The Internet Monk Archives

Another Look: Jon Henry – Already Compromised, Moon Edition

Note from CM: A few years ago I found this brilliant satirical piece by Jon Henry that exposes the kind of thinking that gets Christians in trouble with regard to Bible interpretation.

Is it “biblical” to believe that the moon emits its own light? Read the following, and come to your own conclusion.

• • •

ALREADY COMPROMISED: Moon Edition
by Jon Henry

Bible believers must defend the truth that the moon emanates its own light. Contrary to the revelation of the Bible, modern science wants people to believe that the moon does not have the ability to generate light. Instead, they want us to believe that the moon merely reflects the light of the sun.

Not only is it ridiculous to believe that a rock could reflect the light of a sun millions of miles away, but it’s also unbiblical!

Continue reading “Another Look: Jon Henry – Already Compromised, Moon Edition”

Pete Enns: When God stops making sense (or, my favorite part of the Old Testament)

The Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, Blake

Note from CM: As you’ve no doubt noticed by now, my favorite OT scholar is Pete Enns. He has helped me so much in furthering my understanding of and love for the Hebrew Bible after seminary. I owe him a great debt, and I’m happy that he is always amenable to sharing articles with us here at Internet Monk.

Pete has left his Patheos blog and has formed a new site of his own: Pete Enns/The Bible for Normal People. It is a well-designed site with information about his books and speaking engagements as well as blog articles. It carries my highest recommendation, and you will no doubt see posts listed from it regularly on our IMonk Bulletin Board (right column).

Today’s post reminds me that I once wrote Pete an email and asked him to comment on an observation I had that the “wisdom” teachers in Israel must have played a large part in the final editing of the Hebrew Bible. From the first pages of Genesis to the end of the Tanakh, and especially in the books of the Writings, which concentrate on wisdom themes, the influence of these sages may be seen, and it casts a whole new light on Israel’s story if you see that. Pete expresses well some of what it signifies in today’s post. Thanks, Pete!

• • •

When God stops making sense (or, my favorite part of the Old Testament)
by Peter Enns

The older I get, the more I like–really like–Psalms and the wisdom books, Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes.

Continue reading “Pete Enns: When God stops making sense (or, my favorite part of the Old Testament)”

Is Evangelical Christianity the Wizard behind the Curtain of America’s Moral and Spiritual Decline?

Note from CM: We welcome a new contributor today. His name is Chris Kratzer, and he blogs at Grace//Jesus//Life, a designation that certainly wins our approval around here. In his bio, Chris says:

I am a Jesus guy, husband, father, pastor, author, and speaker. Captured by the pure Gospel of God’s Grace, my focus is communicating the message of Grace and the beauty of Jesus particularly as it relates to life, culture, and church.

The post I requested permission to use certainly contains a strong message of grace, something which Chris finds lacking in his experience of evangelical Christianity. Perhaps your experience has been different, or maybe you will find real resonance with his words. Either way, please welcome Chris and let’s respond to what he says with thoughtful, gracious discussion. After all, that’s really the only way to authentically discuss grace, isn’t it?

• • •

Is Evangelical Christianity the Wizard behind the Curtain of America’s Moral and Spiritual Decline?
by Chris Kratzer

I am not a fan of being on the communicating end of negative things. Most people don’t enjoy that role, I certainly don’t. As one who has to field a lot of critical knocks on my own door, I know what it feels like to be misunderstood, misrepresented, and criticized irresponsibly. So, as I write about things that are not so positive regarding Evangelical Christianity, I do so with much carefulness to avoid becoming a part of the problem, as I truly desire to be a part of the solution.

As I address issues related to Evangelical Christianity in this writing, I am well aware that many Evangelicals, many of which I have as close friends, have wonderful hearts, do great things for Jesus, and are not aware of any harm in which they may or may not participate by being connected intimately or in part to Evangelical Christianity. That was true of me when I was an Evangelical pastor. In fact, I would suspect many Christians who would fall into the category of “Evangelical” don’t even realize it, nor have they considered any negative ramifications to the beliefs they hold and the Evangelical culture thereof.

Yet, when I observe something so alarmingly and clearly wrong, harmful, and deceptive, I feel a responsibility to at least articulate what I see and believe. Not with a spirit of condemnation, but with one of deep concern. No one person or group is perfect. Certainly, not I. For so many years as an Evangelical, I didn’t realize what I was truly participating in and what its ramifications truly were in people’s lives.

From as early as my boyhood sand box experiences, I have learned that many of the people who are repeatedly pointing at problems and things they don’t like from an aggressive, self-righteous posture are often those themselves who have something to conceal. From the bully on the playground to the podium pounding preacher, behind nearly every harsh, judging, fear-inducing, intimidating, and problem-pointing finger is often a Wizard of Oz like coward hiding behind a curtain, concealing the real issues.

The overarching chorus of Evangelical Christianity for years has been that the world is bad, needs to repent, and become like them. They passionately declare their morals, beliefs, and standards are not only the foundation of America, but that which is needed to reverse, what is in their minds, a terrible, declining culture. There is an inner consensus among many Evangelicals that if people just believed, lived, and acted like them, America would be a much better place.

Spokespersons and leaders of Evangelical Christianity such as Franklin Graham almost weekly, make public statements repeating this rehearsed theme that the world is bad, needs to repent, and become more like them in adopted values and lifestyle. A prevailing sentiment seems to suggest that if we would just return to the days of “Father Knows Best” where everything was seemingly simple and clean, things would be so much better.

Many of these statements, communicated in many and various ways, are often textured with judgement, fear tactics, and condemnation of a world that, in their minds, is not so simple and clean anymore. The underlying message is, “we know best.” “We are right, you are wrong, we have it, you don’t; repent, turn to our Jesus, become one of us, or pay the price.” Like in a scene from The Wizard of Oz, from behind the curtain, as the room fills will smoke and the volume knobs of this rhetoric is turned up with deep, Darth Vader tones, many approach the microphone to communicate their displeasures and religious prescriptions at the world, all while declaring it to be “the Gospel.”

Years ago, this Evangelical wizardry was directed against divorce and remarriage, later the issue became blacks marrying whites, today it’s homosexuality and gay marriage. All with the same battle cry, “we are right, you are wrong; repent, turn to our Jesus, think, believe and behave like us, or pay the price.” This has been the underlying missional/discipleship philosophy and posture of Evangelical Christianity for decades. “You are lost, we are found, our job is to get you to our Jesus and “disciple” you to think, believe, and behave like us.” The world is our project, people are a notch on the “got saved” belt. Baptism is an initiation rite, and membership is the entry way into our club.

Of course, it’s never articulated like that, but having been an Evangelical pastor for many years, I know this to be true. This is their Gospel, this is their “salvation,” this is the Evangelical “vision.” In Evangelical Christian produced movies, tv shows, concerts, churches, books, and alike, this is the flavor of Gospel being communicated.

Recently, many Evangelical Christians and leaders have turned up the heat on declaring that America is in desperate moral and spiritual decline. As they gaze out into the world and even within their own organizations and churches, the realize there is a growing number of people who don’t believe and behave as they prescribe. In their mind, the world has turned away from their brand of Jesus, Bible, and Church, and therefore is the cause of all things that are eroding our culture. With labels like “lost,” “sinner,” “progressive,” “liberal,” people who don’t fit their mold become the mission to change, and if resistant, become a kind of enemy.

Yet, like in the The Wizard of Oz, things are not always as they appear.

While smoke billowing Evangelical Christianity declares the world bad, those unlike them the source of blame, and the solution being to repent to their Jesus and learn to think, believe and behave like them, there is a coward pulling the strings behind a curtain. In fact, the one pointing fingers at all the problems in the world has in truth, ironically, become a major contributor to the existence of those problems. Yes, pull back the curtains and see for yourself, Evangelical Christianity is perhaps the greatest contributor to the moral and spiritual decline of America they so detest.

Now, this a bold statement that will surely offend many and likely cost me in relationships and otherwise. But before you write me off, disown me, or label me a heretic, hear me out.

God is love. He loves everyone unconditionally. Love is not a characteristic or attribute of God, it is who He is. God can do nothing else but love.

Out of His nature, which is love, it is articulated in scripture that through Jesus (the personification of Love), the Old Covenant of Law given through Moses has been replaced with a New Covenant of Grace given through Jesus.

As on writer described, “you are not under Law, but under Grace.” Romans 6:14b

This is a cataclysmic, cosmic shift in how God relates to people and people relate to God. Yet, Evangelical Christianity is super slow to the party.

It is a complete transition away from a conditional relationship with God and life that hinges on some level of our spiritual performance, and the ushering in of an unconditional relationship with God and life that is based solely on Christ’s performance. It is not just a move away from the letter of the Law, but the spirit of the Law as well. Let me repeat that, “it is not just a move away from the letter of the Law, but the spirit of the Law as well.” It’s not just Ten Commandments, Leviticus stuff, it’s any form of work, condemnation, judgement, performance expectation, condition, effort, or striving applied to any spiritual aspect of a person’s life. And let me add this, everything is spiritual.

The Bible in its reading and understanding must be interpreted through this covenant of Grace, whose personification is Jesus. This new covenant of Grace began at the cross.

Grace, with no mixture of the Law (or the spirit of the Law), received through faith, is the pure Gospel. And Faith, it’s not a work, effort, or doing, it is a rest. It is not a spiritual performance, it is a spiritual awakening to what Jesus has already done, without your faith, worthiness, or participation. It is not “faithfulness,” it is “faith.” And that faith, a gift from Jesus as well.

Because of Grace, Jesus has not only done something for all people, but also to all people. Beyond having peace with God for eternity, Jesus has made all people into a new creation. At the cross, humanity became a finished work. It was one and done. Period. Jesus didn’t just die as a human, He died as humanity. The old you, was crucified with Christ. Salvation (wholeness) has come.

As a new creation, you are the righteousness of Christ, holy, sanctified, forgiven (past, present, and future), justified, lacking no spiritual blessing. There is no work to be done on your life, you are completely complete. Grace has rendered spiritual growth as something you already are, not something you become or do. The Christian life is not about becoming something tomorrow you are not today through spiritual gymnastics, but about being more of who you already are because of Jesus, through believing. Your performance does not determine you identity, your identity determines your performance. Grace is the beginning and end of everything you are, do, and become. This is the Gospel, that your part is to realize you have no part, only believe. Anything less than this pure Grace Gospel, is Law.

With this in mind, writers in the New Testament, vehemently described how mixing this Gospel of Grace with remnants, portions, or vibes of the Law is not just false and damaging, but evil. Any form of condemnation, work, spiritual performance, earning of intimacy with God, intolerance, judgment, personal striving, finger-pointing, or communication of a God who loves conditionally is to mix the pure Gospel of Grace with Law and to render it a means of death not salvation.

“And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” Galatians 5:4

For this writer, a minimal spiritual performance or act so innocent, symbolic, and simple as circumcision, reflected the presence of the Law and when mixed into a person’s life rendered them severed from Christ. Yikes!

Sadly, knowingly or unknowingly, much of what Evangelical Christianity presents to believers and non believers in regards to the Gospel, discipleship, and the Christian life is a mixture of “Law” at best, if not pure Law. Many of them declare unconditional love with conditions, spiritual growth through personal obedience, sin overcoming through sin management, discipleship through behavior modification and doctrinal unity, and the Christian life an increasing level of personal devotion to Christ. I don’t care how you slice it or how much lipstick you put on that pig, it’s Law, Law, and more Law.

What many Evangelicals declare as needing to have a “balance,” of Grace and Law, one can just hear many of the New Testament writers declaring, “bullshit!” Not because it’s fun to be vulgar, but because of the ramifications of a death cocktail mixture of Grace with Law. Mix the Gospel with any amount, however small, of the Law, and guess what you have? Law. Let me bake you a cake, and drop a wee-little speck of poop into it. Just a smidgen. Don’t worry, you won’t notice. It’s fresh out the oven, you going to eat it?

As one scripture writer discovered, the ministry of the Law is death and condemnation. (2 Corinthians 3:7,9) That same writer also discovered that it is actually the Law that entices people to sin. (1 Corinthians 15:56) Yes, the Law… in letter or spirit is the great sin enticer; not pornography, Miley Cyrus, rap music, or Play Station.

See first, the Law in all its forms, in letter or spirit, condemns. Find me a person with a sin problem and I will have found you a person with a condemnation problem.

Second, the Law appeals to the flesh. The flesh, is not our evil lustful side as some would have us believe, it is actually when we attempt, through any kind of effort on our part to gain or receive from God something He has already freely given; salvation, forgiveness, intimacy, blessing, favor, righteousness, holiness, sanctification, and the list goes on and on.

This is a futile, evil endeavor. It’s a dead end.

First because God has already given completely that which is trying to be gained, and second, because you can’t gain, earn, or receive anything from God through your performance, effort, pursuit, pressing in, or actions, no matter how spiritual they may seem. To do so, is to fall from Grace and declare the cross as foolish and insufficient, and yourself as capable and worthy at some level or another. That is what it looks like to be deceived, to walk in darkness, to water-down the Law (as you think you can handle it), and therefore, to minimize and marginalize Grace (cause you think you don’t completely need it). It is the height of anti-Christ. It is to be bewitched by another Gospel, which is no Gospel at all. And worst of all, it is to entice and imprison people to sin, hypocrisy, and a lifestyle there of.

The Evangelical prescription for sin is at best, a mixture of Gospel and Law. God loves you, BUT… you need to repent (which in their mind, wrongly means “to change”). Do these spiritual things, apply these formulas, attend these groups, solicit this accountability partner, press into this experience with God, say this prayer, read this book, partner with Jesus, attend this conference, take these steps, believe these beliefs, be all you can be for Jesus, follow these rules etc. etc. Problem is, it not only all doesn’t work, it all makes things worse.

For much of Evangelical Christianity, the Gospel is “behavior modification” through some level of personal effort or spiritual performance. All of this, declaring the Law and packaging as the Gospel, and then wondering why people fall away and morals decline for both nonbelievers and believers.

If you take the Law seriously, if you take Grace seriously, if you take the consequences of mixing any amount of Law with the Gospel of Grace, it is clear that much of Evangelical Christianity has actually been prescribing the cancer, not the cure; at best, withholding the cure. Whether they realize it or not, they have been baking cakes with crap it in it, and then wondering why people are getting sick, spitting it out of their mouths, and not getting any better. All while some of them have the gaul to sprout their spiritual feathers, get mad, bark their religious rants, throw up their hands, and act so disgusted (and surprised) when they see a nation that, in their minds, is spiritually dying. Of course it is! That’s what happens when one supplies the cancer as the cure. That’s what happens when you feed people cakes with crap in them.

A few years back, the Barna Research Group showed that the overall divorce rate among Evangelical themed denominations was between 27-34%, while the divorce rate among atheists… 21%. Evidently, in our country, you have a better chance at having a holy, Jesus-like life out of church than you do in it. If perhaps the largest Christian representation in America, Evangelical Christianity is engaging in the ministry of the Law, should we be surprised at the amount of spiritual decline we see in America? Should we be surprised that people are seemingly more enticed and imprisoned to sin now, more than ever? That’s what the Law does. Should we be surprised that Christians exposed to Evangelical Christianity don’t get better, and the world that is watching, has become disinterested and “done” with church.

The truth is, the spiritual prescriptions of much of Evangelical Christianity entice and imprison people to sin, not free them. We can change nothing in ourselves or others. The Holy Spirit does that, and that through pure Grace, not Law or any mixture thereof. The very thing that many Evangelicals declare as too soft (Grace) is actually the one and only thing that has the teeth and grip to change anything.

As one scripture writer discovered, “For the Grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, teaching us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age.” Titus 2:12

What teaches, what changes, what influences? Grace.

Jesus mentioned that you can sense a certain amount of the quality of a spiritual thing by the fruit it bares.

Much of Evangelical Christianity has sadly produced… 1) selfish, consumer minded Christians who believe that “church” is about meeting their particular needs. Thus, Christianity isn’t growing but is actually in severe decline as believers are continually shuffling around to whatever church has the best show and better meets their needs 2) Christians who believe the Bible is equal to Jesus/God and place their understanding of it over standing with people and declare their particular understanding to be “truly biblical”. 3) churches where Christians mainly talk amongst themselves and judge the world, believing they’re right and everyone just needs to become right like them 4) celebrity pastors and leaders who franchise church, their egos, and a performance-driven, hyped up perversion of the Gospel. 5) churches that might welcome a sinner or two into their mix as they look down upon them as their “mission”, but don’t truly “want” them unless they clean up and adopt their values and beliefs. 6) Christians who believe the Gospel is a mixture of Grace and Law, Jesus does His part, but one needs to do their part, or else. 7) Christians and Christian leaders who believe their job is to point out sin in the world, and declare that God loves people so much that if they don’t say a certain prayer and clean up their act, He will justly throw them into an eternity of torture by demons, flames, and a desire to die that will never be granted; calling it all… good news.

In my humble opinion, no one is perfect, especially me, but that is no fruit.

I believe much of Evangelical Christianity, particularly those who embody a more judgmental, prideful, elitist, legalistic, and performance-driven Christian flavor would do well to repent (which really means to “change your mind”) about Jesus, the Gospel, love, bible, the Christian life, sin, and Church so that these areas and their understanding thereof reflect the pure Grace of God and the finished work of Jesus on the cross.

I believe much of Evangelical Christianity would do well to focus on modeling Jesus who is pure Grace and unconditional love. They would do well to stand with people over and above their biblical stances on the issues. They would do well to learn to rightly divide the word of God between the Old Testament and the New, interpreting all scripture through the lens of Grace as Jesus did.

They would do well to move away from “hating the sin and loving the sinner,” and just loving people, period. They would do well to let the Holy Spirit discern and change people, and instead, concentrate on doing their job, which is to love people, unconditionally. They would do well to direct their finger pointing to the loveliness of Jesus, not to the ugliness they deem to see in people. They would do well to trust Grace to do what only Grace can do, which is most everything they think they are capable of doing and charge everybody else to do.

They would do well to live from a posture of, “all of have sinned and fallen short” as Grace levels the playing field for everyone, and everyone needs Grace equally. They would do well to stop marginalizing, labeling, belittling, and treating as second class citizens those who sin (in their judgment) differently then they do. They would do well to proclaim that God loves, accepts, embraces, favors, and blesses all people far beyond what they could ever imagine. He is not angry, vengeful, waiting to punish, or licking His lips to pour out wrath, but rather, His love is deeper, wider, stronger, and more generous and scandalous than they ever imagined.

They would do well to teach, preach, declare and manifest Grace, and Grace alone. Shout it from the mountain tops. Let every word drip with Grace. Then and only then, will any one person, group, country, nation, or world change. This is the Gospel.

It’s all Grace, or it’s not the Gospel.

For I am not ashamed of this Good News about Christ. It is the power of God at work… Romans 1:16

Fr. Ernesto: Oikonomía, a better way to pastor

Note from CM: Today we welcome a longtime friend of Internet Monk, Father Ernesto, who shares with us how we might learn from ancient Orthodox tradition to help people with better pastoral care. Pastors, ministers, priests, and chaplains, I’d especially love to hear from you today, but I think it will also be important to process what Fr. Ernesto has to say from the standpoint of the non-ordained in the church. In my mind, it all goes back to Jesus, who critiqued the religious leaders of his days and told them, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.”

• • •

Oikonomía, a better way to pastor
by Fr. Ernesto Obregon

There was God’s Will to consider, and God was understood often to give people not what they wanted but what they needed. He dealt with people not according to fixed principles of justice but in ways that would best bring about each soul’s salvation. The Byzantine term for this was oikonomía, and it is still an important aspect of Orthodox Christian pastoral theology.

• Brian Patrick Mitchell,
Byzantine Empire—or Republic?
The American Conservative, August 7, 2015.

• • •

Oikonomía is a term that is difficult for many Orthodox to understand. But, I do not think that it is just us Orthodox. It is a concept that has been hard for both Old Testament and New Testament believers to understand. From Jonah saying to God that he just knew that God was going to forgive Nineveh, to Habakkuk being horrified that God planned to use incredibly evil sinners to discipline Israel, to the shock of those who expected Jesus to condemn the woman caught in adultery (or be accused of breaking the Law and be stoned himself), believers keep being shocked at what God decides is the best way to bring someone to Himself.

The author of the article points out the reason when he says, “He dealt with people not according to fixed principles of justice but in ways that would best bring about each soul’s salvation.” Americans have a strong built in idea that God is a law and order God. There is only one problem. That is not really what God seems to do in Scripture. He does support principles of justice. The prophets constantly rail against injustice. But, God’s purpose is to bring people into his kingdom. And, if a law appears to interfere with bringing someone into the Kingdom of God, then God has no problem in putting that law aside. Thus, the woman caught in adultery is forgiven outside the law because that unexpected forgiveness is precisely what she needs to hear in order to bring her into the Kingdom of God.

At the same time, this does not mean that God will always ameliorate punishment. The principle of oikonomía is also carried out if God chooses to be tougher on someone. Thus, in the Book of Habakkuk, the prophet finds that the best way to bring Israel back to obedience to God is for God to choose to use a thoroughly evil empire to attack Israel, destroy the majority of Israel, cause intense pain and suffering, and leave the country devastated. In some pastoral advice that Saint John Chrysostom gives, he tells the priest that they must judge the discipline that is applied to a sinner. Some sinners, he says, need to have their discipline lightened, lest they faint from weariness and leave the faith. But, some, he says, are hard-headed so that the only way to get their attention and bring change is for the pastor to apply a much harsher discipline than that which is specified by the canons. In all cases, the canon serves only as a guideline and not as a mandatory punishment. While it is true that in most cases Saint John Chrysostom urges a lightening of penalties, yet he makes it clear that some cases require the strengthening of penalties.

Oikonomía is hard to understand because it is not a simple reliance on written laws and guidelines, rather it is a reliance on a relationship based administration of godly guidelines. God understands people and God understands what will best work to give the best possibility that a person will truly come to him and be saved. In the same way, the bishop and his priests and deacons are called not to simply apply the canon, but to so come to know the person involved that when they apply the canon, they will do so in the way that is most likely to preserve that person’s salvation. Thus someone may be ordained much sooner than expected. A discipline for a sin committed by a church member may either be lightened or strengthened. But, at bottom, whatever action is taken must be based on a knowledge of a person and what will most help their journey to salvation.

Oikonomía is often challenged by people who think that if one is never sure how a canon will be applied that this will give too much liberty to a bishop or priest and that this will lead to unfairness and favoritism. What they fail to understand is that a strict adherence to a canon is precisely what will lead to something worse than unfairness, it will lead to death for all too many who fall under that canon. Even if unfairness creeps in, yet the practice of oikonomía will lead to more salvation than to too much unfairness. It is amazing how often people use the phrase, “it’s not fair,” to justify strict adherence to law and canons, even when such adherence leads to more death and less life.

Ultimately, the principle of oikonomía is a higher principle than the principle of law and order. Or, perhaps a much better way to phrase it is that the principle of oikonomía encompasses law and order as an ideal guideline that is modified as necessary in its application in order that the maximum number of people are saved. Sometimes it is modified and applied with much less strictness than the canon specifies, but sometimes it is modified with much heavier discipline than that canon specifies. In all cases, oikonomía looks only at what will bring that person to salvation. And that is a very hard concept for American to understand.

Please note, oikonomía does not allow a priest or bishop to do anything they wish. A woman may not be ordained a priest. An elective abortion may not be approved or blessed. Unjust wages may not be declared moral. Oikonomía is about salvation, not about permissiveness or lawlessness. That is why it is hard to understand.

Rob Grayson: The judgement of the cross

Note from CM: This week we will feature posts by several guest writers, starting today with our friend Rob Grayson from across the pond. You may find some of these posts to be a bit controversial, and I chose them because I thought they would prompt lively discussion. I ask you to think before you comment and commit to being good listeners and kind even if you happen to disagree. Let’s show some good iMonk hospitality to our guests.

One more note: in deference to British English, I retained Rob’s spelling of “judgement.”

• • •

The judgement of the cross
By Rob Grayson

“Now is the judgement of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out.”

• John 12:31

Christians are generally accustomed to speaking of the cross as the place and time where God enacted judgement on the world. But what does this actually mean, and what are its implications?

Usually, the cross as the place of judgement is understood to mean the physical location where God poured out his wrath upon Jesus. Here, wrath is understood as the punishment for our sin which God, in his justice, is obliged to mete out: namely death. And Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, gamely hangs on the cross in our place and bears the brunt of God’s implacable justice so that we, in spite of our sin, can escape punishment.

And the cross as the time of judgement is understood as the point in history when God sovereignly intervened in human affairs to solve humanity’s sin problem as described above.

So there we have it: time and place come together at the cross as Jesus bears God’s punishment for our sin. This, then, is the judgement of the cross: a resounding verdict of “Guilty!” pronounced upon the human race by God, accompanied by an unappealable death sentence. The twist is that Christ comes in as an innocent victim to serve the sentence in our place.

This is what I believed without a second thought for most of my Christian life. Until I began, through a process of reading and thinking, to see some gaping holes in it:

Continue reading “Rob Grayson: The judgement of the cross”

Sundays with Michael Spencer: August 9, 2015

The wedge contemporary evangelicals are driving between young and old is incredibly short sighted and deadly. Doesn’t the Bible itself say that the older should teach the younger? We’ve turned things around so that anything new (even if unproven) and appealing to the not yet mature, still developing young is trotted out as appropriate worship. More experienced, mature Christians who should be teaching the young about and sharing with them their great Christian heritage are instead asked to “get with it” or “get out.” The evangelical church will die if all it can do is try to keep up with secular culture and make its focus offering whatever the latest fads or glitz it can to “attract” the young as if the church were somehow dependent on a Christian advertising machine rather than God to draw people to Him.

• iMonk comment from “Jeff”

• • •

I took Denise to morning mass at Stella Maris (“Star of the Sea”) Roman Catholic Church in Moultrieville, SC. Almost 50 in attendance, of every age. Two priests. Two acolytes and two altar boys. Traditionalist. Ad orientem. Eucharist offered in one kind and most didn’t receive it in the hand. Lots of other traditionalist stuff happening. Several Latin masses during the month. All the little things.

I’m watching a father bring his 5 year old (?) to mass, take his hand and dip it in the water, make the cross for him, then take him to his seat and show him how to genuflect. Teenagers around me- apparently on retreat- are immersed in the various actions of Catholic worship, as are all the worshipers of every age this morning. Of course, adults of every age. Plenty of men. At least half or more of the congregation was male.

The traditionalist flavor of mass is more interesting to me, even in this low mass on a weekday, and I’ve read Ratzinger’s Spirit of the Liturgy and know where these priests are coming from. There’s a sign at the entrance to the church saying the parish can’t register any more members from outside their boundaries. Translation: traditionalism is popular down here in Charleston.

The whole idea of the daily mass, and the level of devotion one sees among so many Catholics such as those surrounding me, has to be of real interest to any post-evangelical. Evangelicalism is diverse, but as a movement it is simply engaging less and less with worship, spiritual formation, spiritual disciplines and any form of tradition. The multi-site, internet driven model combined with evangelicalism’s inherent pragmatism and entrepreneurialism makes one wonder if clicking at the computer terminal or taking in the 20 minute drive up/drop in service can be far away as significant models of evangelical Christianity’s virtues.

I am especially impressed with how a small child and an 80 year old man are functioning within the same world of thought, ritual and understanding. Within evangelicalism, we have communities with strong elements of tradition that bind generations together, but overall, we have compromised this to the core, allowing the quest to make the faith acceptable to teenagers to define the style and substance of everything. Where has evangelicalism gone in the last 60 years? Toward maturity and the core of the faith, or toward the latest efforts to be relevant to the young? The old among us are often those who manage to hang on amidst a hurricane of changes.

I see evangelicals doing less and less that will hold anyone in the faith into their 80s. If I were 80, I wouldn’t go near 99% of evangelical churches. The traditionalists somewhere would have me as a customer.

Saturday Ramblings, August 8, 2015

Hello, friends, and welcome to the weekend. Ready to Ramble?

We’re going to start with the beauty of God, reflected in the things He creates. Kansas photographer David Lane spent four months photographing the Milky Way over Yellowstone Park, and the result is a stunning night-time rainbow.

Continue reading “Saturday Ramblings, August 8, 2015”

Merton on Contemplative Prayer (3)

Hence monastic prayer, especially meditation and contemplative prayer, is not so much a way to find God as a way of resting in him whom we have found, who comes to us to draw us to himself.

• Thomas Merton
Contemplative Prayer, p. 5

• • •

In chapter two of Contemplative Prayer, Thomas Merton offers some helpful correctives to common misunderstandings of “the way of prayer” as practiced by monastics and offered to laypersons as well.

One thought in particular struck me as I read it:

It is part of a continuous whole, the entire unified life of the monk, conversatio monastica, his turning from the world to God. (p. 4)

The kind of prayer that Merton speaks of involves “a deep personal integration in an attentive, watchful listening of ‘the heart.'” (p. 5) And when Merton speaks of “silence,” it is not only a description of prayer’s setting, but rather as something that is in us, “wordless,” a stillness deep within, surrendered, renewed in the Spirit, “submissive to the grace of Christ.” Silent prayer is not merely “mental” prayer, but prayer of one’s whole being silently resting in God.

Merton is consciously speaking in more or less equivalent terms about what the Eastern Church has called “the prayer of the heart.” This kind of prayer, embodied for example in the “Jesus Prayer,” is described in the ancient classic, The Way of a Pilgrim. The anonymous pilgrim’s story begins with this testimony:

On the twenty-fourth Sunday after Pentecost I went to church to worship at the Liturgy. During the reading of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians [1 Thess. 5:17] I heard the following words: “Pray without ceasing.” This verse especially fixed itself in my mind, and I began to wonder how one could pray unceasingly, since each man must occupy himself with other matters as well, in order to make a living. I checked in the Bible, and read with my own eyes that which I had already heard: namely, that one should “pray without ceasing,” “pray at all times in the Spirit” [Eph. 6:18], and “in all places pray with uplifted hands” [1 Tim. 2:8]. I thought about this for some time but was unable to understand it.”

And so begins the pilgrim’s quest.

And so it becomes our quest as well, a journey described by Fr. Thomas Hopko in the introduction to The Way of a Pilgrim (Shambala Classics edition): a journey to discover that “life is communion with God: personal, direct, immediate, real, painful, peaceful, and joyful. …that ceaseless prayer in pursuit of God and communion with Him is not simply life’s meaning or goal, the one thing worth living for, but it is life itself. …that Jesus Christ is this life, and that constant, continual, ceaseless prayer in His name opens the door to Divine reality and puts us in immediate contact with the One who is the source, substance, and goal of our life, and our very life itself.”

In Contemplative Prayer, Thomas Merton likewise points to the example of St. Columba, the Celtic saint, who wrote:

That I might bless the Lord
Who conserves all —
Heaven and earth with its countless bright orders,
Land, strand and flood,
That I might search the books all
That would be good for any soul;
At times kneeling to beloved Heaven
At times psalm-singing;
At times contemplating the King of Heaven,
Holy the Chief;
At times at work without compulsion,
This would be delightful;
At times picking kelp from the rocks
At times fishing
At times giving food to the poor
At times in a carcair [solitary cell]. (p. 7)

In this way of prayer, no matter what we are actually doing at any given moment, we seek to be aware of the presence and goodness of God (who is present and good whether or not we are aware!), and to depend on him for breath and strength to live and love.

Teaching One Another: Jesus, Bread of Life

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

Then the Jews began to complain about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not complain among yourselves. No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me; and I will raise that person up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father. Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

• John 6:35, 41-51 (NRSV)
The Gospel for Sunday, Aug. 9, 2015

Help me with my sermon!

This Sunday, I will be preaching at a local Lutheran church on the Gospel text for the day: John 6:35, 41-51. It is a common practice in our synod for Lutheran pastors to get together on a weekday and discuss the sermon text for the coming week. Our friend David Cornwell has testified about the joy he has found participating in a similar weekday gathering, when church members come together with the pastor to work through the passage for Sunday and begin to meditate on its meaning and significance for their lives.

You, my fellow iMonks, are my community, and so I’m calling you to come together today and help me think through this Gospel message of Jesus. As with previous “Teaching One Another” posts, I’ll prime the pump and then give you the opportunity to give input.

Here are some of the things I’ve read about this text and how to preach on it from other students, teachers, and preachers. After reading these, thinking about them, and responding to them, perhaps you would like to share some of your own insights and ideas about the meaning of this text and how it can be presented effectively.

• • •

Craig A. Satterlee at Working Preacher. A key sentence in Satterlee’s sermon says, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and it can lead us to the wrong conclusions.” He focuses his attention on the complaining of the crowd and where it comes from. His observation is that they thought they knew too much and it kept them from hearing Jesus’ words. They knew their own history, they knew their scriptures, and they knew certain things about Jesus and his family. “The Judeans knew some things, but their knowing was limited, and they let it close their ears, shut their hearts, and limit their vision.”

Then Satterlee takes this observation and makes it personal:

So when are we like those Judeans? What issues reveal that we know too much about the Jesus of our traditions and not enough about the living Word God speaks to us now? When do we allow our knowledge of the history of the past to close our eyes to the working of God in the present? When are we looking and listening with open hearts? When are we willing to be drawn to the Bread of life, rather than put our trust in what we know?

• • •

Rev. Anne Paton from the Church of Scotland suggests illustrating this message with Hans Christian Andersen’s story of the Ugly Duckling. The crowds listening to Jesus could only see him as an “ugly duckling,” a small town preacher who came from Nazareth, from an ordinary home and parents. But appearances can be deceiving. Jesus knew that he had come from the Father and had seen the Father. He knew his true identity — he was a beautiful, powerful swan — and told his listeners that if they would listen to God rather than simply judge by what they saw with their own eyes, they would see the truth about him and come to him. Paton quotes this great line from a summary of Andersen’s story: “It does not matter in the least having been born in a duck yard, if only you come out of a swan’s egg!”

• • •

David Owen and Mark Smith. Like others they also note that the people in this story murmured against Jesus because “they were judging things by human and purely external standards.” Then they give examples of those who, in contrast, found God in unlikely people and places — such as Mother Teresa, who found the Lord in the “distressing disguise” of the poor.

They also observe that the people got distracted by their arguments, and that this caused them to miss what Jesus was trying to tell them.

Some of the people rejected Jesus and his message because they were arguing among themselves. They were so taken up with their arguments that they failed to do what matters most and take the matter to God. They were all too eager to have their point of view made known, but did not seem to care to deeply about what God had to say.

Throughout these reflections, there is an emphasis on “missing” Jesus because we allow other things to keep us from being “drawn” into God’s presence where he can teach and feed us.

• • •

Karyn L. Wiseman. Like many, Wiseman takes the opportunity when preaching about “bread” and Jesus’ “flesh and blood” from John 6 to discuss the sacrament and what it means to “feed on Jesus” and be nourished by faith in him. I really like the way she has illustrated and personalized this for us.

Granddad used to say we go to church on communion Sunday to feast on the bread and juice — on those and other Sundays we feast on the Word of God as well. He would say that “anyone who goes away hungry — it’s their own dang fault.” The feast is laid out, the invitation is given and the table is before us. So if we go away hungry, why did that happen? What is stopping us from joining in the feast?

…I am reminded of the times I have been at the table of Holy Communion receiving the bread and cup and was moved in such astonishing ways. One Sunday I was serving communion to my son, who was about 4 at the time. I offered him the bread, saying, “This is the bread of life,” and he looked up at me and said, “I want a BIG piece of Jesus.” He knew this was a feast. He was asking for what all of us have a hard time finding the words to request — more. More God, spiritual nourishment, connections to the Holy, hope, abundance, being part of the Body of Christ, bread that keeps us from hungering and belief that keeps us from thirsting.

When we go away hungry, according to my grandpa, it’s our own fault. So what stops us?

Are we moving toward “reconciled diversity”?

Two articles about Christian unity caught my attention this week.

The first, by Roger E. Olson, captures in its title what I believe is the heart and soul of what the pursuit of unity should actually entail: “True Christian Ecumenism: Reconciled Diversity.”

The scandal of disunity among Christians is not necessarily embodied in the existence of separate denominations. The “visible and institutional” unity for which ecumenists advocate need not mean that all congregations became united into, as Olson puts it, “one worldwide mega-church led by a bishop.” Variety is the spice of life, even among Christians, and the particularities of various Christian groups — “within the limits of basic Christian orthodoxy and worship that is decent and in order” — are to be valued and even loved, says Roger Olson. Rather than forcing everyone to sing in unison, he suggests the goal should be harmonious and cooperative relationships between church groups and traditions, for the purposes of fellowship, intercommunion, and common mission.

During my lifetime I have observed many Christian denominations gradually dropping the barriers they had erected, or taking down the barriers others erected against them, in order to experience reconciled diversity. This is, in my opinion, true realistic Christian ecumenism.

In my opinion, the unity Jesus prayed for among his followers and those who would come after them, their converts and heirs as Christian leaders, is consistent with different opinions about secondary matters. Having “the mind of Christ” does not mean all thinking exactly alike about everything—at least in this world where we all see “through a glass darkly.” Certainly in the eschaton things will be different and we should remain uncomfortable, in this “time between the times,” with any differences among real Christians that keep us from embracing one another as fellow citizens of the Kingdom of God.

But, in the meantime, before that Kingdom comes in its fullness, we can and should find ways to celebrate our differences about secondary matters of the faith while enjoying true fellowship in worship, communion, and mission. That means, in practice, avoiding making an idol out of denominational identity, remaining open to learning from other Christian traditions (e.g., as a Baptist I have come to embrace the Eastern Orthodox vision of “deification”), opening the Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper, to all who confess Jesus as God and Savior, and reconsidering doctrines and practices that have developed that are divisive and have no clear biblical basis.

This is part of the “post-evangelicalism” that I myself have embraced. This kind of “ecumenism” is also part of the ethos of Internet Monk, as stated in the updated description of our site: “A post-evangelical, ecumenical, pastoral, and contemplative site devoted to maintaining a legacy of Jesus-shaped Christianity.” It fits nicely with C.S. Lewis’s illustration of the great common hall off of which the various “rooms” of Christian tradition sit.

Yes, I agree with Roger Olson: we can have our own rooms, but we can also all get together in the hall, and it’s perfectly okay to visit one another’s rooms as well. In fact, it would be fantastic if we all just left the house once in awhile — together — and hung out with our neighbors down at the pub.

• • •

The second article, mentioned by Scot McKnight at Jesus Creed, is by Luke Coppen at The Catholic Herald, and is called, “The Pope’s great evangelical gamble.”

It starts off with a bang.

Somewhere in Pope Francis’s office is a document that could alter the course of Christian history. It declares an end to hostilities between Catholics and Evangelicals and says the two traditions are now “united in mission because we are declaring the same Gospel.” The Holy Father is thinking of signing the text in 2017, the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, alongside Evangelical leaders representing roughly one in four Christians in the world today.

02peter_and_paul_icon Coppen goes on to say that the Pope believes the Reformation officially ended when the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church signed “The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” in 1999.

And, it gives some personal history about Francis’s growing involvement with evangelicals in recent years. When he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Francis began attending gatherings of Catholics and evangelicals/pentecostals, and in 2006 he even knelt on a stage while Protestant pastors prayed over him and asked God to fill him with the Holy Spirit. After that, he began meeting with the evangelical pastors monthly. The article describes his relationship with Tony Palmer, who is part of the “Convergence” movement, which “seeks to blend charismatic worship with a more historically grounded liturgy and understanding of the sacraments.” In a video recorded by Palmer and shown to a group of evangelicals in the U.S., the Pope declared, “The miracle of unity has begun!” In addition, in his travels Francis has publicly asked forgiveness from some evangelical groups for past Catholic persecution.

The article goes on to express doubts about how many evangelical groups will receive all this, even if the Pope were to sign the declaration of unity. In the meantime, Luke Coppen reiterates that Francis is encouraging Catholics everywhere to be more “evangelical” in the practice of their faith, and is including evangelicals in an ongoing dialogue as brothers and sisters.

• • •

Since I still meet people almost every week who distinguish between “Catholics” and “Christians,” I know from experience that much of this will fail to translate or even reach the ears of many, many who long ago decided that Jesus won’t have anything to do with the Catholic church. I’m sure many Catholics feel the same way toward the Protestants.

And these articles do not address the even older issue of healing the Great Schism between East and West. But Pope Francis is not unaware of that either. The rising secular tide throughout the world as well as crises in the Middle East and the impact they have had on ancient Christian communities have his attention, and he has called for closer ties between Catholics and Orthodox “to defend the poor, to end war and heal conflicts, and to help young people to see past materialism and to embrace a ‘true humanism.'”

I’m encouraged when I read pieces like this. And should a leader like Pope Francis step forward and convince us to actually do something about Christian unity, well then perhaps God will use it to create something new in this old and broken world.