We have some interesting ideas about life. Most of them tied to Greek philosophy. In the church among follower of Jesus, we have tied our way of thinking, reflecting, and living around more Greek philosophy than Biblical theology. Here’s a recent presentation that deals with some of those issues.

Enjoy!

Another Sunday has come and gone in which I spent a short period of time inside a building where we followed a pattern that has come to be called church. We gather. We drink coffee and have surface conversation. We sing. We hear announcements. We listen or not to someone teach/preach. We are invited to ask God into our broken lives or we are beckoned to an altar to ask forgiveness of our sins. We drop by a glass with wine or juice and broken crackers and dip and eat or small shot glasses reminiscent of a bar are passed around with juice or wine and we call it communion. Yesterday as I left this weekly routine, I asked myself the same question that the song title asks: “Is that all there is?” Surely, the answer has to be no!

One wonders when we will change our paradigm. When will we discover that Sunday is the day of the week that should remind us that in Jesus we live in a new creation as new human beings with the assignment of demonstrating that new creation to others around us. Tom Wight asked in his recent book, Scripture and the Authority of God: How to Read the Bible Today, the following question: “What are you going to do this Sunday that is creative, that brings justice and mercy, that offers healing and hope” (170). One has to wonder that instead of living to turn the world right side up, we continue to live in the world thinking its thoughts and practicing its actions. One wonders what would occur if we took Wright’s question seriously? One wonders why we are always inviting God to do something when he is working already nonstop? One wonders when we will comprehend that he is inviting us into what he is doing, inviting us into his unbroken world instead of us inviting him into our broken world. So, what are you going to do next Sunday that brings justice, mercy, healing and hope to your neck of the woods?

I originally wrote this blog post May 28, 2003 and thought it would be fun to post it again.

Today while visiting a mall I took a moment to step into the “Christian Bookstore.” The store is about one-third books and two-thirds “Jesus Junk.” I guess to be authentic it should be called the “Christian Book and Jesus Junk Store.” In the book that I mention below there are two bookstores called “Christian Supply.” If you are a pastor I guess your can go there when you supply of Christians is running out and pick up some more.

When I decided to leave, I stopped and picked my very own copy of the newest and latest “Christian Business Directory.” The executive director thought it keen to say that this book had been published as a resource “for you to know where the Christians are in the marketplace and how you can find them.” And that by looking at the book you would get a “complete picture of the whole body of Christ working together for the sake of the Gospel.” Just what we need another Christian ghetto. Maybe we should put out an “UnChristian Yellow Pages” that doesn’t allow Christians to advertise therein so we can know who the real target of the church is.

I had to force my finger from entering my throat. My left hand was overworked from holding on to my right hand. I wasn’t even Biblical (whoa, did I really say that?) because in this case my left hand knew exactly what my right hand was doing.

The most fun was in the list of churches that managed to get listed in the directory. My son and I had a great time reading them. He gave me some of the ideas below to add to my own which appear inside the parenthesis.

We started out with the Anglicans but only one made the cut. Next came the Assembly of God (if only all their assemblies were of God). The Baptist were next: General Baptist Conference; Baptist American; Baptist Conservative; Baptist Fundamental Independent (there was only one of those); Baptist General; Baptist General Conference; Baptist Independent (I guess they don’t associate with the other Baptist); Baptist Reformed (this could only mean that all the other Baptist before were un-reformed); Baptist Regular (what? all the others must have been irregular); Baptist Southern (I guess if we can have Southern Fried Chicken in the Northwest we can have a brand of Baptist that are southern). Wow, I made it through the Baptist. Then there was Bible Missionary (you must own a Bible to be missionary?).

Next was Christian (I concluded that none of the other churches were Christian because this group was listed separately). Then came the Christian & Missionary Alliance; Christian Disciples of Christ (since disciples of Christ should be Christian can you have an unChristinan Disciples of Christ) and Christian Reformed (I seem to recall, yes there it is right above, something called the Christian Church; I concluded that that group must really be the unreformed Christians). Next listed was the Church of Christ and the next one really was funny to me, it was the Christ of Christ United, but it was listed separate from the Church of Christ (can that really be?). We moved on to the Church of God (wow! God finally made it into the name again) and the Church of God Anderson IN and the Church of God Cleveland TN (they are surely a long way from home on Sundays). Then, we have the Church of God in Christ (I wondered why the Holy Spirit didn’t make the cut). Next, we have the listing called Community (one could possibly conclude that none of the other churches listed were communities). Next, the Covenant and Evangelical Covenant were listed (I guess the former is not really an Evangelical church). Now in the “Es” we have the Evangelical Free (Free from what I thought). The next category was only one church: Family Fellowship (does that mean that you are only family if you attend there?).

We then have the Fellowship of Christian Association (do they really only fellowship with other Christians, no wonder the world is going to hell in a hand basket). Then we have the Foursquare Gospel (I have always considered that a really funny name, it always makes me think that the gospel is really square. Could you have a three or two square gospel?). Next were the Friends (I surmised that all the other churches probably didn’t have any friends because they were all in this place). The next one listed was Full Gospel (no part gospels will do and I guess that Paul might not fit there either). As if Full Gospel was not enough we have the Full Gospel Pentecostal (a kinda of Gospel and Acts thingy?). I thought we had left the Baptist (how many more can there be?) when I encountered the Fundamental Independent Baptist (only one, I guess that’s why they are independent, I guess we could call them the FIBs for short).

Then we have the General Assembly of Regular Baptist (can you be a Regular Baptist and not be a part of the General Assembly or does this mean there are irregular Baptist in all the other Baptist churches?). Next was the Independent (of course they are listed independent of all of the other churches as their name implies). But wait, we also have the Independent Fundamental Christian Association (an association of one, how strange). Then we have the Inter-Denominational churches (they can’t figure who they are a part of so they are listed as being in the middle until they grow up and discover which denomination they side with). Next were the Lutherans; the Lutheran (ELCA) [only those inside would know what ELCA would stand for]; and the Lutheran Missouri Synod (only one, there must be more in the home state of Missouri, don’t you think?). Then we have the Mennonite Brethren (Is this an all male church?); Messianic (are they the really anointed ones), and Methodist Free (maybe you can go to this church and the Evangelical Free church and it doesn’t cost anything). Next listed: Methodist United (but as above these United Methodist are listed separately). Then Methodist of North American was listed (I wondered if they were in South America if they would still call themselves the Methodist of North America, probably so!). Just when I thought it was safe and there were no more Baptist, up popped the Missionary Baptist (they must not be very missionary because there was only one of them listed). The next category was Missionary Church (I guess these folks decided not to be Baptist); and then the Nazarenes (I didn’t get how a group of natives from Nazareth would have a church in the Northwest). It was there on the page Non-Denominational Bible churches and then Non-Denominational churches (I guess that you don’t have to have a Bible to get into the second kind). I couldn’t believe my eyes: North American Baptist (how many more of these brothers and sisters are there?).

The Open Bible churches were next (do you think that they positioned themselves this way because the Bible is not opened in so many other churches?). The next listed group was Pentecostal (I guess they don’t consider the Assembly of God or Foursquare their Pentecostal brothers and sisters!). Right behind them and differentiated from them was the Pentecostal/Full Gospel (guess the other group only has part of the Gospel). The Presbyterian, Presbyterian Church USA and the Presbyterian Orthodox were next (the first group must be operating in the USA without permission while the second one must have permission while the last group suggest that neither of the other Presbyterians are orthodox). Next were the Salvation Army (do you have to enlist to go here?) and the Seventh Day Adventist (could you be a Seventh Day Adventist and subvert their dominate paradigm and go to their church on Friday or maybe Sunday. (I guess that would make you a Sixth Day Adventist or a First Day Adventist). Finally, the United Methodist (again united but listed separately, what are they thinking?).

Well that was the end of the list and not to soon for me. However, don’t think that because your church is not listed above that it’s name or group is any better off. You probably can’t do any worse! Just remember, the church names of today will be the fodder for twit tomorrow. I’m glad God has a sense of humor about all this name stuff. If he doesn’t we are in some deep stuff! So what’s in a name? Sometimes som’um and sometimes nuttin’! What’s in your church name?

What are some of the names of churches that seem strange to you?

It’s been busy the last couple of weeks. I have had two cataract surgeries. The second one was a bit tougher than the first one. I can see colors that I had lost from my vision. I can see clearly now at a distance.

I am writing also writing two chapters for an upcoming book from the Vineyard with a working title: Women in Leadership in the Church: A Kingdom of God Perspective. I am writing “Chapter Three: Why Interpretation is Necessary” and “Chapter Eleven: 1 Corinthians 11:2-16.”

Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ
Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola
Thomas Nelson (June 1, 2010)

Years ago, as a rather insignificant young pastor in a large denomination, I fearlessly (too fearlessly, as it turned out) stood before some 10,000 delegates to propose we change the order of our denomination’s statement of faith and move our No. 3 article of faith, “The Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ,” to the top of the list and the then No. 1 article, “The Scriptures Inspired,” to the No. 3 slot. Was not interested in changing the language of the articles, just their order. My motive was pure, I thought. I believed that Christ, as the Bible said, should “have the preeminence in all things”; especially, one would think, in a Christian creedal statement. To my shame, I was jeered off the floor. One colleague later scolded me and said he was “ashamed” of me. It took years for me to live down a reputation of being “renegade” and “liberal” (I was neither). Yet here I am, some thirty-plus years later, more convinced than ever that my proposal was a good idea and I have just found vindication in a new book by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola: Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ. (Where were these guys when I needed them?)

Occasionally, despite all my pious religiosity, I get the uneasy feeling that Jesus has left the building. I, like you, have a tendency to become wrapped-up, even obsessed, in whatever my pet issue is at the moment. It may be anything from evangelism to the environment to end-time prophecy. This is understandable since every year hundreds of titles flood the Christian market dealing with every topic imaginable and we sometimes find ourselves swept up in the current hot topic. But in the end it all comes back to that elemental question Jesus once asked Peter: “Who do you say that I am?” When Christ ceases to be the nexus of our faith and we become absorbed in all the stuff “about” Jesus, and not in Christ himself, we lose our focus.

“The Christian life properly conceived and experienced,” affirm the authors, “is simply a reproduction and a reliving of the life of Jesus.” But Christianity is not just a matter of striving to be “like” Jesus. If that is our sole aim, we are doomed to failure. No one has done or can do it. Rather, we must “be” Christ. Don’t jump to conclusions by that statement. The authors go on to say, “Jesus doesn’t want us to be ‘like’ him; he wants to share his resurrection life with us, [not just] imitate him. Christ wants to live in and through us. The gospel is not the imitation of Christ; it is the implantation and impartation of Christ. We are called to more than mediate the truth. We are called to manifest Jesus’ presence.” Or, as George MacDonald prayed, “O Christ, my life, possess me utterly. Take me and make a little Christ of me.” Quoting Bishop Ryle, with whom the authors agree, “Christ is all. Those three words are the essence and substance of Christianity. If our hearts can really go along with them, it is well with our souls. If not, we may be sure we have yet much to learn.”

Author’s Bio
Leonard Sweet currently occupies the E. Stanley Jones Chair of Evangelism, serving from 1995 to 2001 as Vice President of Academic Affairs and Dean of the Theological School at Drew University, Madison, New Jersey. A Visiting Distinguished Professor at George Fox University in Portland, Oregon, and President Emeritus of United Theological Seminary, he is a weekly contributor to the online preaching resource, Sermons.com. Author of more than two hundred articles, twelve hundred published sermons, and almost forty books, Sweet is currently working on two textbooks: one on preaching, Giving Blood, and one on evangelism, Nudge: Awakening Each Other to the God Who is Already There. His most recent book is So Beautiful: Divine Design for Life and the Church and his weekly podcast is “Napkin Scribbles.”

Frank Viola is a best-selling author and international conference speaker. His books include Revise Us Again, Reimagining Church, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church and the best-selling From Eternity to Here.

Different but Equal: Going Beyond the Complementarian/Egalitarian Debate
Derek Morphew
Vineyard International Publishing (December 29, 2008)

In the introduction to his latest book Different But Equal: Going Beyond the Complementarian-Egalitarian Debate, Derek Morphew points out that in recent years some sweeping theological changes have taken place in his thinking regarding the place of women in Christian ministry and leadership. Not changed so much, he writes, “but I would rather say that it has evolved, as I have tried to keep pace with literature on the subject.” With that I can relate. Growing things change—even growing beliefs. To never vary one’s point of view and hold the same position one did a decade or more ago is no virtue; it just means that a person has stopped learning, stopped growing. There’s nothing admirable about an adult still sucking the same decades-old pacifier. At least that’s what I have told myself and after reading Morphew, I felt vindicated. Evolving Evangelical—I think that’s a label I can live with.

Morphew’s developing outlook especially regarded the role of women in official leadership within the church, an issue that has been a perennial hot topic in religious circles for centuries. Conservative groups holding to a strict literal interpretation of scripture often exclude women from ecclesiastical leadership on what they consider “biblical grounds.” In this view women are to “keep silent in the church,” and not exert authority over, but always be in “subjection” to, men, holding that only men lead in the church because they are, well, males. In this view, only men are pastors, teachers, and theologians and women, um, their contribution is appreciated—they can cook the meals at church banquets and clean up the mess—but by and large they are expected to dutifully follow … silently. Women, who are qualified in every respect except gender, are repeatedly passed over in favor of often less qualified men. Early-on I wondered how a person’s sex could possibly make an unqualified male more qualified than a qualified female based solely on gender. I wondered what the wisdom was in subjugating half the population of God’s kingdom? But over time, with the rise of feminism (both secular and evangelical) and the blistering debate about women’s place in the church heated up, I, like Morphew, decided to take a closer and hopefully more objective look at scripture and come to some independent conclusions.

In Different but Equal, Morphew articulates some of the changes that took place in his thinking as he weaved his way through the minefield, re-read more dispassionately those hotly debated gender-specific biblical passages, and considered Jewish customs, Christian theology, and church history to offer this timely view that lies somewhere between excessive “complementarian” (men and women have complementary but different roles and responsibilities in society and religion) and extreme “egalitarian” (in God’s sight all people regardless of sex are equal in every respect) viewpoints. Morphew’s is a position that allows for differing interpetations while preserving unity. He writes: “The arguments between these two positions are too nuanced for the differences to become the basis for a breach in fellowship.”

Blessed are the peacemakers.

Artist Bio
Derek Morphew, Ph.D., University of Cape Town, South Africa is a theologian, pastor, and teacher who has been involved in pastoring and church planting for the past 30 years. He serves on the national leadership team of the Association of Vineyard Churches in South Africa, is the international director of Vineyard Bible Institute, and is a highly respected author and speaker at conferences, churches, and universities.

This past weekend was really fun. First, there was Off the Map conference in Seattle with Phyllis Tickle, Michael Frost, and Todd Hunter presenting us with an Anglican Eucharist. Phyllis is so spry for her 75 years and the author of The Great Emergence. Michael talked about refocusing church through a Missional lens while addressing Worship, Discipleship, and Evangelism.

On Sunday Morning David Ruis was the guest at Vineyard Community Church in Shoreline, WA and Phyllis Tickle was the evening guest. David is always fun to listen to. Phyllis gave us a tour of 2000 years of church history in about 30 minutes plus a Q&A time. She has a great sense of humor. She said something like, “If you are a female and 76 you can say any damn thing you want.”

David Ruis

Phyllis Tickle

Phyllis Tickle Video

Clip provided by Recycle Your Faith.

Well, not all of the church and not really 90 seconds.

Today, I read a blog entry by Diana Butler Bass from Monday July 20, 2009. Entitled “The Real Decline of Churches.” Here’s what she had to say about the Southern Baptist Convention.

The Southern Baptist Convention–the largest and most conservative Protestant denomination in the USA–records a continued decline in baptisms and an increasingly aging membership. The oft-reported number of 18 million members has declined in the last decade to just over 16 million. And, according to journalist Christine Wicker (see her book, The Fall of the Evangelical Nation), the internal number of active members may well be around 5 million people.

Here is a selection of what waits in store for folks in the Montgomery, AL area on their next Sunday visit in the Baptist arena. Of course, not all these churches are not Southern Baptist but they are Baptist in the South. There are others churches listed as well. These entries are as they were sent in to The Paper of Montgomery County.

East Side Baptist Church

• Here I Am and Here I Go

First Baptist Church

• Speaking the Truth in Love Ephesians 4:15

Friendship Baptist Church

• When We Leave Our First Love from Jeremiah 2:1-13

Freedom Baptist Church

• Sick of Home, Homesick and Home” from Luke 15-11-24

Other Churches
Wabash Avenue Presbyterian Church

• You Smell

Browns Valley Christian Church

• Life’s Difficulties Acts 21:17-32

and BTW: The Merry Mates Sunday School class will be having a class party after church.

Whitesville Christian Church

• Hero’s of the Bible

First United Methodist Church

• Second Chances 2nd Cor 5:17 & James 4:14

First Church of the Nazarene

• Wonder (Full) Bread from John 6:35-5

Possible Conclusion: No wonder the church is in decline. With a diet like this, they are most likely suffering spiritual malnutrition.

The following is an interview of N.T. Wright by Dr. Tod Bolsinger on a variety of topics. Dr Tod Bolsinger is Senior Pastor at the San Clemente Presbyterian Church and Tom Wright is Bishop of Durham for the Church of England.

Enjoy!

N.T. Wright on Heaven

N.T. Wright on the Postmodern Movement

N.T. Wright on Satan and Evil

N.T. Wright on Debate about Homosexuality

N.T. Wright on Women in Ministry

N.T. Wright on Filming the End Times

N.T. Wright on the Authority of the Bible

N.T. Wright on Darwin

N.T. Wright Responds to John Piper

A bit of the Beatles wrapped up in a bit of Chick-fil-a Americana and other tunes by Tim Hawkins.

Then, there is Hawkins on Corporate Worship Songs.

Finally, Hawkins on Bible Verses. Versitius can get you into trouble. There is a wonderful Southern lady about half way in who is listening who doesn’t think this is funny. Could have been my mom!

Halitosis can be defined as “the condition of having stale or foul-smelling breath.” We all have been around folks that suffer from this condition and don’t know it. Most likely, we have suffered from this condition and didn’t know it and got a subtle hint when someone offered us a Tic Tac!

Last week I listened to the first sermon of Rachael Clinton, an intern at the church I participate with (Vineyard Community Church, Shoreline, WA). She has worked with kids for many years, but this was the first presentation given to an adult audience. She did good!

During her presentation she said something about missional life and breathing. I wrote a note to myself to remember. When Jesus summarized the Ten Great Words, i.e., the Ten Commandments of the OT in a shortened saying, “love God with everything you have, and love others,” I was struck with how easy that seemed to be to help remember and practice when attached to breathing. We breathe in the love God, and we breathe out his love to others, which is the essence of being Missional.

At a local gathering of Pastors this morning, I suggested how memorable that was for me personally and then my friend Dr. Ed Cook suggested that the problem with the breathing out was that the church often had bad breath, hence the name of this post: The Church Has Halitosis?

That surely is a question that churches should ask as well as a question that individuals should ask. When we breathe out care for others, is it foul-smelling or pleasant smelling? Does it repel folks from further investigation of Jesus or does it draw them toward a journey with Jesus?

Wonder why we don’t have a halitosisalizer so we could check our breath before we breathe either as a church or as an individuals on our community or on others personally.

Spiritual Tic Tac anyone? Wish it was that easy. It seems that one kind of breath fixer doesn’t work for every kind of foul-smelling breath? I suspect that the same is true for the halitosis of the church and individuals. We may need to discover what smell we are radiating and then find a cure for that smell. Well, there’s an afissiparous musing for you…

In Peter Rollin’s book, The Fidelity of Betrayal: Towards a Church Beyond Belief he posited the concept of a parody of the WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) with What Would Judas Do. One has to wonder, if one is given to such things, what you would do if faced with a radical version of your own religion. Of course, our own self-bred piety would quickly jump to the conclusion that we would not do as Judas did. But, not so quick. While Judas had walked with Jesus for his almost ten years of ministry, he apparently grew weary of this new form of belief that was updating if not outright replacing his old form of belief. Judas lived in one of what Phyllis Tickle calls a “hinge” time in history. Nope, not all was well for the Jews with Romans in town, but on the other hand, they did get to go about a pretty normal life. Yep, there were the rebels like the Zealots, who one of his friends Simon had been a part of. But, for the most part, the social and religious cultures were livable. But, Judas became restless and in one final decision, he showed his true colors and reneged on the Kingdom message of Jesus.

It’s easy to ridicule Judas, but remember his world as he knew it was turned upside down. He was asked to change the story that he and his family had lived in for centuries. Those of us living in USAmerica, we live in a story that is profoundly American. While it has been influenced by the Judeo-Christian motif, it is not, nor never has it ever been, Christian. We have lived in a version of Christianity not only influenced by Enlightenment’s Modernity, but also influenced by a different covenant. I like the American covenant, i.e., the Constitution, but it should not be confused with the Jesus Covenant. They are not one and the same. We, like Judas, are being faced with an increasing tension with what we have lived in and what we should be living in. So, what are you going to do? Betray the church as it has come to be, in favor of one that is more radical than it has been for many years. Does radical mean weird? Wouldn’t being truly human be weird in a good way and not in a weird way? If you were Judas, living in the present form of Christianity, what would you do?

I am facinated by Tickle’s book, Great Emergence, The: How Christianity Is Changing and Why In just a few short, but poignant pages, Tickle produces a review of history that that can take one’s breathe away while still bringing the reader right into her/his present time.

She recently spoke at a conference in Memphis, TN a true Southern city with BBQ and Southern yarns too boot.

Yep, The cool Dr. Todd Hunter is back online and from the looks of him he has taken the pill. From the bowls of Boise, he has created a new ministry called Three Is Enough (TiE). He envisions TiE groups to take shape form Boise to the ends of the earth. He has entered the TiEtrix.

He states in his welcome post:

In one way TiE (Three is Enough) is the culmination of a lifetime of thinking about the intersection of The Gospel, culture, church, kingdom, spiritual formation and evangelism. In another, more humble way, it comes from the closing chapter of my upcoming book from IVP—Christianity Beyond Belief: Following Jesus for the Sake of Others. In CBB, I try to lay out some of the practical outcomes which surround one’s understanding—or misunderstanding—of the Gospel. Much of the conceptual work for the first section of the book comes from my D.Min. dissertation which was titled: Re-hearing the Gospel: Toward Improved Practices for Evangelism and Spiritual Formation.

So go ahead at take a look. Click here and you will be on your way. Don’t forget to take your pill before you make the leap.

The traditional Christian view of life is get right with God by saying a sinner’s prayer, then wait for him to rapture you away from this awful, sinful world, or die and go to heaven. Sound familiar? This story has captivated the church and is the story that many, many Christians live in.

There is another story and it is well articulated by Tom Wright in his article from Time Magazine. Go ahead, take a look, which story do you want to live in? It’s your choice.

I echo Tom Wright’s view in my book God’s EPIC Adventure:

If you went to the streets today or within the corridors of the church and asked what Jesus meant by “repent and believe,” you would most likely hear that he meant “Give up your private sins (most likely sexual, alcohol, and drug abuse) by accepting Jesus and gain some “inner peace” by believing a body of dogma and joining the local church at the corner of walk and don’t walk so you can go to heaven when you die.” God’s EPIC Adventure, 187.

AND

With the resurrection of Jesus, God created a new world and sent Jesus’ followers off to announce it to the world. If you go to the resurrection chapters in Luke 24, or in Matthew, or Mark, or John, and say, “What do the evangelists think this stuff means; why are we telling this story?” The answer is not, “Jesus is risen again, therefore, we can go to heaven when we die and be with him.” It’s interesting they never say that, those resurrection chapters. Rather, they say, “Jesus is risen from the dead. Therefore, God’s new creation has begun, and you are commissioned to go off and make it happen.” That’s the emphasis. And it’s a new world of justice and freedom; it’s the exodus world, the return-from-exile world, the world where Jesus already reigns as Lord, it’s the world with good news for all, especially, as in the New Testament, for the poor, 213.

Also see Tom Wright’s Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church

Over the last few months (October 21 and December 17), the Barna Research Group has surveyed folks about their belief in several well know Bible stories. In the survey they conducted belief about the following stories were quarried.

Survey respondents were asked if they thought a specific story in the Bible was “literally true, meaning it happened exactly as described in the Bible” or whether they thought the story was “meant to illustrate a principle but is not to be taken literally.” Six renowned Bible stories were then offered to adults for their consideration.

October 21

• The resurrection of Jesus. About 75 percent (75%) of those surveyed believed this story to be literal.
• Daniel in the lion’s den. Almost two-thirds (65%) thought this story to be literally true.
• The parting of the Red Sea. Just a shade less that the Daniel group, sixty-four percent (64%) believed this story actually happening.
• David and Goliath. Sixty-three percent (63%) found this story to be literal.
• Peter walking on water. The percentage of folks who took this to be literal was sixty percent (60%).
• The six days of Creation in Genesis. Those who accept this as literal was also 60%, but the breakdown was interesting. Seventy-three percent (73%) of the sixty percent who believed this story had not attended college, while only thirty-eight percent (38%) who attended college believed the story was literal.

December 17, 2007

• The Virgin Birth. Three our of every four people survived (75%) believed this story to be literally true.
• Turning water into wine. About seventy percent (70%) accepted this story about the event at Cana as having actually occurred.
• The feeding of the 5,000. Two out of three people, sixty-eight percent, (68%) view this story as factually accurate.
• Noah and the flood. The percentage was sixty-four percent.
• Eve and the Serpent. The survey results reads, “In total, 56% of adults believe that the story of the devil, disguised as a serpent and tempting Eve to sin by eating the forbidden fruit, is literally true.” I always find this interesting in that the text of the story nowhere identifies the serpent as Satan. So, it seems in this case, that the fifty-six percent who believed this story, believe it in a way that the story itself does not present. I often ponder how many things we believe about the stories are not really in the stories.
• The Strength of Sampson. Less than fifty percent (50%) believe this to be factually true.

How People Live Stories
Barna concludes from these statistics that Americans struggle with “the concept of truth, the nature of God, and the value of the Bible in personal decision-making.” He also notes that there is a “significant disconnect between faith and practice” and that the Bible has become “a respected but impersonal religious history lesson that stays removed from…life.”

Within modernity, we have presented the Bible in such a fragmented way that it is amazing that anyone believes any of these stories. As Barna points out, believing the stories and applying them is two different things. Maybe the problem is with the process. Usually the text of Scripture is presented and then a suggested “one-size-fits-all” application is given by the presenter. This supposedly is to keep the text from just becoming something one only believes to become something one actually does. The problem is the fragmentation of such an approach. Both a fragmented presentation of isolated verses used in a prooftexting fashion and a presentation of stories independent from their context or shuffled within the context of the books they come from produce a fragmented or quilted follower of Jesus.

What if we tried another approach. What if we stopped trying to apply parts of Scripture to our lives and discovered the Story of Scripture and how as an actor/actress within that story we are to play out our part in his EPIC adventure. How would that change the way in which we present the Story/stories of Scripture?

Reading the text is important. To that end I am preparing a reading program called Reading the Bible Without Additives in 100 Days, using Today’s New International Version’s presentation of the text in The Books of the Bible™ as the text to read.

Go to Reading the Bible Without Additives in 100 Days for more information.

Bulimia nervosa, commonly known as bulimia, is an eating disorder and psychological condition in which the subject engages in recurrent binge eating followed by feelings of guilt, depression, and self-condemnation and intentional purging to compensate for the excessive eating, usually to prevent weight gain (see anorexia nervosa). Purging can take the form of vomiting, fasting, inappropriate use of laxatives, enemas, diuretics or other medication, or excessive physical exercise. The cycle damages bodily organs. Bulimia is common especially among young women of normal or nearly normal weight (Wikipedia).

I am reading a book What the Best College Teachers Do coincidentally, about what great college teachers do to motivate their students in their courses. It is fascinating. Early in the book I ran across the term “bulimic education” a kind of cram (binge) for a test because its important to remember and give back (purge) on a test all those facts the instructors wants the student to remember, thinking that with this common exercise, one has learned something.

When I saw that term, I thought about the thousands of followers of Jesus who have “bulimic spirituality.” They binge on certain spiritual activities and then purge all over anyone who will listen to their new found spirituality. I used to call this part of the flock “constipated Christians” always taking in and rarely giving out until the preverbal cork pops and then they vomit on whoever is the closest. But, I think it is time for a “phrase upgrade” from “constipated Christians” although I still like the ring of that, to “bulimic spirituality.”

In what “spirituality” are you bulimic? If it works like the physical / psychological, we probably don’t ever recognize the condition in our lives, much less know what specific spiritually we binge and purge with.

Here’s a short video clip of Brian McLaren asking me a question about God’s EPIC Adventure. Enjoy.

Today, while I was participating with my community of faith, I was captivated for a few minutes by a small young lady about 16-18 months old. Her mom and dad were setting right in front of me. They had let her down during musical worship. First, she wandered about one row toward the front, then she returned and put her hand in a cup that her mom was holding and got some cheerios. She was smiling and dancing around to the music. After her second time back to mom for a refill, she ventured about two rows away, then returned. Next, she ventured three rows away and returned. Then, she ventured into a row with some other folks and danced around, then returned. Next, she discovered there was another whole area behind her she had not yet explored. She refilled and went toward the back. The parents set calmly and watch their daughter enjoying herself with great big smiles of enjoyment on their faces. On one occasion, she got out of the sightline of the parents, her father got nervous and went to rescue her.

As I watched, I thought how wonderful it is to have a relationship with a heavenly parent who allows me to wander off, explore, and dance around a bit all the time enjoying my exploration, and then offers me a bit of refueling when I return, but when I wander too far off course, nervousness sets in, and I sense the rescuing hand of a loving parent scoop me up just before a possible catastrophe occurs.

Wow, isn’t freedom great?

Rose, my pastor, made a comment on my online Bible Study called Decoding the Apocalypse in response to a question: What is a clear witness? Below was my response to her comment.

As with most things, the Enlightenment Project produced a rash of reductionism. Witness was reduced to things like the “Four Spiritual Law” and “door-to-door” evangelism with the sole intent of putting an argument to people demonstrating that they were sinners and needed salvation so they could go to heaven when they died. If they surrendered they prayed the “sinners prayer” and got their barcode, so they could be successfully identified upon entry into eternity. Sound familiar?

Living openly, lovingly, and for others with Kingdom of God attributes such as the “fruit of the Spirit” was not prioritized as “witness.” If it was, it was more like “sissy” witness where “speech and argument” was seen as “real” witness. Of course, Paul introduced what he calls the “fruit of the Spirit” which is love, out of which come all kinds of lifestyle corrections. I believe for him, the “fruit” was a tangible demonstration of the “age to come” entering into “this present evil age.” It was the lifestyle of the future being brought into the lifestyle of the present. It was living the future now as though it was then. Living in this way surely would produce abundant conversations about why one is living differently than others in our physical communities. Telling one’s story in lifestyle would surely allow for opportunity to tell one’s story in words where one can give and honest, resounding, answer that she/he loves God. There is little or no argument that can be given for a life change. When the blind man in Scripture told his story, “I once was blind, but now I see,” having known the life of the blind man who was now a seeing man, who would argue.

Yes, to live well and to talk well we need to be empowered by the Spirit. His presence and power is not just for healing the sick and casting out demons. His presence and power are needed to help us live a Kingdom present life in the midst of an age gone amuck. When was the last time that when faced with a choice of a decision to be Kingdom people or “amuck people” we stopped and even briefly asked for the power of the Holy Spirit to decide in favor of being a Kingdom person? I better stop now, I’m talk’ too much here.

Brain McLaren suggests that we who live in the West may be living in an Echo Chamber where it is difficult to “listen to the voice of others.” One solution to this potential difficulty is to get out of the Echo Chamber by reading and thinking about how folks in other parts of the world think and write. The following article is a great start toward that goal.

A UNIVERSAL CORE?
by Sherman YL Kuek, OSL
Sherman is an itinerant minister and an Adjunct Lecturer in Christian Theology at Seminari Theoloji Malaysia (STM). He spends much of his time journeying with his friends in reflecting on faith, life, and culture in a profoundly theological and yet simple way. Sherman blogs on www.ShermanKuek.net.

In speaking of contextualisation, there are (rather simplistically) two trends of thought:

1) The gospel consists of a “static universal core”, a series of articulations which is time insensitive and perennially unchanging. The contextualisation project is simply about enfleshing this core with a cultural facade for the facilitation of communication and understanding. The core, essentially, does not change.

2) The gospel consists of a “dynamic universal core”, a series of articulations which is time sensitive and perennially changing with the development of our theological understanding. The contextualisation project, whilst being about the cultural expression of this “dynamic universal core”, is also about allowing the enfleshment process to provoke us to re-examine the legitimacy and relevance of the universal core. This means that the universal core, by its sheer dynamic nature, is vulnerable to being modified, changed, eradicated, retained, or reaffirmed in accordance with that deemed necessary.

I suspect that the “emerging” people are those who are more ready to embrace the second of the two approaches, and not anyone is willing to sit well with this methodological vulnerability.

But anyone who is seriously going to engage his/her context authentically would almost immediately see that the second of the two is probably the only way by which one can be authentically contextual in his/her theological methodology.

II
This section dwells on some further sustained thoughts pertaining to the “dynamic universal core”. If we posit that the dynamic universal core is “time sensitive and perennially changing with the development of our theological understanding”, what reasonable sources possess legitimate ascendancy over the dynamism of the core?

It is open knowledge that the emerging people are serious about engaging with the dominant culture confronting the Christian gospel (in the West the postmodern culture, and in Asia perhaps the postcolonial ethos). First and foremost, this engagement is about the vulnerability of allowing the dominant culture to challenge the Christian gospel with serious questions regarding the adequacy, accuracy, and even the absolute rightness of the latter.

But it is probably a misunderstanding beyond proportions that these people engaging with culture are actually permitting the culture to redefine the core. It is most likely that culture raises questions which shed doubt on the perennial universality of the core, but not necessarily that culture redefines the core.

In my observation, it seems to me that whilst culture is permitted the role of the “interrogator”, the contextual thinkers are going back into the Great Christian Tradition to seek solutions for these problems raised by culture. They do not claim that culture itself provides the answers. They seem to have an implicit understanding that the Great Christian Tradition itself possesses more than a sufficient wealth of wisdom to provide plausible solutions for challenges posed by culture. The Great Christian Tradition causes one to expand and deepen the core such that one realises that his definition and demarcation of the core may have been overly limited and unnecessarily fossilised.

Thus, it is not uncommon for contextual thinkers to move beyond the boundaries of their own limited traditions (i.e. their denominational / traditional boundaries and familiar scope of theological positions) towards other even older traditions in search of responses to the problems posed by culture. This explains the openness of the emerging people towards the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions and their willingness to listen to other ecclesial voices beyond that with which they are familiar. Again, this is not something deemed acceptable to every Christian thinker of every tradition. Some traditions are, by their sheer nature, implicitly closed to conversations which challenge the rudiments of their all-familiar categories.

The Christian faith is more than 500 years old. In fact, the memory of the Christian Church goes back beyond 2,000 years. The contextual thinker holds on to this wealth of ecclesial life and therefore understands that there is no need for theological insecurity, for he has a long, long history – a Great Story of which he is a part – consisting of multiple voices of wisdom who have come before him and who would be able to infuse wisdom and impart solutions in his endeavour to be a relevant voice within the present scheme of life. This is the reservoir of ecclesial jurors for the contextual thinker which many others fail to observe or choose to ignore all together.

For him, the challenges posed by cultural confrontations do not cause him to pander into a state of intimidation and self-preserving defensiveness, for he looks beyond himself and his restrained traditional familiarity; and behold, a world of endless possibilities is open before him as he gleans from the voices of his many Fathers who once treaded the path on which he now finds himself. Someone aptly comments (and the contextual thinker certainly mirrors it well): “It’s not about the old ways, it’s about the much older ways.”

It is easy and dangerous to distort the telling of the story of Jesus. Within American Conservative Christianity we have come to think of Jesus in one of two ways. First, an embodiment of divinity like a computer avatar rather than the unique incarnate son. We think of his death as an example of great sacrifice and his resurrection becomes a way of thinking and talking about God’s continuing work in the present world. Second, we think in a dualistic way. Jesus is someone who is from the outside of our world, a superman of sorts who has come from another sphere to tell us that our true home is someplace else, namely heaven. His coming was to teach us how to follow him to that distant and unearthly destination.

There is something wrong with that picture. Neither way of thinking comes close to the Story of Jesus as presented in the Gospels of the New Testament. American Conservative Christianity, served up on a regular basis in America and exported to the global world, simply ignores what the Bible actually says about Jesus in favor another story that has been created out of bits and pieces of perception and refracted through various biblical passage which misreads the text of the Biblical Story.

This brand of Christianity passes itself off as authentic because it believes the items that have come to be thought of as orthodox, namely incarnation, atonement, resurrection, spirit, and second coming. But, what has happen is that all these beliefs have been joined together into the wrong narrative sorta like a kid who is drawing a “draw by numbers” picture but decides to follow another sequence rather than following the numbers. The result of this activity: of not following the right sequence, is drawing a picture other than the one intended. If you put all the elements of Conservative Christianity within a story of a deist God who sent his superman son to undergo some redemptive violence in order to satisfy his primal vengeance, then raise this dead body to life in order to show followers a way back to heaven and away from earth only to come again and snatch them away from earth as earth finally rolls toward rotting in hell. If that is the narrative that one sets incarnation, atonement, resurrection, spirit, and second coming into, then that production produces a violently distorted parody of biblical Christianity. Alas, this is the story of American Conservative Christianity.

So What Biblical Story?
A fresh way of understanding the Story of Scripture is to understand it as a story where humankind, though created good, became radically flawed by sin. Into this flawed world, Jesus came as the long awaited King of the Jews, who themselves had been the redemptive promise of God for some two thousands years. Jesus came to do what Israel had failed to do. Jesus took on the weight of sin and exhausted it, not so those following him could escape this world because it was bad or evil, but because of his resurrection could become part of the project of new creation, a new heaven and earth, or one might say a new garden. This project started after the first created beings chose to follow themselves and not God. The second coming then, is not a day in which Jesus will snatch away his bride from this evil earth and take them to heaven forever, but a time when the rule of Jesus which was already established in his first coming: birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, will finally be established in peace and justice in a transformed heaven and earth. It is this Biblical narrative that should replace the present conservative Christian narrative, so that this narrative can make a fresh impact on the world in this present time. N. T. Wright was influential in these thoughts.

I just listened to Len Sweet’s Napkin Scribbles (see below) about leaving his Bible behind on a recent trip to West Virginia. It reminded me of the time that I was leaving for a church service years ago and put my Bible on the trunk of the car while helping the kids inside. When I arrived at the church facility, my Bible was gone. I remembered what I had done and retraced my journey but did not find it. It was an interesting loss. It was the Bible that I had used all the way through seminary, with its notes and all. I looked for it along the journey route for several weeks, even looking on occasion, a year of so later. I called all the churches in the neighborhood, thinking some Good Samaritan may have found it and turned it to the church’s lost and found.

Like Len, I have wondered over the years if the church has left behind its use of the Bible which has casued the culture to leave the Bible out of its reading. I hear conversations from time to time about the Bible, usually a small discourse on a verse (versitis) or two or a tip of the hat by a small reading. The story of Scripture should impregnate our lives but that is difficult when the churches we attend leave out this important ingredient of being a Christ-follower. When a church leaves the Bible behind, it is not long before its congregants will also leave it behind. When the congregants leave the Bible behind they won’t be able to learn its Story and the sure results is that they won’t live its Story. Well, at least that’s my opinion.

Well, I decided not to blog live but to link to the actual talks that were given at the conference. It was a great time of inspirational learning about being missional. So take a listen. I’m not sure how long these feeds will be here.

Enjoy and make any comments you would like to make.

Friday Evening
The Meaning of Missional: Scot McKnight

The Meaning of Missional: Scot McKnight

The Meaning of Missional: Part 1. Todd Hunter

The Meaning of Missional – Part 1: Todd Hunter

The Meaning of Missional: Part Two. Todd Hunter

The Meaning of Missional – Part 2: Todd Hunter

Saturday
Reflection: Todd Hunter

Reflection: Todd Hunter

Morphing the Missional: Rose Swetman

Morphing the Missional: Rose Swetman

What Shall I Call This Presentation?: Scot McKnight

What Shall I Call This Presentation?: Scot McKnight

Interview with a Missional Minded Atheist: Jim Henderson

Interview with a Missional Minded Atheist: Jim Henderson

Going Missional without Getting Mean: Todd Hunter

Going Missional without Getting Mean: Todd Hunter