God and circumstances and Godliness
29 Dec 2011 Leave a Comment
A couple months ago( I wrote this then but never published it, ha) I had an experience at Church that was one of the most moving I’ve had in a long time. No single factor deserves the credit, except for God’s Spirit I suppose. But don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying I had one of those “moments” where I “felt” the Holy Spirit in a special way and that I really liked it. Instead it was the form and content of all that was said and done that was formative and transformational for me where I was at. My weekend was on a downward trend of anxiety and frustration over a whole range of issues. One of the readings that morning was about when the people of Israel complained in the desert. It was convicting. A follow up reading was done antiphonally with the congregation repeating the second part of each poetic phrase of a selection from Psalm 78 where the people sang out the praises of how God provided for and led our ancestors in the faith. It was so wonderful to remind myself of God’s faithfulness in this very biblical fashion. I was ashamed at how much I had forgotten the goodness of God in my own life as well.
Furthermore, I began to scrawl out notes about three of the most significant events in the Gospel: The Transfiguration, the Cross, and the Resurrection. I quickly thought of it like this. The Transfiguration revealed God’s glory beyond circumstances. It was as if the curtain of this world’s darkness was pulled back for a moment allowing the full weight of truth to become visible (and terrifyingly good). The Cross revealed God’s love in circumstances. In this image, we see the full weight of trouble and sin and yet God’s powerful enduring love in it. How intimate and strong! In the Resurrection appearances, we see God’s victory over circumstances. All of this infused my heart with immeasurable hope and courage. Additionally I began to feel like I really could go forward and continue to profoundly love the unlovely (like myself) with unconditional value and respect, and also with courageous confrontation when necessary. If God is glorious beyond, victorious over, and loving in the midst of the darkest accumulation of the world’s wicked circumstances, then I could, by Him living in me, have no reason to faint under any complexity.
Sometimes, for me, I really do get zeroed in on circumstances in life. It’s not because I am forgetful of God, but rather, for the very sake of the kingdom of God, I view every aspect of life as an opportunity to manifest and witness His kingdom’s dominion- and this intense task orientation sometimes means I lose sight of the forest for the trees. But I have to admit that recently I’ve gotten dizzy and overwhelmed to the point of feeling like this was a battle with an uncertain conclusion. God gives more than a good hope. He gives beauty and happiness beyond the fight, strength and perspective in it, and the eternal victor’s prize beforehand! I felt more free to confess my faults than ever before and more peaceful and empowered afterward. It is His work beyond me, in and through me, and unto His own secure dominion. I will praise Him and give my all to accept and follow and learn. Just thought I’d share that.
Friend of sinners
14 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
I have a number of pet peeves when it comes to some of the popular misconceptions of the scriptures. My strongest ones come from times when people not only have dramatically misinterpreted them, but also then turn around and use their misguided thinking to imagine they are thereby following some radical and elite spirituality, possibly even rebuking others as missing the boat when it comes to following Jesus. One of the most classic ones has to do with the understanding of Jesus “hanging out with sinners”. If he spent most of his time chilling with the prostitutes, why are we so concerned with being all holy and separate and whatnot? Give me a break! This buzz-line of an argument has been constantly used to justify low moral standards at worst, watered down worship and ministry at best, and all around compromise in life. It goes without saying that we should love people and should desire to reach them with the gospel truth. But it does not automatically follow that we should try to “reach” people by any means possible. To put it to the extreme, should we have a pedophile over as an overnight guest or go on a drive by with some gangsters?! I think (I pray, I hope) that most of us realize that Jesus never meant for us to abandon healthy boundaries.
The fact is that he never did this himself, either. People only think this way because they fail to realize that his “hanging out” was not like we think and the “sinners” in such references were not what we think. The type of people in question (prostitutes, tax collectors, etc.) were definitely coming from groups that were dark and corrupt (though sometimes they were merely non-Jewsish), but the contexts whereby we see Jesus with them are all contexts where they were either coming to Jesus to learn from Him or else Jesus was a fellow guest of someone who was doing so, or else it was just normal day-to-day life (i.e. the woman at the well). This is not at all the same as Jesus just kickin’ back with bad people in their badness. They were overtly pursuing to some degree who Jesus was and what He was teaching. On the whole, His three short years on record were an intensive teaching and reaching journey. There was no time for any normal life of “hanging out” with any group of people except as side visits on a travelling ministry trip (which largely included synagogues… Jewish churches).
Even then, the “sinners” in question were only really called such to reference the life they came from. He is never seen “rubbing elbows” with people set in their evil ways, only with people who were dramatically coming out of it. The scriptures highlight their particular status as “sinners” as a contrast to the self-righteous and unloving Pharisees (the understanding of which is also one of my pet peeves) who are not judged or criticized for staying away from the lifestyles of evil men, but for rejecting an honestly repentant person (or even the possibility of their repentance and God’s forgiveness) out of an hypocritical (i.e. false front) rhetoric regarding ceremonial cleanliness. Technically, such people were considered “unclean” according to Jewish custom and thereby, to even be in the same house as them, especially to share a meal, without them going through a process of cleansing (going to the temple and making an offering, etc.) was to make oneself unclean as well. It wasn’t a matter of being more willing to associate with evil people “where they are”, but with never being so self-absorbed and self-satisfied that we lose sight of disinterested love and openness for all people to come to God in their need. The Pharisees’ understanding and application of this custom had cut off such possibilities of love and outreach. Yes, Jesus did reach out- way out. But he never spent any free time just shooting the breeze down in the brothels, not even as a sort of “maybe they’ll eventually wanna know why I’m different and ask me” endeavor.
I have a friend who runs an outreach center for troubled Somali youth in Minnesota (word up, Molly!). It’s awesome. These kids need some place to go that’s good clean fun and recreation, keeping them out of trouble. At the center, they do indeed just kick it with these “sinners”. But, again, the youth are coming to their center, which has special rules on behavior and leadership that infuses healthy conflict resolution, positive encouragement, and just plain gospel truth into all they do. I hope that people can see the humongous difference between this and others who, in the name of the false interpretation I’m addressing, continue to spend their time with people (“friends”) who are involved in violence, drugs, and sexual immorality. Not only do we need to separate for the sake of our own health and growth, but also so that there can truly be something for people to come to (and I don’t just mean a Church service, though they too are being drastically watered down in the name of “seeker sensitivity”) when they finally decide to leave such evil ways. The proverb cited by Paul himself (the most inclusive of missionaries) is forever true. “Bad company corrupts good morals”. But if we will continue to be a light on a hill, and not lose our saltiness, the world will be impacted for good instead!
Kids these days…
09 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
Old man rant time! I’ve been working with youth since the time I became an adult (cough, twelve years ago, cough). I went seamlessly (well, not really seamlessly so much as dramatically through a conversion experience that radically changed my life) from being a youth to leading youth. My own youth was spent in deep depravity and rebellion. My work with youth has mostly been in religious contexts. These facts have colored my perspective in a couple of ways that I know of. First, they force me to accept that, even to the extent that I may think that things have gotten worse (and no, this isn’t a post all about how downhill things have gone since I was a kid, though it includes some of that), sin in youth is nothing new and in fact should be expected. Second, for as much as we recognize that all are sinners, over the years I have become more and more deeply convinced that we should permit no room for accepting this as ok, especially in the Lord, especially when working with youth in a formative situation. God wants to sanctify His people in order to truly make them a light to the world (which is way darker than even I am regularly exposed to). Third, I have tremendous hope and aspiration for the possibilities and potential that living a righteous life from youth can afford.
My main observation about youth today (and I’ll throw in here that, of course, I’m not talking about every single person, but the general trend) is that, more than ever before, their problems and issues are direct manifestations of the popular culture. This is true because of our new era of entertainment and communication, which has blossomed with the explosion of television and been crowned with the internet, has made possible instant and constant access, with a residual movement toward turning all of reality into nothing but an entertainment program with each of us as her or his own producer (at worst co-producer, at best celebrity star of the show). This has multiple ramifications that are a big big deal for those of us who raise or otherwise minister to them. For one thing, it means realizing that, above and beyond the normal youth vs adult or human vs authority temptation for rebellion (which I do also posit has special impetus in our time) there is a new, and in my opinion stronger, force to reckon with in the battle for each person to buck off any interruption to their own desired programming for their life. In short, you have to hijack their show, maybe their whole station, in order to shape their being for good.
This is true even when their parents give you the right, and even when the student is religious, for even general Christianity today tends to present itself as self-help rather than demanding self-surrender, and especially where it pertains to submitting to another human being. But, I digress. This means shattering their delicate voyeuristic fantasies over and over in a way that never had to be done with kids of the past. And generally speaking, the older the kid (and the more cool gadgets they have and freedoms they have from parents), the harder the hammer has to be to shatter it (again we’re not talking about the good kids so much, though what we call good doesn ot exempt them from having the same need that I’m discussing here). The great news is that, on the other side, the child can find that reality isn’t something they need to hide or escape from, and that it can in fact be a great adventure and a loving kingdom, more wonderful than any of their own machinations! It may even be true that such “broken in” students are more open and pliable to truth than previous generations because they haven’t spent all their time getting calloused since they’ve not really been engaging in it (though there is definitely a lot more confusion to correct along the way).
Another major ramification is that it is far more difficult to do anything with youth that does not meet their sense of instant entertainment gratification. It is commonly observed that we all used to create our own fun and enthusiasm in various ways (some pin it down to “imagination” though I don’t accuse our youth of lacking that per se). Youth today just seem increasingly unable to do this. Motivation for engaging real life must often be provided (like a director to an actor) by someone else or else by the overwhelming nature of the activity at hand being very inherently entertaining or special. Since life is not at all like that all the time (nor even most of the time), there is a frustrating rub here. Students must be challenged to do more than they think is fun and adults must constantly consider the nature of life’s motivations for doing things in order to transfer healthy values.
According to my evaluation, the worst effect in all of this is that any and all of the terrible ways of our secular society are that much more assimilated and practiced by our youth from earlier and earlier ages, to the point that our 3rd and 4th graders are joking about sex! So many “isms” are not only underlying the stuff kids ingest through media (relativism, nihilism, hedonism, narcissism, etc.) in heavier doses than ever before, but these also are natural derivatives of living for entertainment in the first place. In a time when Christianity is being proffered as a “personal experience” I suggest we return to a more fundamentalist approach of hard core, absolute reality check. Either Christ is Lord of all or He isn’t. Either we need to revere Him or we don’t. Either love is right and righteous, or it isn’t. And on and on the list could go. We can’t begin to think we are competing with the multi-billion dollar industries that have their attention. Our truth needs to be so solid that everything else becomes starkly hollow by contrast. Our proclamations shouldn’t be like commercials for a product we’re selling, but rather like declarations of war on all lies to the contrary, with an army of arguments to back them up. Youth today will not be truly changed until they are truly challenged. Will we be bold enough?
The will of God
31 Jul 2011 Leave a Comment
This summer has been crazy. From wondering what I would do for work, to Carrie finishing her degree, to one of our car’s going to its grave, it feels like a stream of “brain teasers” have hit me regarding God’s will for my family’s life. Some would question whether it is even fitting to refer to matters of God’s will as brain-related so much as an application of another kind of paradigm that a short list of theological emphases affords. I was struck with one of those moments where I am aware of a variety of approaches, all with some good and valid insight. In such times I usually take to making lists, and, when the content is not too esoteric, sharing them like I am now (do I have the spiritual gift of secretary-ism?):
1. God’s perfect will vs His permissive will: This is the most immediate, the most obvious, and the most popular distinction that is made. Surely a good God (and God is perfectly good after all) doesn’t ever want any evil to happen, but it definitely happens. So as long as we are accepting that He is in fact God (and good), we have to articulate a category like this to account for the “allowances” that we experience. This means we can both encounter evil through the tension of this mystery and also maintain a deep rooting in God’s righteous law. It also brings great joy and comfort to know that no evil can replace or overtake God, but that His immanence is truly and unendingly universal. No, God doesn’t make all things happen for a reason. But He does make all things work together for good for those who love Him (Romans 8:28).
2. God’s intention vs His plan: Wonderfully, there is even more revealed to us behind the thick curtain of God’s permission of suffering. One great and glorious truth that so many have found to be fundamental to the faith in these uncertain times we live in is that, while the fullness of God’s good intentions may not be met in any given era, they will be met eventually according to the delightful knowledge that He has a plan underway (and has from the beginning). This is far more than simple allowance. It is taking the world by the horns and riding out its wild bucking rampage until it is tamed into its pen (with varying degrees of force applied, but characteristically deferential). It is so very reassuring to remember this element. We can thus begin to work out God’s will in total peace.
3. God’s general will vs His specific will: And this is where people immediately surrender that peace in confusion. If we are simply shooting for His perfect will and realizing that we are falling short, but also realizing that He will continue to work a plan in it all for good according to His overall intentions, then we need not worry and fret about particular plans and decisions the way that so many of us do. We should just “give our best, and let God do the rest”. But, if we are deeply relying on the fact of God having a “plan”, we can easily begin to think in this third pattern where it is broken down into general (ex. salvation) and specific (ex. where to park the car). The dilemma comes when we realize that this specific will is not publicly revealed anywhere. Yet, various aspects of the scriptures and of our faith lead us to believe we can and maybe even should be getting direct ”leading” from God in this area. Many interesting stories come to us, for instance, about how this or that “feeling” or otherwise inexplicable decision led to a “divine appointment”. This is fuel on the fire which leads us into some dangerous flames if we’re not careful and wise in it.
For instance, I think most of us have made peace somehow with the fact that such specifics are not always revealed, to say nothing of the fact that they may not even always exist (most would agree that He probably doesn’t have a parking spot picked for us, though that’s not to say He doesn’t care, or that it might not have huge implications, or that He might not have one picked out occasionally). Likewise, it is healthy to accept that such leading may not always be definite or immediate (i.e. a strong, clear sense of what to do in our “gut”), and may in fact require a lot of investigation, prayer, and counsel, with the end result still feeling more like 75/25 than certainty. And of course we must add that, even with a direct leading, we need corporate discernment and accountability to be sure it is not clearly leading us in the wrong direction. There is much that could be said and is being said to help us hone this process. But let us also address some fundamental criticisms of the whole notion.
4. God’s script vs His relationship: The deepest error in getting caught up in such a feed-me-my-line type of living is that it is hollow. While it is keen to note that the methods of receiving God’s specific will essentially demand a constant communal and spiritual existence from us, this by no means guarantees an actual loving relationship with others or God. To the contrary, it fosters a mindset that sees all else in the world (even God) as a means to a personal end- getting God’s specific will right for my life. Even if the ulterior motive for this is for God’s glory or the benefit of others, it still bottlenecks at this point and the self becomes the ultimate center upon which everything depends. The bottom line is that this is incompatible with God’s intentions. It is clear that He seeks relationships, full, robust, honest, free, creative, loving relationships. How wooden of us to be zeroed in on following some kind of heavenly “script”. It is wonderfully edifying to open ourselves back up to the terrifying freedom of God’s agenda. In other words, too much emphasis on the specifics leaves us myopically sacrificing the generals. My coach used to call it tunnel vision, and those who had it usually ended up costing us the game.
5. God’s steps vs His goal: Now, I hope you don’t take me as suggesting that God has no such specifics for us in our life. I believe He does indeed and that remaining open to Him in this way is a key component of Christianity. It’s about following a real person- Jesus- in a concrete way- His Church- through the power of the Holy Spirit. If we reduced it even to something like “loving relationship with God and others”, we have made it a project at our bidding and have lost touch with Christ. Sure love for God and neighbor is the greatest commandment, and we should be about it. But our faith is more than this. And God’s will is for more as well. This is why He not only “works in mysterious ways” in the sense that we sometimes don’t understand. but that His perfect will actually requires Him to call our attention out of the “wind and the waves” of any particular agenda of our own and unto His face. We are not meant to be preoccupied with making sure our every decision fits the pre-ordained details of God’s “specific will”. Rather, we should be spending our energy worshipping the living Christ and letting Him lead us into the fullness of life. Yes, He inspires vision, and projects, and ministries, and particular actions; He calls us to community and commands us to structure it right; He walks with us into and out of our families. But what’s more is that He sanctifies us. He teaches us and forms us and empowers us and challenges us to become kingdom people, not just act like them. This doesn’t mean learning how to be a better puppet at His command, but how to be a better person with greater love and wisdom. We should always be open and submissive to His specific will in any given, and everything that He does He does through making disciples of us, but His perfect will, along with His permissive will, intentions, and plan, even the specifics themselves are shaped according to the purpose of what many Christians refer to as theosis- making us more and more like God himself. In order to do this, I think it would, at least occasionally, require that He back off and let us drive a little, the way parents do with kids learning to ride a bike (or even the car). This would mean intentionally not disclosing the answer key to life or the road map to the goal. Indeed, such a revelation of the exact steps leading to the goal would paradoxically be counter-productive to ever getting there!
So, let’s seek after and follow Jesus, wherever He leads, and become the kind of people He wants us to become, doing our best to be open to His “specific will” while also being at peace knowing that nothing is going to knock Him off His throne and that we can’t do better than our best shot at doing right, nor can we do any better than allowing the Lord to sanctify us, filling us with knowledge and wisdom and insight and discernment as we remain faithful to Him, trusting that He will always have a plan for working good from whatever we’re able to offer.
The human web
22 Jul 2011 Leave a Comment
No, not the internet! But I will give a quick nod to say that it certainly has intensified (inflamed?) the web that I want to discuss. But what I’m referring to is the rudimentary interconnectedness of all humans on the planet. For now, I am only referring to the living, though the connection with the dead merits investigation and acknowledgement from a Christian point of view. I am certainly not referring to the nebulous, new-age “energy” connection, though there is some small amount of science to explore in the matter for those who feel like it (and no, it won’t provide any scientific support of telekinesis, or discover any “unused” portion of the brain, etc.). And I am open to the idea of realizing an existential principle of openness that is much like what the new age energy proponents urge, except it has to do with the merits of our disposition rather than any actual energy “flow”, but that’s another story, too. What I really want to discuss are the often unnoticed or underappreciated ways in which our interconnectedness affects life.
For starters there’s what is commonly known as the “butterfly effect”. While the movie by that title was a bit disturbing, the overarching concept was solid- that each act has repercussions that eventual alter all of life, so that “a butterfly that flaps its wings in one part of the world causes a hurricane in another part”. It is even better (more clean, less Ashton) portrayed in the video “God is a DJ“. I think this is a generally well-received realization, that is, when people finally do realize it. In habit, I don’t think enough people realize what stands behind every little detail of life- a complicated web of actions and interactions that changes everything if tweaked just a tiny bit! In application, it starts to raise our appreciation of God’s interventive acts (and anybody’s acts for that matter) as truly eternal. This means there can be an upward spiral to every good act and a downward spiral to evil- something that should cause us to consider carefully how we act. It also brings humility to imagine how it is that God achieves anything at all of His panoramic and detailed intentions in such a chaotic system! It certainly puts a pause in my criticisms of what I think He has or has not done.
Rooted in this understanding, there is the less popular understanding of how we affect one another through our connection to God. Working with the notion that God has chosen to leave room for human will in His saving/sanctifying the human race, we must realize that every time someone resists His fullness in their lives it also closes a doorway for His blessing to flow through them as much and thus also not as much into the whole human race as God attempts to work with us all simultaneously. Each act has enough ramifications by itself. If you throw in the will of people trying to resist things, it gets crazy complicated, and the end result is less good than if there were less sin. Now someone might want to point out that God “works all things together for good” or site the OT examples of God using evil rulers for His purposes. I simply assert that life is always better when the ruler God uses is good rather than evil. If he could do as much as He has with evil to work with, imagine what He can do with goodness (consider what He accomplished with just one sinless human- Jesus!). In the end, any sin anywhere, no matter how small or “personal” reduces the possibilities for heaven on earth everywhere! How grievous then is our sin, and how wonderful when God can find a “a head He can lift…”?!
This all brings a whole new light to the value of solidarity. When we take actions that have no other end but to intentionally express this connectedness that I’m discussing, it does more than just help us remember the fact. It is an act in which the actor is forming herself according to the precise nature of our existence, as opposed to the twisted and contorted ways in which we futilely try to live to the contrary. It could be likened to a ship which (finally) opens its sails square to the wind. Similarly, this begs us to re-visit the theological articulations of vicarious suffering. If one man were to live perfectly, he could not, according to our inescapable connectedness, do so without bearing the weight of the fullness of human sin which opposes his perfection. As if this isn’t enough to make the head spin, what if God intentionally also takes advantage of any righteousness He finds to direct more of His precious efforts (again, limited by the sins of others according to God’s own decision to work with human will rather than overwrite it) to others rather than to us…? This is quite mysterious!
Lastly (it’s all I can handle right now without my brain exploding) there’s the question of limitations in revelation due to the contrast between God’s holiness and our humanity’s sinfulness. In other words, perhaps there lies a reasonable explanation here to the common complaint that God seems not to speak freely and audibly to each of us as we might want or expect. Rather, perhaps our entanglements make is necessary for Him to bracket such speech in a holy context (like His plan of salvation in history through the nation of Israel, fulfilled in Christ, blossomed and carried to fruition in the Church). In the prayer of the St John Chrysostom, he promises, “for I will not speak of thy Mystery to thine enemies”. While a born and bred “evangelical” like myself may balk at such words at first, they now echo this insight- that God’s revelation to us absolutely must maintain its context or else it becomes precisely what some people see it as (and this the result of so much unfaithfulness by those who call themselves Christians)- a scrambled mess. If mankind is permanently linked as a unity, then the special circumstances of God getting in the mix, and of the Church becoming a special sphere for such interactions, are of necessity also communal in nature. It almost needs not be said then that individualism is not only unhealthy in its extremes, and not only foreign to the truth, but also a dangerous machination. Lord, have mercy.
Nature vs nurture
24 Jun 2011 Leave a Comment
An age-old question. A ponderance approached from many vantage points for many purposes over many years by many people (learned or otherwise). A dialogue with insights and conclusions holding universal import and a plethora of particular applications. A matter for theological scrutiny and also inevitably for philosophical abstraction. I chime in today on the issue in order to clarify one main important aspect. No serious thinker/scholar of any discipline can continue to hold to an either-or position as the final umbrella answer, as if there were no such thing as a biological influence to our being, or as if our biology alone determined our lives. On a side note I find it quite peculiar (and dangerous) that we live in a society that errs in both ways together. On the one hand, the “nuts and bolts” approach to human existence supports a total and rampant hedonism. “You and me baby ain’t nothin but mammals” is an anthem of American society. And with the next breath we excuse any and every fault (if there even is such a thing as a “fault” anymore in public discourse) as simply the product of a bad society. Even the first couple on Earth engaged in such finger-pointing when put on the spot. This combination of saying we are all nature in make-up and all nurture in morality is a deadly foundation for a society, not to mention wrong. In addition to this, with the rise of research and general popularity of genetic science, there is a strong shot in the arm given to the notion that we are nothing but the fatalistic outcome of our DNA. Yet, with so much work poured into both the sociological argument (i.e. nurture) and the biological one (i.e. nature) simultaneously, it should be quite settled by now we are dealing with both at all times. One of my favorite lectures in Psychology was when I got to share with students the flow chart on nature vs nurture which showed clearly the complexity of the interplay from conception forward. Yet, I am dismayed at how often one or the other extreme case is made as a philosophical basis for viewing or justifying various behaviors.
And this is where I want to “chime” the loudest. Certainly there are some aspects of human life that are far more heavily influenced by nature than nurture (ex. height) and others that are the reverse (ex. clothing preference). Just as certainly, there is much confusion about which issue falls where. And there is much more grievous deception and folly when it all boils down to the area of behavior. You see, the distinction must always be held between one’s general inclinations (which may themselves be influenced by any number of biological aspect, from chromosomes to hunger, with the latter type being surprisingly more difficult to resist at times and yet curiously given far less allowance in our society than the former) and one’s actions based on those preferences. Discussions about personality provide a great example of this. While there is good reason to believe that many of our deepest traits of how we tend to see, process, respond, and present ourselves to the world are grounded in strong biological dispositions, we cannot for one moment think that this could trump the demands of character development, which may end up changing us in these areas. And anyone, like myself, who has taken (and given) multiple personality assessments over time, realizes that at the very least some amount of genuine change in person is quite normal.
Another example of the matter comes from Gardner’s theory on intelligence. In my opinion, it is rooted in good science on brain function (though I fundamentally disagree with the way that the theory attempts to identify people as one type or another- a part of it that flatly contradicts the science of everyone having all to some extent). But, when it is applied to argue that we should simple cater to the strengths (as if they are unchangeable) rather than try to have everyone develop a certain level of proficiency in some basic areas regardless of the fact that some people are naturally stronger than others in that area when they come to us, it has lost its basis in science and been marshalled according to the false philosophy that our classroom behavior and learning abilities are all nature, abdicating the nurture element (and often, unfortunately, similar types of intellectual negligence are made in the process of assessing such abilities to begin with).
Both of these examples reveal ways in which many have subtly bowed down to the shrine of humanism, worshipping the almighty and immutable brain and staring mystified at the physical body which we are not sure how to either tame or claim. The remedy will ultimately come from looking beyond the question altogether up to the horizon of God’s dynamic call to a life of repentance and transformation (and the fact that the immaterial/spiritual component is quite ignored is a whole other problem to be corrected). This doesn’t mean we neglect the fullness of our created existence nor that we deny the powerful role it plays in our lives. Rather, our physical selves must be taken up as well and offered unto God for healing, blessing, and commission. After all, it is as physical beings that we were created and it will be as physical beings that we will be redeemed and live eternally. So there is no allowance made for a bare behaviorist approach to our existence (or our faith), nor for an abstract “mental” approach alone. We must take it all and give it all, opening ourselves to the transfiguration of it all in the kingdom.
What I remember
29 May 2011 Leave a Comment
For the past few years, Memorial day has been a time when I get quiet and polite trying to be respectful to those who remember their dead. While I have been an absolute pacifist when it comes to taking a life or fighting a war, I have not wanted to use this day to hurt people’s feelings. Interestingly, this memorial day has especially found me surrounded with the challenge to love my enemy (Bin Laden) and pray for the fool (Camping). Now, as we turn to remember those who died trying to kill the enemies of America, I want to express something to their credit that is new in my heart. As I wrote about in a different post, my pacifism been cracked open a bit by some reflection on the Genesis account. Since then, as I’ve wrestled through some tough attempts at trying to apply this newfound principle in today’s world, I have come to a new appreciation of the blurriness of the issue. That blurriness is no more blurry than in the situations Americans have faced in the Revolutionary War and WWII. The end result is that I am able today (in a way I have not been in years) to attribute honor to those who lost their lives by rushing the fires of evil out of a noble heart that was set on loving and serving God (according to how they understood his commands regarding taking a human life). It is no small thing they have done, and I am moved by their strength.
However (you knew this was coming), this is a far cry from glorifying the motive of patriotism in these bloody and awful endeavors. The whole notion of killing and dying “to protect the Constitution” is hogwash from a Christian perspective (the Constitution being a completely Godless framework for a country). Killing to protect one’s family is also not what I am praising. Nor am I praising killing for “freedom” in general. None of these are adequate motives in the taking of a human life (though certainly they are good for the giving of one’s life). The only honor to be found in such disgusting mires of human evil is in the fact that one is serving God faithfully, despite the messiness of the affair. It all comes down to how and why and where and when and in what way God condones/commands the just taking of life. And, like I said, since I now appreciate better that it is not perfectly obvious what to do in every context and circumstance, I am revisiting the amazing and inspiring stories of sacrifice and valour in a new light (i.e. a positive one).
In doing so, I am also feeling like it’s worth holding these brave women and men up as examples today of bravery itself! I think we live in a time of scared, self-indulgent, sissies. Who will stand for what they believe in, regardless of the inevitable and eventual cost? Who will give up their luxuries to help in a desperate cause (of which there are many today in our nation)? Who will say what needs to be said in a world of deception and darkness? Who will call sin sin and God God? Who will do what it takes to build a holy life, a happy marriage, a healthy family? Who will break the social ice and address the ills of America head on (sure it’s a great country as long as you’re not one of the quarter of births that are aborted!). Who will surrender their pride and return to serving the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords? Let’s enjoy a day off tomorrow and celebrate the good things in life. Let’s also remember that a good thing is worth fighting for. I’m not talking about killing and warring (unless God says to), but rather the simple virtue of courage. Rise up Americans! Rise up Christians! (maybe after sleeping in first, but you know…when you rise, Rise!)
