Recently there was a unique situation that is unfortunately not as unique and rare as it should be. This situation dealt with the people from a local conference called “Shake the Nation” and protesters from local human rights groups. These two groups were arguing about some political and Christian issues. Local press covered the protests and spoke with people from both sides. In all, it was a regular protest scene in a place that is definitely not used to having protests. But it should have been a situation where we can all walk on a Middle Road.
The Christians from the conference held fast to their position and did not relent one bit. They believed that homosexuals are evil, gay marriage is evil, schools should have prayer, and many other stances on Christian-political topics. They were resolute and stubborn on their positions – stubborn to the point that they seemed arrogant and prideful. They were going to do whatever they had to – including upset every person in America – in order to get their way…and subsequently help the people that they just upset. They want to have specific Christian beliefs in politics and policy so that they can unite the very people that they are currently separating!
There needs to be a Middle Road in these types of situations. Sometimes Christians need to set aside their agendas in order to love people and have community with people. It seemed like the Christians at this conference were enjoying the contention and the dissension. That is a horrible attitude, and it had a terrible impact on the reputation of Christians in Idaho.
We have to focus on finding a Middle Road in ways to share our opinions and beliefs.
We have done a pretty poor job so far, and we need to do better.
We need to do better because we can do better.
There is a Middle Road.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Questions about Jesus
Here are just two questions to think about. They are some things that we always say, and we all know what they mean. But how do they work? That is what we should look at. And, please, save your heresy comments until the end.
What does it mean when people say "Jesus loves you".
- He does not physically touch you to give you a hug or a kiss.
- He does not sit next to you to give you comfort.
- He does not audibly talk to you.
- He does not write you notes, emails, texts or anything.
So what does it actually mean? How does Jesus actually love people? How can people feel loved by Jesus? Again, it might sound like heresy or something, but it is important to think about. It is important to know. This generation wants a tangible and relevant God who impacts their life - not a well-worn one liner.
What does it mean when people say "Jesus will be with you".
- He does not physically be there with you.
- He does not audibly talk to you.
- He does not make Himself visible.
So what does it actually mean? Since we cannot see Him or hear Him - how can Jesus be there with people? This generation does not want another copout statement. We want to connect with a real and genuine Jesus.
Again, it is important for us to think about these questions.
But it is equally important for us to allow the questions. We cannot be afraid of these questions. We cannot be uncomfortable with these questions. We need to find the middle ground on these questions and how we do that is this: we find our middle ground through the answers. Questions always lead to answers.
What does it mean when people say "Jesus loves you".
- He does not physically touch you to give you a hug or a kiss.
- He does not sit next to you to give you comfort.
- He does not audibly talk to you.
- He does not write you notes, emails, texts or anything.
So what does it actually mean? How does Jesus actually love people? How can people feel loved by Jesus? Again, it might sound like heresy or something, but it is important to think about. It is important to know. This generation wants a tangible and relevant God who impacts their life - not a well-worn one liner.
What does it mean when people say "Jesus will be with you".
- He does not physically be there with you.
- He does not audibly talk to you.
- He does not make Himself visible.
So what does it actually mean? Since we cannot see Him or hear Him - how can Jesus be there with people? This generation does not want another copout statement. We want to connect with a real and genuine Jesus.
Again, it is important for us to think about these questions.
But it is equally important for us to allow the questions. We cannot be afraid of these questions. We cannot be uncomfortable with these questions. We need to find the middle ground on these questions and how we do that is this: we find our middle ground through the answers. Questions always lead to answers.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Misunderstandings and the Middle Road
Lately, there seems to be some contention between two different camps: the emergent church and the traditional church. (Note, I just use these terms for lack of a better name. I think we know what I am referring to when I use these terms even if they are not exactly correct.) This contention is not necessarily veiled, but it has been openly voiced by many different people and groups. Yet I believe that this contention is not due to inconsistencies with Scripture, open heresy, or unwise interpretations. Many of the arguments between the traditional church and the emergent church are simply because of misunderstandings.
And if we make an effort to better understand each other – I know we can find a middle road to walk on together.
Here is one example.
Rob Bell presents a different view of the story of Jesus walking on water than most traditional teachers and pastors. It is a more personal view that looks more in depth at what Jesus was trying to say specifically to Peter. Bell tries to make this story very applicable to real life and to issues that we struggle with spiritually, emotionally, and mentally everyday.
But David Brickner the Executive Director for Jews for Jesus discourages Rob Bell’s interpretation of this Scripture passage. He believes that Bell’s teaching is harmful and off-centered. He lumps Rob Bell’s teachings in with other harmful teachings that he believes are bringing down the church (Here is the link to the article - http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/2008_04/01).
So is there a real problem here? Do these two men have different goals for the Church and for people? Honestly, I don’t think so. It’s only a misunderstanding.
Brickner is worried about the role of Jesus being watered down. Anything that may take away from the importance of the Lord is what makes this man upset. He views Bell’s message as a replacement. He believes that Bell is replacing a belief in Jesus with a belief in self. But that is not what Bell is talking about at all. Bell wasn’t trying to make the point that we should replace our belief in Jesus with a belief in self. He is simply saying that sometimes we limit our belief in Jesus by having a disbelief in ourselves and our ability to follow Jesus. Brickner was assuming that the question posed was “Who should we believe in?” which has an obvious answer of Jesus. Since Bell’s teaching was about having a belief in ourselves, Brickner obviously had a problem with that. But that was not the question! Bell was not trying to answer that question. He was just stating that one small part of this faith journey is that sometimes our poor self-image and self-esteem can limit our ability to believe in Jesus. These two men were talking about two different things.
If we try to understand each other better, we will be able to find a middle road. We don’t have to be quick to argue or assume the worst even if something is different from what we are used to. We simply need to amend these misunderstandings so that we can connect with each and move on together.
Move on through the Middle Road.
And if we make an effort to better understand each other – I know we can find a middle road to walk on together.
Here is one example.
Rob Bell presents a different view of the story of Jesus walking on water than most traditional teachers and pastors. It is a more personal view that looks more in depth at what Jesus was trying to say specifically to Peter. Bell tries to make this story very applicable to real life and to issues that we struggle with spiritually, emotionally, and mentally everyday.
But David Brickner the Executive Director for Jews for Jesus discourages Rob Bell’s interpretation of this Scripture passage. He believes that Bell’s teaching is harmful and off-centered. He lumps Rob Bell’s teachings in with other harmful teachings that he believes are bringing down the church (Here is the link to the article - http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/2008_04/01).
So is there a real problem here? Do these two men have different goals for the Church and for people? Honestly, I don’t think so. It’s only a misunderstanding.
Brickner is worried about the role of Jesus being watered down. Anything that may take away from the importance of the Lord is what makes this man upset. He views Bell’s message as a replacement. He believes that Bell is replacing a belief in Jesus with a belief in self. But that is not what Bell is talking about at all. Bell wasn’t trying to make the point that we should replace our belief in Jesus with a belief in self. He is simply saying that sometimes we limit our belief in Jesus by having a disbelief in ourselves and our ability to follow Jesus. Brickner was assuming that the question posed was “Who should we believe in?” which has an obvious answer of Jesus. Since Bell’s teaching was about having a belief in ourselves, Brickner obviously had a problem with that. But that was not the question! Bell was not trying to answer that question. He was just stating that one small part of this faith journey is that sometimes our poor self-image and self-esteem can limit our ability to believe in Jesus. These two men were talking about two different things.
If we try to understand each other better, we will be able to find a middle road. We don’t have to be quick to argue or assume the worst even if something is different from what we are used to. We simply need to amend these misunderstandings so that we can connect with each and move on together.
Move on through the Middle Road.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
This Is Not The Church...Part One
There are certain things that the church is doing today that are not representative of what the church is all about. People in the church are furthering the poor reputation of the church through selfish and prideful actions. These actions and instances give the church such a bad name and put us in such a horrible light to the watching world that it makes dedicated Christians want to point at these things and scream "THIS IS NOT THE CHURCH!"
Well, I am going to try to do that now.
Granted, I am the chief of sinners. I understand my own faults, and I will not judge another person any more harshly than I would judge myself. I am not saying that nobody ever makes mistakes. But I am definitely saying this: there are highly visible representations of the church that are damaging to its reputation. These are usually solitary incidents or situations in relation to the thousands of good things that the Church attempts and accomplishes. But for some reason the only images of the church that are available are these damaging ones. So I write these posts to show that these things really are not the church.
I want to try to portray a true representation of the Church to the world. I want to show that these other things are NOT THE CHURCH, and the true church is built upon love, charity, freedom, and faith.
Our reputation has suffered enough from these damaging accounts, and it is time that we tried to show people who we really are.
I believe that one way to do this is to show how these damaging accounts are not the church.
THIS IS NOT THE CHURCH!
Well, I am going to try to do that now.
Granted, I am the chief of sinners. I understand my own faults, and I will not judge another person any more harshly than I would judge myself. I am not saying that nobody ever makes mistakes. But I am definitely saying this: there are highly visible representations of the church that are damaging to its reputation. These are usually solitary incidents or situations in relation to the thousands of good things that the Church attempts and accomplishes. But for some reason the only images of the church that are available are these damaging ones. So I write these posts to show that these things really are not the church.
I want to try to portray a true representation of the Church to the world. I want to show that these other things are NOT THE CHURCH, and the true church is built upon love, charity, freedom, and faith.
Our reputation has suffered enough from these damaging accounts, and it is time that we tried to show people who we really are.
I believe that one way to do this is to show how these damaging accounts are not the church.
THIS IS NOT THE CHURCH!
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Heaven, Hell, and the Kingdom of God
Heaven. Hell. The kingdom of God on earth. What do these three things have in common? They are at the heart of a controversial shift of thought in today’s church. But even in this controversy, there is a middle road for us all to tread that will help us to all work together.
One side indicates that that heaven and hell are the only two things to think about. This thought is mainly attributed to the older generation. Heaven is the only motivation for people on earth. We should live our lives here on earth simply looking forward to the day when we can go to heaven. Also, hell is the other side of our motivation. We come to Jesus because He saves us from hell. We witness to others for the sole reason that they will not go to hell. Everything in our lives revolves around the motivations of heaven and hell.
The other side – the side attributed to the postmodern and emergent church – downplays the role of heaven and hell in a Christian’s. Instead, they focus everything upon living out the kingdom of God on earth. They want to live their lives fully here on earth – not simply waiting for heaven, but working hard to make this world better. Also, they witness to people because they want them to experience the kingdom of God on earth, as well. Everything revolves around living and furthering the kingdom of God on earth.
So why are these two thoughts so opposed? One side can’t believe that a Christian wouldn’t care about heaven or hell. The other side wonders why everything Christians do is only concerning heaven or hell. One side just doesn’t want people to go to hell. The other side wants people to know there is so much more than just heaven and hell. Who’s right? Who’s wrong? What should we be preaching, teaching, living, and believing?
Well, not to be anti-climactic, but we should be doing both. Why does it have to be one or the other? It doesn’t. I will argue that point with anyone. We do not have to choose between these two things. We can preach and teach and live both of these principles – and we need to, as well. It is becoming a divisive issue. The older generation is worried about a weak Christianity that is not focused on what is most important: the eternal state of the soul. The younger generation is frustrated with how the church has forced heaven onto people and scared them with hell over the years. It is beginning to look like lines are being drawn over this issue.
But it does not need to be so. There is a middle road that we can tread. This issue does not have to be either/or, but it can be both/and. Heaven and hell are important factors to the Christian story, but it can be portrayed in a much more relevant way. The kingdom of God is a wonderful motivation, but the eternal state of the soul needs to be of vital importance, as well. We can combine our thoughts. We can mold our beliefs about this issue. Both sides have good hearts; we simply need to find the middle road on this issue: a middle road called “both/and”.
We must find the middle road on this issue.
One side indicates that that heaven and hell are the only two things to think about. This thought is mainly attributed to the older generation. Heaven is the only motivation for people on earth. We should live our lives here on earth simply looking forward to the day when we can go to heaven. Also, hell is the other side of our motivation. We come to Jesus because He saves us from hell. We witness to others for the sole reason that they will not go to hell. Everything in our lives revolves around the motivations of heaven and hell.
The other side – the side attributed to the postmodern and emergent church – downplays the role of heaven and hell in a Christian’s. Instead, they focus everything upon living out the kingdom of God on earth. They want to live their lives fully here on earth – not simply waiting for heaven, but working hard to make this world better. Also, they witness to people because they want them to experience the kingdom of God on earth, as well. Everything revolves around living and furthering the kingdom of God on earth.
So why are these two thoughts so opposed? One side can’t believe that a Christian wouldn’t care about heaven or hell. The other side wonders why everything Christians do is only concerning heaven or hell. One side just doesn’t want people to go to hell. The other side wants people to know there is so much more than just heaven and hell. Who’s right? Who’s wrong? What should we be preaching, teaching, living, and believing?
Well, not to be anti-climactic, but we should be doing both. Why does it have to be one or the other? It doesn’t. I will argue that point with anyone. We do not have to choose between these two things. We can preach and teach and live both of these principles – and we need to, as well. It is becoming a divisive issue. The older generation is worried about a weak Christianity that is not focused on what is most important: the eternal state of the soul. The younger generation is frustrated with how the church has forced heaven onto people and scared them with hell over the years. It is beginning to look like lines are being drawn over this issue.
But it does not need to be so. There is a middle road that we can tread. This issue does not have to be either/or, but it can be both/and. Heaven and hell are important factors to the Christian story, but it can be portrayed in a much more relevant way. The kingdom of God is a wonderful motivation, but the eternal state of the soul needs to be of vital importance, as well. We can combine our thoughts. We can mold our beliefs about this issue. Both sides have good hearts; we simply need to find the middle road on this issue: a middle road called “both/and”.
We must find the middle road on this issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
