Christians have considered this a taboo subject- almost as if they were adding to the Bible itself.

Personally, I'm glad this is changing. After all, stories can bring truth to life. Whatever you may think of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ", one cannot deny that this movie brought the issue of faith back into the mainstream. I'm sure that Anne Rice's book about Jesus will have a similar catalytic effect.

P.S. - I'm still praying for James Hetfield.




The Fire of Curiosity in Science and Religion

I remember reading Kitty Ferguson's "The Fire in the Equations: Science, Religion and the Search for God" closer to the time it originally came out- around 1994. The re-read I'm doing now is even more compelling than the first run-through. The author does a great job of articulating the issues behind both religion and science's search for "the Ultimate". Theology speaks in terms of the search for God, philosophy talks of the "prime mover", and science seeks to articulate a "Theory of Everything".

Ferguson does a masterful job, not only of "beautifying" science for the seminary crowd (who sometimes make the mistake of assuming it's less dynamic than it actually is), but also of redeeming the cause of the theolog for the scientific crowd.

Recent debate and subsequent lawsuits between evolution theorists and the intelligent design crowd suggest that not one, but both schools of thought assume they have different end goals and unrelated levels of bias. Again, Ferguson does well to remind us that the search for truth is the search for truth- and any search begins with a subjective filtering of reality (i.e. bias).

Even more interestingly (and perhaps, ironically) Ferguson goes so far as to say that the subjective "faith statements" made by both theology and science are of the same sort. She writes:

"On the one hand, God is supposed to have foreknowledge. On the other hand, we are told we have free will and will be held accountable for our actions. How can both be true? On the other hand, the Theory of Everything (in science) may have determined the future from the instant of the beginning of the universe. On the other hand, we are told we do best to assume we live in a contingent universe- a universe that can be studied only by looking at it, not by pure thought, no matter how advanced and well-informed that thought. The enormous paradox that lies at the heart of Western religion seems to lie at the heart of science as well."

"Fire in the Equations" is well worth the read. What many with a postmodern sensitivity will enjoy is the discussion of Quantum Physics- where neat, linear arguments about the law of cause and effect seem to break down entirely.

Even as the collected evidence mounts, so too do the mysteries- and the surrounding glory.




The Real Politik of Jesus

Recently a study that looked at the causes of fruitful political reform around the world was released. The data, studied by a Washington based International think tank, was gathered over 33 years in some 67 nations.

The results overwhelmingly support the idea that the most effective way to replace authoritarian regimes is through non-violent protest and education.

Where groups resorted to violence and terrorism the rate of fruitful change was significantly reduced. In cases where a terrorist group did manage to overthrow a government, that new government was highly likely to suffer the same fate by a later usurper.

All this goes to show not only that both Jesus and Gandhi had it right in terms of defining the higher moral ground, but that they also had it right in terms of outlining a an approach that could actually help to change the world for good.

Now that's the kind of "real politik" that I can support.




Iran Threatens Israel with Annihilation

Most of the civilized world responded with shock and dismay after hearing that Iran's leader, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had not only stated publicly that Israel "must be wiped off the map", but then later stood by his comments when asked for further comment or clarification.

The remarks by Ahmadinejad have only added to already tense relations between Iran and the UN. Ahmadinejad's comments come on the heels of concerns regarding Iran's refusal to submit to UN standards on nuclear proliferation. On November 24th the International Atomic Energy Agency (part of the UN) meets to decide whether to take Iran before the UN Security Council.

Such events make a couple of things occur to me:

1.) Its no surprise that Israel is as prickly as they are when it comes to peace with their neighbors. Those of us in the West really have no sense of what it must be like to have the entire neighborhood of nations around you ready to "wipe you off the map". And that's not even taking to account the historical experience of Jews in the Holocaust.

2.) After all this time, after all our supposed modernization and humanitarian progress, the fate of the world rests on the situation in the Middle East. While this may at first appear alarmist (and alarmists frustrate me as much as the next guy_) all one has to do is consider what a man like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would do if he had the power of nuclear weapons at his fingertips.

As much as many like to claim that peacemaking is a human trait, it is clear that in some parts of world where a Judeo-Christian ethic has not taken hold; such notions are for all intents and purposes- non-existent.


It seems that these days barely a week goes and I stumble across yet another critical response to the Emerging Church conversation. Now, first off I want to clarify that I do not necessarily wholeheartedly endorse everything that everyone who calls themselves Emergent does. That should come as no surprise though, because the Emergent movement is an ongoing process- not a finshed product. There are many voices involved in the conversation right now.

So, its not that I'm responding as if some personal offense has occured when someone critisizes the Emerging movement. I don't mind fair dialogue- even when its critical. What I find frustrating is just how often people make comments about Emergent that suggest they neither understand it- nor perhaps care to.




What Happened to "Seek First to Understand"?

Christianity Today recently ran a piece called "Why James MacDonald Is Not Emerging". This is a series of articles posted by James MacDonald, a pastor and Christian radio personality on the program "Walk in the Word". It turns out that in parusing through this piece, I barely got through the first paragraph before noticing some blatant mischaracterization of the Emergent take. At best, this was due to a superficail understanding of the postmodern dynamic in Western society. At worst, it was a blatant mischaracterization of the aims of Emergent.

MacDonald writes:

"In the past few years we have analyzed our culture ad nauseum. Cultures don’t come to Christ, individuals do and the fields are more ripe for harvest than ever before.

Our endless discussion of culture has become just an elitist substitute for rolling up our sleeves and getting the Good News to the people who are hurting right now! Baby Boomer, GenX, Postmodern, blah, blah, blah. The discussion itself is modernistic and we’re just talking to ourselves. How about a more compassionate extension of our own life in Christ and please . . . a lot less perpetual babbling about culture, which even when rightly observed is not the answer, duh - Jesus is!"

Where to begin?

First of all, since when does one assume that analyzing culture- when done with the aim of reaching non-believers, is the opposite of "rolling up our sleeves" and gettting down to work? Preperation is important. No- we don't have to have all the answers before we begin. But yes, analysis does make a difference.

As I've written before, the modern sensitized Church only really became effective in reaching a modern society once it truly understood that society. All postmodern sensitized Christians are trying to do is prepare to be linguistically and conceptually relevant to their neighbors in the here and now.

Lastly, despite what MacDonald says, those in the Emergent movement are the least likely to be "talking to themselves". If anything, Emergents have taken flack from more traditional Christian cirlces for the very opposite reason; for being too open-minded to discussion and interaction with other faith groups.

Come on... Let's be fair. It seems that MacDonald's lack of enthusiasm for analysis led him to make some sweeping assumptions about the Emering movement- and therefore while his passion is admirable, his ignorance is anything but.




A Greener Wal-Mart

You know "the times they are a changin" when Wal-Mart decides to take the lead on developing green energy resources to run its behemoth empire. This past week Wal Mart annouced it was aiming to one day be 100% fueled by renewable energy resources.

Considering the sheer size of Wal-Mart (it is the biggest company in the world by most standards) this is no small shift in policy. If Wal-Mart is willing to take the lead its likely others will follow; as much for the good publicity as for the fact that its good for the environment.

It has occured to me on more than one occasion that Wal-Mart is to some extent a potent example of where Western Christianity has gone a little wrong. Sam Walton started Wal-Mart with an aim to bring low prices to his customers. People, not just in America, but around the world, have gladly eaten up the savings.

However, questions about working standards and emplyee benefits (or the lack there of) have led many to question if Wal-Mart is too pro-consumer in its approach.

In the 20th century a similar phenomen occurred when churches competed with each other to be the "religious service providers" of choice for a Western, consumer-driven society. In this "me-centered" theology, issues like social justice and personal sacrifice often took a back-seat.

Let's hope that this more holistic attitude towards "doing good" continues to catch on in the corporation and in the Church.




Honoring the Memory of Rosa Parks

Rosa Parks, a civil rights leader who put her faith to the fire by refusing to surrender a bus seat to a white passenger in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955, died at the age of 92. Mrs. Park's heroic actions spawned the emboldening of other civil rights activists - Martin Luther King Jr. being one of them.

Last month religious leaders from all around America hailed Rosa Parks as a hero. It is still rather astounding to think that segregation was so deep-seated, only a few decades ago. As Christians, we cannot help but wonder at the fact that while many Christians were "part of the solution" in the South, others used the Bible to justify their racist beliefs and behaviors.

Considering that such events took place only 50 years ago, we can serve the memory of Mrs. Parks by keeping an open mind to our hearts, open eye to the Scriptures, and open heart to the Holy Spirit, regarding the ways we might be misapplying the Bible today.

It's easy to condemn the past- because we can deny responsibility. But to truly learn from the past is to remember that we are capable of the same mistakes as those who came before us- even if those mistakes take a different form.



Current from: March-April 2007 - January-February 2007 - November-December 2006 - July-October 2006 - May/June 2006 - April 2006 - March 2006 - February 2006 - January 2006 - December 2005 - Christmas Current 2005 - November 2005 - October 2005 - September 2005