Category Archives: exhortations

The Bible wants you to ask different questions.


As believers, I think oftentimes our tendency is to read the Bible and make it about the Christian life, instead of about Christ. We  look to the Bible to answer questions like “What does the Bible say about smoking weed”. “What does the Bible say about gambling”. “What does the Bible say about debt and finances”, and so forth.  We’ve been told for a long time that the Bible is a guidebook for living. That’s its our B.I.B.L.E [ Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.] and because its our B.I.B.L.E, we’re able to read it as a manual and expect that it will have all the answers to all the questions we have, regardless of the topic or obscurity of thought.

So take questions on sex, debt, tattoos, smoking, dieting, leadership, pornography, etc. These are questions that we expect the Bible to answer. We have these things on our mind and we go through the Bible or type in a word search into biblegateway.com, and one of two things happen. 1) we get frustrated because the answers aren’t clear, or 2), or we get emboldened to extrapolate answers from bits and pieces of ideas that really were never designed to provide answers for us, which results in bad exegesis and ideas which go beyond the scope of what is actually written.

Why aren’t the answers front and center to those kinds of questions? Its because the Bible doesn’t just provide us with answers, but it changes the culture of the questions that we ask.  The answers aren’t always clear because when we read the scriptures, the Bible doesn’t push us to answer those kinds of questions. Rather, when we read the scriptures, we are prompted to ask different kinds of questions altogether. Questions like “Who will rescue me from this body of death, O wretched man that I am?” ” How can a man become right before God?” “Should we sin more so that grace may abound”? ” Who is my shield, my portion, my strength?”

The Bible wasn’t designed to answer all these relatively obscure questions we come to ask it, but rather the Scriptures actually informs and changes the very questions we ask. It pushes us to ask a whole separate kind of questions. The Bible talks about a lot of things, but it doesn’t give all its themes equal air time. Rather, the dominant message of the Bible is God loves and in Jesus justifies sinners. That framework functions as the lens by which every story, parable, historical happening, theological idea, person, miracle, act of God is read through and is purposed by. So as we read the Bible and study the world, we need to ask God to grip us by the radically disproportionate focus on God’s saving love for sinners, seen and accomplished in Jesus Christ,  up and against everything else.

Different kinds of questions. Different culture for the questioner.


Well worn


“I identify as a vaguely butch, vaguely femme, male-bodied anarcho-queerion”

I’m on a bit of a kick reading gay literature and queer theory as of late [ mostly for a project I'm working on for this blog] but through my readings I wound up on genderfork. Genderfork is a website which serves as a safe haven of support for people who don’t self-identify in the typical male/female, gay/ straight paradigms. Its motto is “beauty in ambiguity” and the community posts short profiles of themselves and say what label if any they identify with and what sort of third-party pronouns they like to be addressed by.

One person said “I identify as… “Genderqueer, Androgynous, Boi, Gender-Fluid” another said ” Masculine-Feminine Switch, Dyke-leaning pansexual girlfag.” One said “Ambiguous Gender Ninja.” and another described themselves as  “Transgender, Two-Spirit, Polysexual, BiDyke.” One said “”Gender-bending gender-Awesome” and others gave the shorthanded  “Gay,” “Soft Butch”,  “Queer” “Cis-gender,”, etc.  One person said ” I identify as a vaguely butch vaguely femme male-bodied anarcho-queerion.” Lastly a “they” named Crispin said that “I identify as a Schrödinger’s cat of gender, I never know what I am until I try to observe it. One day I’ll observe and be a straight man, five minutes later I may find myself to be an asexual androgene, or a genderqueer woman, or none of the above.”

Its been an interesting time of introspection to develop a fully-orbed response to this. Because here’s the thing- there are Christians who will read something like that and be at a complete loss. In their state of revulsion and sanctimonious piety they’ll hurl epitaphs at these ambiguous ones and dump their bodies into hell themselves if given half a chance. Others in their ignorance will fight and argue using strawmen and throwing philosophical sophistry bombs while raging about the damage they are doing to society, while still others will present rude, unsophisticated, damningly stupid biblical arguments which serve as little more than to kindle the fire of resentment and recoil. All of which is unfortunate and is a blight to our faith, because we have so much more to offer than that. We have beautiful, wonderful, exhilarating and redemptive things to say- so let’s not lose our opportunity.

We live in a pluralistic, post-modern society, where created and contradictory self-identification is not seen as bad or confused, but completely legitimate. In a way queerfork can be thought of what happens when Jacque Derridas intermingles with the critical theories of  Eve Sedwick. It’s gender deconstruction and reconstruction absent the societal norms which we have traditionally understood and navigated. For all practical purposes we have discarded the laws of non-contradiction so that we can be whatever we want to be, whenever we want to be, and it doesn’t matter if they overlap or bump up besides each other or are at odds with each other in any way. Its a tribute to our post-modernism; a pomo-sexual revolution, and the whole time we are being told that far from being confused, those with this mentality are free, clear- headed thinkers. They have attained a higher level of consciousness than we have and have become unshackled and unburdened from heteronormative ways of thinking.

Has a failure to polarize sexuality into distinct camps done damage to society? Not in the way that is commonly understood.  Fluid, borderless and “create your own label” sexual identities is the natural progression for a society that “loves the world and the things of the world.” So its not damaging society as much as it is reflecting society and changing societal norms. Its not causing a rift in our societal evolution so much as it is our societal evolution with the challenge not to stop it but to navigate through it and recognize it for what it is.

So what is our response? Our responses are manifold. We don’t laugh at or mock people who are dressed like this or look this way. We don’t make jokes out of it or use the occasion to demonstrate our own sin. We are the first persons to engage them and love them through friendship and relationship. We stand up for them and offer them protection from all verbal, emotional, and physical violence. We never for a minute regard their socio-sexual expressions as sin without being bruised by the weight of our own. We step in and repel any ignorant misconception, misstatements or fallacies regarding anyone expressing themselves on whatever end of the sexual matrix they feel they are on. And lastly once all of that is done, we never lose sight of the core of our convictions as Christian believers, and we verbalize with compassion the good news that Jesus is sovereign over all gender and sexuality. This is the reality that he has in his wisdom and glory created it for a specific purpose and function, which we proclaim the truth in conjunction with the gospel, and never apart from it.

What is the truth? The truth is that the Bible addresses human sexuality from a holistic perspective of God’s intention and design. In contrast to both pagan sex rituals and our modern obsession with sex, the Bible places sex within the total context of human nature, happiness, and holiness. Taken out of this context, sexual anarchy reigns as sex is set loose to be an end in itself.

Jesus created human beings as male and female, both in His own image [Mark 10]. Thus, gender is not a mere biological accident or social construction. The contrast and complementarity between the man and the woman reveal that gender is part of the goodness of Jesus’ creation. Modern efforts to redefine or redesign gender are directly contrary to the Bible’s affirmation of maleness and femaleness as proper distinctions. God’s glory is seen in the maleness of the man and the femaleness of the woman. This pattern of distinction is affirmed and enforced by liturgical orders and restrictions on dress, hair length, etc. Any effort to confuse or deny gender differences is expressly forbidden and opposed by Scripture, especially as seen in Old Testament legal codes.

As image bearers of God- made in the image of male and female, we don’t see a plurality of options or purposes . We don’t see a “he made them male-ish” and “female-ish” but rather two distinct and yet complementary groups with complimentary qualities and characteristics, so that the woman in union with the man would be “one flesh.” There are rare times when these marks are mixed or obscured, but such exceptions are few and they reinforce the norm. As a result, men and women’s gender identities are grounded in and, to an extent, limited by the permanent details of their sexed bodies. Jesus himself has very specific ideas about what is male and female and how that ought to be expressed sexually and through gender roles. [Man is infused with maleness" and Female is designated as woman-ness, which must by necessity be different from man and maleness]. Everything that is contrary to that, no matter how much it may be genuinely felt, biologically anchored, or sociologically accepted, is to be rejected and recognized as the ruthless embodiment of sin-scrapped rebellion that it is.

But praise God that Christ died for every sin- heterosexual, homosexual, and everything invented by the human mind that could possibly lie in between. There is grace and forgiveness for everyone who repents and puts their faith and hope in Christ. Our heart of stone is removed, and we are given a heart of flesh to fuel our new nature, which abides in Christ. No longer are we slaves to sin and to our former nature, but we are free to love and worship him and experience true joy apart from the shallow fleetingness that is “happiness”. Through him we get to become his friends, sons and daughters, no longer under the threat of his wrath, but free and forgiven in his love. That’s the template we work from.

[And note. There are rarely any silver bullets when sin is concerned. Having ones sexual orientation inclined towards the same sex as a believer  is a weighty, weighty burden. In light of this, I would suggest that the biblical command for anyone who is struggling with same sex attraction or sexual dysphoria has two prerogatives. The first is to take this to Christ in prayer, asking that God would redeem their sexuality so that Christ might help them become “reoriented,”so that they would be counted in the “and such were some of you” category in 1 Corinthians 6. If the Lord in his sovereign mercy does not make this a reality, and that feeling of attraction to the same sex, or that feeling of attraction to the opposite sex from perspective of being a different sex, or that feeling grotesque displacement from your physical body does not go away, then living a life of celibacy is the final call, all the while praying for the first. It is a painful cross to bear. It is lonely and frustrating and at times bleak. It is a bloody war; a vicious and heartbreaking battle. But in the whole process God will be slowly refining you in the slow burn of sanctification, and his pleasures and promises are better.]

To the ” Masculine-Feminine switch, Dyke-leaning pansexual girlfag” such notions will probably be regarded as horrific and scary as hell and an attack on their being and nature. [Note, I would regard blurring of the line and failing to polarize sexuality ultimately as the true ferocious, deviant, and mephistophelian attack on women, but that specifically is a different argument] In a very real way it is. All we can do though is approach each person as calmly and loving as we can. Not as a project, but so that we can genuinely like who they are as people. Not as self-righteous, but from a posture and position of constantly being bombarded with our own sins and inadequacies and the price that had to be paid for them on the cross.  That’s what we need to communicate and what we need  as Christians to start being the driving force for our forays into the world. Let us be unmoving and unyielding in our convictions while being extravagant and immoderate in our joy and affection for each others souls.


Complaints Medieval Monks Scribbled in the Margins of Illuminated Manuscripts

Complaints Medieval Monks Scribbled in the Margins of Illuminated Manuscripts

This is a reposting of an interesting brainpickings article. In it they list a number of curious notes in margins and colophons made by medieval scribes in whatever biblical manuscripts they were writing. [Note; a colophone is an endnote that might include the scribes name, or the place and date when he wrote and finished the manuscript. One could think of it as a scribe's "signature." Leaving a colophon is a  practice that is almost unknown in early biblical documents, but become relatively normal in late minuscules]

“New parchment, bad ink; I say nothing more.

“I am very cold.”

“That’s a hard page and a weary work to read it.”

“Let the reader’s voice honor the writer’s pen.”

“This page has not been written very slowly.”

“The parchment is hairy.”

“The end of the book- Thanks be to God!”

“The ink is thin.”

“Thank God, it will soon be dark.”

“Oh, my hand.”

“Now I’ve written the whole thing; for Christ’s sake give me a drink.”

“Writing is excessive drudgery. It crooks your back, it dims you sight, it twists your stomach and your sides.”

“St. Patrick of Armagh, deliver me from writing.”

“While I wrote I froze, and what I could not write by the beams of the sun I finished by candlelight.”

“As the harbor is welcome to the sailor, so is the last line to the scribe.”

“This is sad! O little book! A day will come in truth when someone over your page will say, ‘The hand that wrote it is no more’.

 


Free Song from Matt Papa

Matt Papa has made the song “It is finished” from his album of the same name available for free. Building on the theme of “it is finished” it functions as a balm to the soul and a vivid reminder as we approach Good Friday and Easter.  It is quite excellent and definitely worth a listen.

Matt Papa – “It Is Finished” Lyrics

Once and for all
Once and for all
You offered up Your life
For one and all
For one and all
The perfect sacrifice
Atoning blood was shed
Love conquered when You said…

It is finished
It is done
To the world salvation comes
Hallelujah, we’re alive!
Hell was silenced when You cried:
It is finished
It is finished

Who is this king
Who is this king
So mighty and so strong
He is the one
He is the one
The earth has waited for
God’s remedy for sin
With mercy for all men

It is finished
It is done
To the world salvation comes
Hallelujah, we’re alive!
Hell was silenced when You cried:
It is finished
It is finished

Well the earth shook and trembled
The sun bowed it’s head
The veil of the temple was open for men
As Jesus went down in the cold of the grave
Defeated the darkness when He overcame
The keys of the Kingdom were placed into hands
Of children and priests and of fishers of men
Through all generations His voice will be heard
Creation resounds the victorious words!

It is finished
It is done
To the world salvation comes
Hallelujah, we’re alive!
Hell was silenced when you cried:
It is finished
It is done
Now completed, the work of Love
Hallelujah, He’s alive
Join the song of the ransomed Bride
It is finished
It is finished
It is finished!


When Truth And Unity Collide

Suppose you met some people who told you they were believers. They stated they believed in the God of scriptures, believed that Jesus was his Son, that he died for their sins and that he rose from the dead. They believed salvation was by faith and grace, and that loving God and loving people were of supreme import. They were in close community with each other, attended their church weekly, loved their families and friends, served each other in sickness and in health, were openly evangelistic, took care of the widows and orphans, and created a loving environment in which they were able to thrive and affect the community around them. They only had one idiosyncratic belief. They believed that you could only be saved if you followed the OT dietary laws and restrictions. Other than that they were all good.

Could you be in unity with them? Would you let them attend your Church and mix and mingle with you and your friends?  Would you consider them brothers and sisters in Christ and give them an audience as they explained their beliefs? What sort of actions would categorize your love and affection for them? Would you welcome them with open arms? Have ecumenical Church services with them? Would you draw them into your community and give them free reign to integrate themselves into your own service? Would you let them teach you about why they had their unique beliefs about how salvation relates to the dietary laws? Would you let those beliefs get in the way of unity, or would you dismiss that as ultimately a non-issue that you refuse to let divide the two groups?  How united do you believe you could be with them?

Paul certainly answered that question for us. Swap out circumcision for dietary laws and you are essentially painted a picture of the Judaizers. These were men who believed that unless you has your genitals cut as a sign of your obedience to the ancient mosaic laws, you could not be saved. And so far from acquiescing to that particular theological nuance and dismissing it as simply a difference in opinion, a non-issue- something that did not matter in light of their love for each other, Paul warns people about them and ferociously attacks both them and their theological particulars.  He writes in Phillipans 3:2 Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh” He further goes on to castigate them, declaring that they were not even true Christians, saying  ”Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in–who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery– to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.” Galatians 2:4-5

Paul and his team did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour. Why? So that the truth of the gospel would remain with them. While some people may have suggested that they remain united with these people and that we ought not to let theological differences divide, Paul is quick to dismiss that. He understood that they posed a serious threat to the gospel of grace and the universality of the Christian mission. For this reason his very goal was to divide. He called them evil men who were dogs and unbelievers. He purposefully disrupted and destroyed any hope of unity that people on either side may have desired because he recognized that unity at the expense of truth is no unity at all. It is nothing but shallow and meaningless symbolism which breeds superficiality.And while some people may have argued that this was unfair because the Judaizers were kind to others and were well liked and respected in the community, or that the world might see these divisions and judge the Church for that, Paul didn’t make their benevolence,  kindness or generosity the dividing line of unity and Christian acceptance, but rather made their theology and their proper understanding of soteriology the issue which divided and consequently defined them.

So again I ask, in light of this, how united could you be?


I hate it when God “shows up.”

I remember when I used to go to Christian retreats/festivals/revivals/conferences. I used to love them so much. They were quiet times of reflection, a time to spend in unabashed and unashamed camaraderie with fellow believers. More importantly though, they always had great music. I knew without a doubt that the evenings would be intense. It would be a kamikaze of blue lights, key changes, tears, sweat, and a 23 minute rendition of  Michael W Smith’s Let it rain.  It is a collusion of blood, bone and brain matter; fused with flickering lights, heat, glowsticks and D-chords. The synapses are firing. The skin is getting prickly. It would leave me on my knees, my chest heaving  and my body crumpled on the floor because I could not stand the weight of the glory of God in the room. The air was too thick with it. It was too much for my heart and legs to bear.

In the aftermath, in the stillness with our spiritual afterbirth, we would reflect on the experience as we rode home in the dark in buses and vans. It was a quiet time of holy reverence for what we had just gone through. As we came out of our shells and began to talk,  we would always agree on the same thing, that the music was awesome and that “God showed up.”   Later on during the next morning service, the Pastor would call up one or two of us teen representatives on stage to talk about our time there. We would invariably share the same thing, that it was a fantastic life changing experience, and that ” God showed up”.

But why did we say that? Its because since we were little, we’ve been conditioned by the Church and the purveyors of modern evangelicalism to believe that emotional experiences are equated to a spiritual experience. That they are interrelated and interchangeable. That if you have an emotional response to a song or to an atmosphere, that God is there and at working. I can’t remember a time when that wasn’t taught, either explicitly or tacitly. They might not outright say it, but their actions scream it. Music is a powerful thing, all the much more when it is consecrated with the Holy Spirit and imbued with spiritual words and meaning. That’s why I can remember how I felt every single time conference,  but I can’t tell you what was preached on. I could walk someone through minute by minute of a two hour worship set during certain retreats, but I couldn’t you what scriptures they used to preach on for 15 minutes afterward, other than 2 Chronicles 7:14 [but only because everyone always uses that verse]

Do I think God shows up? Absolutely, but listen- he ALWAYS SHOWS UP. God is there at every Church service. Every prayer group. Every congregational meeting. Every Bible study. God is there and has shown up, and he has shown himself relentlessly faithful to do so. He is an omniscient, omnipresent deity whose Spirit lives inside of us, present in nearly every way possible as we gather together as believers and as his children.  It is a wonderful, beautiful and precious thing, and yes, that can be an emotional thing. But he is never far from us. So why is it I’ve never heard anyone say that God “really showed up” during a Bible study through the book of 1 Samuel?  Why is it that no one says that God “showed up” during a Sunday school lecture on the penal substitution atonement?

Why is it that God only “shows up” when we’re jumping up and down with arms raised? Why does he only “show up” when our hearts are beating fast and when we’re engulfed in a heightened emotional state? Is it a more powerful manifestation, or a more palpable iteration? Why make these artificial distinctions when there is no objective basis for doing so? I’ve heard some of the most idolatrous, blasphemous things said at certain conferences where God “really showed up”. I’ve bit my lip during certain songs that contained the most vilely irreverent lyrics where God “showed up”. I’ve heard heretics bastardize the scriptures and manipulate them into every theological grotesquerie at retreats where God really, really “showed up”. What has “showing up” come to mean?

Why is there so much emphasis on getting people to this emotional state and then constantly reinforcing the meaning and significance of this state? Why is so much money, energy, and ministry resources dedicated to creating occasions where people can have these experiences? Are these experiences spiritual by virtue of their very existence? How can this constant reinforcement of “experience = meeting God” be healthy for anybody who wants to grow and be sanctified? What happens when the thrill, the flush and the buzz go away? What theological monsters and biblical confusions are being created in the mind of a man who can’t distinguish them, and in fact doesn’t want to? What happens when they get tired of chasing the high and come to the conclusion that loss of experiential high means that they’ve been abandoned by God? That the burnout means that God is no longer showing up? That the angst and terror of depression and spiritual desolation is proof positive that they’ve been severed from Christ and betrayed by His love?

What happens then? Will God “show up” or will He show up?


Seven Misconceptions about Submission

Mary Kassian has a great little article about the misconceptions about submission at her website. I like Mary a lot and find her articles to be generally quite excellent. It’s worth the read here

Misconception #4: Submission is a right—a husband has the right to demand his wife’s submission.

A husband does not have the right to demand or extract submission from his wife. Submission is HER choice—her responsibility… it is NOT his right!! Not ever. She is to “submit herself”— deciding when and how to submit is her call. In a Christian marriage, the focus is never on rights, but on personal responsibility. It’s his responsibility to be affectionate. It’s her responsibility to be agreeable. The husband’s responsibility is to sacrificially love as Christ loved the Church—not to make his wife submit.


Going “Deeper” in Church; a Caution

 

For centuries people have complained, protested, asked, begged, argued, whined, and have essentially driven themselves to distraction because the have desired to go “deeper in Church”. I imagine this has caused many Pastors to become very frustrated at times, if not downright discouraged. Its a familiar theme. It is the last refrain of the restless. People want deeper church, deeper bible studies, deeper worship and deeper community,  but I’m  not sure they always know what that means.  I would imagine that  from a Pastors perspective it is difficult to please the people who are always clamoring for “deeper”,  especially because everyone seems to have a different idea of what “deep” is.

1. Depth as facts and the accumulation of knowledge.

This is the group that thinks the teaching is deep if they’ve learned something they didn’t already know. Satisfaction and a sense of fulfillment comes if they can walk out of a sanctuary with more information than they had coming in. For some it is looking for new ways to read bible verse, or delving into a more thorough explanation of the context. For others it is hearing a proper exegesis, uncovering a textual variant, or pondering thoughtful nuances. What is the caution? In many ways this is “deep”, but  information is not the goal, and information alone is not depth. When this accumulation of knowledge becomes the main purpose it can produce an elite class of biblical hobbyists who are almost Gnostic-like in their love for more knowledge, isolating  themselves from the community of faith and breeding a superiority due to the rigors of their intellectual pursuits. Is that really deep? Knowing biblical facts is important, but surely we want to go deeper than the demons, who know more about Scripture than we do and are devils still.

2. Depth as “Insights for Daily Living”

This group believes that “deep” means “insight for life.” They want to see the scriptures applied to their daily living, as method and techniques, so that they can behave a certain way or garner for themselves certain results.  “Deep” means “applied well,” and transformation [rather than information] is the goal. The purpose is personal renewal, and so a high premium is placed on the unpacking of life principles which will be conducive to life transformation. In many ways this is good because Pastors don’t want people looking in the mirror of God’s Word and then walking away unaware of their reflection. Every teacher should hope for transformation. What is the caution? Even if people hope to apply the Bible to their everyday life, there is the propensity to be self-absorbed readers who skim the Scriptures in search for practical tidbits as if they are reading a self-help book.  Is that really deep? If we go about Bible study this way, we never deal with the big picture of Scripture and therefore end up spiritualizing earth-shattering truths into cute and quaint verses and sticking them on coffee mugs.

3. Depth as relationships and “doing life together”

This group sees depth in the width and height and breadth of their relationships. Interpersonal relationships where quantitative and qualitative time is spent together is valued and esteemed. The focus is not on shallow acquaintances, but rather the forming of loving communities where they feel they can be open and honest with each other. They thrive in small groups where the purpose of the gathered group is not as important or central as the friendships that will be formed there. They find themselves unfulfilled if they are in a Church where they find it difficult to connect and “do life” together. What is the caution? They like to talk about spiritual things, and yet thorny and prickly issues of doctrine are often avoided as there is the fear it will cause division.  To them the body of Christ  is a family that does not fight and unity is central, and with this can come a failure to take theology seriously. Is that really deep? Relationships are important, but not if it means sacrificing spiritual growth and  doctrinal proficiency at the altar of stagnation.

There are more categories than that,  but it serves to show what a frustrating thing it can be for Pastors who are juggling these complaints from different people, and what cautions can arise for those who have particular views of what “going deep” is. Clearly a certain degree of balance is important. But those are only three examples, and even then the situation isn’t so easy to untangle. Because then you throw in the people who like the preaching, but think the music isn’t deep enough, or who like the music, but think the liturgy isn’t deep enough, or who like the liturgy, but think the sacraments aren’t deep enough, or who like doing like together and the insights for daily living, but think the preaching isn’t deep enough. It is a wild mess  and it is a wearing, weighty thing for any Minister to endure. For this reason we need to check ourselves before we start talking about going deeper and how something isn’t deep enough, particularly at an individual level, lest we needlessly discourage our Pastors without some introspection on our parts.


Almost [saved] Poet Ezekial Azonwu

This is a phenomenal video by the people over at P4CM. Poert Ezekial Azonwu is simply electric and the gospel-centeredness is majestic. I would strongly recommend that everyone watches the whole thing through. And yes- I would give anything to be there. The next Poets lounge is going down October 29, 2011. See http://p4cm.com for more details. Highly Recommended!


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers

Powered by WordPress.com