philosoflow

Participatory Salvation

To what degree can participation in the present kingdom of God be accounted to you as righteousness?

The whole Bible, back to front, is about the kingdom of God... what it looks like, what it was supposed to look like, who was supposed to represent it, and what happens to those who don't participate in it. The Old Testament kingdom of God was meant to be established by Israel, God's chosen people. They weren't chosen to be exclusive members in the kingdom, but to represent the kingdom to the rest of the people of the world. They did not fulfill their end of that bargain (between God and Abraham). They were not the blessing they were meant to be. I think the kingdom of God was to be far more advanced than it was when Jesus arrived. If he didn't already know the situation, I'd say he was likely to be disappointed to arrive on the scene to find that his chosen messengers were far from loving, far from generous, forgiving, healing, gracious and kind. In fact, the kingdom of God that was to be established through Israel was no where to be found. hmph.

Then Jesus spends much of his ministry reminding us... the kingdom of God is at hand, AND it's coming.  It's here, and it's not yet here at the same time. The potential for all of us to participate in the kingdom of God is a present reality, but the fact that few of us actually are is also a reality.

Our post-Enlightenment Christianity has done much to separate salvation from participation in the kingdom. Martin Luther was the first to privatize faith, and reduce it to a you-and-God thing, which was a needed move at the time, but the long term effect has been the total privatization of faith to the stay-out-of-the-me-and-God-thing-it's-none-of-your-business-if-my-relationship-with-God-is-one-sided. It seems that the invention (yes, it's true we invented it) of the "sinner's prayer", has allowed us to also dualize the roles of evangelist and discipler. "Well he's a great evangelist, but he's not a very good discipler." Could someone show me where Jesus models that duality? Just curious.

So my question has extreme implications. If Jesus said there will be a lot of people who do cool parlor tricks in his name but never really know him, than what are we to do about people who "really know him" but don't do all the "churchy Jesus stuff"? Could it be that by responding to the Holy Spirit's pull on your heart, you could be loving and generous and kind (not for their own sake, but out of response to God) and participate in the kingdom of God without ever knowing the name of Jesus? 

Yes, there is no other name by which we can be saved, Jesus made the way possible, and only through him are we saved, but do we interpret that to mean that: A - Those who say his name in a cheap 30 second prayer are "saved"; or B - Those who represent what he stood for by participating in the kingdom of God that he modeled for us (though they might not know his name) will be saved? or both? (I think we may not need the cheap prayer at all, but what does that mean for people of other religions who model Jesus' character out of pure concern for Jesus' pure concerns? Are they participants in the kingdom? Look up Rahab and Melchizzedek in your Bible, tell me what you read.)

Paul and James both said that Abraham's faith was accounted to him as righteousness. Paul said it was because Abraham believed God, James said it was because Abraham believed God so much that he did what God said to do. This is not salvation by works, but salvation by participatory faith, a faith that finds it's way through your hands and feet into the world around you. The age of fire insurance salvation is over, the kingdom of God is at hand.

islam - good!

So this week I was sitting in a cafeteria in the University of the capital city of a fundamentalist Islamic nation, surrounded by Muslims who couldn't speak a lick of English. There were about 10 guys around me, playing charades with me in Arabic trying to communicate (I guess I was rather interesting). Then the guy on my left tapped me on the shoulder and said, "Allah - Mohamed - Islam - good! (big smile, thumbs up)." I smiled because I recognized that with essentially ONE English word, this man was witnessing to me about his faith. I was secretly cheering for him in my heart, "go, man! You may be cheering for the wrong prophet, but your conviction is admirable, and I hear your concern for my soul.  Thank you." Of course, I didn't say it cuz he couldn't understand a word I said. We could use some of that fervor, huh?

Later, a student came by that could speak English, so he translated for my conversation with the others. They asked me about my faith, about the differences between Mohamed and Jesus, about violence in both our religions, about the cartoon fiasco around the world and about how Muslims who behaved like Muslims would likely get along rather well with Christians who behaved like Jesus. We agreed that our faiths are closer to each other than most give them credit for, and that understanding each other is important. I told them I wanted to move there with my family, and they welcomed us openly. All this in a country where the price for both conversion and proselytizing is death. Good times.

perfect paradox

Wrapped into Christianity is the perpetual unrealized dream of the possibility of perfection and yet never the ability to awaken it into reality.  The ropes of life, and life as it should be seem to run parallel, only brushing against each other from time to time as they undulate between intersection and separation.  Yet if we could braid them together, and live as we should live, would the cost to our understanding of grace be too great?  Is Jesus less pleased if the ropes rarely touch?  Or is his concern more with opening our eyes to see both ropes?  It is not my intention that is damaged, for I aim to live as I should every day, and it is not my behavior that needs repair, for I would undo Christ’s own ideals by inflicting government over my behavior to reach righteousness.  So what can I do?  My intentions are good, and my behaviors are bad.  I can see life as it should be, and yet invariably experience it as it is.  Yet I cannot resign, I am driven into the paradox by my passion for Christ.  I know only that I can never back down from pressing toward the ideal.  I can never stop reaching, even in the reality of perfection’s unattainability.  And faced with the futility of my straining, I am discouraged by failure, yet in perfect paradox, I am also pleased with how much further I can reach today, than I could yesterday. 

Canadian takes gold in Lord-Sayers World Championships

A satyrical look at public prayer:-)

            Most agree it was a pretty impressive competition on Friday when hundreds gathered to hear prayers from notorious Lord-sayers in Tallinn, Estonia.  The annual championship pits pastors and evangelists from all over the world against each other to see who can use the word “Lord” most often during a single prayer. 

       This year’s invitational was hosted by the Evangelical Alliance, and despite the interdenominational makeup of the contestants, it was the Pentecostals who dominated the podium.  R.J. Corcoran, a newcomer missionary from Ireland, took third with a single prayer containing 103 Lords.  Second place was achieved by the Episcopal Bishop from Zambia, Nigel Ammaman with a commanding 126 Lords and 15 Hallelujahs during a near 22 minute prayer.  The star of the show however, was Canadian pastor Bob Johnson, who in just seconds shy of the 25 minute limit, said Lord a staggering 167 times, while weaving in a record shattering 49 hallelujahs and 32 oh gods to destroy the old record of 43 hallelujahs set in 1999 by the evangelist Ivan Green from England.  One spectator commented, “It was amazing.  He never opened his eyes or lowered his hands even once.  It was poetic, the presentation alone makes me proud to be Pentecostal.”  “His Lord-saying was so remarkable that I totally lost the content of the prayer.  I’ve never heard a prayer like that before.” said one judge. The referee commented to Bob after the presentation, “167 Lords! God himself could not ignore that.”  But Bob, being ever the humble pastor replied, “It’s not for me, this gold medal is for the streets of heaven.  I just want to make my Father proud.”

            The sport was waning a few years ago.  It wasn’t drawing the crowds of the early 60’s, so the organizers sought ways to increase interest in it.  During a regional competition in 2001 the judges and organizers instituted a new rule including several other words that were to count for points.  The new “secondary points” could be achieved by complementing the Lords with Hallelujah, Praise Jesus, Oh God, and Boom.  This was hoped to draw a greater audience, and a more ecumenical representation.   

            Over the years, the sport has been dominated by the evangelicals, primarily the Baptists, Pentecostals, Vineyard, and Free-Church representatives.  Though the competition is recognized by the Lutherans and Catholics, their experience in free-prayer is not as developed and many of them have resorted to writing their prayers down before hand.  “It’s a good strategy, if you can prophesy what everyone else will bring to the table” quipped one Lutheran.  Though the Orthodox churches at large still do not recognize the sport, a fringe group of rogue Priests turns out every year to compete.  “It’s more difficult for us”, Father Igor Ivanov remarks “because our liturgy is so rigid.  We spend weeks searching through liturgical databases looking for prayers containing the most Lords, and then we concentrate on speed reading in our training.”  Igor held the only silver medal ever to be won by an Orthodox participant, from the Bogotá open in 1996.           

            “The common Christian might not even know about the elite event, but in fact, there may be someone training for it in the pews of your local church.  It’s becoming quite popular.” One of the organizers said.  The organizers are presently in discussion with the God Channel for syndication of next year’s event scheduled to take place in Seoul, Korea. 

disposable spouses

This is a rant, hence it's in the not so graceful category.  I'm frustrated with the church these days with the lack of value placed on marriage in the positive and adultery in the negative.  Sure, we have great marriage seminars and christian counselors and church weddings, but what good has it done?  The divorce rate in the evangelical Church in North America is on par with the secular world (see Time Magazine, can't recall which issue at the moment).  Perhaps we should spend more time on Jesus.  We expend a great deal of energy opposing the homosexual community (whom I love, BTW),though they do not generally identify themselves as followers of Jesus, but we fear and tolerate the adultery that exists among our own people (who do generally identify themselves with Jesus).  What is it with christians and adultery these days?  I have good christian friends who have been idiots in adulterous relationships. I have a pile of "good christian" relatives who've been trapped by it.  My own family just about lost it on account of my mother's affair. I have one good friend now, a "godly man" in all other terms, that is in the middle of an adulterous relationship while separated from his wife.  Can he see it? no.  Does it matter? yes.  Is his pastor even remotely concerned? not unless it becomes a church drama.

Sure Jesus was really gracious with the adulterous woman he met at the well, but she had just met him that day, how was she to know what being with Jesus meant in light of her lifestyle?  Oh, wait, that's right... Jesus told her... "sin no more." Even on the first day they met, Jesus himself was able to communicate love, grace, acceptance, and "sin no more". (The friends I'm talking about have had relationships with Jesus for 10 or more year) As followers of Jesus it seems to me we're EITHER really good at the love, grace, acceptance thing OR the "sin no more" thing.  Can't we do both?  Aren't we supposed to do both if he's our example?

Is it just me, or are we blind to the pervasiveness of our culture on this point?  Should we not be behaving more like a kingdom of God than a culture puppy to humanism?   

I was in California recently for school. One of my professors came into the classroom and introduced his "covenant partner and friend" to whom he has been married for 30+ years.  How great I thought, that that title carries so much more with it than "wife" or God forbid, "spouse." I liked that language and think I'll adopt it.  Even in our churches today, wives are disposable, at great cost to our witness to the real kingdom of God I might add.  Let the christians have their spouses, followers of Jesus have covenant partners and friends, and those last forever, no matter which god you serve.

the myth of omni-competence

I went to dinner with Omar today.  He's a good friend.  I'm never quite sure which of us is the mentor when we get together, I get so much out of chatting with him, and yet he insists it's the other way around.  So we were talking about team leadership, and what's important in team. He asked me, "What does consensus decision mean to you?" So speaking from my unbounded ignorance I said, "I dunno... everyone compromises, everyone agrees, I guess." We talked about consensus leadership, and how on his team, he is always looking for consensus. He's thought about this stuff a lot. His guidlines for consensus decision making were:

1. Everyone gets the chance to have their opinion heard until they feel it has been understood (even if not agreed on).

2. The decision cannot violate the character, core beliefs, or core values of any of the members of the team.

3. The decision doesn't have to be unanimous, but it's not carried until everyone is willing to speak as a team. That means that those who don't agree with the decision still support it, and will represent it as a team voice. So in the end, everyone "agrees," whether they do or not.

I don't know if I've been exceptional about this.  Partly I haven't had to be since I've been the founder of our ministry here.  But then some of this stuff I do intuitively with people that work with me, and I see it working in the team I left to my successor.  In any case, this consensus stuff has a huge effect on the old style of "great man" leadership, which doesn't work so well anymore.  I think "great men" fall victim to the myth of omni-competence, and rob themselves of the benefits of team leadership. 

The new "great man" is the one who gives power away, empowers the snot out of whomever possible, takes the risk on people.

welcome

This is my first blog post.  I tried to blog about two years ago but it didn't work out so well.  Now I really have to do it.  What I'll use this for is a dumping ground for my thoughts, which most often dwell on the present state of christianity. I tend to spend a lot of time thinking, and not everything I come up with is worth publishing, so I'll put it here to see what happens.

My wife, Dawn has been blogging for a while. She has dozens of fans. She writes about our family life and funny things that she thinks about. I'm not as funny as Dawn, but I'm still quite thought provoking, and likely more offensive, so that will be my feature. But still, you should check her's out at www.empyr.blogspots.com

(cheers to Tito for the mad name)