The Internet Monk Archives

A Long Way from the Lake

The Calling of Saint Peter and Saint Andrew, Tissot

As Jesus walked along the shore of Lake Galilee, he saw two brothers who were fishermen, Simon (called Peter) and his brother Andrew, catching fish in the lake with a net. Jesus said to them, “Come with me, and I will teach you to catch people.” At once they left their nets and went with him.

He went on and saw two other brothers, James and John, the sons of Zebedee. They were in their boat with their father Zebedee, getting their nets ready. Jesus called them, and at once they left the boat and their father, and went with him.

– Matthew 4:18-22, GNT

* * *

I like James Tissot’s painting of this Bible story. Though I think the artist overdid it when it comes to Jesus and his clothing, I find his depictions of young Peter and Andrew delightful.

Tissot made visits to the Holy Land in the 1880’s and saw then that fishermen used their nets in the shallows next to the shoreline to catch fish. Believing that the same method would have enabled Peter and Andrew to hear Jesus calling them from the nearby land, he portrayed them in similar position. He also observed that the fishermen wore nets around their waists in which to put the fish they caught so they could carry them easily, and so he included that in his depiction as well.

What I like most about this painting is the way James Tissot has captured the realistic physiques and body language of the two young disciples. You can see their boyish vigor as well as a bit of their eagerness and awkwardness, and you get a sense of their youthful curiosity about the Stranger calling to them — the One who is on the verge of changing their vocation and setting them on a new course for the rest of their lives.

And now I feel old.

I well remember the season when I splashed to shore as a young man, casting my nets aside for Jesus. At that time (believe it or not) I was trim and fit. I was also eager and awkward, ready without question to try anything, to walk any road. With lots of zeal and a little bit of knowledge, Jesus and a lot of gracious people gave me a chance. They didn’t laugh at my youthful appearance, they put up with my childish mistakes, and they were somehow willing to affirm my vocation as a minister. With feet still wet from the lake and a lot of wet behind the ears, I tromped into the church and into their living rooms and we talked about Jesus.

It all felt just as simple as that.

That was over 35 years ago. There are many days now when I wonder if this “follow me” business is strictly a young person’s game. Whatever eagerness I had then too often feels like “been there, done that” now. The awkwardness I currently exhibit is not that of a young athlete coming into his game, but of a man who increasingly looks for the railing to hold on to when descending the stairs. I’ve got shoes on now and they are dry and comfortable, and I tend to be cautious about someone — anyone — trying to change my life out of the blue.

I’ve been thinking these thoughts lately in a kind of mid-life fog. The kids are grown and out of the house. They have climbed up out of the water and are starting to walk their own paths. A lot of our friends have moved on to other things in other places. Our daily work goes on, and though the work is satisfying and meaningful, I can’t help but feeling there must be more out there for me, for us. Perhaps my recent efforts toward being ordained in a different church tradition will make clear a new path, but for now I wait.

This is turning into an unexpectedly difficult transition. I am finding the reinvention of one’s self that accompanies mid-life much more challenging than I ever thought it would be. It used to be pretty clear to me who I was. I was one of those young men in James Tissot’s painting. I heard the call. I looked up. Eagerly, awkwardly, I splashed to shore and went on an amazing journey.

But we’re a long way from the lake now.

I keep waiting for Jesus to pass by this dry and weary place.

Saturday Ramblings, January 25, 2014

A student in Canada has renewed discussion about how far universities and other institutions should go in order to honor religious viewpoints. The young man in question refuses to attend classes or discussions where women might be present. “One of the main reasons that I have chosen Internet courses to complete my BA is due to my firm religious beliefs, and part of that is the intermingling between men and women,” the student wrote in explaining his refusal to meet with a discussion group. The professor was ordered by the Dean to accommodate the young man, whose religion was not identified. Presumably, it was not Unitarian.

From the “we Christians aren’t the only ones with a lunatic fringe” department, comes the story of a Satanist musician murdered for not being Satanist enough. Apparently the murderer felt the musician’s lack of faith disturbing, and said it was “tarnishing” Satanism.

By the way, the murdered musican’s bandmates posted a “hellbook” announcement, in which they encouraged their fallen comrade to “have a rest down there brother”. And they say Satanists aren’t thoughtful…

Phillip Yancey says there is a new genre of books: Christian Hip. These are penned by authors who “came out of a strict evangelical or fundamentalist background, and they write about their spiritual detours in a loose, memoir-type style with a few obligatory bad words sprinkled in.” I suppose we should throw previous offerings of Donald Miller and Rachel Held Evans and their ilk in this camp as well. Yancey sums up the best of the recent books. It’s a short list.

A Victoria’s Secret store came under fire for banning breast-feeding. After buying $150 worth of lingerie, Ashley Clawson was told she couldn’t feed her crying infant son in one of the dressing rooms; an employee helpfully directed her to an alley outside the store. Clawson felt this was sadly ironic for a company dedicated to “celebrating women’s bodies” and said the attitude conveyed was, “if you are a mom you don’t have a right to feel sexy.” Or perhaps the type of women’s bodies they celebrate (and the way they celebrate them) undermines the notion that women’s bodies should be valued for anything other than their sexual appeal to men.

An Albany man was convicted of murdering his wife because she was not sufficiently supportive of his new-found interest in Islam. At some point the man apparently took his wife’s cellphone and text-messaged naked pictures of her to all her contacts. One text said: “I’m so evil I tried to contract AIDS and give it to my loving and caring husband.” Another text stated: “I’m sorry everyone but I pretend like I’m a Muslim when in all reality I’m a (prostitute) and I represent Satan.” Seems legit.

Proving craziness does not discriminate (even when people do), two middle-aged men were arrested for attempting to build a portable X-Ray device that shoots radioactive beams at Muslims, as well as N.Y. Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

70’s pop stars Captain and Tenille announced their divorce this week. They were best known for their song, Love Will Keep us Together. Hmmm. In any case, I best remember the duo for their incredibly profound Muskrat Love. This sublime ballad forever speaks to the deepest and holiest part of my soul:

Such erudation. So sagacity. Such grammar. And besides, without this gem, I would have gone through my teens years never knowing that muskrats dined on bacon and cheese.

I have previously argued that Imagine is the most over-rated song in the history of the universe. Remembering that Muskrat Love actually climbed to Billboard’s number 4 spot, I am now open to reconsidering that.

Continue reading “Saturday Ramblings, January 25, 2014”

When Science Changes…

In the year 1543, just before he died, Nicolaus Copernicus published “De revolutionibus orbium coelestium”. This treatise, in development for nearly 30 years, advanced the idea that the earth revolved around the sun (heliocentrism), rather than the long held idea that the earth was the center of the universe. It is unclear whether Reformer John Calvin was aware of Copernicus, but it is clear that Calvin still held to the idea that the Earth was fixed in place, and everything else moved around it. In 1554, in his introduction to his commentary on Genesis he wrote:

We indeed are not ignorant, that the circuit of the heavens is finite, and that the earth, like a little globe, is placed in the center.

Luther on the other hand, was clearly aware of Copernicus, and clearly did not accept his theories. He had this to say about Copernicus:

People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. This fool…wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.

Luther made this statement in 1539, four years before Copernicus’ book was published, but Copernicus’ ideas had already been circulating in Germany for quite some time.

For the most part Copernicus’ ideas were largely ignored by the church for decades. It was a theory that was easily defeated with a strong apologetic. The matter came to a head in 1616 when the Catholic church considered banning the works of Copernicus. The astronomer Galileo traveled to Rome to try to persuade the church not to do so. Galileo, while not the inventor of the telescope, had been using it to confirm Copernicus’ work. The church did not accept his arguments and Galileo was eventually convicted of heresy in 1633. He died in 1642, almost 100 years after Copernicus.

The year Galileo died, another future scientist was born, Isaac Newton. It was Newton’s work on gravity, published in 1687, that gave the conclusive supporting evidence for Copernicus’ theory. The church realized that it had to reinterpret the Bible based upon this new evidence. It was not until 1758, 71 years later, that books supporting heliocentrism were taken off the banned list by the Catholic church, and not until 1835, another 77 years, that the original works on the topic by Copernicus and Galileo were “unbanned.”

It had taken the church over 200 years to come to terms with Copernicus’ ideas.

The world is a lot smaller today, ideas fly faster, and technology is advancing at an exponential rate. In thirteen years the cost of sequencing a human genome has gone from $100,000,000 to $1,000. Which of course brings me my second topic. Evolution.

Darwin published his origin of the species in 1859. From Copernicus to Newton was 144 years. From Darwin to the completion of the human genome project in 2003 is 144 years. (I just made that connection now as I was writing this.) We are in what I would call the Newtonian age of Evolution. The point at which the streams of evidence have become irrefutable. How long will it take the church to accept this and change their interpretations to fit the science? The change has already started to happen. For most young people, Christian and non Christian alike, the matter has already been decided. Like heliocentrism, it will take a couple of generations for the science to be nearly universally accepted in the church, but its day is coming.

This brings me to my final thought. I have been reading a lot of Rachel Held Evans recently. What you have read here has come about though interacting with her material. In our sidebar we have linked to her post The Bible was ‘clear’. She writes:

It’s easy to look down our noses at the Christians who have come before us and discount them as unenlightened and uninformed. But to accept Galileo’s thesis, our 17th century forbearers would have had to reject 1600 years of traditional Christian interpretations of passages like Psalm 93:1, Ecclesiastes 1:5, and Joshua 10:12-14.

It was another post on slavery from a year ago that really caught my attention:

I think it’s important to remind ourselves now and then that we’ve been wrong before, and that sometimes it’s not about the number of proof texts we can line up or about the most simplistic reading of the text, but rather some deep, intrinsic sense of right and wrong, some movement of the Spirit, that points us toward truth and to a better understanding of what Scripture really says.

The clearest association I make, of course, is with the gender equality discussion within evangelicalism—not only because it’s an issue near to my heart, but also because we are dealing with many of the same biblical texts. But I wonder about other things too—about homosexuality, for example—and I confess I spend some nights lying awake, watching the lights from passing cars make strange shapes on my walls, wondering if we’ve done it again, if we’ve marginalized another group of people because we believed the Bible told us to.

That is what causes me to lie awake as well. When it comes to the churches attitude and beliefs about Homosexuality I can’t help but wonder if we are in another Copernicus moment. Science hasn’t completely settled the question yet, but it certainly seems to be pointing in a certain direction. I don’t think we have to wait for Newton this time. Perhaps Galileo will do.

Ken Smith on the David Jang Controversy

Note from CM: Ken Smith is an independent journalist from Washington state who was gracious enough to send us a post on a subject we thought might be of interest to iMonk readers. In September 2012, he teamed up with Ted Olsen at Christianity Today to publish two articles on what they called “The Second Coming Christ Controversy.” Here are the links to those articles:

Ken has also written about the subject of these articles, David Jang, on his blog: Confessions of a Would-Be Theologian. I’m grateful for this update for our readers. Thanks also to Dan Jepsen, who contacted Ken and facilitated getting today’s post for IM.

* * *

I still remember the first phone call, sometime during the spring of 2012. The voice on the other end was quiet and nervous. “I’m a member of David Jang’s community,” he said, and I could almost hear him swallowing hard. “I’ve been reading the posts on your blog about David Jang. And there’s something you need to know.”

It’s very strange how these things get started.

When my alma mater, Bethany University, finally acquiesced to its financial troubles of long standing, the alumni took it hard. So when it was announced that an offer had been made to acquire not just the campus, but also the name and even the legal corporation, all of us who loved our very imperfect school were relieved. Olivet University, another small Bible college located in San Francisco, was going to move in by the fall, and had pledged to continue Bethany’s name and mission.

Those alumni who still felt close to the school were naturally curious about Bethany’s new owners, and a few of us started digging around. One person described them as “a bunch of rich Korean Pentecostals,” and that naturally piqued our interest. How many of those are there in the world?

The school’s website was helpful. Olivet University, we read, was associated with the Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches, and was founded in 2000 by a man named David Jang, a Korean pastor and theologian. OK, fine. But who is David Jang? Back to Google.

This is where it all turned unexpected. Because the first thing we turned up was some Japanese blog dedicated to proving that David Jang was the leader of a dangerous cult whose members believed he was some sort of “Second Coming Christ”. And then another Japanese blog dedicated to proving that the author of the first blog was himself a dangerous nut-job. And then some wild he-said/she-said debate over on an anti-cult website, with accusations and spelling errors flying like kicks in a low-budget kung fu movie.

OK, we all thought. That was strange. You sure do find some weird stuff out in the dark corners of the Internet. But it was clear there wasn’t really any chance that the “Second Coming Christ” accusations could be true. After all, Olivet’s denomination, the EAPC, was a member of the World Evangelical Alliance, a reputable organization that in one form or another went back to the mid 1800’s. Olivet’s president, William Wagner, was a lifelong Southern Baptist missionary, and was once even a candidate for president of the SBC. I even tracked down and talked to the pastor at one of their churches, Paul de Vries, a former professor of ethics at Wheaton. You simply don’t get those kinds of endorsements unless you’re reasonably orthodox.

And that was a good thing. Because we quickly learned that the Christian Post, owned and operated by members of Jang’s community, was perhaps the world’s largest Christian news website, with the formidably Baptist Richard Land as its executive editor. The International Business Times, also owned and operated by members of Jang’s community, was an equally large and popular secular news property. And lots of other popular Christian websites and organizations – Apostolos Campus Ministries, Young Disciples of Jesus, Breathecast, Diakonos, Ecumenical News, Gospel Herald, the Holy Bible Society, Christian Today (not Christianity Today) – as well as secular websites and companies – Veremedia, Veritas Legal Society, Stevens Books, Yibada – were also owned and controlled by members of Jang’s community.

Still, there were things about Olivet that bothered me – you can be as big and orthodox as you like and still have problems – and I wrote about those things on my blog. And then I got the chance to write about Olivet threatening to sue me because of that post, and the resulting kerfuffle led to several more posts over the ensuing months. By the spring of 2012, though, I was ready to let the thing drop. How many posts can you really write about a big distributed organization with some weird websites?

That’s when I got the phone call.

It was a former member of David Jang’s community. And the first thing he had to tell me was that I was wrong. The group really did teach that David Jang was a “second Christ”, he said. This wasn’t just something he had heard second-hand. He himself had made that confession, and to a senior member of David Jang’s community, to a name I recognized.

I was gobsmacked.

This member and I talked many times, and for many hours, but it wasn’t until a second former member emailed me, and then a third, and then a fourth, and then lots and lots more, that my confusion was able to resolve itself into anything coherent.

Continue reading “Ken Smith on the David Jang Controversy”

A Poorly Developed Picture

I have seen an article promoted in recent days around the web called “The Church’s Frightful Kodak Moment.” After reading it, I posted the link on the IM Bulletin Board and today I will say a few words about it, not because I agree with the piece, but because it is important for all of us to see that the corporate-marketing ethos and mentality of church growth in evangelical Christianity is still alive and strong.

Thom Schultz founded Group Publishing, a popular source for youth and children’s curriculum and teaching materials in evangelical congregations. He and his blog, Holy Soup, are described like this:

Thom Schultz is an eclectic author and the founder of Group Publishing and Lifetree Café. Holy Soup offers innovative approaches to ministry, and challenges the status quo of today’s church.

[Thom] now devotes much of his time to innovating breakthrough ways to connect regular people to God.

Schultz tells what he considers to be a parable of warning for the church. Touring the formerly flourishing but now mostly empty campus of a Kodak manufacturing plant, he makes a number of observations from which he thinks the church can learn.

Though Kodak invented digital photography, they didn’t appreciate its potential because they were a company built upon film technology.

This led them to misperceive their mission. Because they thought they were in the film business rather than the imaging business, they clung to traditional methodology and “clouded their ability to think about the real objective and outcome of their work.”

They failed to accurately read the times, the pace of change, and the character of the culture that would embrace digital photography and leave print technology behind.

They became victims of their own success, “clinging to what worked in the past at the expense of embracing the future. “

Schultz think churches are prone to make the same mistakes. For example, he writes:

Many church leaders believe they’re in the traditional preaching business, the teaching business, the Sunday morning formula business. Clinging to the ways these things have been done diverts the focus from the real mission of helping people today develop an authentic and growing relationship with the real Jesus.

And:

A pastor in our upcoming documentary, When God Left the Building, said his church will not make any changes to become more effective because someone will inevitably object and get upset. “We abdicate every time,” he said. “We just can’t lose any more members.” That congregation is already dead. They just don’t know it.

So, Thom Schultz suggests that the church learn from Kodak’s failures. This is our “Kodak moment,” he warns. Unless we (1) accept the reality that things are changing and churches are declining, (2) give up trying to simply “tweak” what we do and instead focus on “revolutionizing,” and (3) take risks by acting now and experimenting with bold new ideas, we face a future like Kodak experienced.

Therefore, Schultz exhorts us to re-examine everything we’re doing. To ask big questions. To step out and try something. To boldly step into the future because that’s where God is moving.

Etc. etc. etc.

To which I say, with all due respect, “Yawn.”

This is not challenging the status quo. This is the very definition of the status quo when it comes to evangelicalism, and it has been at least since Thom Schultz started writing youth curriculum back in the 1970’s. It’s the same old church growth mantra: “Change or die!” It’s the same old focus on “catching the next wave” and riding it into the future. It’s the same old emphasis on “relevance” and “effectiveness” and “success.”

Though he tries to convince us that the church is hopelessly committed to outmoded methodologies, the only example he uses is that people may have grown tired of the Sunday morning worship show (with which I agree). He also throws out some lines about encouraging people’s spiritual vitality rather than mere attendance (with which I also agree).

But what is so status quo and stale are the lame “answers” he suggests. Let’s get creative! Let’s brainstorm! Let’s think outside the box! Let’s do something different! Let’s be revolutionary! Let’s be bold! Let’s be proactive! Innovate, innovate, innovate!

Look.

Kodak is a business. The church is not.

Kodak sells products. The church does not.

Kodak competes with other businesses in a realm of technology and in a commercial marketplace that is constantly changing, demanding innovation in order for the business to make profits. The church does not.

The church is not a business, and the experience of commercial institutions like Kodak does not provide appropriate lessons for “making the church more effective.” I don’t find that phrase helpful in any way whatsoever. We do not and cannot control our “effectiveness” by means of better methodology. Continuing to think like this will only lead us farther away from the church’s true mission, in which Jesus is central and vital, and farther down a path which is all about making a name for ourselves and building our own proprietary kingdoms™.

The church is about Jesus. The church is about life. The church is about people. The church is about the grace of God flowing into human lives and making us more human (not more “effective”). As human beings made new in Jesus, we live among our neighbors with faith, hope, and love. Like Jesus, we lay down our lives so that others might live.

Even if our church buildings and institutions become empty Kodak-like campuses, and are ineffective, uncreative, having no form or comeliness that make them attractive, with no organizational or institutional beauty that people should find them desirable, by God’s own simple and creative means — people of faith loving their neighbors — God will bring life and health and peace and build the church.

Thom Schultz’s article represents the same tired evangelical thinking about the church’s mission and methodology: imagining that what we’re about requires relying on “spiritual technology” to “connect people to God” and build “effective” churches. It’s just plain bad theology, folks.

In fact, it is nothing less than an ongoing denial of Jesus’ words about the organic nature of the Kingdom, which involves seeds falling into the ground and dying so that they may bear fruit and bring forth life.

Though all the world go digital and beyond, building gleaming towers that reach to the heavens, the mission of Jesus proceeds with a quiet, unstoppable tenacity at ground level.

Get the picture?

iMonk Classic: To Do the Best with What We Have

To Do the Best with What We Have
A Classic Michael Spencer Post
From January 2008

The following incident is fictionalized from real experience.

I look at my watch. It’s time for a counseling appointment. I clear my desk, bring in the extra chairs and wait.

My appointment arrives and the conversation begins. This is a first time conversation, with someone I don’t know. I spend a lot of time listening. Then questions. More listening. I try to put what I’m hearing into some kind of order; to make some kind of helpful response.

I’m not a quick thinker. My feelings are always way out in front of my thoughts. So I have to be cautious in counseling to be sure I’m doing what’s needed and helpful.

My counselee says the conversation has been helpful. He leaves. It’s been an hour and fifteen minutes. Longer than I like, but not unusual for a first conversation.

What did I hear? I heard what it means to do the best with what you have, as God brings all things into himself through Jesus Christ.

I hear about a broken marriage. Silence. Distance. Public pretense. I hear about broken children. The fear of what’s next and the impact of what has already been. I hear about ministry; a ministry that goes on under stress that’s unimaginable to me.

I hear about faith and its stumbling steps to do what is right. I hear of guilt, the certain knowledge that one has fallen short. I hear the cry for restoration of broken relationships; the longing for Christian community and the church to be what family and friends have failed to be.

I hear about secrets and the reluctance to speak of them. I hear of the learned response of looking away; the habit of staying busy; of attending to “real life” and never looking at the inner world. I hear of the pain of sin’s lingering work, its blindness creating deception and its deep roots that drive us away from God, others and even ourselves.

I hear of persistent belief in God, prayer, the Bible, the work of the Spirit. I hear the ache for a pronouncement of forgiveness.

I hear the mystery of God’s call to be a servant and a minister when life is broken. I hear the mystery of God’s presence in the midst of brokenness that is not healed and darkness that does not lift. Yet, I hear of love for others and a simple, loyal, persistent love for Jesus and for the people Jesus loved.

I hear about doing the best you can with what you have, even when what you have is broken, wounded and bleeding from our human frailties and cruelties.

The world loves to point out hypocrisy among Christians. I want to point out the inexplicable, amazing absurdity of people who continue on with Jesus when any rational, reasonable person would abandon all hope. Of course, love is not reasonable or rational. Love suffers long, all the while rejoicing in the truth.

If you are a person who believes that all ministers and their families are picture postcards, let me break this to you gently: many ministers and their families are living in hell, and you don’t know it. Perhaps right in front of you. For them, the ride to church to face you may have filled them with fear that somehow you might see past their facade and into the failure and hurt.

The tendency these days is to project the image of the minister as young, absurdly happy, socially perfect and free from care and hang-ups. In fact, many ministers are living lives of pain and facing situations that would make you wince, if not curse. The price of being the shepherd of Christ is often high; so high ordinary persons could seldom stand to see it.

Perhaps some Christians are masochists. Or truly warped from being around so much need and paying too little attention to their own lives. I cannot say what is motivating an individual person to carry burdens that would break others, and do to it for the sake of Christ, his gospel and his church.

Part of me wants to say “Go fix your marriage. Be 100% available to your kids. Let the ministry go for a while.” That’s probably very good advice.

But another part of me senses that brokenness is part of ministry, and it is not for me to say to God or another person what forms of brokenness should stop the show, and what others can be carried on and through.

I do know that my eyes are opened, again and again, to the immense pain that surrounds me in the Christian family. So many of God’s servants are hurting in their body, families, marriages and in ways I cannot label or identify.

Yet these are some of God’s best servants and most Christ-filled saints. Some of his most useful, loving people. The crucible does not need to be approved by me or you to be effective. God chooses his own instruments, preparing, sharpening and equipping them as He chooses. His agenda is Jesus. Mine would be comfort, wholeness, happiness and so forth, with Jesus as the end result. God is only interested in making us like Jesus.

So the cross, and the instruments of crucified glory, are his doing. I am a listener; an observer.

I bow my head and pray for what I’ve heard and seen. I will do so many times in the future as I realize I am watching, in the midst of pain, a kind of holiness that is only a rumor for me.

We do the best with what we have given to us, or what we have left over or with what still works after the latest wreck. And God forms Christ in us, brings Christ through us, glorifies Christ in us and all in all.

In such colors, the Spirit paints the Incarnation every day, and presents the painting to the Father. And each picture looks more and more like the Jesus we have never seen with our eyes.

Or have we?

MLK on the Church

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
January 20, 2014

Today, we present an excerpt from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, written April 16, 1963. King wrote this in response to a public statement that had been made by eight white Alabama clergymen, who disapproved of Dr. King and his methods of civil disobedience.

There is much we could focus on in this letter, but today let’s hear MLK’s words regarding the church of his day. Perhaps they can help us reflect upon the contemporary church, the challenges facing her, and how we as the people of God might “do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with [our] God” (Micah 6:8) in our own communities today.

* * *

In deep disappointment, I have wept over the laxity of the Church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the Church; I love her sacred walls. How could I do otherwise? I am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson, and the great grandson of preachers. Yes, I see the Church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and fear of being nonconformists.

There was a time when the Church was very powerful. It was during that period when the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the Church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.” But they went on with the conviction that they were a “colony of heaven” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” They brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest.

Things are different now. The contemporary Church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the archsupporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the Church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the Church’s silent and often vocal sanction of things as they are.

But the judgment of God is upon the Church as never before. If the Church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early Church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. I am meeting young people every day whose disappointment with the Church has risen to outright disgust.

Maybe again I have been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world?

* * *

King, Dr. Martin Luther; Thoreau, Henry David (2011-03-12). On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Thoreau & Letter from Birmingham Jail by King (Kindle Locations 566-581). Final Arbiter. Kindle Edition.

Homily for Second Sunday after Epiphany

Jacopo-del-Sellaio-XX-St-John-the-Baptist-1485-XX-Museum-of-Fine-Arts-Budapest — St. John the Baptist, Jacopo del Sellaio

John Testifies to Jesus
A sermon for the second Sunday after Epiphany, 2014

The next day he saw Jesus coming towards him and declared, ‘Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, “After me comes a man who ranks ahead of me because he was before me.” I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel.’ And John testified, ‘I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” And I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God.’

– John 1:29-34

“Thus, John unfolds for us here on the lips of John the Baptist a whole christology.” (R.E. Brown)

* * *

Today’s Gospel text is the second of three texts, presented as three speeches and actions of John the Baptist that took place over three days:

1:19-23 – John testifies about himself.
1:24-29 – John testifies about Jesus.
1:30-42 – John sends his disciples to follow Jesus.

Thus, the Gospel transitions from the one who “was not the light” but who came to “testify to the light” (1:8). From here on, the story will focus intently on Jesus.

In this testimony, John the Baptist first points to Jesus as the Lamb of God. In his commentary on John, Raymond Brown points out three possible referents for Jesus as the Lamb.

First, in Jewish apocalyptic literature, the Lamb is a conquering King who destroys the world’s evil. This is reflected in other Johannine texts such as Revelation 17:14 – “…they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.”

As we read in the Gospels, John the Baptist proclaimed coming judgment and linked it with the One who would come after him. This vision of the conquering Lamb could well have been on his mind when he pointed to Jesus and said, “Behold the Lamb of God.” If this is at least part of what he meant, then for Jesus to “take away the sin of the world” would include the destruction of evil at the putting right of the world.

Second, in Isaiah’s prophecies, YHWH’s Servant is the one who is led like a lamb to the slaughter, taking the sins of the people upon himself (Isa. 53). John’s Gospel does make connection between Jesus and that particular Servant Song in Isaiah (see John 12:38). “Lamb” would then point to Jesus as the suffering Servant.

Third, John may be referring to Jesus as the paschal (Passover) Lamb. The Fourth Gospel is well known for its Passover symbolism. Brown lists some of the most prominent:

Jesus was condemned at the moment the priests began slaying the paschal lambs (19:14).
Jesus was offered a drink on hyssop, the plant used to spread the doors of the Israelites with the lambs’ blood at the first Passover (19:29).
John 19:36 makes special mention that none of Jesus’ bones were broken, a reference to a requirement for the paschal lamb.

In other Johannine literature such as Revelation, the conquering Lamb mentioned earlier is specifically the Lamb who was slain, whose blood provides a ransom, to whom the Song of Moses is sung, and who provided living waters for his people (see Rev. 5:6, 15:3, 7:17, 22:1, 5:9).

In worship, as we come forward to take communion each week, we sing, “Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world, have mercy on us, grant us peace.” We, like John the Baptist’s first disciples, take our cue from his testimony. Pointed to Jesus, we rise and go to him.

Secondly, in his testimony John the Baptist points to Jesus as the preeminent One. He does this by insisting that Jesus existed before him and thus holds a higher rank than the Baptist.

It may be that this reflects, as do other passages in John and elsewhere, that some of the followers of John the Baptist had become sectarian and considered themselves his disciples rather than Jesus’. The Fourth Gospel strongly emphasizes that John had to decrease and Jesus had to increase, and that John encouraged or even sent his disciples to follow Jesus and not him. He was not the light; he testified to the true light.

This may also have to do with the situation of the community out of which this Gospel was written. Traditionally, the apostle John is linked with the church at Ephesus. Acts 19 shows us that John had a strong group of disciples when Paul journeyed there and that under his ministry they were baptized into Jesus and received the Holy Spirit. Perhaps the issue of following John the Baptist vs. following Jesus remained a live issue when the Gospel was composed.

The point is clear: only Jesus is central, primary, and worthy of ultimate allegiance. This story remains a constant reminder that other loyalties are secondary. Church history and contemporary Christianity is littered with examples of people who confuse other agendas with following Jesus alone.

Third, John the Baptist points to Jesus as the one anointed by the Spirit, the Son of God. John’s baptism of Jesus is not directly mentioned here; John only highlights one aspect of the event. He testifies that God had revealed to him how he would recognize the Messiah — he would be the one upon whom the Spirit descended and rested. And so it came to pass.

John took this to mean what all the Gospel witness: Jesus is the Son of God, that is the Messiah, the anointed King for whom Israel waited (see, for example, Psalm 2). Isaiah also pointed to him as the one who would possess the Spirit (Isa. 11:2). As the Gospel proceeds, we will hear Jesus talk more and more about the Spirit, because he is not only the one upon whom the Spirit rests, but the one who will baptize others with the Spirit. In particular, in the Upper Room Discourses of John 13-17, Jesus talks to the disciples about his going away and sending “another Paraclete” to be with them and in them forever.

The presence of the Holy Spirit is the mark of God’s creative work. From “the beginning” when the Spirit of God hovered over the waters of chaos, to the days of John when the Spirit came down upon the waters of the Jordan at Jesus’ baptism, to the baptismal font, where the Holy Spirit creates new life and identity for each believer, from beginning to end God’s salvation comes to pass through the Spirit’s work. From creation to new creation, he brings life and health and peace to God’s people by uniting us with Jesus.

In these dark and cold days of winter, may our hearts be warmed and strengthened by the ongoing nourishment of feeding upon Jesus: Lamb of God, preeminent one, possessor and bestower of the Spirit.

Saturday Ramblings 2.0 — 1/18/14

Hello, iMonk friends. This is Chaplain Mike and I have asked my good friend Daniel Jepsen to lead us in our weekly clean-up of the monastery. Dan used to be the youth pastor in the church where I served, so I am fully persuaded in his ability to both make and clean up messes. Now he’s senior pastor there. Thus, I know he’s in shape because over at the church he’s been setting up tables, clearing jams from the copier, shoveling snow off the sidewalk, and doing dishes after coffee hour, i.e. the things I used to do. Just the training we require for this shindig we call Saturday Ramblings.

Over to you, Dan…

* * *

Chinese tycoon Chen Guangbiao got a lot of flak about his business card last week. Undeterred, Chen wants to buy the New York Times or maybe the Wall Street Journal, because “I am very good at working with Jews.” This should go well…

The Oscar nominations are out. One of the best picture nominees, Philomena, is being called “another hateful and boring attack on the Catholic Church.” Your thoughts on best picture?

A Planned Parenthood board member has stepped up her promotion of a secular society and her attacks on Christianity; at the same time she declares abortion to be “a sacred gift.” As Inigo Montoya might put it, “You keep using that word…”

A Tennessee pastor will not face criminal charges for snake handling after a grand jury’s decision. One church member described the ruling as a great vindication of religious liberty, saying, “To me it violated my right as an American to have my freedom of religion. It shouldn’t matter to people if the Lord moves on me and I feel like I need to take up a six-foot rattlesnake. I should have that God-given right.” After all, surely when Jesus said, “take up your cross” he was thinking of a six-foot rattler.

The Church of England is experimenting with “an alternative liturgy” for people who want to get baptized but do not believe in the devil, sin, or the need to repent. Instead of being asked: “Do you reject the devil and all rebellion against God?” and “Do you repent of the sins that separate us from God and neighbor?” parents and godparents are asked, “Do you reject evil and all its many forms and all its empty promises.” Empty promises? Really? Is evil nothing more than false advertising?

The Roman Catholic Church is not downplaying the devil; they are seeing a rise in exorcisms. The totally non-biased Telegraph reporter notes that exorcisms are, “fabled to rid people of possession by the Devil.”

Meanwhile, in France, twenty-seven Roma (Gypsies) who were charged with selling child brides and teaching children to steal. Their lawyers claimed that France couldn’t apply its laws because the gypsies didn’t recognize them: “in some cases they [the Roma] were simply following age-old Roma traditions and generally operate outside the norms of society in ‘the style of the Middle Ages.”… “It is very difficult to interpret their behavior based on our own twentieth-century standards,”…“This community crosses time and space with its traditions…” Why the rather bizarre defense? First Things speculates, “The prosecution was trying, we suspect, to find an objective basis by which to convict the Roma, that is, a way of disproving the defense’s claim on grounds the defense couldn’t contest. Because in a secular and pluralistic society the alternative is saying “This is right and that’s wrong, whatever your culture tells you,” and no one wants to say that out loud.”

Well this is interesting: apparently your view of whether Genesis 1 is “literal” or symbolic depends a great deal on your personality. The YEC viewpoint is more popular with “those who prefer to take in information via their senses versus via intuition. In contrast, religious believers who see the Bible’s creation story as symbolic tend to be more intuitive.” Please insert your own snark here.

The Atlantic reported on a Pew survey of how Muslims in various countries thought women should dress. A (very slight) majority in two countries thought women should have the freedom to choose their own attire. How comforting.

A New York based satanic church has raised the money to create a seven foot statue of Satan, and hopes to plant it right next to the Ten Commandments monument at the Oklahoma Capital building. The design features two small children looking up adoringly at Baphomet (representing Satan) , and is large enough that other children can sit on Baphomet’s lap. Because really, what five year old would be terrified by a seven-foot goat demon?

A British study reports that religious people take less sick days, are less prone to anxiety and depression, and find more meaning in life than non-religious people. Religious people apparently also have a thicker brain cortex, which I assume is why we occasionally get called “fat-heads”.

Hiroo Onada died Friday. He was the Japanese WW2 soldier who refused to believe Japan had lost, and kept on fighting for another 29 years. Only a visit by his former commander in 1974 convinced him. In Japan, he received a hero’s welcome for his tenacity.

Pastor John Ortberg and Professor Bradley Wright have been working on a new app to help users “track spirituality in real time”. SoulPulse users are asked two questions each day about their feeling about God and their emotional state, and what is happening in their life. Later, they receive color-coded interactive charts that can show, for example, that one person may be more aware of God after a couple drinks and reading Heidegger by the fireplace, while another might feel closest to God at the end of a good nap. Wright said one participant wrote in that “his spiritual low was watching his child’s soccer team get creamed by the opposition.” And really, why wouldn’t it be?

Some horrible medical cases recently have made “brain dead” more than a cheap insult lately. The Grey Lady has a good summary of what the term means in a legal and medical sense.

Too sad to make a joke about: North Korea is again named the number one persecutor of Christians. The same report notes, “Officials said a total of 2,123 Christians were martyred in 2013 compared to 1,201 the previous year. Syria had the most martyrs with 1,213 followed by Nigeria 612, Pakistan 88, Egypt 83, Kenya 20, Angola 16, Niger 15, Iraq 11, CAR 9 and Colombia 8. The death total in North Korea is not available due to the extreme difficulty to obtain public information from the secluded country. Overall, persecution of Christians worldwide continues to increase. It is estimated that 100 million Christians are actively being persecuted. The level of persecution may vary from one country to another, but those persecuted suffer from interrogation, arrest and even death for their faith in Christ. Millions more face discrimination and alienation. It also notes that “Christians are the most persecuted minority in the world.” Don’t expect the Grey Lady to put this on the front page.

Birthdays today include Peter Roget, of thesaurus fame (did you know he also invented the slide rule and a pocket chessboard?), Daniel Webster (another wordsmith), A.A. Milne, and two of my favorite actors, Danny Kaye and Cary Grant.

One Foot In The Wilderness

Michael Spencer kept looking over his shoulder. He was willing to express views that were not popular among others of his denomination and he expressed concern that there were individuals out there who were looking for opportunities to “report” him to the administrators at the school where he worked. I got a real sense of this when I started comparing this blog with his sermons. It was if I was reading the writings of two different people. Topics that he wouldn’t touch in his sermons he would raise on Internet Monk. Items like Inerrancy, Youth Earth Creationism, how the church responds to homosexuality, and a host of others.

When I was at seminary I was told a story by my Hebrew and Greek professor He was known to have some strong views that didn’t exactly define inerrancy in the way that many in the denomination would like. He was once at a denominational banquet about to enjoy his dinner, when a stranger sat down across from him. Without so much as introducing himself, the stranger asked in a belligerent way, “Do you believe in inerrancy?” My prof had a five second internal debate. “Do I want to spend the next hour trying to explain the finer points on my beliefs on inerrancy to someone who is not likely to want to listen, or do I enjoy my dinner?” He chose the latter, looked up at the man, answered “Yes”, and then continued eating.

Perhaps he was mindful of Clark Pinnock who learned his lesson the hard way when he was nearly thrown out of the Evangelical Theological Society for his views on inerrancy and open theism. Pinnock’s willingness to be open to new ideas has paralleled much of my own spiritual journey and I strongly identify with his comment that:

Not only am I often not listened to, I am also made to feel stranded theologically: being too much of a free thinker to be accepted by the evangelical establishment and too much of a conservative to be accepted by the liberal mainline.

While Clark Pinnock managed to keep his place in the E.T.S., Peter Enns was not so lucky when it came to his employment. His published views on inerrancy resulted in him losing his job. As a side note, I am thankful to Internet Monk for introducing me to the writings of Peter Enns. If you have ever wondered about the question of a historical Adam or the interpretation of Genesis, two more of those touchy topics, his book “Evolution of Adam” is a must read.

Like Michael Spencer, I find myself looking over my shoulder. I find myself at increasing odds with my church on both theological and philosophical matterd, some of which have been alluded to in this post. There have been many times when I have wanted to speak my mind on an issue, comment on facebook, or even like a post, but have not done so. Primarily because I know that doing so will create conflict and hurt feelings within the church, and probably lead to my removal from leadership of my small group. It is my love and care for those in my small group, and others in the church, that causes me to bite my tongue. To quote my lovely wife, “being right isn’t necessarily always the most important thing.” I wonder though if my convictions about various topics will reach the point where I will no longer be able keep quiet.

For now though, I soldier on, but it seems like I am marching on a finer and finer line. One foot in the church, and one foot in the wilderness.

P.S. A quick plug for small groups: I have noticed a strong correlation in my life between my own spiritual growth and small groups. If you find yourself disenchanted with church, or perhaps not attending, see if you can find a small group to be part of. You may find that it makes a world of difference in your spiritual life.