Lewis Mumford wrote that modern man has operated under the delusion that man can use science and invention to “fabricate an artificial world infinitely more wonderful than that nature had provided” (The Pentagon of Power p. 11). Mumford believed this contributed to man’s attitude of waste and misuse of natural resources.
If Mumford is correct, the implications are even more serious for Christians. For the Christian, it would not be a waste rooted in the belief that we can design a better world than nature produced, but a waste rooted in the belief that we can produce a world better than God produced. Waste and misuse are not only poor stewardship, they are symptomatic of anthro-deification (the deification of the human species).
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Reflections on Religious Knowledge Survey II
In my previous blog, I argued that the United States is a mission field. The fact that 86% of Americans believe in a God (or higher power) indicates an open door for conversation. Some might argue that such a high figure indicates we are not a mission field--that most are already believers.
However, there are disturbing indications that this belief might not point to what evangelicals would consider “true believers.” This number would include those of other belief systems or a generalized personal spirituality. The latter possibility is one that I encounter with increasing frequency in my college teaching. Though this evidence is anecdotal, I suspect it reflects a growing trend of “buffet-style” spirituality where the individual picks and chooses aspects of religious belief from various sources to create a customized religious system for themselves.
Perhaps most troubling to me is the number of those who self-identified as Protestant or Roman Catholic but who did not understand the basic concepts of their tradition concerning how one accesses the grace of God.
In the Roman Catholic tradition, the grace of God is mediated through the church and its sacraments to the believer. The most prominent of the sacraments is the Eucharist in which the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ. By receiving the sacrament in faith, grace and forgiveness is communicated to the believer through the medium of the host (the bread and wine). Only 55% of the Roman Catholics in the survey knew this belief. While I personally disagree with the theology, my point is that less than half of those surveyed knew what their own tradition teaches about salvation!
The Protestant result is worse. Only 19% of the Protestants surveyed understood the basic Protestant principle of salvation by faith apart from works. The idea of sole fide (faith alone) is a basic tenet of Protestant theology and stood at the very point of the separation from Rome. Yet, contemporary American Protestants do not understand what their own tradition teaches about salvation—a number lower that the Roman Catholic respondents! In my own personal observations in the classroom and in my church work, anecdotal as it might be, I believe this number to be correct.
While a direct connection cannot be made (theological acuity is not necessary for salvation), if a person does not understand what his/her own tradition teaches about the path to God, should we assume they are, indeed, saved simply because they believe there is a God? At the very least, it is an indictment of the failure of the church to disciple its members.
However, there are disturbing indications that this belief might not point to what evangelicals would consider “true believers.” This number would include those of other belief systems or a generalized personal spirituality. The latter possibility is one that I encounter with increasing frequency in my college teaching. Though this evidence is anecdotal, I suspect it reflects a growing trend of “buffet-style” spirituality where the individual picks and chooses aspects of religious belief from various sources to create a customized religious system for themselves.
Perhaps most troubling to me is the number of those who self-identified as Protestant or Roman Catholic but who did not understand the basic concepts of their tradition concerning how one accesses the grace of God.
In the Roman Catholic tradition, the grace of God is mediated through the church and its sacraments to the believer. The most prominent of the sacraments is the Eucharist in which the bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ. By receiving the sacrament in faith, grace and forgiveness is communicated to the believer through the medium of the host (the bread and wine). Only 55% of the Roman Catholics in the survey knew this belief. While I personally disagree with the theology, my point is that less than half of those surveyed knew what their own tradition teaches about salvation!
The Protestant result is worse. Only 19% of the Protestants surveyed understood the basic Protestant principle of salvation by faith apart from works. The idea of sole fide (faith alone) is a basic tenet of Protestant theology and stood at the very point of the separation from Rome. Yet, contemporary American Protestants do not understand what their own tradition teaches about salvation—a number lower that the Roman Catholic respondents! In my own personal observations in the classroom and in my church work, anecdotal as it might be, I believe this number to be correct.
While a direct connection cannot be made (theological acuity is not necessary for salvation), if a person does not understand what his/her own tradition teaches about the path to God, should we assume they are, indeed, saved simply because they believe there is a God? At the very least, it is an indictment of the failure of the church to disciple its members.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Religious Knowledge Survey -- Reflection 1
In Matthew 28:19-20, Christ gives the church its mission statement: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” (NIV) The job of the church is to make disciples, i.e. believers who learn and obey the teachings of Christ.
The recent US Religious Knowledge Survey by the Pew Forum provides indications of how well the church is fulfilling its mission statement. All organizations should periodically compare their outcomes with their mission statements as a tool of self-evaluation. Using the survey results as a measure of “product,” how are we doing?
Turning first to the level of faith, the first impression seems good. The vast majority of Americans believe in God or a higher power (86%). However, as James reminds us, the demons believe.
I am not calling my fellow Americans demons; rather, I am pointing out that saying one believes in God and having a personal relationship with that God are not necessarily the same thing. It also does not equate to serving that God. It should also be noted that the findings show a belief in a God or higher power (e.g. Brahman in Hinduism).
The good news for the church is that the majority of our neighbors have, at least, an intellectual acceptance of the idea of “God or a higher power.” This provides a point of contact, a conversation starter. We should be prepared to carry on an intelligent, reasonable conversation about the different perspectives presenting what Peter termed a reasonable defense of what we believe.
On the other hand, we must not fall into the modern view that all beliefs are equally valid and all that matters is that we sincerely believe. It is my opinion that the right to believe whatever one wants is to be respected and that the holders of other beliefs are to be respected on a personal level. However, respecting the right to a belief and respecting the believer are not the same as holding all beliefs to be equally valid. Nicodemus (John 3) believed in God and was a leader of his religion yet Jesus said to him “you must be born again.”
My conclusion: while the majority of Americans (according to the survey) hold a belief in God or something on the level of a god, we should not misunderstand what this means. The reality is that the United States is a mission field. The existing belief in a higher power provides an opportunity to share our beliefs but it does not present us with evidence that we are a society of Christian believers. The church should realize as it looks at the culture around it that it is a field “white unto harvest” and begin the work of fulfilling its mission statement.
The recent US Religious Knowledge Survey by the Pew Forum provides indications of how well the church is fulfilling its mission statement. All organizations should periodically compare their outcomes with their mission statements as a tool of self-evaluation. Using the survey results as a measure of “product,” how are we doing?
Turning first to the level of faith, the first impression seems good. The vast majority of Americans believe in God or a higher power (86%). However, as James reminds us, the demons believe.
I am not calling my fellow Americans demons; rather, I am pointing out that saying one believes in God and having a personal relationship with that God are not necessarily the same thing. It also does not equate to serving that God. It should also be noted that the findings show a belief in a God or higher power (e.g. Brahman in Hinduism).
The good news for the church is that the majority of our neighbors have, at least, an intellectual acceptance of the idea of “God or a higher power.” This provides a point of contact, a conversation starter. We should be prepared to carry on an intelligent, reasonable conversation about the different perspectives presenting what Peter termed a reasonable defense of what we believe.
On the other hand, we must not fall into the modern view that all beliefs are equally valid and all that matters is that we sincerely believe. It is my opinion that the right to believe whatever one wants is to be respected and that the holders of other beliefs are to be respected on a personal level. However, respecting the right to a belief and respecting the believer are not the same as holding all beliefs to be equally valid. Nicodemus (John 3) believed in God and was a leader of his religion yet Jesus said to him “you must be born again.”
My conclusion: while the majority of Americans (according to the survey) hold a belief in God or something on the level of a god, we should not misunderstand what this means. The reality is that the United States is a mission field. The existing belief in a higher power provides an opportunity to share our beliefs but it does not present us with evidence that we are a society of Christian believers. The church should realize as it looks at the culture around it that it is a field “white unto harvest” and begin the work of fulfilling its mission statement.
Monday, August 30, 2010
A Work of Creation
In the midst of the creationist-evolutionist debate, many of the basic theological and spiritual affirmations of the creation narrative are neglected. One such affirmation is the concept that creation is a redemptive act and therefore, salvation is a creative act.
Genesis 1:1-5 begins with the declaration that the act of creation began as the Spirit of God moved over a chaotic, formless deep. Into the darkness, God called forth light and began the process of bringing order out of that chaos. The dark chaos begins to be fashioned into the created order which will be declared to be good. This is an act of redemption.
So it is with sinful humans. Our lives are dark and chaotic. God penetrates our darkness with the light that is Christ. Into the chaos of our existence, the will of God brings purpose and order. The Spirit of God moves over us in an act of re-creation which moves us from the darkened chaos into the new person God wants us to be.
In John’s commentary on this passage (John 1:1-17), he declares that Jesus is the light that shines into the darkness and that those who believe in him are given power to become children of God—born not of blood and flesh but of God (John 1.12-13). Just as creation redeems the chaos into order, the believer is re-created from a chaotic existence into a child of God.
Genesis 1:1-5 begins with the declaration that the act of creation began as the Spirit of God moved over a chaotic, formless deep. Into the darkness, God called forth light and began the process of bringing order out of that chaos. The dark chaos begins to be fashioned into the created order which will be declared to be good. This is an act of redemption.
So it is with sinful humans. Our lives are dark and chaotic. God penetrates our darkness with the light that is Christ. Into the chaos of our existence, the will of God brings purpose and order. The Spirit of God moves over us in an act of re-creation which moves us from the darkened chaos into the new person God wants us to be.
In John’s commentary on this passage (John 1:1-17), he declares that Jesus is the light that shines into the darkness and that those who believe in him are given power to become children of God—born not of blood and flesh but of God (John 1.12-13). Just as creation redeems the chaos into order, the believer is re-created from a chaotic existence into a child of God.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Life: A Reflection
This week has reminded me of the nature of human existence. On the one hand, I have been working with several couples on the preparation of their weddings. I see the excitement, the love, the joy. They have shared with me their journeys and I have observed how they have stood with each other and supported each other with the ongoing challenges of life. I am reminded of the joy of life.
On the other hand, several stories have come to me of families facing unexpected tragedies in the form of human violence and accidents. The grief and fear of these families are the polar opposites of the joy and hope of the couples planning their weddings. These stories have reminded me of the sadness that human life can be.
Both categories of experience have refreshed in my mind the wonderful thing called life. It is the joy of new beginnings, the hope of love, the pain of loss, and the mystery of the unexplainable. The stories of happiness and the stories of sadness reinforce for me the sacredness of human existence.
And these events remind me of the grace of God--the giver of life and the giver of love. A God who never promised us an easy life, just a more abundant one. A God who is there with us to enhance the joy of our weddings and a God who is there to comfort us in our funerals. A God who is there with us by the side of a hospital bed and in the routine days that pass uneventfully.
For those families experiencing great joy and excitement: a prayer of thanksgiving for the gift of love and happiness. For those families facing the most difficult days of their lives: a prayer for strength and comfort. For all of us: a prayer to value the sacredness of life itself with all of its joys and sorrows.
On the other hand, several stories have come to me of families facing unexpected tragedies in the form of human violence and accidents. The grief and fear of these families are the polar opposites of the joy and hope of the couples planning their weddings. These stories have reminded me of the sadness that human life can be.
Both categories of experience have refreshed in my mind the wonderful thing called life. It is the joy of new beginnings, the hope of love, the pain of loss, and the mystery of the unexplainable. The stories of happiness and the stories of sadness reinforce for me the sacredness of human existence.
And these events remind me of the grace of God--the giver of life and the giver of love. A God who never promised us an easy life, just a more abundant one. A God who is there with us to enhance the joy of our weddings and a God who is there to comfort us in our funerals. A God who is there with us by the side of a hospital bed and in the routine days that pass uneventfully.
For those families experiencing great joy and excitement: a prayer of thanksgiving for the gift of love and happiness. For those families facing the most difficult days of their lives: a prayer for strength and comfort. For all of us: a prayer to value the sacredness of life itself with all of its joys and sorrows.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Calvin Miller. The Path of Celtic Prayer
The Path of Celtic Prayer by Calvin Miller was published by Intervarsity Press in 2007 as part of the Formatio series. Formatio presents studies on spiritual formation. Miller's contribution seeks to glean what contemporary Christians can learn from the prayers of the Celtic Christians.
Miller's reflections on his visits to Celtic Christian sites and on the reading of Celtic literature leads him to six principles of prayer that Miller believes will help deepen the prayer life of the contemporary believer. At the same time, Miller provides pointed observations about the shallowness of discipleship in much of the modern church in America.
The six principles are: 1) Trinity Prayer, 2)Scripture Praying, 3) Pilgrim Praying, 4) Nature Praying, 5) Lorica (breastplate) Prayer, and 6) Confessional Prayer. Miller is an evangelical scholar writing for a (primarily) evangelical audience. However, his source material is the Celtic tradition which was rooted in Roman Catholicism. Evangelicals will learn much we need to hear however about a more mystical, meditative, and theological approach to personal prayer. The chapters on Trinity prayer and confessional praying are quite insightful and reflect nuances of the devotional life often overlooked in today's evangelical church.
Because his focus is a Roman Catholic tradition, those of the Roman Catholic tradition, Eastern Orthodox traditions, and non-evangelical Protestants will profit as well from reading this book. The emphasis is on the believer entering into the presence of the triune God in reverent prayer. This emphasis transcends the categories of the Christian family tree.
Christians unfamiliar with the history of Christian devotion and the writings on spiritual devotion and discipleship from the richness of the history of the church may well find a whole new world opening to them in this brief introduction to Celtic prayer. The 170 pages are an easy, but mind-provoking, read. More importantly, I think you will find this book spirit-provoking.
Miller's reflections on his visits to Celtic Christian sites and on the reading of Celtic literature leads him to six principles of prayer that Miller believes will help deepen the prayer life of the contemporary believer. At the same time, Miller provides pointed observations about the shallowness of discipleship in much of the modern church in America.
The six principles are: 1) Trinity Prayer, 2)Scripture Praying, 3) Pilgrim Praying, 4) Nature Praying, 5) Lorica (breastplate) Prayer, and 6) Confessional Prayer. Miller is an evangelical scholar writing for a (primarily) evangelical audience. However, his source material is the Celtic tradition which was rooted in Roman Catholicism. Evangelicals will learn much we need to hear however about a more mystical, meditative, and theological approach to personal prayer. The chapters on Trinity prayer and confessional praying are quite insightful and reflect nuances of the devotional life often overlooked in today's evangelical church.
Because his focus is a Roman Catholic tradition, those of the Roman Catholic tradition, Eastern Orthodox traditions, and non-evangelical Protestants will profit as well from reading this book. The emphasis is on the believer entering into the presence of the triune God in reverent prayer. This emphasis transcends the categories of the Christian family tree.
Christians unfamiliar with the history of Christian devotion and the writings on spiritual devotion and discipleship from the richness of the history of the church may well find a whole new world opening to them in this brief introduction to Celtic prayer. The 170 pages are an easy, but mind-provoking, read. More importantly, I think you will find this book spirit-provoking.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions
“Trust in the Lord with all your heart;
And lean not upon your own understanding.
In all your ways, acknowledge him;
And he shall direct your paths.” Proverbs 3.5-6
Decision-making--do you remember a time when you did not seem to making decisions and choices almost minute by minute? I am not sure I do. I suspect that as a child (so many moons ago now) I went minutes, perhaps hours without having to decide a single thing. It is only a suspicion though—I simply cannot remember not being a decision-maker, a chooser. Perhaps that is when we realize we are adults: when life seems to be just a continual process of deciding.
In this selection from the Hebrew wisdom literature of the Old Testament, we are given a basic principle on approaching life. Consequently, it gives us wonderful insight into decision-making and choosing. The passage draws a distinction between what I will call the “human equation” (HE) and the “divine equation” (DE).
The HE approaches life from the ability and capacity of human reasoning to analyze, interpret, and comprehend life situations. It seeks to solve the problem, make the choice, or make the decision based on human wisdom and knowledge. In short, when at a crossroads of life, the HE attacks the situation from my own ability to deal with the choices.
Now, this is not altogether bad. I like human reasoning. After all, I have devoted a huge part of my professional life to the study and teaching of the history of ideas. I believe that the human capacity to think, to reason is part of the imago dei (image of God) in humans. I have been teaching a course called Critical Thinking for a decade now and all research in that field indicates that those who employ critical thinking skills, on average, have more successful lives and are more content.
Why? Pardon the humor—it just makes good sense. Because of their use of critical thinking and effective reasoning, they have made fewer bad choices; therefore, less self-inflicted wounds. Their lives are usually less chaotic and when difficulties do arise, they apply their thinking skills to problem-solving and effective ways of approaching the difficulties. This either minimizes the damage or gives them an able method of coming to terms with, and adjusting to, the situation. Those who just react or who do not apply reason in an effective way tend to make more bad choices, create more problems for themselves, and have less of an ability to come to terms with changing circumstances.
My point here is that the HE, when used badly, leads to bad choices and worse outcomes. The HE, when used to its best, can provide a great deal of benefit to the situations of life.
However, if reason is part of the imago dei and if reason leads to better decisions, how much more effective would the DE be? The DE looks at life situations from God’s ability and capacity to deal with it. It is going to the source of human reasoning at its best—the mind of God.
You might recall that in Isaiah, God says through prophet, “Come, let us reason together…..” Yes, the Book of Isaiah later says that God’s ways are not our ways and his thoughts not our thoughts. However, look at what the two together seem to be saying to us. Humans have a capability and reasoning together with God (because of the imago dei). That said, God’s reasoning is so far superior to our reasoning that we cannot fully comprehend it.
This is not a bad thing though. If human reasoning, with its limitations, can still improve life, then how much more improved would life be if we employ the superior reasoning of God? I think this is the point of the thinker that penned Proverbs 3.5-6.
Hebrew poetry (and Proverbs is written in poetic form) employs parallelism as a major structural component of what it is trying to communicate. In other words, it is not just the meaning of the words in each line, but what those words mean in syntactical relationship to the lines around each line.
For example, “trust” in the first line means to put your whole weight on something. That is to say, to trust something to hold you up (like a chair or tree limb). This parallels “lean” in the second line. We are to trust in the Lord with all our “heart.” Look at the parallel to “heart.” It is “understanding.” The problem is that we use heart as a metaphor for emotion; in Hebrew culture, it was the metaphor for the thinking of a person, the will, the consciousness. It was used by them the way we use “mind.”
So, adjusting for cultural metaphors, the two lines form an antithetical parallelism (the second line contrasting with the first line): “Put the weight of your thinking on God and do not lean on your own thinking.” This is reinforced by the next verse where the reader is told to acknowledge God in all the ways of life and he will provide direction.
The application: when confronted with a decision, I can take one of three possible categories of approaches. Option one: I can approach the situation using my own mind but not to the best of its ability and I will have increased odds of choosing poorly and making my life worse. Option two: I can use my human reason exclusively but use all the best critical thinking skills to choose as wisely as I humanly can. This, on odds, is a better option than number one. Option three: because the best of human reasoning is modeled on the image of God in each of us, yet still pales in comparison to the reasoning of God, I can seek the direction of God as his wisdom is far better than mine, even at its best.
Option three is the best. That does not mean the choices are easy are that my life becomes trouble-free and utopian. It does mean that the odds are better and even when I can not understand why things are the way they are, I can trust there is a greater wisdom at work. As one who still suffers from earlier decisions poorly made, I can verify the superiority of this approach to the normal human approach.
This is not faith to the exclusion of reason; rather, it is reason and faith informing each other. Give it a try—what do you have to lose?
And lean not upon your own understanding.
In all your ways, acknowledge him;
And he shall direct your paths.” Proverbs 3.5-6
Decision-making--do you remember a time when you did not seem to making decisions and choices almost minute by minute? I am not sure I do. I suspect that as a child (so many moons ago now) I went minutes, perhaps hours without having to decide a single thing. It is only a suspicion though—I simply cannot remember not being a decision-maker, a chooser. Perhaps that is when we realize we are adults: when life seems to be just a continual process of deciding.
In this selection from the Hebrew wisdom literature of the Old Testament, we are given a basic principle on approaching life. Consequently, it gives us wonderful insight into decision-making and choosing. The passage draws a distinction between what I will call the “human equation” (HE) and the “divine equation” (DE).
The HE approaches life from the ability and capacity of human reasoning to analyze, interpret, and comprehend life situations. It seeks to solve the problem, make the choice, or make the decision based on human wisdom and knowledge. In short, when at a crossroads of life, the HE attacks the situation from my own ability to deal with the choices.
Now, this is not altogether bad. I like human reasoning. After all, I have devoted a huge part of my professional life to the study and teaching of the history of ideas. I believe that the human capacity to think, to reason is part of the imago dei (image of God) in humans. I have been teaching a course called Critical Thinking for a decade now and all research in that field indicates that those who employ critical thinking skills, on average, have more successful lives and are more content.
Why? Pardon the humor—it just makes good sense. Because of their use of critical thinking and effective reasoning, they have made fewer bad choices; therefore, less self-inflicted wounds. Their lives are usually less chaotic and when difficulties do arise, they apply their thinking skills to problem-solving and effective ways of approaching the difficulties. This either minimizes the damage or gives them an able method of coming to terms with, and adjusting to, the situation. Those who just react or who do not apply reason in an effective way tend to make more bad choices, create more problems for themselves, and have less of an ability to come to terms with changing circumstances.
My point here is that the HE, when used badly, leads to bad choices and worse outcomes. The HE, when used to its best, can provide a great deal of benefit to the situations of life.
However, if reason is part of the imago dei and if reason leads to better decisions, how much more effective would the DE be? The DE looks at life situations from God’s ability and capacity to deal with it. It is going to the source of human reasoning at its best—the mind of God.
You might recall that in Isaiah, God says through prophet, “Come, let us reason together…..” Yes, the Book of Isaiah later says that God’s ways are not our ways and his thoughts not our thoughts. However, look at what the two together seem to be saying to us. Humans have a capability and reasoning together with God (because of the imago dei). That said, God’s reasoning is so far superior to our reasoning that we cannot fully comprehend it.
This is not a bad thing though. If human reasoning, with its limitations, can still improve life, then how much more improved would life be if we employ the superior reasoning of God? I think this is the point of the thinker that penned Proverbs 3.5-6.
Hebrew poetry (and Proverbs is written in poetic form) employs parallelism as a major structural component of what it is trying to communicate. In other words, it is not just the meaning of the words in each line, but what those words mean in syntactical relationship to the lines around each line.
For example, “trust” in the first line means to put your whole weight on something. That is to say, to trust something to hold you up (like a chair or tree limb). This parallels “lean” in the second line. We are to trust in the Lord with all our “heart.” Look at the parallel to “heart.” It is “understanding.” The problem is that we use heart as a metaphor for emotion; in Hebrew culture, it was the metaphor for the thinking of a person, the will, the consciousness. It was used by them the way we use “mind.”
So, adjusting for cultural metaphors, the two lines form an antithetical parallelism (the second line contrasting with the first line): “Put the weight of your thinking on God and do not lean on your own thinking.” This is reinforced by the next verse where the reader is told to acknowledge God in all the ways of life and he will provide direction.
The application: when confronted with a decision, I can take one of three possible categories of approaches. Option one: I can approach the situation using my own mind but not to the best of its ability and I will have increased odds of choosing poorly and making my life worse. Option two: I can use my human reason exclusively but use all the best critical thinking skills to choose as wisely as I humanly can. This, on odds, is a better option than number one. Option three: because the best of human reasoning is modeled on the image of God in each of us, yet still pales in comparison to the reasoning of God, I can seek the direction of God as his wisdom is far better than mine, even at its best.
Option three is the best. That does not mean the choices are easy are that my life becomes trouble-free and utopian. It does mean that the odds are better and even when I can not understand why things are the way they are, I can trust there is a greater wisdom at work. As one who still suffers from earlier decisions poorly made, I can verify the superiority of this approach to the normal human approach.
This is not faith to the exclusion of reason; rather, it is reason and faith informing each other. Give it a try—what do you have to lose?
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Measuring a Prophet
Ezekiel 2 provides us with the commission of Ezekiel to the prophetic ministry. God tells him that his audience is a rebellious people (v. 3). They are described as “impudent children” and “stiffhearted” (v. 4, KJV). Ezekiel is given every indication that they will probably not listen to his message.
This passage teaches us that the worth of a prophet is not determined by the response of the people. Rather, the worth of a prophet is determined by his obedience in the proclamation of the message. We tend to judge on audience size and audience response. God judges obedience. When we judge on the audience and response, we are in danger of creating celebrity cults.
In Ezekiel 33.30ff, God describes a people who come to be entertained but are not changed by the word. It is not Ezekiel’s fault as he delivers faithfully the message given. It is the people’s fault as they are more interested in the experience of the moment than in life change.
The church in America today has become such a people of God. We have created celebrity cults around the speakers who make us feel good and entertain us. Some of those speakers tell us what we want to hear. Others proclaim a definitive “thus saith the Lord” yet we are so focused on the experience of the moment that we are not challenged to change. God is not measuring the prophets on the number of seats filled in arenas. He is measuring the obedience of the speaker to the command to proclaim the word. He measures the audience not on attendance and experiences but on the changes in life.
Remember, in John 6, Jesus begins with a multitude of 5000+, by the end of the chapter, he is down to the twelve (really, eleven, since one is a betrayer) and Jesus is asking if they too will leave. If we had measured Jesus by the standards of the cult of celebrity, we would have to count him a failure. Clearly, God measures by a different rubric altogether. By the measure of obedience, Jesus is a clear success.
This passage teaches us that the worth of a prophet is not determined by the response of the people. Rather, the worth of a prophet is determined by his obedience in the proclamation of the message. We tend to judge on audience size and audience response. God judges obedience. When we judge on the audience and response, we are in danger of creating celebrity cults.
In Ezekiel 33.30ff, God describes a people who come to be entertained but are not changed by the word. It is not Ezekiel’s fault as he delivers faithfully the message given. It is the people’s fault as they are more interested in the experience of the moment than in life change.
The church in America today has become such a people of God. We have created celebrity cults around the speakers who make us feel good and entertain us. Some of those speakers tell us what we want to hear. Others proclaim a definitive “thus saith the Lord” yet we are so focused on the experience of the moment that we are not challenged to change. God is not measuring the prophets on the number of seats filled in arenas. He is measuring the obedience of the speaker to the command to proclaim the word. He measures the audience not on attendance and experiences but on the changes in life.
Remember, in John 6, Jesus begins with a multitude of 5000+, by the end of the chapter, he is down to the twelve (really, eleven, since one is a betrayer) and Jesus is asking if they too will leave. If we had measured Jesus by the standards of the cult of celebrity, we would have to count him a failure. Clearly, God measures by a different rubric altogether. By the measure of obedience, Jesus is a clear success.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
What Is Worship Anyway?
The nature of worship? Religion often focuses on cultic activity. Biblical Judaism, at points in its history, exhibited this tendency. The history of the Christian Church is full of such focus. The Greco-Roman world referred to acts of religion (prayer, sacrifice, liturgy, etc.) as “cultus deorum” which can be translated as “care of the gods” (cf. Bart Ehrman’s The New Testament, vol. 4, pp. 26-27). [Note: Do not confuse cultus/cultic with the contemporary vernacular use of the word “cult” for what is thought of as a dangerous religious group. Here, cultus/cultic refers to the worship practices of a group.]
The Hebrew prophets of the Old Testament argued that such cultic activities were secondary to showing compassion and justice to others. Jesus taught that if you come to make an offering and remembered someone had something against you, go and be reconciled to that person before continuing the act of worship. Paul wrote that all the Torah (including the cultus) was fulfilled in loving your neighbor as yourself. James reminded us that true, undefiled religion is the care of widows and orphans. In other words, the true “care of God” is taking care of his children.
Without compassion and justice, liturgy is empty, void of meaning. While we should devote ourselves to praise and worship, we must remember that true praise and worship is in helping those who are suffering. Without that, everything else is putting on a show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Ed2Go
