Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde

This is my reading of Isaiah 53:

There is the deep magic of the prophetic voice as it speaks of the one to come, and how he will be treated, and what that treatment will accomplish. But there is an even deeper magic here. God was pleased to allow God's own face to be bruised, that in God's own face there would be no beauty that we should desire. God bore our own likeness in God's own self to such a degree that he became a god that would bruise and wound its own creation. That it would become an angry, jealous tyrant laying waste its own creation in fits of rage by flood and pestilence and sword. That it would strike its servant dead for daring to reach out and steady the Ark of its very Covenant. That it would rejoice as the heads of infants were dashed against the rocks.

This is Odin, becoming stronger as the blood of the fallen flows. This is Kali dancing on the body of her beloved. This is the Morrígan, washing the bloodstained garments of those about to die. This is the very creator, being birthed into its own creation as a projection of our own duality of darkness and light. Just as all gods arise out of our collective unconsciousness, bearing to their very core the conflicted iniquity and beauty of us all.

And why should this god be any different? Why should this god not die, as all gods die, when they have worn out their welcome. When we have hid our faces from them and despised them for their ugliness, their pettiness, and their ultimate ineffectiveness.

And yet here is deepest magic of all. Here is a god who did not just take upon itself the punishment for our sins. Here is a god who suffered itself to BECOME sin. Here is a god become so twisted and depraved that it would birth an entire race of children with the express intention of killing (or in some versions eternally torturing) all but a small remnant. A god become the ugly thing that clawed and crawled its way out of the darkest places of the human heart, gorging on the body and blood of sacrifice, until one day we could no longer keep pretending we believed.

And on the day of our unbelief this god died. And it is good that this god died. For when a god dies, might not something it is bearing in its own body die with it?

But the story didn't die. A myth is woven into the fabric of the universe. And in the telling and retelling the myth is being redeemed. The story is being rehabilitated. The monsters of our own creation come to be seen as more than they once appeared. There is beauty, truth and goodness woven into the tapestry of sorrow, death and pain.

We get the god we ask for. We get the only god our imaginations are able to conceive. And as we grow to ask for better gods we begin to catch a glimpse of what was always there behind the veil. Of that which the seers and the prophets, the oracles and the shaman, the dreamers and the mystics, have been hinting at, however imperfectly, all along.

The death of Jesus was apropos: all gods must die.

Then when the ship rode the water, fires mounted on the ship. And in the blaze of the fires one was seen bending over the body of Baldur and whispering a father's last farewell into his dead son's ear. It was Odin All-Father. Then Odin went down off the ship and all the fires rose into a mighty burning. Speechlessly the Æsir and the Vanir watched with tears streaming down their faces while all things lamented, crying, "Baldur the Beautiful is dead, is dead." -Norse myth

The Son...can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. -John 5:19

But stories don't end, they get retold. And the tale grows in the telling. And one day we'll tell it aright.

The arc becomes a circle.

As above, so below.

When I got to the section where Jesus on the cross forgives them I said to myself, I might not even know if God exists, but if the giant nihilistic shit-hole we call planet earth is going to have hope in it I'm going to arbitrarily, but for aesthetically persuasive reasons, choose the narrative where the homeless dead Jew tells the person who just killed him, in front of God, "forgive him", 'cause that's beautiful.

-Tripp Fuller

https://homebrewedchristianity.com/2016/08/25/live-from-vancouver-with-sallie-mcfague-and-john-cobb/

Well I'm actually still alive... who knew...

Deconstruction has (thankfully) finally ended. I waited all this time to be sure it really was over. Apparently it is.

Emerging from the rubble we find that god is dead. Good riddance I say. God was a right nasty old bugger who deserved to be deaded. That god was no different from the rest of us who bore the seeds of our own deadness in our very DNA. The "Walking Dead" you might say. We kill off the "other" and find that they come snarling back to take their revenge (ISIS kills the gays in Orlando and Christians everywhere find themselves a bit confused).

Or it's a Game of Thrones where the Donald, the Bern and the Hillary battle it out for a seat on that most uncomfortable of seats. All iron swords piercing your backside in some demented S&M game where the winner gets flayed and frozen in the winter of our discontent is coming so pray to the mother of dragons for some goddamn heat.

More to follow I presume. Meanwhile this Amber by birth has passed (ever so briefly) through Orange and thought Green was a right nice place to hang out til Teal came calling and I never looked back. If that confuses you then good... it confuses me too. Check out a bit of integral theory here.

Oh... and lest you worry about the fate of my immortal soul... I'm a bigger fan of Jesus then I've ever been before. It's just that his father turns out to be a lot different than what I'd been led to believe.

Again... more to follow.

Peace out!

Could Hitler be "Saved" - A Thought Experiment

Having been around the around the Christian theological block a few times I think I have a pretty good basic grasp on the subject of salvation (the theo-nerds call it soteriology) and various theories of the atonement, eschatology, the afterlife and so on. I was reading a blog post about Hitler in Heaven and I thought it would be fun to try and figure out just how that might be possible, or even IF that might be possible, within the various doctrinal systems that would pertain to such a thing. I'm sure I'm over simplifying, but here is a quick list of possible scenarios that could allow for Hitler being in Heaven. Note that these scenarios fall within the generally accepted Christian range of belief systems. Certainly people will argue vigorously between the more Reformed side (options 1 and 2) and the more Arminian side (option 3), but you generally won't get thrown out as a heretic for falling into either of these camps.

1. Eternal Security (Once Saved Always Saved)

2. Election

3. Deathbed Conversion

So lets quickly think through these options.

Eternal Security, referred to by the nerdy as perseverance of the saints, would hold that anyone, even someone like Hitler, could technically make it into Heaven by virtue of having had a valid and true conversion experience at some point in their life. If it was a true and valid conversion experience, then God is essentially honor bound (by virtue of certain passages of scripture) to honor that salvation experience. Of course the sheer lunacy of applying this doctrine in a rigid and un-nuanced way has resulted in a sizable number of escape clauses that God can presumably use to avoid having Heaven populated by the likes of a Hitler. Most popular would be the question of whether or not the conversion experience was true and valid. It seems to go without saying that if Hitler was going to make it into Heaven purely by virtue of his true and valid conversion experience at the age of 15 or so that it wasn't actually a true and valid conversion experience. Or something like that...

Election is the idea that God chose in eternity past, before the creation of the world, just who would be saved and who would be damned. From this it generally follows that the elect person would (obviously?) have a conversion experience at which point the perseverance of the saints kicks in and we can jump up to the above paragraph and follow it through from there. Well sort of. With election you don't have the possibility of an untrue or invalid conversion experience so God doesn't have that escape clause open to him should an elect Hitler make it to the pearly gates. Fortunately you can just push things back up the line a bit and deduce that if an elect Hitler showed up at the pearly gates he wasn't actually elect. Never was and never could have been. Phew... 

There is a school of thought that subscribes to once saved always saved but doesn't subscribe to election (Free Will Baptists, etc.). In other words, the conversion experience is a matter of free will but once you've had the conversion experience your will (at least in regards to salvation) is no longer free. Technically your will in regards to, oh lets say, genocide is still free, but those who commit genocide obviously didn't have a true and valid conversion experience... And, well, you get the point...

Having eliminated the first two options we are obviously left with the deathbed conversion. Interestingly the deathbed conversion works just fine with the first two options so I guess we really didn't eliminate them after all. But anyways... the idea here is that a person could live a completely horrible life, they could be as evil as, lets say, a Hitler, and if, for whatever reason, they had a conversion experience at some point prior to their death (even if only minutes or seconds prior), they're good to go. They've got their pearly gate pass in the pocket of their white robe and they're golden.

As I said, this works fine with option 1. They were elect, but perhaps for the purposes of demonstrating God's glory it was determined that Hitler wouldn't have his actual conversion until right before his death. In Hitler's case this is made a little harder by the fact that his death was a suicide (historically a sin), but there's still at least a second or two of consciousness after the trigger is pulled for the conversion to take place. It also works fine with option 2 for pretty much the same reasons.

I don't know about you, but this all leaves me a bit dissatisfied. However, I assure you this conversation has been had many many times in Christian circles. I've been a part of many many such conversations. I don't think I've ever heard a thoughtful and sincere Christian say that it was simply impossible that Hitler could make it to Heaven. Most people are pretty sure he won't be there, but all the various doctrinal systems pretty much have to allow for Hitler to make it to Heaven.

I'd say most people, regardless of their theology, would agree that Hitler showing up in Heaven via any of the above scenarios is kind of hard to swallow. But we have to accept the possibility, because after all to deny it would be to essentially deny that God is all powerful and God can make anything work out. Even a sociopath showing up at the pearly gates with a free pass. Another thing that makes it hard to swallow is that inherent in all of the above doctrinal systems is the idea that when a "saved" person dies they are immediately made perfect (theo-nerds call it glorification) either at the moment of death or at the moment of the resurrection (depending on your doctrinal system). They were "counted" as perfect at the moment of their conversion, but are actually "made" perfect at that post-death point. Nowhere in here is there any notion of making restitution for wrongs done or having to suffer any sort of punishment for the vile deeds done. At least not for Protestants. Catholics have purgatory which, at least in the case of Hitler, sounds pretty good.

If you made it this far you should be wondering something, and if you're not it's probably because I'm not a very good writer. You should be wondering how it's possible that anyone could NOT end up in Heaven. If God is powerful enough to get even a Hitler into Heaven by election, by choosing them before they were ever born and then working things out from there, why wouldn't he just choose everyone? On the other hand, if God can step in between the time a trigger is pulled and the time a brain is splattered and bring even a person like Hitler to conversion, then why wouldn't he do this for everyone? How do we know he WON'T do it for everyone?

By this point you're probably coming to the conclusion that this whole things is starting to get a bit silly. How did we get to the point where we've got to make up all these convoluted scenario's when trying to figure out how a person like Hitler could make it to Heaven? Maybe all our systems and doctrines and rules have boxed us, and God, into a framework that seems to make sense if you don't really push too hard on it, but once you really start pushing at it, and drawing things out to their logical conclusions, you end up with scenarios and arguments that are just plain silly.

Maybe the real story of how God will get people like you and me, even people like Hitler, into Heaven actually makes sense. Maybe it is a lot less silly, and a whole lot more beautiful, than we're making it out to be.

Stay tuned...

George MacDonald and C. Baxter Kruger

I have read, listened to, and watched, a huge amount of "Christian" (and other types of spiritual) content during the past decade. I have followed more rabbit trails than I care to remember. In that sea of words, George MacDonald and C. Baxter Kruger are the two voices that have risen buoyantly to the surface and that I have been unable to sink with my caustic volleys of hurt, fear, anger, doubt and suspicion.

C.S. Lewis famously said of MacDonald:

I know hardly any other writer who seems to be closer, or more continually close, to the Spirit of Christ Himself.

In the introduction to an online version of Unspoken Sermons is this quote from Dr. Rolland Hein:

The purpose of Unspoken Sermons is to arouse the reader’s will so to choose, by imparting a clearer understanding of what God’s Will is. It is not to argue doctrines intellectually. It is not to formulate a systematic theology. MacDonald’s insights are not for the mind alone, but for the heart. They afford the reader glimpses of truths which to the child-heart of the true Christian are undeniable. MacDonald avows: “I believe that no teacher should strive to make men think as he thinks, but to lead them to the living Truth , to the Master Himself, of whom alone they can learn anything, who will make them in themselves know what is true by the very seeing of it.” The careful reader (and this material may not be read otherwise) will certainly have such a confrontation with Truth in the pages ahead. More than once reading here has brought sudden tears to my eyes and an involuntary thrill to my breast, and I have seldom had a stronger feeling of certainty that I was standing in the presence of valid insights into the Eternal Mystery than during the reading of these Unspoken Sermons.

When I read that quote I knew EXACTLY what he meant. The "sudden tears" and "involuntary thrill" have happened many times while listening to the words of both these men. I will go one step further than Dr. Hein: I have NEVER had a stronger feeling of certainty that I was standing in the presence of valid insights into the Eternal Mystery than during the reading of these Unspoken Sermons. Indeed, it is only now that I am nearing the end of reading them that I can start to imagine being able to read the Bible and discovering the Christ in its pages that for so long has been hidden by the "doctrines" and "teachings" of men (not to mention my own self-obsessed blindness).

George MacDonald - Unspoken Sermons (all these are free)
Kindle: http://amzn.com/B00849E492
Audio: http://librivox.org/unspoken-sermons-by-george-macdonald/
Web: http://www.online-literature.com/george-macdonald/unspoken-sermons/

C. Baxter Kruger - Lecture (audio or video)
http://www.perichoresis.org/free-resources/free-lecture-series.html

I would highly recommend the audio version of Unspoken Sermons recently made available at Librivox by David Baldwin. It is very obvious that it was a labor of love and I feel like I am in the presence of MacDonald himself when I listen. Blessings upon you David.

The Problem with Unbelief

This post by Peter Rollins is absolutely stunning. I have been trying, and failing, to make this connection for years. To think that the root of my traumatic relationship with Christianity and Church was believing TOO much. And here I always thought the problem was my doubt. This makes so much sense.

The John 14:6 Challenge

Recently a challenge was given over at Homebrewed Christianity. The challenge was to record our responses to the John 14:6 quote bomb about Jesus being the exclusive way to God. I'm not sure if I'll send this in, but I at least wanted to commit some thoughts to writing.

There are a lot of ways this passage could be, and has been, spun. I think that scholarly examinations of the text have proved, and will prove, very useful and enlightening. As with most texts, it will be possible to come at this from a variety of angles and wrest from it a variety of nuanced interpretations which will mostly be congruent with the mindset and tradition the interpreters bring with them. I would like to simply respond with a story.

My wife was raised in a home that was essentially non-religious. Her father is of Jewish ancestry and her mother of Christian, but both are non-practicing. As far as I can tell they are not Atheist's, they simply seem to have a willingness to accept that God is whomever or whatever God is, and don't seem to have any compelling need to "figure it out".

Of course my story is the exact opposite. I was raised in a very biblicist and legalistic Christian environment. Our denomination was so concerned about maintaining doctrinal purity that we even had our own schools. It was of paramount importance that we knew and understood the (somewhat distinctive) fundamental beliefs of our church and we were guilted into encouraged to "share our faith" whenever and wherever we could. We were so conservative and confident in our beliefs that we would consider even the Southern Baptists as apostate and liberal.

By the time I married my wife I was no longer attending church on a regular basis, but I still held to the beliefs instilled in me by so many years of attending church and 14 years of "christian" education in denominational schools. My wife was attending a United Methodist church and had no problems identifying as a Christian, but was completely free of religious baggage (a state I envy more and more all the time).

Several years ago, early in our marriage, we had our first theological discussion. I think it was prompted by seeing a couple of LDS missionaries riding their bikes into a neighborhood. The conversation reached its crux when I stated that however genuine their faith and admirable their intentions, since they didn't believe the right things about Jesus and were not "christian" (as defined by my beliefs of course), they were almost certainly lost. My wife then calmly asked if that meant her father would not go to heaven even though he was a very good man and a kind and loving father. I immediately kicked into full-apologetics mode and explained why it didn't matter how good or kind he was, it all hinged on him accepting the free gift of salvation offered by Christ. She, again quite calmly, made a statement that has triggered a complete deconstruction of not only what I believe, but the very nature of belief. She simply said that when she stood before God she would ask God where her father was (heaven or hell), and if God said her father was in hell then she would reject God to God's face and go to be with her father. That she would rather spend an eternity in hell with her kind and loving father than spend an eternity in heaven with such a monstrous being.

Only someone steeped in the biblicist/evangelical mindset can understand the way in which that statement rocked me to my core. Here is someone I love saying something that, on the one hand, makes perfect sense, but on the other hand seems utterly blasphemous and horrifying. I tried my best over the ensuing months to convince her of the error of her ways, but to no avail. You see, her threat to reject God was purely theoretical because she never had believed, and never could believe, that such a scenario could ever happen. Her worldview and view of God just simply wouldn't allow for such a thing to happen. She instinctively knows, without any biblical, philosophical or theological education, that she can affirm the value, and even inspiration, of the scriptures, while at the same time understanding that all attempts to construct airtight theologies and interpretations of scripture is simply an impossibility. And this causes her absolutely no angst, concern or confusion.

It has always been so important to me to "get it right", to find the truth and figure out what I should believe in order (I suppose) to "be saved" or avoid hell. My wife instinctively knows that trying to define and believe the right things, as it comes to these matters, is not only impossible, but is totally wrongheaded and a supreme example of missing the point. She instinctively understands that following Jesus is not a matter of believing the right things about Jesus, but is a matter of actually following him. She instinctively understands that even if John 14:6 means that the only way her father can come to God is through Jesus, that, far from being a scary thing, that's really quite a good thing. She instinctively understands that if Jesus was just a good man or a prophet whose example we should follow, that her father is in pretty good shape. But that if Jesus is actually God incarnate who came on a mission to save the whole world then he probably, being God and all, is able to actually accomplish that. In which case her father is in even better shape.

So when people quote bomb John 14:6 at me, I can't do any better than my wife. The only thing I still lack is the utter and complete innocence and guilelessness with which she can completely fail to understand why John 14:6 is a problem. May she never lose that childlike faith. May she never ever hold up the Bible and eclipse the face of God.

Believing the Right Things

I recently received an emailing from the Christian Research Institute regarding a book they are putting out by their president, Hank Hanegraaff (The Bible Answer Man). This book apparently attempts to provide "right" answers to questions regarding heaven, hell, near death experiences (NDEs) and other "afterlife" related subjects.

After a short discussion centered on a particular account of a near death experience, Hank wrote the following.

I have no doubt that Colton and the others had actual subjective experiences, and I am in no way questioning either their sincerity or their motives in sharing those experiences. But our culture has forgotten one very simple fact: you can be sincere and still be wrong.

This is why we must “test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Truth matters, and what we believe about the afterlife will matter for eternity, so it’s vital that we get it right.

I've written my new book Afterlife to help you “get it right” and provide biblical answers to your questions about what life will be like in heaven, the theology of hell, NDEs, and even whether your pets will be with you after death.

I have no quarrel with Hank's particular opinions regarding NDE's and the afterlife. He is welcome to his interpretations and opinions just like anyone else. What I do want to focus in on is the following sentence: "Truth matters, and what we believe about the afterlife will matter for eternity, so it's vital that we get it right."

It wasn't all that many years ago that I would have accepted that statement without batting an eye. And I suspect many in Hank's target audience (fairly conservative, evangelical, etc.) would not bat an eye. But when I read that sentence today I was disturbed by the ramifications, and confused logic, of that way of thinking. If I'm not mistaken, what Hank is saying is that our eternal destiny is riding on our ability to believe the right things about our eternal destiny.

It's not difficult for the average person with access to the Internet to discover that Christians down through history, and Christians across the doctrinal spectrum today, differ widely on their beliefs about the afterlife. Even Christians who put a premium on the inerrancy of Biblical inspiration differ quite significantly from one group to another and even one individual to another. So should we actually imagine God, at the final judgement, making decisions based on what a person believed about the afterlife? From a purely statistical standpoint it is highly unlikely, given the broad spectrum of Biblical interpretation on the matter, that any one group or individual would have managed to "get it right".

If salvation is primarily a matter of "getting it right" in terms of our beliefs, whether they be about the afterlife or pretty much anything else, I'm afraid none of us is looking very good. As my wife always says, "we're all going to be in for some big surprises when we get to the other side. And those who are most certain they've 'got it right' will be in for the biggest surprises of all". But those surprises, as she'd say, won't be the terrifying surprises Hank assumes so many will encounter, they'll be joyful surprises as we encounter the "depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past tracing out!" - Romans 11:33

The Faces of God

A little girl recently asked her mother why God made sickness. The mother, understandably, found it hard to formulate an answer to this question. I think anyone, regardless of their education or sophistication, would find it hard to answer that question. Especially to a little girl.

I was thinking about this and I realized that answers to these types of questions, especially to children, in some very real sense create God. God may well be an ontological reality, a being in relationship to the actuality of time and space. But the only God we can know and interact with is the God that has been created in our minds via language. God may even be able to work, directly and indirectly, to shape and mold our image of God, but our perception of God will always be, for us, the only God we can interact with. So the answer to the question of why God made sickness necessarily implicates God, and creates God, in relation to the answer.

Think about the various answers that could be, and have been, given to the little girl's question. These answers come from a variety of cultural and religious backgrounds and reflect a huge diversity in terms of world view. Even in the Christian and Jewish scriptures there is no cohesive picture of God, but rather we see a God who is seen and depicted by the various authors speaking out of their own time, place and situation.

And so God is created and recreated across time and place and given form and meaning by the language of the prophets, the mystics, the seers and all who would speak and think and write about the divine. Assuming God is a being, with a "self" and a purpose, how would God deal with this? How would God accomplish God's purposes, whatever they might be, knowing full well that to some God wears the face of anger and vengeance, though tempered by mercy and love. To others God wears the face of a kindly grandfather, giving good gifts but unaware of, or unable to do much about, the sickness, pain and death. To others God wears the face of indifference, unmoved by the cries of creation, watching time and space unfold according to a plan laid down before time and space came into being.

But yet I believe God must be wise and good enough to wear all of these different persona's and even take responsibility for the necessary results of those personas and fold those results into a deeper reality that lies behind the reality that we create by our perceptions and our language. God allows God to become the God we create, because that is the only God we can relate to.

Some folks, and I am one, believe that God went so far as to literally become a human being. This God/Man has since become about as multifaceted as the God he called Abba, but I do think he did something that has yet to be fully understood. I suspect that from the rubble and ruins of failed attempts and disastrous misunderstandings something new will emerge that has a face, not of our own creation, but one that arises out of the communal body that has become God's own body. And this face will be the true face of God, and with this body God will heal all things, including the sickness that so troubled the little girl.

How Do We Respond?

To you who are ready for the truth, I say this: Love your enemies. Let them bring out the best in you, not the worst. When someone gives you a hard time, respond with the energies of prayer for that person. If someone slaps you in the face, stand there and take it. If someone grabs your shirt, giftwrap your best coat and make a present of it. If someone takes unfair advantage of you, use the occasion to practice the servant life. No more tit-for-tat stuff. Live generously.

Here is a simple rule of thumb for behavior: Ask yourself what you want people to do for you; then grab the initiative and do it for them! If you only love the lovable, do you expect a pat on the back? Run-of-the-mill sinners do that. If you only help those who help you, do you expect a medal? Garden-variety sinners do that. If you only give for what you hope to get out of it, do you think that’s charity? The stingiest of pawnbrokers does that.

I tell you, love your enemies. Help and give without expecting a return. You’ll never—I promise—regret it. Live out this God-created identity the way our Father lives toward us, generously and graciously, even when we’re at our worst. Our Father is kind; you be kind. Luke 6:27-36 (The Message)

Loving our Muslim neighbors unconditionally

As usual I do not follow the news. As usual there are some things that refuse to be ignored. I suppose that's a good thing.

Apparently the Mosque near ground zero is one such thing. Frankly I just don't get why people are so worked up about it. But then, since I stopped following the news, and especially since I stopped listening to the political talking heads, it has become increasingly difficult to understand why people get so worked up about a lot of things. It's amazing how different things look when you're not being constantly harangued by the frantic, hand waving purveyors of doom and gloom.

Anyway, I could write a blog post putting forth my feelings about the whole thing, but someone already took the time to write an excellent blog post about it. This is what I would write (I just wouldn't write it as well).

Loving our Muslim neighbors unconditionally

Treadmills

In a (now not so) recent post I said that everyone should stop everything until they know and understand their place in relation to God. I want to expand on that because I think it's absolutely critical that we get this. Most of us, if we're honest, do not live lives that are full of peace, joy and love. Oh we might have moments of bliss, brought on by a moving song, a great movie, or some religious ritual. We might have the occasional feeling of satisfaction when we've done a good deed or reached out to a hurting person. We might catch glimpses of glory in nature, or in a moment when a relationship is actually working well. But, by and large, most of us, in the words of Thoreau, lead lives of quiet desperation. Let's face it, heroic moments in a movie, complete with stirring soundtrack and professional editing, never seem quite so heroic when we're the ones facing sickness or debt; a looming temptation to sin, or a relationship that brings much more pain than joy.

When faced with these realities of life, what do we tend to do? If we're not inclined to any sort of spiritual faith, or belief in some sort of god, then we might, like Sisyphus, simply hitch up our pants and start pushing the boulder back up the hill. Grab some happiness where it can be found and just get on with the business of living. If we're of the Christian persuasion, or, I imagine, of most any other religious persuasion, I think we do the same thing. We hitch up our pants, get on whatever religious treadmill we happen to currently be in possession of, and start getting with the program. And, if you hadn't noticed, there are a lot of different treadmills.

There's the treadmill of right doctrine. There's the treadmill of right living. There's the treadmill of healthful living. There's the treadmill of theology. There's the treadmill of political action. There's the treadmill of church attendance (or avoidance). There's the treadmill of good works. There's the treadmill of a daily devotional and Bible reading. There's the treadmill of family values. There's the treadmill of Sabbath keeping. There's the treadmill of obsessing over end time prophecy and last days events. There's the treadmill of rediscovering and restoring long lost "truths". There's the treadmill of spiritual formation (the spiritual disciplines). There's the treadmill of missions. There's just no end of treadmills. Many of them are perfectly fine (and necessary) things, as long as we don't expect them to actually take us somewhere. Funny thing about treadmills is that, great as they are for strengthening and toning our bodies, they don't actually get us to any real destination.

So here we are, huffing and puffing along on whatever treadmill we happen to currently be on, and one day we look around and realize we haven't gotten anywhere. Oh, we might have conquered a particular sin, or discovered some new (or long lost) religious truth. We might have established a habit of regular church attendance, or we might have set ourselves free from the chains of the institutional church and started our own house church. Hooray! Hallelujah! But when we're quiet, when the trials of life hit, we realize we're no more peaceful or happy or at rest then we were when we started on the treadmill. And, just maybe, we're actually a little less hopeful, a little more questioning, a little more cynical.

So what do we do? We start looking around, we might do some Google searches, we might read another book, we might find another spiritual teacher, we might find a different church, we might start our own church, in short we get a different treadmill. And then we're back on there huffing and puffing and working that treadmill for all it's worth. Because this time, by golly, we've found it. This is the holy grail, this is the secret, this is the pathway to God. Maybe, just maybe, if we work this treadmill hard enough God will finally stop being disappointed with us. Maybe we'll finally stop feeling guilty and condemned for not being good enough. Maybe our dad will finally think we're a beautiful young lady or a brave and strong young man. Maybe our grandpa will finally think we're a good enough Christian. Maybe our mom will finally get off our back and stop nagging at us all the time. Maybe we'll finally stop being terrified that when we face the judgment seat of Christ he's going to shake his head sadly and turn his face from us forever.

Tell me something. Has it worked for you yet? How many treadmills have you tried? What treadmill are you currently working? Did you just start on this treadmill all bright eyed and hopeful, or are you getting ready to get off your current treadmill because it just doesn't seem to be working like it used to?

Think about it. Really think about it. And then think about this.

A parent considering adoption gets a picture and description of a little child from some other country. In their hearts they know this child belongs in their family. So they set into motion the legal proceedings to complete an adoption. Nothing that child can do can prevent those legal proceedings from taking place. In fact, before that child even knows the parents exist that child might already be legally adopted and have a place in the family. It might still be weeks or months before the child is actually brought home. It's not the child's choice, there is nothing the child ever did to earn that adoption and there is nothing the child could do to prevent it from taking place.

That's you. You're the adopted child. There's not a treadmill in the world that could get you adopted in the first place, and there's not a treadmill in the world that can keep you adopted (or get you unadopted for that matter). It's not up to you. In fact it happened before you were even born. Here it is in black and white from the pen of Paul:

How blessed is God! And what a blessing he is! He's the Father of our Master, Jesus Christ, and takes us to the high places of blessing in him. Long before he laid down earth's foundations, he had us in mind, had settled on us as the focus of his love, to be made whole and holy by his love. Long, long ago he decided to adopt us into his family through Jesus Christ. (What pleasure he took in planning this!) He wanted us to enter into the celebration of his lavish gift-giving by the hand of his beloved Son.

Because of the sacrifice of the Messiah, his blood poured out on the altar of the Cross, we're a free people—free of penalties and punishments chalked up by all our misdeeds. And not just barely free, either. Abundantly free! He thought of everything, provided for everything we could possibly need, letting us in on the plans he took such delight in making. He set it all out before us in Christ, a long-range plan in which everything would be brought together and summed up in him, everything in deepest heaven, everything on planet earth.

Ephesians 1:3-10 (The Message)

And just in case you don't like The Message, and also because there are some cool things highlighted by another version, here is the same passage from the TNIV:

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

Ephesians 1:3-10 (TNIV)

In the light of this passage let's think about some of the reasons we might get on a treadmill.

• So God will bless us? We've already been blessed with "every spiritual blessing in Christ".
• So God will accept us? He not only accepted us, He CHOSE us before the creation of the world.
• So we can be a part of God's family? We've already been adopted. It's a done deal.
• So we can be holy? Well, that's exactly what He chose us for, "to be made whole and holy by his love" as the Message has it. We don't make ourselves holy, as should be obvious to anyone who's tried that treadmill for any length of time.

I wish like everything I could just end this right here. If I could end it right here, and if you actually believed what I'm telling you, then that would be wonderful and no more would need to be said. But of course the believing bit is the hard bit isn't it? Some of us, if we're honest, just don't really believe it. It seems too good to be true. And some of us immediately start thinking that if it's true then everyone would be saved (I wonder what that says about us if that's our first thought?).

So to wrap this up let's look at one of the most excellent summaries of the gospel in the whole Bible.

For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again. So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God. -2 Corinthians 5:14-20 (TNIV)

Holy Spirit, give us ears to hear the truth. Help us to finally accept who we really are and stop trying to get somewhere on our own steam. Help us to get off our treadmills. Open our eyes so we can see that we're already in the lap of our Papa. Jesus dove headfirst into the darkness of our alienation, grabbed hold of us and brought us back into the circle of love, the other centered dance of the Holy Trinity.

• Who does Christ's love compel? Us (that includes you).
• Who did Christ die for? All (that includes you).
• Therefore who died? All (that includes you).
• Who can be regarded in the same old way? No one (that includes you and everyone else).
• Who was reconciled to God in Christ? The world (that includes you).
• Whose sins are not counted against them? I'll leave that one up to you to figure out.

I implore you, I beg you with everything that is in me, to stop trying to reconcile yourself to God. You (YES YOU) have already been reconciled to God in Christ. So again, I implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.

This is not something you actively do. This is not some frustrating game God is playing where Jesus fulfills a legal transaction but it doesn't actually become real until you reach out under your own power and take the promissory note from his hand. In that model, even though it reveals a lot of beautiful truth, your reconciliation is still dependent upon something you actively do (reaching out under your own power and taking the promissory note).

The difference is so subtle that it's almost invisible, but the ramifications are huge. So huge in fact that we have entire faith traditions (i.e. Calvinism and Arminianism) built up over the centuries due to the natural outgrowth of philosophical paths which started out just a little bit off the mark on this point.

No, being reconciled is not something you do, it is in fact the cessation of doing anything at all and the acceptance of the fact that the "doing" has already been done. Yes, I know the word "acceptance" has an active component to it. I think the English language simply fails us here. A student of Greek might help us out by talking about the different voices (active, passive, middle). I'll just wrap it up by returning to the original metaphor of the treadmill. Instead of slogging forward trying to obtain something that's always just out of reach, and instead of stepping off the treadmill and chucking the whole thing altogether (Atheism), just stop and let yourself fall off the back of the treadmill where you'll finally discover that you are right where you've always been, in the embrace of the Trinity.

Then and only then, only when you know who you are and where you are, will you be able to start truly living. Then and only then will repentance and baptism and forgiveness and taking up of crosses and discipleship actually start making sense. Only then will you be able to actually get back on some of those treadmills, not as a way to find inclusion in the triune life of God, but as someone who is held, with every step, in the unfailing embrace of the Trinity.

I can't take it anymore

I try not to read or follow the news. I definitely stay as far away from politics as I can. Still, no one can live in a complete vacuum. As such I am aware of the oil spill in the gulf. I am going to say something in response to this tragedy. I don't care that it might not be reasonable. I don't care that it might not make common sense. I just don't care. This is not political, because as you would know if you knew me I no longer can tell the difference between our political parties and don't have even the tiniest amount of faith in any party or politician. OK here goes:

I am green. I guess I was green before I knew there was such a thing. I identify more with the Sierra Club than I do with the country club. I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, more than that I literally grew up living in the wilderness. I guess you could say my dad is one of the last remaining mountain men. It's only been through living so far away from there for so many years that I've begun to realize just what wilderness means and how important it is to me that it continue to exist and that it be protected.

I have tried in the past to conform to the religious right and the conservative politics that I thought were my "Christian" duty. I couldn't do it. I don't care how much sense it makes. I don't care if conservatism can be successfully won and argued in a logical debate. I just don't care. I don't care that I'm having a knee jerk, bleeding heart, tree hugging, save the whales, idealistic reaction. I honestly don't care. You can make all the arguments you like about the necessity of offshore drilling or drilling in Alaska. I heard them all. Heck I've argued them myself. They may even be good arguments. I don't care.

I'm not interested in logic. I'm not interested in what's best for our country or our economy. I don't even care if the result is we all revert back to 3'rd world living conditions because we can't sustain our way of living without raping the land. To HELL with our way of living. I mean that literally, because I honestly believe that's where God will send our way of living at the last day.

In Genesis 1 God told our ancestors to "be responsible for fish in the sea and birds in the air, for every living thing that moves on the face of the Earth. (The Message)". For too long certain elements of Christianity have heard the traditional King James type translation of that verse and have used it as an excuse to exploit God's good works of nature for their own advancement without any thought to protecting, respecting and cherishing it as the thing of beauty and grandeur that it is.

I think we Christians ought to be sold out for a few things. Not everyone can do everything of course, but to the point of personal sacrifice and beyond here are some of the types of things I think we ought to give our lives for.

1. Fighting Aids in Aftica.
2. Fighting poverty all over the world.
3. Fighting racism in our own hearts and minds and in our own back yards.
4. Standing in solidarity with the poor and persecuted all over this world.
5. Working for reconciliation between ethnic groups, religious groups, and other groups that need it.
6. Reconciliation with first-nations.
7. Standing against corporate greed and consumerism in favor of the environment.

Ok. Just had to get that off my chest. Now I'm off to figure out how to put some action to all this talk.

It's an Oak... No, it's a Maple

I was reading a popular Christian blog this morning and the following statement jumped out at me.

Most books are easily-verified, easily fact-checked. A book discussing a particular doctrine can be easily held up to the Scripture and seen immediately to be true or false.

I suppose it must be really nice to actually believe that. I suppose in some ways the Christian life would be a lot simpler if the Scriptures were actually a concise doctrinal treatise written in our own contemporary language by authors who were born and raised in our own time and place. I know that in the Christian world we certainly have such books and every major era of history has certainly produced their own versions of such books. If I were so inclined I could hold up a book to something like Calvin's Institutes or Barth's Church Dogmatics and see quite easily if it were true or false in relation to a particular theologian's interpretation of Scripture.

I think it is certainly true that the Christian Church has been able to agree on a basic foundation of common fundamental beliefs. We can all pretty much agree with the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed. We can even pretty much all agree on the basics outlined by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. However, there are very few books that discuss doctrines at the basic fundamental level contained in the creeds or Mere Christianity, and those books that are at that level certainly don't cause anyone to desire to hold it up to anything, Scripture or otherwise, to see if it is true or false.

No, the books the blogger is talking about are books that deal with doctrines that are not universally agreed upon within the Christian community. These might be books that deal with doctrines that are unique to, or at least uniquely interpreted by, a particular denomination, or they might be books wherein a particular theologian, scholar or layperson is arguing for something unique to themselves or their own smaller group. Thousands upon thousands of these types of books have been written, read and argued about for the last 2 thousand years. While it is certainly true that anyone can hold one of these books up to the Scriptures, it is also true that the conclusions drawn as to its truthfulness or falsehood will be quite varied and will have more to do with the examiners place in a particular tradition or denomination then it will have to do with the examiners ability to know exactly how to correctly interpret the relevant passages of scripture.

My point is this. If the Holy Scriptures had been intended to be the basis for a comprehensive Systematic Theology we would not have these thousands of books espousing their own particular interpretations of doctrine. But since we do, and since the debates, arguments and holy wars continue unabated, I think I will throw down the following, sure to be contested, statement (actually it's already been made and contested).

Apparently the Scriptures were never intended by God to be the basis for a comprehensive Systematic Theology and set of doctrinal statements.

Certainly the Scriptures contain exactly what God desired them to contain. And certainly they are completely sufficient for His purposes. I suppose it's just possible that in our thirst for knowledge and understanding we have focused so intently on the botanical structures of the individual trees that we have lost our ability (to some extent at least) to see the beauty and grandeur of the forest as a whole.

What's with all the beeping?

I've been reading Tim Challies blog from time to time lately. I find it's a pretty good balance to my usual diet of heterodoxy . I think all in all he is amazingly gracious given his milieu.

Anyway, a recent post of Tim's (having nothing to do with 'doxies of any sort) captures the frustration I'm sure many of us feel in this always-connected world of smart phones, email and the scintillating thumb-dance of the chronic texters.

If you can fit it in between sending that email, checking your voice mail and texting your pal about the latest youtube craze go check it out.

Later, I'm getting beeped.

Fine Tuning

I've been fascinated lately with thinking and reading about the origins of life (or "OOL" as my betters refer to it), and the fine tuning of the universe necessary to give rise to and/or support life. I think there isn't much argument about the fact that our universe is incredibly fine tuned. You certainly don't need to subscribe to ID (Intelligent Design) to accept that fact. In fact I'd guess about the only partaker in the origins arguments that don't need to make a big deal about fine tuning might be the YEC or OEC (Young/Old Earth Creationist) camp. I think some Theists, certainly some Christians, probably believe that God holds the universe and life together in some sort of magical/supernatural fashion which doesn't really need fine tuning, just lots of magic powers.

Just in case anyone wasn't sure, I am a Christian, and I do believe that God has lots of "magic" powers. I just happen to think that it's becoming abundantly evident (to me at least) that one of two things is true. Option one is that God created a universe and life in a literal Genesis 1 and 2 kind of way but gave it every appearance of being much much older than it really was, with every evidence that some sort of big bang happened, and with every evidence that some sort of really long evolutionary process gave rise to life via common descent. Option two is that God created a universe that actually began with some sort of big bang and actually did give rise to life through a really long evolutionary process via common descent.

Either option is equally plausible since God, being God, could pull off the deception in option one so well that it is indistinguishable from option two. You'd just have to wonder why he would do such a thing.

I like this clip of Richard Dawkins talking about fine tuning. I think his points are very good ones.



I think the most interesting thing about his remarks is that he summarily dismisses any sort of Theistic role in the origins of the universe and of life, stating that it can be quickly dismissed because it is just a regression and passes the origin question back up the line (who created God?). He also dismisses a science fiction theory that this is all some sort of "Second Life" simulation for the same reasons (who created the Programmer?). The theory he doesn't dismiss is the multiverse theory which, instead of falling prey to regression, seems to fall prey (to me at least) to infinite expansion.

This theory is a clever one in that it tries to remove the basis for the fundamental questions. It basically says: "fine, since you're always asking where X came from or what caused X or what came before X, we'll make the questions moot by positing an infinite number of universes, all of which could be tuned in completely different ways.". With this theory our universe could have been "birthed" out of a singularity in another universe which was in turn birthed in a similar fashion and so on ad infinitum. When someone asks "how likely is it really that our single universe, ancient and massive as it is, could have been fine tuned enough for life?", this theory can say "well, given an infinite number of universes it's not so hard to believe that 2 or 3 of them might just happen on the right tuning."

So let me get this straight, you dismiss the notion of a God infinite in scope and duration as the causal explanation for the universe, but accept the notion of a multiverse infinite in scope and duration. I'm afraid it's still just another regression. Even though you've made it infinite in scope and duration, doggone it I still just can't help asking where the multiverse came from, what caused it to be, and why.

In which I apologize to King George and others

Let me start by saying that I'm glad to be an American. I have a feeling that if I were blessed enough to have been able to spend significant amounts of time in a variety of other countries I'd still be glad to be an American. It certainly seems like a lot of people from other countries feel that way given the level of immigration into the USA over the years. But (and you knew there was one) I feel I need to set the record straight on a few things.

Down through the centuries a lot of things have been done in the name of God, Jesus or Christianity. A lot of things have been done in the name of a variety of deities, but since I'm of the Christian persuasion I'll limit my discussion to that arena and let others deal with the rest. Under the banner of the Christian God (in one form or another) countless wars have been fought, and more often than you might think the wars were between groups or nations that both believed they were fighting for, or at least with the blessing of, the very same God. Beyond taking to the field for God and Country, ordinary folks, calling themselves Christians, engaged in the genocide of indigenous populations, slavery and various other questionable activities, apparently without seeing any contradiction.

Now, let me point out again that all of these things are part and parcel of human history, and have taken place under the banner of any number of deities and belief systems. In fact some of the worst have taken place under the banners of no-god-at-all, or even anti-god (think of the Soviet Gulag's, or the Cambodian Killing Fields). But again, my issue is with those who would do such things under the banner of the God I happen to worship and believe in.

I should also point out that all of these things were being done in the name of Christ long before there was ever a United States of America, so not only should we be careful about thinking this is a particularly Christian issue, we should also be careful about thinking this is a particularly American issue. But again, since I'm a Christian and an American, I'll limit my remarks to so called Christian America.

The New Testament of the Christian Bible has a fair amount to say about government, rulers, politics and war. It is by no means a primary theme, but it does pop up from time to time. What many people might find surprising is that right down the line, every time the issue pops up, you'll find that the New Testament seems to be in direct contradiction to the traditional viewpoints of many Americans, especially those on the religious right, regarding this nations founding, its status as a "Christian" nation, and many of its subsequent actions.

If, as many have said, this country was founded by Godly men under God's direction, then you'd think we'd find some evidence in the New Testament that this could be so. In fact, the very opposite is what you'll find. Never, in the entire New Testament, does God endorse or encourage people to rise up against their governing authorities. This country came into being on the basis of a revolution against its own government. The clearest and longest statement in the entire New Testament regarding the attitude a Christian should have towards their government is found in Romans 13:1-7.

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

I don't think I need to say much about that passage. A quick comparison of the circumstances surrounding the birth of this nation with that passage has got to make you squirm a little.

There has been a long standing argument in this country between the left and right, the Christian and the non, about whether the founding fathers were, in fact, Christians, or whether they should more properly be considered Deists. Strangely the lines seem to be drawn exactly opposite to what logic would dictate. In light of the passage above, I could quite imagine a Deist penning the Declaration of Independence. I could quite imagine a group of Deists, or even of Atheists, holding up the banner of "Self Evident" truths, or "Inalienable Rights" and rising up against a government they felt was tyrannical. I could even imagine God working out his purposes through that group of revolutionaries. What I can't see is how anyone who has actually read their New Testament and determined to follow Jesus could march under that banner and take the lives of their fellow men, especially when you consider that the "enemy" also considered themselves to be Christian, and also considered themselves to be fighting for God and Country.

Let me quickly point out that I'm not questioning whether the leaders, or the commoners, who fought on either side of the Revolutionary war were devout followers of Jesus. I'm sure many of them were. I'm sure many of them honestly believed that what they were doing was the right thing to do.

Moving on from there things only get worse. It has been said repeatedly, from stump speeches and pulpits, that this is a Christian nation, founded by Christians and meant to be a beacon of Christian evangelical light to the darkened world. I must protest. Very little about the way this country was founded looks even the tiniest bit like Jesus. Very few of the actions surrounding this countries founding look like the actions of people who are following the path and the words of Jesus. Wasn't it Jesus who said the following?

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. --Luke 6:27-36

Can you honestly imagine Jesus advocating that his followers rise up in violent revolt against their rulers? Can you honestly imagine that Jesus would lead his followers to systematically wipe out an indigenous population in order to take the land for His glory (stay with Jesus here, we'll deal with the Old Testament another time)? Can you honestly imagine that Jesus would lead his followers to build much of "his" country on the backs of slaves? No, these are not the actions of those who are truly following Jesus, these are at best the actions of human beings. These are the kinds of things that humans have always done. The founding of this country was no worse and no better than the founding of most other countries down through history, in fact it was, quite simply, very much like the founding of most other countries.

So yes, for my part, as a United States citizen, I am quite willing to apologize to old King George for revolting against him. I am quite willing to apologize to the Native Americans for the genocide and theft enacted against them. I am quite willing to apologize to the slaves, and all of their families and descendants, for the atrocities committed against them. But, on the other hand, as a citizen of the United States the passage from Romans applies directly to me and I will be the best citizen that I can be.

Ultimately, however, my truest citizenship is in the Kingdom of Jesus, and Jesus quite pointedly said that his kingdom was "not of this world" -- John 18:36.

This is how the world will end

Yeah, I borrowed that title from The Elms. Check out what they're doing for Haiti. Help them out if you can.

But before you do that I'd like to ask you to watch this video. There are a lot of people running around making claims about how and when the world will end. What's especially sad is the tendency of Christians to get involved in all of this speculation. Just in my lifetime, the stated time of the end has come and gone more times than I can remember. The "Left Behind" series is mere child's play compared to the meticulous eschatology I was taught to cull from the apocalyptic writings of Daniel and The Revelation. But to what end? It only brought fear.

So, what with all the earthquakes, pestilence and war. What with the rumblings of the beast and the whoring of Babylon. What with all the wild eyed prophets crying out "the time is near". Let's go back to the feet of our master. Let's listen to the words of Jesus. What was it that He actually said. I think this message is right on the money. Take a listen.

We could all do with another listen

MLK Dream

Confessions of a Recovering Seventh-Day Adventist - Part 1

UPDATE - 05/26/2010: I've decided to remove this post because it no longer reflects my heart. There are actually a lot of posts here that no longer reflect my heart, especially if you go back to the time that this blog was mostly about politics. I'm not removing them because I want this blog to serve as an expression of my journey. For that reason I suppose I should leave this post here but I just can't. Maybe I'll rewrite it one of these days.

I'm leaving the comments. I think they're valuable.