Quotes from On the Mystery

Tags

abba, absolute, adventure, baptism, basileia, catherine keller, christ, christian, Christianity, commonwealth, dissolute, gandhi, god, gospel, incarnation, infinite, intimacy, jesus, jesus christ, jewish, johannine, john, John Cobb, king, kingdom, logos, Love, martin luther king, messiah, messianic, messianic age, metaphysical, mlk, on the mystery, pontius, pontius pilot, process theology, Religion, resolute, revalation, risk, romero, son of god, wisdom

I just finished reading On the Mystery by Catherine Keller. It’s a fantastic book, and I’d highly recommend it. In then vein of Process Theology, Keller explores the tension between the perspectives of the absolute (frequently fundamentalist, conservative evangelicals) and the dissolute (frequently liberal, progressive agnostics). She shines a light on the problems within each interpretation and attempts to offer “a third way,” as she calls it. Not absolute or dissolute, but resolute. Unlike the absolute and the dissolute, the way of the resolute opens doors rather than closes them. I found her reflections on scripture and other sacred stories to be refreshing and beautiful. Here are a couple quotes from the book which stood out to me.

—

It is not Jesus’ death that transforms but his life–a love-life that had the power to persist beyond death, as the stories of the resurrection mysteriously suggest. Granted, that mystery has been almost ruined by dogmatic “I believes.” But for those with ears to hear afresh–the purpose of a Christian life is not whatever sacrifices it entails. That purpose is a way, a life, and a truth. It will entail sacrifices of various kinds, and sometimes, in the face of Pontius power, terrifying ones. But they are never the purpose. They are the risk. No more than Jesus did Gandhi, King or Romero want or seek to die. Even when they could predict their imminent death, as each seems to have done, they were not choosing to die, but to persist in love. Love “risks the adventure.”

In order to avoid the misunderstanding to which “kingdom [of God]” can now give rise, I often stay with the original Greek term. The basileia is not a political programme. But neither does it leave politics alone–especially when a contemporary empire draws upon Christ for legitimation. “The best English translation,” argues John Cobb, “may be ‘commonwealth.’ This term, besides not emphasizing the controlling power of a ruler, suggests that the realm may be organized for the common good.” The “commonwealth of God” resists every human superpower. Jesus meant it “to be a world in which God’s will is done, God’s purposes are fulfilled.” He saw his work and that of his community as “foreshadowing” that world–by beginning to actualize it here and now.

Within the Christian narrative, the incarnation in Jesus of that divine Logos, that world-creative Wisdom, is portrayed as a distinctive event. Indeed, it may be considered unique in this strong sense: only this person, as far as we know, has so realized the divine lure as to become “at one” with it. That intimate union or “sonship” is not a metaphysical given but an event of becoming, itself symbolized by Jesus’ baptism.  But does this make the incarnation an exclusive revalation of God in the final or competitive sense usually meant by identifying Jesus as the “only Son of God”? To the contrary: the whole point of the unique incarnation is to open up a new intimacy with the infinite. The one Gospel that features the incarnation, the “becoming flesh,” signifies this open process powerfully: “to all who received him,” writes John, “he gave power to become children of God” (John 1:13). In other words, to embrace this logos is to become a son or a daughter of God. The standard notion that only Jesus is the son of God directly defies the same Johannine text!

When we say that Jesus is the Christ, we mean that from our point of view the Jewish expectation of a Messiah was in a certain sense realized. If it was fulfilled in the person of Jesus–it is because he resolutely realized the possibilities tendered him by what he called abba. We might say that the initial aim for him moment to moment was to realize the messianic age, or the basileia, in the midst of his own limited circumstances. But this is precisely not to say that the messianic process was completed or exhausted. On the contrary: the possibility of its actualization in our own limited context was given a supportive communal shape and therefore a new imperative.

Advertisements

Group Hallucinations

Tags

academic, bart d ehrman, bart ehrman, believers in jesus, christ, christian, Christianity, conservative, evangelical, god, gospel, gospels, group hallucination, group hallucinations, his way church, historical, historical jesus, jesus, jesus christ, marcus borg, meaning of jesus, nt wright, pastor, psychology, reliablility, Religion, rob deluca, scholar, scholars, shaman

A while back I got on a Bert Ehrman kick for some reason. I ended up listening to five or six debates that he did with a number of conservative evangelical scholars. The debates usually address the historical reliability of the Gospels. Ehrman–not surprisingly, if you’re familiar with his work–argued that from a scientific/historical perspective, the gospels aren’t historically accurate or reliable in the modern sense of the word. The academic historical process attempts to uncover what the most probable rendering of events was. Because miracles are by definition the least probable possibility, the Gospels aren’t reliable. So says Ehrman, at least.

One of the topics that received decent play in several of the debates was the possibility of group hallucinations. Group hallucinations were one of the possible explanation for some of the miracles recorded in the Gospel accounts. Ehrman and whoever he is debating go back and forth over whether divine intervention or a group hallucination is the more probable explanation. Accounts of group hallucination are rare and poorly documented in the academic practice of psychology. Even NT Wright (an individual whose academic reputation far outshines those with whom Ehrman is debating) in his and Marcus Borg’s book The Meaning of Jesus, argues that it is unlikely that the idea of Jesus could have transformed from the Historical Jesus to Jesus Christ (God incarnate) in such a short period of time in the minds of the Believers in Jesus.

I’m no psychologist, nor have I researched group hallucinations. However, I do believe that there is compelling evidence that coercive forces of group dynamics make a compelling explanation. Take the following video as evidence. It’s another example of the work of shaman/pastor Rob de Luca. Whether or not this qualifies as group hallucination, I’m not qualified to say. However, I think it demonstrates how compelling the pressure to fit in can be. I mean, from all indications these people actually believe that de Luca is tossing glory bombs. They actually feel themselves getting hit by something. Also, take note how quickly the newcomer conforms to group norms.

A spontaneous group hallucination is highly improbable. I, for one, would be skeptical of such an occurrence. However, if sufficient pressure to conform to a group exists, I believe it’s entirely possible for a group of people to legitimately believe the are experiencing a non-real experience. The brain’s ability to override perception combined with sufficient social pressure may lead to something not too unlike a group hallucination. I would suspect that the participants in this video would be able to provide a fairly cohesive, unified explanation of their experiences. Save for the ridiculousness of the actual circumstances, their accounts–even from the newcomer–would probably be similar enough to be credible. It doesn’t quite amount to group hallucination, but I think this video provides strong evidence that social pressure can create a similar environment.

Where the Spirit Leads (Theodicy Follows)

Tags

age, apostolic anointing, barnum & bailey's, bible, christ, christian, Christianity, church, demon of poverty, economic, economic justice, empire, exorcise, god, greed, his way church, jesus, jesus christ, juggernaut, political, poverty, poverty demon, prophetic, race, regime, Religion, rob de luca, rob deluca, signs and wonders, society, superficial, supernatural, theology

This video was posted over at Scotteriology. Aside from being one of the most absurd, incredible, ridiculous things I’ve seen in a long time (and if you want more, check out this video where the pastor is throwing “Spirit bombs” from a “Spirit pool”), what this man is doing makes me irate. His Way Church is headed by Rob de Luca who “operates in a strong apostolic anointing with supernatural signs and wonders.” While his signs and wonders fall far short of Barnum & Bailey’s, the power of group dynamics is a spectacle that is both sickening and fascinating.

Here is a clear, concise example of a church which has completely lost touch with the spirit of Jesus’ message (not to mention reality). Yes, Jesus’ message and the entire Bible are chocked full of radical teachings about poverty and excessive wealth. Economic justice is one of the major prophetic threads that weaves throughout the stories in the Bible. However, let’s reexamine the context in which this pastor is operating. Young, white people seem to make up the largest demographic in the church. Everyone on the video–regardless or age or race–is dressed in somewhat trendy clothing. My superficial evaluation is few of the church members are struggling under the intense economic injustice that I see on a regular basis in my neighborhood. Yet his ignorance is forgivable to me. The apparent hypocrisy is a little harder for me to stomach. I would estimate that there is easily $25-30,ooo worth of equipment for music, sound and lighting behind him. The church doesn’t–thank God–appear to have a massive congregation either, certainly not enough that such an expensive sound-light-music rig could be easily purchased. If you’re going to preach a radical message of economic justice, don’t do it through a sound system that’s worth more than the annual salary of someone living at the poverty line.

However, I want to move beyond mere appearances and the hypocrisy of the church and examine the sewage of theology that’s being spewed here. Gesturing forcefully towards the sheeple of his congregation the pastor chants, “Prosper! Prosper! Become a millionaire! Prosper!” He claims to be casting out demons of poverty.

Even if the Demon of Poverty is exorcised, it will undoubtedly return soon, as the demon who sent it–Greed–is still abundantly present in our society. The real problem I have with this theology is that it absolves any who subscribe to it from any and all responsibility in seeking economic justice. “There is no need for me to change how I live. Their poverty is caused by a demon.” Jesus brought a radical message that got him killed by the political and economic juggernauts of the day. The drivel offered by this power is not only complicit with the regime of empire, it actually furthers their cause.

Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.”

Bell’s Hell

Tags

christ, christian, Christianity, eterna conscious torment, genocidal, genocide, god, good news, gospel, hell, jesus, jesus christ, Kevin DeYoung, Love Wins, mars hill bible church, mass murderer, murder, pastor, punishment, Religion, rob bell, spirituality, trusted, wrath of god, wrathful

Rob Bell, pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church, has never shied away from asking hard questions. He recently release the following video to promote his upcoming book, Love Wins. The following quote from the video illustrates his propensity to question what many consider to be foundational beliefs.

Millions and millions of people were taught that primary message, center of the Gospel of Jesus is that God is going to send you to hell unless you believe in Jesus. So what gets subtly sort of caught and taught is that Jesus rescues you from God. But what kind of God is that, that we would need to be rescued from this God? How could that God ever be good? How could that God ever be trusted? And how can that ever be ‘good news’?

His words have created quite a stir and led some to prominent evangelicals to denounce Bell as a heretic. In response to Bell’s video, pastor Kevin DeYoung created a list of eight reasons that Christians need to believe in a wrathful God. Another blogger at C. Orthodoxy provided a succinct, effective rebuttal of DeYoung’s reasons that illustrate how most of his points aren’t grounded in history or logic. Furthermore, DeYoung paints himself as the archetype of those Christians whom Bell raises such strong questions against. This isn’t a problem per se, except that DeYoung does such a poor job at answering the questions that Bell raises.

For me the most perplexing thing is that people feel the need to defend a wrathful God. What about a wrathful God is worth following? If humanity’s finite mind is able to conceive of a being greater than its creator God, what does that say about the nature of that God? Furthermore, what does it say about humanity? What is it about such a God that is so appealing that millions around the world give their unquestioning devotion to such a God?

I know many Christians who subscribe to the view that hell is a state of eternal, conscious torment. Despite the fact the Bible’s descriptions of hell only fits such an interpretation if one accepts the views of non-canonical texts while selectively ignoring the historical context of most of the canonical texts that address the subject, many, like DeYoung, defend this view of hell as a necessity. DeYoung said, “We need the doctrine of eternal punishment.” Do we really? Is such a view really a necessity, and if so why did Jesus never mention it? Sure, Jesus talked about Gehenna (translated “Hell” in most English Bibles), which was a valley outside Jerusalem where trash was dumped and burned. Perhaps Jesus just forgot to mention the eternal, conscious torment bit.

What frightens me most is that people defend the necessity of believing in the eternal, conscious punishment for all but a small percentage of the 105 billion people who have lived and died on this planet. Just as with the genocidal God, I see no reason to defend such a God. Perhaps the most baffling thing to me is that people will argue that God is both loving and a genocidal, mass murderer who condemns billions to eternal, conscious punishment. I just don’t understand how that makes sense.

Unapologetically Christ-centered?

Tags

alma mater, alumni, anderson in, anderson ind, anderson indiana, anderson university, apologetic, apologizing, apology, AU, carmel macchiato, christ, christian, Christianity, college, cross, fundamentalism, god, ironic, jesus, jesus christ, liberal arts, macchiato, modus operandi, religious, right-wing, unapologetic, unapologetically, unapologetically christ-centered, university, venti

About three months ago my alma mater released series of recently produced commercials on YouTube. This one, “AU: Unapologetically Christ-Centered,” was the topic of significant debate and discussion among a number of alumni.

The hang up for many of us was the phrase, “unapologetically Christ-centered.” We reached a general consensus that we all grew and developed in our understandings of faith and Christianity while at Anderson University. This growth was an integral part of our experience, and as such one could say that our experiences at AU were “Christ-centered.” The problem was the word, “unapologetically.” The term was troublesome to many of us because of the connotations and cultural/historical baggage it carries with it. It is often associated with right-wing, religious fundamentalism (three of the top ten results on Google for “unapologetically” fall into this category). However, when one compares AU to other small, Christian, liberal arts universities, the environment at AU is not one of religious, right-wing fundamentalism–or at least it wasn’t when I attended. Many of us felt the commercial misrepresented our experience.

(I’m not sure why this topic–which was put to rest 3 months ago–was running laps in my head 6 minutes after I woke up this morning. I was barely conscious enough to remember that you shave with a razor, not a toothbrush. Maybe I just watched Inception too recently. Anyways.)

I want to take issue once again with the phrase “unapologetically Christ-centered.” The phrase seems to imply that people out there are apologizing for being Christian. Otherwise, there would be no reason to distinguish oneself as unapologetic. Now, I can understand apologizing for Christianity. A quick review of history demonstrates that Christians have committed plenty of horrible deeds. However, that’s not the issue at hand. It doesn’t say “unapologetic, Christ-centered.”

My question is this: Who are all these people who are going around apologizing for being Christian?

I mean, imagine if someone walked into Starbucks and said, “Yeah, I’d like a venti caramel macchiato. Can you put my caramel in the shape of a cross? You know, like God. Sorry, I know it’s an inconvenience, but I’m a Christian.” (Unfortunately, the only part of this story that is fictional is that the person apologized for being a Christian). Nobody does that! I mean, I’ve known a lot of people over the course of my life. Furthermore, I’ve known a disproportionately high number of Christians over the course of my life. I can’t recall a single instance where someone apologized for being a Christian. If enough people are going around apologizing for being Christians that a school needs to differentiate itself as unapologetic, you’d think I would’ve witnessed that apology at least once.

Furthermore, if anyone is apologizing for being Christian, that to me indicates that they have a low self-image. People who are secure in their identity don’t to apologize for who they are. If that’s the case, I don’t think you’ll boost their confidence much by bragging about how unapologetic your are. Way to stomp the little guy while he’s down.

I’m being satirical and ridiculous about this subject, which is not my typical modus operandi. However, I am sincerely trying to imagine someone being apologetically Christ-centered. Somehow every believable scenario comes out ridiculous.

So, why identify oneself as unapologetically Christ-centered, if no one else is apologizing for it?

As an afterthought, does anyone else think the proximity of “unapologetically” and “Christ” is a little ironic? I mean, isn’t seeking forgiveness and reconciliation sort of the central teaching of Jesus Christ? Or is that just me? Yeah? The Bible doesn’t talk about that anywhere? Huh. Coulda sworn it was in there somewhere.