Assertion #4: Most Christians are not Christian

I think about this a lot.  I mean, this is the kind of thing that will keep me up at night.  I think what does that word actually mean.  How has its meaning changed overtime?  The word Christian often is a word I think about.  Well, I finally looked it up!

First, here is my own weird misconception on what that word means.  To me, for years, I have thought that Christian means "little Christ."  So that made sense to me.  We are to be little anointed people called to do God's work in the world.  We are all anointed, set apart, and called to continue Christ's ministry.  Of course, we all disagree on what that is.  Most evangelicals have made it a political party platform.  Whereas others have made it a list of rules to follow, or beliefs to verbally agree with.  Others have made it all about caring for the poor and suffering.  Or just a way to escape eternal torment in hell (because that's the God I want to follow, one which will torture you until you love him).

What I discovered is that the word Christian (Christianos) is only found 3 times in the Bible.  And like all good names for movements, it was originally meant as an insult.  It was a way to degrade those who follow and continue Jesus's ministry.  This word means a slave of Christ.  In the Greek speaking Roman Empire, this ending was used to denote whose slave you were.  It was a dishonoring title.  So if you were a slave of Peter's then you would be called Peterianos, as a title denoting your status.  You are not free and you belong to Peter.

So I assert that most Christians (including myself) are not Christian in that we are not truly slaves of Christ.  Our titles tends to be whatever our jobs are.  And I would find it weird if someone said their title was Christian.  I would assume it is ploy to sell me something.

By the way, Christ is an Eschatological title.  It is a title that points to a future that is being ushered in by this person.  It is an anticipation of the full realization of the coming Kingdom of God, which has no death and dying (a.k.a. sin). So being a slave to this person means that you are participating in the coming of this Kingdom.  You are participating in making this partially realized Kingdom a full reality. It is not an honorable position.  It is a servants position in which you lose your identity as whatever you are in this current age and you are fully identified in this future.  It is a position with a foot in two eras being split in half by participating in both at the same time.  Bringing eternity to right now while staring in the face of death and despair.  Speaking hope in the place of despair.

I am not a slave of Christ the way I should be.  I fall in and out of bondage to the gospel and bondage to sin and death.  I would venture that most people who call themselves Christian would not like being called slaves. We prefer follower or occasional church attender.  Slave is such a harsh term with a lot of baggage. It was originally meant as an insult, but the early church decided to make the normative title. So normative that today it means almost nothing.

Assertion #3: Moving to another country due to an election is just a silly threat

I hear people say things like I'm moving to Canada, or Australia, or umm...Uzbekistan (I've never hear this one, but still) because whomever has been elected to whichever office.  The absolute worst thing in the world is that they elected some communist, fascist, elitist, backwoods, Muslim, Christian, baby killer man or woman to this important political office (that list of adjectives was kind of fun to make).

After every election cycle we should lose about a quarter of our eligible voters to some other country that may or may not follow whatever principle that they are looking for.  I don't think people actually do the research on these countries.  I mean Uzbekistan, really?  Strangely, this quarter of the eligible registered voters and their families are still here to make this empty threat again.  Until people follow through with this threat, I condemn it as stupid.  When someone from Australia says to me, oh I met this guy who moved here because Obama was re-elected, I'll have to reconsider my thoughts somewhat.

Side note: I think conservatives wouldn't like Australia or Canada.  I hear Uzbekistan is nice (I haven't really heard that) or maybe Germany or Portugal or Saudi Arabia or Mexico, why doesn't anyone say they are leaving for Mexico when their politician loses?

Anyway, what makes people think that another country is going to be any better.  I mean our political system was designed to be slow and it is intentional that everything always grinds to a halt.  Our system is working because it is still really hard to pass a law.  Of course, stupid laws get passed all the time. And yes, the political game is totally annoying and entertaining and stupid (I'm a fan of this work today). Although things change as new people become in charge in this republic, nothing changes super fast.  So stick it out, fight for the changes you think are most important, and fight to preserve things that you think need to be preserved.  In the end, if things get really bad you can always go to a place where nationalize healthcare is in place like Canada or Australia and then everything will be better for you.

Assertion #2: Money is an Evil I'd Like to Try

There are so many cliches about money.  Things like, money doesn't buy happiness, money is the root of all evil (which is a misquote of a bible verse). I totally agree that money does not bring about happiness. As the late rapper will attest to "Mo Money, Mo Problems."  Greed can be the cause of all kinds of horrible things in this world.  The pursuit of money above all else creates sweat shops where poor kids work 12 hour days for little money in horrible working environments.  It causes wealth at the expense of others.  It causes unnecessary competition between people.  Greed creates a lot of problems, that's why it's a deadly sin.

Money itself is neutral.  It doesn't create anything.  The correction to the misquote above is something like, "the love of money in the root of all kinds of evil" (1 Timothy 6:10).  Not that money is evil.  Money is a tool. Greed is evil.  I disagree with our late rapper friend, Biggie Smalls, I believe mo money, different problems,  which doesn't flow as well in a song.  Not being able to pay the rent, feed your child, feed yourself are all real problems.  Not knowing where your next meal comes from is a problem.  Deciding between whether you are going to eat or child will have diapers is a problem.  There are a lot of problems that go along with little or no money.

I can talk about the problems associated with not having much money.  Student loans helps me understand some of those problems, but not the extremes that I mentioned above.  I don't know what the problems are with having "mo money".  I would like to experience those problems.  I would like to know the problems, but only for research, of course.  This isn't greed, right?

Here is the song I referenced several times:

Assertion #1-Manliness is not selfishness

I have decided to change my format on this blog a little.  It has been called meaningless assertions the whole time, but I have not been very assertive in my assertions (see what I did there, that was fun).  So, from here on out, I'll be making assertions and number said assertions.  They may be social, political, theological, or just random assertions, but above all they will be meaningless and mine.

Assertion #1-Manliness is not selfishness.

Do you remember that Dodge Charger commercial from 2010?  It was a Super Bowl commercial I believe, and I can say honestly it really irritated me.  If you don't remember here it is:

It's called "Man's Last Stand."  Here is my problem.  It basically says, "I will be considerate of you as a person implying that being considerate is emasculating as long as I can drive this powerful 'manly' car."  I will be considerate of you, only if it will get me what I want.  I can understand the office things.  I mean let's face it two hour meeting are horrible, but putting the seat down, cleaning the sink after shaving, these things are just being considerate.

Increasingly, in my view of the world, being a man means being selfish.  Look at most Vince Vaughn movies.  He plays a petty selfish man perpetually stuck as a 12 year old boy.  There is nothing wrong with 12 year old boys, but a 40 year old needs to act differently.  It cannot be all about self and satisfying your own desires. Side note: that shouldn't be what 12 year old boys should do either.

Being manly in my view has nothing to do with selfishness.  In fact, I believe the best thing you can do as a man is to be selfless.  Obviously, there are times that you have to take care of yourself, but you cannot always do that.  Being a man or being mature means caring for others and being considerate of others regardless of your reward for it.  Being a man should be defined by how you put your abilities to work to make this world a better place.  Having a penis doesn't mean that you have the right to be selfish, instead it means that you need to understand that everyone has personhood and needs to be respected.  Manliness is being considerate and caring, not self seeking and overly aggressive.

How would you define being a man?  Does the way being a man is portrayed in the media ever make you angry?

There is No Cosmic Why!

Tragedy is everywhere.  We all face some pretty horrific things in our lives and we all hear about even worse things.  From war, to rape, to other acts of senseless violence there is a normal question asked into the universe..."Why?"  God gets this question in response to tragedy all the time.  Why did so and so have to die?  Why did that happen? Why is there war, famine, drought, pain, suffering, sorrow?  Why is there so much bad?

I believe, along with others I hope, that God does not cause these things to happen.  Therefore, there is no why.  There is no cosmic reason for pain and sorrow.  The only reason is people are stupid or there is a scientific reason for most natural disasters.  There is natural cause and effect, but there is no cosmic reason for the bad that happens.

If I truly believe this line of thinking then it has to apply to everything.  Thus, I have to ask did God really caused the pain and suffering of Good Friday, or did humanity?  It's often thought of as part of God's master plan, but why would God cause so much pain if God doesn't still cause it today.  Is this the one exception to my belief?  I was told as a kid and teenager that God orchestrated the whole cross thing because it was God's way and plan for redemption.  But what if just like God doesn't cause the hurricane that rips through a major coastal city, or doesn't cause the car crash that killed that teenager, God didn't cause the crucifixion?  Would it change anything?

Here is my assertion: I believe that God didn't cause Christ's crucifixion, but instead knew it was coming.  All of those times when Jesus is predicting his own death had less to do with God's causation and more to do with humanity's own patterns and causation.  Jesus knew that things he was saying and doing was in direct contrast to the ruling authorities of the day.  It was especially an affront to the Roman way of life.  Therefore, he knew he was going to be crucified, but he also knew that he couldn't live any differently than he was.  He knew that there was a better way to live and a just kingdom to look forward to.  He knew that he has the start of the that just kingdom, so he had to live in it now realizing the consequences of his actions.  Therefore, God did not cause the crucifixion to happen, but instead it was caused by our own systems.  The crucifixion exposes our systems of domination and violence for what they are.  And they are not of God!

There is a second half to my belief that God doesn't cause the bad things to happen in our lives.  And it is but God brings the good in the bad situation.  What I mean is that in the face of tragedy, people will throw aside differences to become one for the greater good.  They will rebuild cities.  Cry with a friend who lost a loved one.  Decide to dedicate her life to the research and cure of a disease.  Educate people on the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse.  In the face of tragedy when everything is looking absolutely horrible there is always a little good that God is working into the problem.  Just like how on the third day, God raised Jesus from the dead, ushering in and validating the kingdom that Jesus had started to build.  In the face of death there is always resurrection.  So in the face of tragedy, we should absolutely mourn, but also have hope that in the face of violence, pain, suffering and sorrow there is the crucified Christ reminding us that there is always resurrection.

Amen?

Misunderstood Words

So, I've been reading and thinking a lot about misunderstanding words.  Or more accurately, the way words change in meaning over time.  Since, I'm a big geek and mostly ready theology books (especially Biblical Theology books) I've been mostly thinking about the way a 1st Century Palestinian would understand a word versus how we understand it today.  Appropriate for the season maybe we should look at what the word resurrection means.  The first thought that come to my head is zombies.  We have the popularity of "The Walking Dead" to help us all think about zombies.  Doesn't resurrection sound just a little like zombies? Jesus got up out of the grave after being dead for a while and on top of that we eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood...zombies.

That's definitely not what first century folks were thinking about when they heard the word resurrection, and probably not most of you.  Sometimes as N.T. Wright writes about in "Surprised by Hope" we confuse resurrection with a great soul migration.  We dismiss the material and make it a move to the spiritual.  This is an easy move to make.  This world sucks so we are going to leave it behind as we transition through death to a purely spiritual life.  This is what Plato was apparently all about (I'm excited because I'm going to read some Plato soon).  It's what the Gnostics were all about.  If you don't know they were a heretical sect of Christianity that considered the material world to be evil and the spiritual was good.  The only thing that mattered was the non-corrupted soul because your body was evil.  It's an easy thing to slip into because we can look around and see how much evil there is.  But God did call the world good in Genesis and the end of that story called everything very good so maybe the material is rebellious and incomplete rather than evil. 

So what does resurrection mean?  Jesus' resurrection was the first resurrection of many to come.  The resurrection was so surprising to the first century because they thought it was going to happen all at once.  All of the faithful who died was going to be resurrected all at once into a new life in which God dwells among the people.  It's an end times vision, not end of the material world, but rather the renewal and completion of the material world. Christ's resurrection means that this renewed age has begun and was a sign that this world is being transformed into the complete vision of God.  Resurrection is a symbol, which participates in and points to God's coming transformation of this world into heaven.  And we are called to continue showing glimpses of this resurrection to the world that is continually being transformed into something better than we can ever imagine. 

What do you think about when we talk about resurrection? Zombies? Going to Heaven? Something else?

Doubting

I just did a message with my students about doubt, and I'm not sure I really said anything.  I told them of times of doubt in my life.  I said that doubt can be used to deepen or further your faith.  I'm not sure I really explained how.  It turned into a "look at other people who doubted but chose to act on faith anyway" message instead of a "this is how doubt can be good for you" message.  All I really said is that you are going to always have doubts and questions, but I didn't get into how it works.  Maybe it's because I have some residual "it's not okay to doubt" lesson leftover from my childhood.

As I think more about it, I keep coming back to the book Insurrection by Peter Rollins.  In this book, Rollins talks about what he termed "Pyro-Theology" (please excuse the lack of page numbers, I don't have the book with me).  This is the process of lighting everything about your faith and religion on fire.  Whatever stands at the end of the fire is what faith is about.  Run with your doubt so that it completely deconstructs all that is part of your religious and faith experience until you get to the stuff that can't be taken apart any further.  Then, build your life on that.  Doubt is what you use to grind away the unnecessary fluff of religion, the stuff that doesn't make sense, the stuff that is contrary to real life experience, the stuff the leads to hate or destruction.  Doubt is needed to get past the junk in our faith traditions so that you can truly come face to face with truth.

Trying to do this Pyro-Theology would definitely not be easy.  It wouldn't be comfortable, but maybe it's comfort that is keeping us from authentic faith.  Maybe authentic faith cannot come without setting fire to the faith you have.  Maybe doubt is more important to faith than acceptance.  And perhaps once you burn it all down to see what's standing, you'll find that all the fluff that burned to the ground makes more sense.  Then you can build it back up with purpose and understanding, while replacing the structures that don't fit.

What do you think?  How has doubt helped you go further and deeper with your faith?  What have you burned to the ground?  What was left standing?

Immutable

Today, I was trying to center myself and get in tune with God.  I was laying on the floor praying, meditating, contemplating, when I started saying in my head, "Thy will be done" over and over.  Then, it morphed from the Lord's prayer to something more like "Not my will but yours be done."  Which I think is from Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (only took two times to spell that correctly).  

Then, my contemplation broke down, or at least changed.  I began to think about immutability. I began to ask is God immutable or am I?  Is the problem God or me?  I've been having a hard time conforming to God's call and I found myself wondering if God has compromised as much as God will.  Maybe I'm the one stubbornly standing my ground.  Is it me digging my feet in, not willing to bend a little?  Maybe God isn't the "Unmoved Mover" that Aristotelian thought has poisoned our faith with.  Maybe God is super flexible, yet knows when to stop. 

There are a couple of different lines of thought that remove immutability from the list of attributes we give to God.  Most notable is the Open Theism of the Evangelical movement (Greg Boyd is a big proponent of this), and then there is Process Theology, which is based from Alfred North Whitehead's philosophy.  Both of these visions of God show a God who is moved by us.  A God who loves us and responds to us, who is changed by us (this might more process than open theism). But I wonder what the Eastern Church or the Church fathers thought of this.  If you know feel free to leave a comment. 

This process/openness thought seems much truer to the God who offered to spare Sodom and Gomorrah (three tries on that one) as God struck a deal with Abraham.  The God who changed plans in the desert during the Exodus as a response to the way the Israelites acted.  This seem more mutable than immutable.

So what do we do with this?  Is helpful to recognize that God is bending at least to point to us and is inviting (not forcing) us to bend a little more towards God? 

The Prayer Exchange?

Lately, I've been thinking a lot about prayer, partly because I'm doing a series at my church on it, and partly because I've been struggling with prayer.

The struggle I have often with prayer is simply, what does it do?  I know that it is a way to connect and build a relationship with God.  That seems to work in a contemplative style of prayer, which I love.  But what about those prayers of petition.  You know the prayers asking God for things.  Besides the feeling that God should be a cosmic vending machine giving us what we ask for if we can only put the combination of change together and hit the right button (part of the message for tomorrow), I just wonder what the point is if God is really going to do whatever God feels is best at the time.  And looking around the world, it can be pretty hard to see what God is doing.

So I can pray for whatever I want and God will answer however God wants, then what's the point?  Should we do these kind of prayers at all?  Even prayer request time can quickly turn into gossip time.  Someone will lift up a prayer and then we ask all kinds of questions to get more detail as if the more details we give God the better the chance of God granting that wish (Is God a Genie?).  Which seems to be a perversion of the spirit of prayer requests. 


In exchange for talking to God, God will grant us three wishes, I mean prayer requests.  Then all will be well.  Except it doesn't seem to work that way at all.  It seems like God works in this world differently than how we expect.  Sometimes it can feel like God doesn't work at all, or is that just because God refuses to encroach on our free will.  Then what do prayers of petitions do other than voice our deepest desire to the creator of the universe?  Maybe that's all it is...