A Final Word about Creation Week

By Chaplain Mike

Cue applause. Cue wild, hilarious celebration in the streets. Creation week has come to an end.

As God himself would say, “Time for a rest!”

Before we go, I want to take this opportunity to say “thank you” to all who have read and commented. You have, in some ways, participated in a different kind of “Internet Monk” this week. It’s been a bit more academic, more focused on pure study and esoteric theological discussion than on other weeks. I hope you haven’t found it impersonal, too “heady,” or too impractical.

It’s not that I doubt for one second the capacity of our IM readers to digest this stuff. You folks always impress me with your knowledge, experience, and insights. I have learned a great deal from reading your comments, and in some cases, your input has helped me refine or even rethink my position on some area of interpretation.

Continue reading “A Final Word about Creation Week”

Religion and Culture

(Note: Richard Niebuhr wrote a classic book called Christ and Culture. I highly recommend reading it to understand the variety of relationships possible between Christianity and culture. I don’t attempt to summarize his ideas here, just my own thoughts from my travels and studies.)

Recently Lisa Dye quoted Derek Prince as saying, “Never let your religion become cultural.”  On the one hand, that statement offers excellent practical advice, which I think was Mr. Prince’s intention. On the other hand, it expresses an idea almost oxymoronic, even nonsensical. It all comes down to the word “culture.”

Generally when we say “culture” we mean the conditions and attitudes prevailing in our time and place. By culture in this sense we mean the movies we watch, the media we’re exposed to, and the philosophies we’ve consciously or unconsciously espoused. We mean what we wear, what we eat, what we spend money on, and what we ignore.

This culture is what Mr. Prince meant when he warned us to avoid mixing religion and culture. We shouldn’t conflate Christianity and the modern American or Western way of doing things. We are all too likely to think that our way of doing church, or doing government, or dressing, or raising children, is the “Christian” way of doing it. Some people even assume that you have to belong to a particular political party to be Christian; or that you have to be literate; or that you have to pray the sinner’s prayer in a one-knee, hunched-over crouch before you can be saved.

Mr. Prince is cautioning us not to be like the old lady shouting a final farewell to a departing missionary: “Just make sure they all wear shoes!”  Religion is not dependent on whether its followers wear shoes — we all know that. Cultural norms of dress, food, gathering styles, and music may have to be adapted or jettisoned when we spread the Gospel to other cultures. We cannot afford to present Christianity as an American, or Canadian, or Australian, or whatever, religion.

Of course, Westerners are not the only ones who have cultural blinders on. There are many Third-World Christians who think — no, they KNOW — that you have to sit in chairs and sing translated praise choruses in order to be true believers, even though they typically, according to their own culture, would sit on the floor and chant in a pentatonic scale. Both the local believers and the missionaries who go to them assume that the Western forms of modern evangelical worship are universal, and both local believers and missionaries would insist that, say, Orthodox Christians, who stand in front of pictures and sing Eastern style music, cannot possibly be believers. (I speak from direct experience here.)

The church can take on inappropriate trappings from non-Western cultures as well. Many churches in post-Soviet countries are run exactly as Stalin would have run them, because that is the management style they’re familiar with. (Here we run them like a corporation, which is of course much more Christian, isn’t it?) In an animist culture Christianity gets mixed up with rituals and superstitions that are often antithetical to the Gospel. A Greek woman told me, for instance, that it was terribly bad luck to buy a Bible. When I asked how you should get a Bible, she said that you have to steal it from a church. (Please, before you comment, I’m not implying that Greece is an animist culture; but certainly that type of superstition is a hold-over from animism and not a Christian belief.)

The tricky thing is determining where the dividing line is. How can we tell what is cultural and what is universally Christian?

Good question, and it leads us to the nonsensical aspect of saying that religion shouldn’t be cultural.

Everything human is cultural. There is nothing we share that is not cultural. A non-cultural human being would be like the enfant sauvage, the wild child discovered naked, speechless, and unsocialized in France over a hundred years ago. It is through culture that we know how to eat, talk, work, wash, dress, build shelters, even think. These are not instinctive behaviors, they are learned, and the word culture sums up all that we have learned to know, feel, believe, and do.

So religion can’t be separated from culture. God made us to be cultural creatures. When Jesus became human, he came to a particular culture; he ate what they ate, wore what they wore, spoke the language they spoke. He was a first-century Jew as well as the Second Person of the Trinity.

Even as believers we are not to be isolated individuals but part of the culture of the Body of Christ. We aren’t instinctively Christian, we have to be taught to grow into our new culture. Religion must be cultural if it is to be human.

So the challenge for all Christians is to think through what elements of their beliefs and understandings are culturally particular; not necessarily to abandon them but to understand those elements as nonessential parts of the faith. Good advice, I know, and almost impossible to do. It does help to travel, to see how many things we take for granted are unheard of in other civilized societies. It does help to read old books and study history, to understand how people could still be Christians before the Bible was compiled, or when they couldn’t read, or when they lived in entirely different social systems. It does help to talk to people of different beliefs even in our own time and place — this web log is a great eye-opening way to do that.

But I think that American Christians are also challenged to believe that we are cultural beings. In fact, it’s a very modern, American thing to say that religion shouldn’t be cultural. That statement would have been productive of blank stares in any other time or place. We delude ourselves that we are individuals independent of our culture, that we think exactly what we want and do exactly what we choose, that religion is just the Bible and me. No, we, like all people, are a product of our culture, and that’s not a bad thing. In that sense religion not only should be cultural, it must be cultural.

We will never get this right. We can’t really understand what our culture is any more than a fish can understand what water is. We can only pray to have our eyes opened, study a far wider world than we experience, and stop thinking our way of doing things is the only way.

So the challenge becomes humility and discernment. I have to know what it is I don’t know, see differences I didn’t even know could exist. I have to be wise about what in my culture is truly Christian, merely neutral, or demonic. I have to learn from people of other backgrounds, both Christian and non-Christian, and see what aspect of God shines through them. I have to consider which unthinking, deeply held beliefs are in fact leading me farther from God and my true nature, even if they seem to me to be the only obvious way. My religion will be cultural, but may that culture be more and more the culture of the Kingdom of God.

Sunday’s Gospel: On a Mission with Jesus

By Chaplain Mike

Fifth Sunday after Pentecost
Lectionary Readings
• 2 Kings 5:1-14
• Psalm 30
• Galatians 6:[1-6] 7-16
• Luke 10:1-11, 16-20

Today’s Gospel: Luke 10:1-20 (NRSV)
After this the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them on ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself intended to go. He said to them, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest. Go on your way. See, I am sending you out like lambs into the midst of wolves. Carry no purse, no bag, no sandals; and greet no one on the road. Whatever house you enter, first say, “Peace to this house!” And if anyone is there who shares in peace, your peace will rest on that person; but if not, it will return to you. Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the labourer deserves to be paid. Do not move about from house to house. Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat what is set before you; cure the sick who are there, and say to them, “The kingdom of God has come near to you.”

Luke 10:1-9, NRSV

It has become common over the past generation for businesses and enterprises of all kinds to write “mission statements.” These are designed to express why an organization exists. What are we called to do? What particular contribution are we called to make? That’s what the mission statement is about. These statements should be succinct, clear, and easily communicated. That way, those in the organization can stay on track, and communicate their group’s mission easily to others.

Followers of Jesus Christ have a mission statement, too.Continue reading “Sunday’s Gospel: On a Mission with Jesus”

Surd Evil, Serpents, and the Cosmic Battle

By Chaplain Mike

A number of commenters to IM this week have struggled with our interpretation that the story of the fall and its consequences does not indicate a radical change in the nature of creation itself as the result of human sin.

If, BEFORE THE FALL—plants and organisms decayed, if carnivorous animals ate other animals, if earthquakes shook the land, if meteors crashed onto the earth’s surface, if entire species died out and became extinct, if bacteria and viruses caused illnesses and suffering, if accidents occurred, causing injury and pain, if ancestors of humanity and perhaps even other human beings on the earth before Adam and Eve lived and experienced the vicissitudes of life and then died, if as Tennyson famously wrote, nature was “red in tooth and claw,” even at the beginning, then doesn’t that undermine the teaching of Scripture—that all these evils are to be attributed to the fall of humankind and the entrance of sin into the world?

I don’t think so.

Continue reading “Surd Evil, Serpents, and the Cosmic Battle”

Exile from Eden (Gen 3)

By Chaplain Mike

As we near the end of “Creation Week” here at IM, we come to our final study in the early chapters of Genesis. Today we look at the account of Adam and Eve’s sin and their expulsion from the Garden in Genesis chapter 3.

This is the second act of a three-act account that tells “what came forth from the skies and the land” (2:4). Chapter 2 set the stage with the description of God’s Garden in Eden, the creation of Adam and his priestly calling, and the provision of a helper, the woman, who corresponded perfectly to him and made the perfect partner to join him in the work of “serving and keeping” before God in the Garden. The epilogue to the story concluded with the words, “And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.”

Continue reading “Exile from Eden (Gen 3)”

Saturday Ramblings 7.3.10

After a heady week here at iMonk of creation wars and Christian arts, Jeff Dunn swooned with the vapors and had to lie down for a bit, leaving the Saturday-themed rambling up to me, Adam Palmer. Shall we?

As long as we’re on the subject of Creation Wars, let’s begin with this story that tells us paleontologists have been completely wrong in their estimates of when complex life began on the Earth–wrong by 1.5 billion years! Yes, paleontology got turned on its ear this week when fossils indicating complex life were dated to approximately 2.1 billion years ago. Paleontologist Philip Donoghue gets the prize for best quote, saying the discovery was “like ordering an hors d’oeuvre and some gigantic thick-crust pizza turning up.” A thick crust pizza topped with 2.1 billion-year-old fossils. Yum.

Since we’re already on the scientific front, and since this is Saturday ramblings, I thought it only appropriate to include a story that has this delightful bit of rambling: “Clearly the chain of coupled harmonic oscillators is entangled at zero temperature.” Yes, clearly. What are they talking about? A theory introduced this week that quantum entanglement is the mechanism holding DNA together, preventing the double helix from vibrating itself apart. Please read the story and then explain it to me, ’cause it sounds mighty cool. Oh, and while we’re on the subject, “quantum plasticity” a new theory that allows a solid to flow like a liquid through itself. No word yet on whether these two new quantum theories, despite their distance from each other, share the same existence. (Yes, that was a nerd-flavored quantum mechanics joke.)Continue reading “Saturday Ramblings 7.3.10”

In the King’s Garden (Gen 2), part two

By Chaplain Mike

The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.

Genesis 2:8 (NASB)

In the first part of Genesis 2:4-25, we saw:

  • The pre-fall condition of the land
  • The creation of Adam

Beginning at verse 8, the author describes:

  • The garden God planted in Eden (2:8-14)
  • Adam’s role and responsibility in the garden (2:15-17)
  • God’s provision of a partner for Adam (2:18-22)
  • Poetic speech: Adam’s response (2:23)
  • Epilogue: The gift of marriage (2:24-25)

Our focus in this post will be upon the Garden, the priestly calling of Adam, the two prominent trees and what they represent, and God’s threatened penalty for eating from the forbidden tree.

Continue reading “In the King’s Garden (Gen 2), part two”

Surprise! God Does Art

In my previous essay we looked at the culture of Jesus junk. I tried to say things in a nice way–maybe I was too nice. I still have many friends in publishing, in broadcasting, in music production and distribution. Many friends who seek to follow the Lord from their hearts, yet sometimes have to hold their noses and put out a product they would not want in their own homes due to the possibility of extreme embarrassment. I have been there myself. Now, I just can no longer participate in the death of true art.

That is a powerful statement. The death of true art. Yet that is what so much of Christian entertainment is: the death of art. When I taught at a university in the 1980s, I required students in one of my upper division courses to read Frank Schaeffer’s Addicted to Mediocrity: Contemporary Christians and the Arts. Is that how our generation will be remembered? As the ones who took art from beauty that glorifies God to being simply mediocre? Or will the memory of our contributions be even seen that kindly?

(The art selected for this essay is titled Death Of Art. The artist? Marilyn Manson.)

Continue reading “Surprise! God Does Art”

Selling Jesus By The Pound

Editor’s note: We often provide links for products mentioned in these posts that will take you Amazon where you can buy them. This is both for your convenience as well as being a revenue-generator for InternetMonk.com. We are providing no such links in this essay, as we cannot in good conscience recommend most of the products mentioned here. If you want to buy any or all, you are on your own. Also, before you read this essay, take a moment to read why Michael Spencer, the original iMonk, stopped shopping in Christian bookstores.

My friend Jen has a novel she really needs to finish. It starts with a man talking with his therapist. This man owns a Christian gift store, even though he is not himself a Christian. He has found Christians to be extremely gullible and easy pickings when it comes to making money.

But he recently came upon a challenge. He had a box of leftover WWJD bracelets he couldn’t sell. What to do with them?

“Then I had this great idea,” he tells his therapist. “I hung up all the bracelets on their rack, and made up a new sign: What Would Jabez Do? They sold like hotcakes!”

I have told Jen she has to finish this novel. The only problem is it will sound much more like truth than fiction.

Continue reading “Selling Jesus By The Pound”

Genesis and My Post-Evangelical Wilderness

By Chaplain Mike

A couple of years ago, I agreed to help a small group that was losing their “pastor.” They weren’t really a “church,” but a small band of exiles from traditional churches that met in house groups and then gathered together on Sunday. When the church planter who had formed them moved away to take a more traditional pastoral assignment, they needed someone to lead and give them guidance.

Enter me, part-time. I agreed to lead their services on Sunday and help them decide where they wanted to go.

They said they wanted to be a “community” church — a church that majored on the majors and allowed for differences in other areas of doctrine and practice. Of course, that needed to be defined.

One fellow in the church was interested in “creation science.” He had convinced the previous pastor to let him lead Sunday evening studies using an Answers in Genesis video series. He invited me to one after I got involved with the group.

I found the experience agonizing. I’m no expert in science, but the “evidence” presented certainly did not ring true to me. Furthermore, the Biblical teaching was pure dogmatism, completely dismissing all other views as wrong.

I made an appointment to meet with my new friend. In his home I expressed my opinion that these videos should not be used in the church. They represented a fundamentalist approach to the Bible and the subject of creation and allowed no room for any perspective beside their own. This kind of teaching was not conducive to the kind of “community” church the group had expressed interest in becoming.

One Sunday morning soon after, I taught my understanding of Genesis 1. I tried to do it humbly, expressing clearly that there are other views and that I was offering my interpretation as one possible option.

To make a long story short, the whole thing fell apart. Though some said they appreciated my teaching and found it helpful, others reacted not so much to what I said but to what I didn’t say. I did not believe in six literal 24-hour days? And so on. In an instant I was persona non grata because I couldn’t repeat the YEC code to their satisfaction. The fellowship soon decided to break up. To be sure creationism was not the only (or even the most important) issue, but it was a straw that helped break the camel’s back.

That was my last experience in church ministry.

As I’ve shared here before, I consider myself a “post-evangelical Christian”. That means I have moved outside the evangelical culture and forms that have dominated conservative Christianity since the post-WWII years. My experience with that little group illustrates one reason why.

Evangelical culture has always been characterized by conflict. Battles over specific doctrinal, practical, and cultural issues flame up regularly. When I was a new Christian in the 1970s, the charismatic movement and biblical eschatology were hot topics. Inerrancy later became a battleground. Public issues associated with the “culture wars” have provided ongoing debates. In recent years the hot button issue of creation vs. evolution has prompted cultural, political, and theological skirmishes aplenty.

I have been wounded in more than a few of these types of conflicts. For example:

I am not charismatic, but on the other hand I believe the evangelical church has long neglected the reality of the Spirit’s ministry. Boy, do I remember those days when the charismatic movement was influencing churches everywhere, and some were writing about “charismatic chaos” in response. Some felt that fire from heaven was finally falling on the church — a new Pentecost! Others were busy trying to put out wild fires and fireproof their congregations. Each side has had its proof-texts and ways of looking at Scripture. I found it hard to “take sides.” I saw where each side made legitimate points, and where each was on thin ice.

Eschatology has been a biggie. I had a spiritual awakening in Hal Lindsey’s heyday and used to sing “I Wish We’d All Been Ready” with great passion. I graduated from a strongly dispensational Bible college, and attended a seminary that was premillennial by confession. But I was always skeptical. Dispensationalism was just too neat, too mechanical. It turned the Bible into a giant puzzle, and try as I might, I couldn not put the pieces together.

I struggled to work out my views while attempting to teach the Bible in church. One church to which I sent my resumé had no place for anyone other than a convinced pre-mil, pre-trib advocate. I was not that man. It seems I have never fit comfortably in any of the communities where I’ve studied or ministered. And I’ve gone farther from the original positions I was taught the more I’ve read and considered the Scriptures. Over the years my studies have led me to a form of amillennialism. Anthony Hoekema’s book, The Bible and the Future, is one of the finest theological texts I’ve ever read. I think N.T. Wright is an eschatological breath of fresh air. I think the “Left Behind” series is a travesty of literature and theology. I’ve never found one single text that supports the idea of a Pre-Trib rapture. Friends don’t talk about the subject when I’m around.

A third issue is creationism. I suppose I was exposed to evolutionary teaching in high school classes such as biology and anthropology, but not being much of a science student, it made little lasting impression on me. The Bible college I attended was YEC in orientation, but it was not stressed. We read The Genesis Flood, and took a literal approach to Genesis. I accepted this perspective but thought little about it.

And then came seminary. Old Testament and Pentateuch scholar John Sailhamer opened my eyes to the wonders of the Torah, and he taught Genesis in that light. He encouraged us to read the creation story in the light of Israel’s story, and I have never read it the same since.

I taught Genesis and the Torah to my little church in Chicago. When we moved to Indianapolis, I led a five-year class in Genesis. In every other church and ministry where I’ve been involved, I have focused on the first book of the Bible and especially its opening passages. Rarely in any of those settings did the subject of evolution come up. I never taught the book in order to “answer” the ungodly worldview of secular science. I did not think that was the author’s (or, the Author’s) intention in writing Genesis, so I did not approach it that way.

However, in recent years, the increasingly loud and strident voices of “creationists” on one side and “new atheists” on the other have polarized the debate and have made it difficult to present any other views without getting hammered from one or both sides.

So, is there a place for someone who may not toe the party line, but who simply wants to teach the Bible to help people know God better, be shaped to be like Jesus, and participate in God’s mission in the world?

  • Where can a non-charismatic charismatic fit?
  • Where does a person fit who thinks eschatology is a supremely important aspect of Christian theology, but who finds the “Left Behind” approach to be terrible Biblical interpretation?
  • Where might someone fit who does not think Genesis was written to answer modern scientific questions, and who would like to teach the book according to its original meaning and intent?

The post-evangelical wilderness.

Some of us are here because of what I call these “evangelical fad-fights.” Someone decides that a particular doctrine or issue is the crucial matter of the moment upon which Biblical Christianity and godly culture will stand or fall. Pressure mounts to choose sides. Armies muster. Trenches are dug. Ammunition is stockpiled. Strategists strategize. War plans drawn up. Propaganda campaigns attempt to rally the patriots, discourage the enemy, and persuade the uncommitted. Battles are waged. Losses mount. Who will win the victory?

You try being a conscientious objector in that atmosphere. Try being someone who utters the opinion that the issues may not warrant an all-out war. Try saying, “You know, those folks on the other side have a point here.” Try expressing your reservations about the absolute rightness of the cause. Try calling the whole endeavor an adventure in missing the point.

“Now the land was an uninhabitable wasteland…” (Gen. 1:2, my paraphrase).

Somewhere God’s Spirit is hovering over the dark deeps. In this I hope.