Next-Wave Ezine > church & culture

Comments on Can We Still Trust God's Word, pt. 2
By Next-Wave Readers

(0)

dealingwith
(9/20/02 11:43 am)
my Jesus can beat up your Jesus >seems very garbled if not read in conjunction

actually, if in or out of...

...and I would like to retract my generalization about under 30, since that was (naturally) jumped upon. Ron, you could have been 18 and running in the Democratic primary for all I knew.

........

"All right, guys, let's get out of here," the Shoney's manager says with as much patience as he can muster. Some group of drunk guys had come to the restaurant after a long night of drinking. A couple of them had gotten into it with a Baptist of some sort just trying to enjoy his All American Breakfast (half price before 7AM).

"Yes it is!"

"No it's not!"

"Yes it is!"

"No it's not!"

He gets in one last "Yes it is!" before the group of ragged men are shown the door and join a group of gutter punks on the sidewalk.

"Finally," he thinks satisfactorally, "I can finish my meal and get to Starbucks where I can get 'real' with some INTELLIGENT human beings!"

CelticJesusFreak
(9/20/02 11:53 am)
"If you believe what you like in the Gospel and reject what you don't like,it is not the Gospel you believe but yourself."Augustine

david editor in chief
(9/20/02 3:28 pm)
The pub's getting crowded [And the bartender drops a glass in disbelief, mouth gaping, everyone turns around to see what happened...Saint Augustine has entered the pub!]

David: Hello, Mr. Augustine, what would you like to drink?

Augustine: Bloody Mary.

Michael: Whoa.

Charlie: Impressive.

David: What distinction should we make between "Gospel", "Word of God", "Bible", and "Scripture"? These all seem to be distinct terms, yet we often use them interchangeably. If the Word of God is a 1:1 ratio with the Bible, wouldn't we limit God's voice? If "Gospel" is God's only word, do we limit the stories within the Bible/Scripture? What about the Kingdom message? Or has that become interchangeable with the Gospel? What is infallible? The text? The Word? The Bible? The original manuscripts that we've never seen?

Augustine: That's a lot of questions.

michaeltoy
(9/20/02 4:00 pm)
*sigh* It all turned into a bunch of name calling. I didn't learn a thing except that Ron would be unlikely to let me lead a Bible study in his church.

I hereby apologize to Ron on behalf of all the heretics. We thought a dialog was possible, and so we drew you into what turned out to be a "bash pastor ron" thread. As a pastor, I'm sure you get enough of that from your own congregation without needing us to add to it.

I'm still hoping I can help create a space for conversation as opposed to long distance artillery fire. Here's my last try.

Ron asks the question, "How can I tell people that Jesus was right about John 3:16 but He was wrong when he referenced Adam and Eve as the first historical people or that Jonah was truly swallowed by a whale."

From out here is the land of "heresy" and "shallow christianity", that question itself seems shocking, it implies that Bible must be literally true, an exact and perfect historical document, or you have no Gospel, no good news for people. It sounds like someone who's faith centrally located in a systematic theology, not in the God who inspired that theology. I say this not to attack Ron, who's faith I do not question, but to try and reveal how differently we are looking at the world.

The historicity of the text is not neccessarily foundational for a postmodern Christian. If evolution is true, the story of Adam and Eve is still just as deadly important, as it is the beginning of the story which results in the death and ressurection of Christ. If Jonah is a myth, it is a true myth, and cannot be dismissed.

Can each side hear enough of this to figure out how to re-cast the questions, to discover a language for dialog that doesn't degrade into name calling? Scott said "... this is fundamentally a conversation about language and it meaning (or lack therof). now there's a postmodern thread for you." and I only now begin to understand what he meant.

-Michael

michaeltoy
(9/20/02 4:11 pm)
Actually, maybe I did learn something ... I learned that Ron drinks Diet Coke, and Augustine likes Bloody Marys.

I've learned to have a conversation with one foot in a bar, and the other in a Shoney's.

I re-re-re-learned to check my assumptions before I post, especially if it is a confrontational post.

I'm afraid that the other thing I've learned is that evangelical/foundationalist/rationalists and postmodern/communal/explorers can't have a productive conversation.

I should have read the rest of this month's next-wave before spouting off, the "Running with the Ball" article is perhaps instructive.

*sigh*

-Michael

Edited by: michaeltoy at: 9/20/02 7:39:28 pm

JonB
(9/20/02 8:02 pm)
Michael I am humbled by your tone and gentleness. You sound caring. After re-reading my posts, I come across angry. Not a great tone to have in any conversation. Ron, I apologize for antagonizing you. I had no business taking your article to task.

I'm in the process of backing out of the room marked evangelical. But I don't know what room I'm backing into, yet. That, however, doesn't give me the right to be so confrontational in my posts to Ron., or anyone.

JonB

charleswear
(9/20/02 8:04 pm)
Sighing is ok.... Hey Michael,
Don't beat yourself up for being confrontational. Some great discussions come from disagreements. Of course, I don't mind the give and take, being a professional giver and taker (I am a lawyer by trade). Also, having served as a pastor, I can identify with your sympathy for Ron. Pastors take a lot of "guff" from parishoners. Ron would have his hands full if that bunch in the pub were his deacon board! Fortunately, we are not. By the way, I'm the diet coke drinker. Ron was accused of liking latte's.

But hey, I think if I were to attempt to add anything to this discussion, it would be this: It is clear to me that all of us in this discussion thread are trying to follow Jesus. I happen to think he is a great example. He was continually confronted by religious leaders who were accusing him of breaking the law as contained in the Jewish scripture. And, amazingly enough, he sure did break "their" law, healed on the Sabbath, walked on the Sabbath, spoke of God as his Father, associated with sinners, and the list goes on. The sermon on the mount confronts nearly every tenet held dear by the reigning relgious groups of his contemporary day. And his teaching was "in addition to" or "in exposition of" the word of God.

I can't explain it, but my take is, he wasn't very "biblical." I recently reread the John 3 Nicodemus encounter. I was using the New Living Translation. I was also looking at the text in the context of our discussion. I could not find a single key text, or reference to scripture. Here is Jesus, conversing with a religious leader, and even in that context he does not use scripture to make his point. He uses an analogy: Entering the kingdom of the heavens is like being born "again." Only place the phrase is used, yet we now label true Christians as those who have been "born again."

The Zaccheus story provides an interesting contrast. The context is different but once again, no scripture reference, no proof text. Instead it's "I must be a guest in your home today." And for some reason, perhaps only known to Jesus, Zach repented and became a disciple because Jesus invited himself to lunch!

To the rich young ruler, he said, "Go and sell all you have and give it to the poor, and follow me." Interesting we Christians have not become known as the "sellers of all we have" or the "givers of all we have to the poor."

I don't know if I'm getting anywhere with these examples, but what I am trying to say is this: Jesus, empowered by the Holy Spirit, engaged his culture with stories, metaphors, invitations, and commands! Sometimes his methods worked, folks dropped everything and followed! Sometimes they didn't.

I think we can learn something from him as we relate to those who we wish to invite into a kingdom relationship with the Living God through His Son, Jesus, the Christ.

I love the discussion, because it means we are trying to learn from one another.

Blessings,
Charlie

david editor in chief
(9/21/02 4:51 am)
playfully reverent Charlie (who in my opinion is a living text on Christian wisdom, gentleness, and insight) is so right on...or maybe as next-wave publisher, I feel a certain affinity. Great discussions do sometimes come from disagreements. Our common ground is Jesus. I also think we should not be afraid to be playfully reverent. Some of my best ideas come up when I "play". When we play, we do risk the chance of being misunderstood (and I hate being misunderstood), but we also risk the wonderful opportunity of making friends and speaking wisdom into each other's life.

I enjoyed reading Ron's article. If he keeps writing, I will continue to publish them. I mean-- look at the conversations they create! It's awesome. We should be talking like this MORE OFTEN. The question is NOT: Can postmodern sojourners and fundamentalist faithful have conversations? We MUST continue in conversation. It's our family...even the freaky side of our family.

[David the bartender lowers his shotgun and puts it back behind the bar.]

So keep talking okay?

[Everyone's silent. The editor seems serious. Talk?]

Daniel (still on the floor): Oh-kay!!!

note: If I didn't consider Dan a friend, I probably couldn't pick on him as much as I do. :)

Len Hjalmarson
(9/21/02 12:29 pm)
conversations with Auggie: Len arrives late, notices the bartender mopping up, and a seedy looking guy at the far end of the bar nursing a beer.

Len walks up to the grey haired gent and notices he is reading "The City of God."

"Hey, that's a great book! I don't see people reading Augustine much in bars."

"This isn't a bar. And I wrote it."

"Ah." Len looks around and notices the landscape has changed. Obviously this is just part of the MATRIX and obviously this guy has a screw loose.

"So... what's up? Do you always come here to read and drink.. ah.. (sniffs).. tea?"

"I come.. called or not called.. to all significant exchanges."

"Hmm.. really... (looks at the mildly curious man behind the counter..) Pepsi please."

The grey haired gentleman closes his book.

"You know, there were some great exchanges here tonight. There were some good answers, and some good questions."

Len replies, "Yah, I know...I always miss this stuff."

"Like, what distinction should we make between "Gospel", "Word of God", "Bible", and "Scripture?" These are the kinds of questions that Karl Barth wrestled to the ground. Only now are his wrestlings and findings really becoming relevant...and heard."

"There are other questions that need to be asked, like "How do church and kingdom relate? When is one equal to the other, if ever? What does it mean to "believe?" In what sense is truth carried in literature (propositional) and in what sense can it only be personal?"

Len: "Hmm.. yeah, those are good questions alright!"

"Here is one I heard tonight: What is more important.. trying to spread the Gospel, or understanding the culture?"

Len has his face buried in his Pepsi, but he looks thoughtful.

"Ok, I'll bite on that last one."

Auggie smiles.

"They are one question."

Auggie's smile gets broader: "that's no answer."

Len: "How can we spread the gospel if we don't connect with the culture. We'll be talking a different language."

"Go on..."

Len: "When David phoned me and related the conversation of tonight, I ran down here...too late...ah well. But as I listened I recognized that the largest problem was not theological...though there are thorny issues there.. the problem was communication. There were two paradigms in use...and that made communication very difficult. That in turn raised other issues of trust and suspicion...further blocking dialogue. Without trust, and with emotions and fear rising...there is no communication possible. Not much point of trying to share the word or the Word if we can't communicate."

"I see..." looking serious, "Do you have a good analogy for me?"

"Sure. I've been reading this Franciscan priest lately. He says, "The mind can only take pictures using the film with which it's loaded."

Auggie laughs. "Well, I didn't grow up in the age of images, but I know what you mean. Images are only metaphors frozen in time."

Len looks puzzled. "I never thought of it that way...ok."

"Do you have more to say on the question of culture and heaven...or salvation?"

Len: "If you don't mind my blabbing...yeah. Here goes."

"In the Incarnation Jesus entered the created world, the world that was created by God “very good.” The Word became flesh, the ultimate stamp of approval on God’s creation. C.S. Lewis wrote,

"There is no good trying to be more spiritual than God. God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature. That is why he uses material things like bread and wine to get the new life into us. We may think this rather crude and unspiritual. God does not: He invented eating. He likes matter. He invented it.”

Auggie looks puzzled. "I don't see where you are going."

Len: "I'm not surprised. Your own heritage is more Greek than Hebrew, right?"

"Granted."

Len: "Ok, let me finish."

"The Greek word for salvation could be seen as having reference to a spiritual and legal transaction, but the Hebrew word is much larger.

"Your culture, and mine, made salvation into an individual, private and spiritual transaction, divorced from the rest of life. The dominant paradigm was belief, and the tragedy of modern evangelism was to call many to believe but not to follow. As Jim Wallis phrased it,

“An individualistic understanding of the Gospel carries the danger of making salvation into another commodity that can be consumed for personal fulfilment and self-interest.” (Agenda for Biblical People, p. 31)

"The Hebrew word for salvation is “shalom,” and while shalom is generally translated “peace” it is not simply the absence of war. Shalom in Hebrew is a word, meaning wholeness in life, right?"

"Yes, I'm aware of that meaning."

"Good. Now we need to do a bible study.

"In 1 Kings, Chapter 4, we have a description of what it was like to live in Israel in the golden age of the Davidic monarchy, which came to fruition in Solomon’s reign and became a metaphor for the coming of the Kingdom of God to Israel.
20 The people of Judah and Israel were as numerous as the sand on the seashore; they ate, they drank and they were happy.
22 Solomon's daily provisions were thirty cors of fine flour and sixty cors of meal, 23 ten head of stall-fed cattle, twenty of pasture-fed cattle and a hundred sheep and goats, as well as deer, gazelles, roebucks and choice fowl.

"This is one table every day! The reason for such an abundant table is because of the size of his court. In eastern thinking the power of a monarch is known by the bounty and size of his court. All the foreign ambassadors and the emissaries and the Cabinet Ministers of his government are there at his court because of the extent of his kingdom."

24 For he ruled over all the kingdoms west of the River, from Tiphsah to Gaza, and had peace on all sides. 25 During Solomon's lifetime Judah and Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, lived in safety, each man under his own vine and fig-tree.

"Derek Morphew comments:

"Shalom means physical health, a good marriage, healthy children (quite a lot of them!), a good relationship with your neighbor (he’s not stealing your crops and flocks), your crops are multiplying, your herds are multiplying, your vines are growing well, your fruit trees are groaning under the weight of the fruit, the weather is good (there are no droughts in the country), the feasts up at the temple happen wonderfully every year, the worship of the musicians is wonderful in the temple and you live a life of celebration. And Israel ate and drank and they were happy. And this applied to every person, safe and secure in their own land with their own house, sitting on the veranda looking at the sun going down, toasting Solomon. And saying, “The Kingdom of God is amongst us”. European Pastors Conference, 1998

"You see.. there is no split between the spiritual and the material. To be blessed and experience salvation is much more than salvation from sin. I'm sure you would agree that to divorce these things is to make the error of the gnostics."

"Yes, I see your point. So then, in emphasizing the Greek world view.. my culture loaded a certain film. Your modern culture used essentially the same one."

Len: "Yes. And in doing so, we compartmentalized salvation, separating it from discipleship, and even in some ways from earthly reality. We objectified reality, including the word of God, divorcing troth from truth, covenant from christianity, and many other divorces. We believe now more in information than in formation, and we have even recreated a priestly caste system that has disempowered the people of God. But that's another story."

"I see... and you think the dying culture gives hope of rediscovering these things?"

Len: "Yes, I hope so. You see, ultimately truth is personal. I believe that we only really know what we live. Do I want to see people saved? Of course. Do I think lectures will get them there? No. Lectures and information are not transformational.. relationships are transformational. ANd the best sermon is one I see. As a later saint said, "Preach the gospel at all times; if necessary, use words."

Auggie laughs and hefts his mug of Chai Tea. He stands up.

"Well, perhaps those of you who are faithful to the Lord Jesus can still teach us Greeks something. I bless you in your attempts."

"Thanks. You have as much. We want to honor those who have defended the faith before us. And we want to take the best and leave the rest."

"Good. Go with God."

RickSeelhoff
(9/21/02 2:24 pm)
Hey! We must've went to separate schools together! Mind if I join you?

I should probably warn you though (you'll find out soon enough, regardless!) that I am way strange! But, from what I've heard so far of this most interesting conversation, I think it's safe to say we're all men of like passions.

I have a scar - want to see it? There's a story behind it - want to hear it? It's a good one! No, really!

Back in '72 I was recruited into what I thought at the time was the Lord's Army. In those days the outfit was known as the Children of God. Their manual was the Bible, and their claim to fame was the fact that they weren't just talking Bible, they were actually doing it - actually living it 24 hours a day, week in and year out. Though we were small, our vision was not - we were out to conquer the whole world for Christ our Great King and Commander. The weapons of our warfare were not carnal, but spiritual, mighty through the Truth of God as it was revealed to us in His inerrent and infallible Word. It was a no-brainer - all we needed to do was be faithful to God's Word by obeying His commandments, seeking first His Kingdom, and all these things shall be added unto us. So we pored over the Manual, memorized the Rules, and did our duty of service, which was an honor and a privelege as well as a responsibility and our reasonable worship. We were convinced the Rules never changed, but the Church did over the milennia. It was clear to us that the Church had lost its effectiveness in the world (and it was obviously ineffective and ineffectual) precisely because it had failed to faithfully adhere to the Manual and follow its Rule.

So far so good, you might say.

Not so fast.

What does the Rule Book say, in fact?

What does it say to wanna-be recruits?

It says, first of all, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men. If any man will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily, and follow. If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour. If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple. Go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. And as you obey and go, ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

That is the rule for disciples - forsake all. It's right there in black and white. The Rule has not changed. "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life."

The way that worked out in the church community was like this:

"The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet; and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
All that believed were together, and had all things common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved."

They were together, and had all things common. That's the Rule. That's the Biblical Norm. And this is what happens when the Rule is followed and obeyed: "when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness."

That was then. This is now. Now the church is filled with Ananiases and Saphiras. And we wonder why it's dead?

So what's with the scars, you might ask? Well, they're there because I snuck away. I backslid. It's what happens when you go AWOL from that outfit. There's Rules for dealing with guys like me. I caught some serious flack. There was a freaking mine-field all around the perimeter with trip wires all over the place, and hidden holes with nasty punji stakes lining the bottom, and other various and sundry gnarly anti-personnel ordinances scattered about. I got beat up pretty bad on my way back to the DMZ. But I made it, thank God. But some DMZ - seems to be a heck of a lot of friendly fire in these parts. Or is it just a grand food-fight?

Anyway, you can call me insubordinate and a turn-coat, but as you might imagine I have a real problem with that there Rule Book.

I still love it though. I pore over it every chance I get. Because I'm looking for Jesus. Anyone seen him, lately, btw? I still trust the Bible to be reliable. But it's no substitute for Jesus the Word made Flesh, by whom God spoke in these last days so expressively and supremely. There's just no compensating for the Spirit's absence. Lending the written Revelation godlike attributes won't fill that gap, I don't think, and will without a doubt make more problems for the Church (and the world) than it will solve.

Anyway, near as I can tell, I'm a point-man, just like you guys. I just happen to be a refugee from a very strange place, so my points may appear to be a bit skewed. I understand. You should see it from this side. But I'm hoping if we could keep talking amongst ourselves and point out all that we know and all we've seen and heard, maybe we could come up with something substantial and worthwhile. We're all after the same thing, seems to me.

~Rick

Len Hjalmarson
(9/21/02 3:26 pm)

Re: salvation - personal, individual, communal, cosmic? As I showed this post to my wife just now she was amazed that I didn't tease out the implications of redemption a bit more. Now notice, I have purposely moved from talking about salvation - a problem word because of the modern church - to redemption. Salvation tends to imply individuals getting their fire insurance. Redemption is a much bigger word and closer to "shalom."

Redemption embraces all of creation.. "the creation itself eagerly awaits..." "the summing up of all things in Christ.. things in heaven and things on earth." The church is the center, but not the circumference of that plan.

Isn't it funny that we always make salvation about us, when it's about the Creator's love for the whole of creation? Our mission is much bigger than getting bob next door saved. ANd oddly enough, when we live like our mission is bigger than that... bob next door may finally take notice.

Len Hjalmarson
(9/21/02 3:30 pm)

Re: scripture
"Scripture is in the hands, but not in the power, of the church. The church is most faithful to its tradition, and realizes its unity with the church of every age, when, linked but not tied to its past, it today searches the Scriptures and orietns its life by them as though this had to happen today for the first time." Church Dogmatics, Karl Barth.

"We are only now emerging from a long ice age during which an undue emphasis was laid upon objective truth at the expense of subjective experience." A. W. Tozer

gruvEdude
(9/21/02 7:08 pm)
Greetings in the Name of Lord Jesus the Christ!

"This conversation is very interesting," the gruvster notes as he relishes his Dr. Thunder (Walmart's Dr. Pepper) from the viewpoint in front of his computer. "There are things that I thought that I believed until I actually voiced them. Hearing the power of the word made me realize just that I didn't believe as I thought I did. Keep the discussion going, friends. Seek and you will find."

"As far as the stories of Jonah and Noah, etc., are concerned we must remember that our super-natural God arranged these events. Years ago, today's technology may have seemed as science fiction. Even moreso, when we depart from our earthly existance we will realize God in ways that are beyond our wildest dreams."

From death he did rise and will come again.
Move on with him now to be ready for then.

RickSeelhoff
(9/21/02 7:39 pm)
Hi Len! Good stuff!

>Salvation tends to imply individuals getting their fire
> insurance. Redemption is a much bigger word and closer
> to "shalom."

> Redemption embraces all of creation.. "the creation itself
> eagerly awaits..." "the summing up of all things in Christ..
> things in heaven and things on earth." The church is the
> center, but not the circumference of that plan.

> Isn't it funny that we always make salvation about us,
> when it's about the Creator's love for the whole of
> creation? Our mission is much bigger than getting bob next
> door saved. ANd oddly enough, when we live like our
> mission is bigger than that... bob next door may finally take
> notice.

Bigger is good. Bigger is our friend.

"Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."

"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

Another big word I'd like brought to the table is Reconciliation. I tend to prefer the combo platters.

mmm.... platter...

~Rick

[The discussion continues here...]

(0)