Category: Worldview


Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus, Is it Possible?

Filed Under: Christendom, Church History, Recommended Books, The Viral Jesus Book, Worldview by rossrohde — 4 Comments
January 21, 2012

The video, Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus, has touched a deep chord or a raw nerve in many people. In the last eleven days it had been watched on YouTube 15,839,759 times (as of Jan. 21, 9:10 AM, Pacific Time). That’s over a million times a day! Not surprisingly it has made some people angry, but to the vast majority, particularly the young, it is speaking what has been on their hearts but they could not, would not, or feared to say. Here is the video for the three of you out there who have not already seen it ;) .

Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus:

What has surprised me is the frustrated, angry or negative response. Here is one of the most creative and eloquent.

Why I Love Religion and Love Jesus:

So what is going on here? Is religion good or bad? It’s not that simple. Part of the problem is a confusion of terms and worldviews, which Mike Morrell does a good job of clarifying in Jesus and Religion’s Relationship Status: It’s Complicated.

So let’s define terms roughly as Jeff Bethke (the author of Why I Hate Religion but Love Jesus) is defining it.

Jesus = A loving intimate God who we can know and experience personally. This Jesus is revealed in the Bible.

Religion = All the extra bits that have encrusted themselves around Jesus over the years; the extra-biblical traditions of men.

Is this even important? I believe it is extremely important. The fact that this video is getting a million hits a day ought to tell us something. This has touched a deep chord in our society. I believe it is religion, as defined above, which is keeping the Gospel of Jesus from going viral. That is why I wrote my book, Viral Jesus.

  • If we define religion, as it is defined above, why would anybody want to defend it?
  • Do you believe religion can get in the way of the Gospel?
  • After watching Bethke’s video, are you more into Jesus or religion? Be honest with yourself. Even if you are closer to the “Jesus” side of the equation, did he poke some of your sacred cows?
  • Do you think it is possible that American Evangelicals could be as religious as Catholics, just having a different set of “extra bits?”
  • Do you believe Fr. Pontifex in Why I Love Religion and Love Jesus was wrong (or right) 100% of the time? Is it possible to have a real relationship with Jesus in the midst of a lot of religion? Did you find that you agreed with some of what Fr. Pontifex said? Did that surprise you?
  • Does criticizing religion play into atheism’s hand, as Fr. Pontifex states?
Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Vocabulary Confusion

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Christendom, Jesus is Lord, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — Leave a comment
January 20, 2012

Influence flows from what is inside of us.

When we use one word, but give it the meaning of another, confusion can ensue. I think there is a lot of confusion nowadays in the Church by the way we confuse and abuse three words: authority, influence and power. So, I’d like to give what I believe are good definitions of these word and show how the misuse of these words leads not only to confusion but often, harm.

Authority

Parker J. Palmer in his book The Courage to Teach talks about the authority of a teacher.

External tools of power have occasional utility in teaching, but they are no substitute for authority, the authority that comes from the teacher’s inner life. The clue is in the word itself, which has author at its core. Authority is granted to people who are perceived as authoring their own words, their own actions, their own lives, rather than playing a scripted role at great remove from their own hearts. When teachers depend on the coercive powers of law or technique, they have no authority at all. [1]

For more on this read Authority: How Jesus Leads a Church.

I think this is an excellent understanding of authority. Authority is what flows out of one’s character, one’s experience, one’s life, which gives us the ability to impact others. It reflects who we are. It has nothing to do with position, title or power. Nor can it be invoked. We either have authority or we don’t, and that depends on who we are.

Influence

Influence is a gift. It is a gift from the person being influenced and it is a gift from God. We cannot force someone to be influenced by us. Either they trust and respect us enough to influence them or they don’t. It is their call. And, it is a gift from God. God gives us the ability and the favor to influence others. Still, it is not anything we have control over; it must be given. Influence, then, is the trust, respect and honor others give us which allows us to impact their lives. Influence is when what is inside of us flows out to impact others. Influence and authority are deeply related.

Power

Power comes from the ability to reward or punish others, thereby impacting what they do. Power comes from force, position or title. It may be accompanied by authority and influence but needs neither. It can be wielded gently or harshly, but it is based on reward and punishment, not necessarily the desire or will of others. Human power has no place in Christianity but is exceedingly common in Christendom. Power is the ability to control others behavior through reward and punishment. At its core, human power is fear based and coercive. Power is not related to authority and influence. It is a separate entity. One cannot have influence without authority. Power can stand on its own, but when it does so, it is destructive.

I’m willing to bet each and every person reading this blog has had an experience, at one time or another, with the following scenario. Someone, perhaps the “leader” states, “You must submit to the authority of ______________.” As in, “I’m the pastor, you must submit to my authority.” That isn’t authority, its power. We don’t submit to authority, we respond to it. Power needs and demands submission. Authority and influence neither need submission nor demand it. There is no place for that in biblical Christianity, yet we see it all the time in Christendom.

Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. (Luke 22:25-26).

I suspect that Jesus was being ironic here. I believe he is using the word “authority” but describing power; in other words mocking and denigrating the power I have describe above. What do kings and lords have? They have titles, positions and power. They can reward and they can punish. They demand submission. We aren’t even supposed to say we are doing so for the good of others. After all, Jesus noted they “call themselves Benefactors.” We are not to be like that. Instead we influence others based on the authority, love and service that comes from our lives. To do so requires no title, position or power. We can do it coming from the position of a little child or a slave. Yet even a slave can have the influence and authority of character and experience.

We have no control over the authority and influence we have, other than being godly people who serve others with a whole heart. Still, we can have great authority and influence. Human power, a common element of Christendom’s behavior, should have no place among us. It is destructive. It is not our job to reward or punish, that belongs to God.

  • Why do you think the wielding of human power is so common in Christendom?
  • What happens when we see a brother/sister in sin, when we know what he/she should be doing? Isn’t that a time to use power?
  • How can we gain more authority and influence? Is it something we should seek?
  • If we have real influence and authority, do we have to be careful how we use it?

[1] Parker J. Palmer, The Courage to Teach (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998) p. 33.

Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Success

Filed Under: Christendom, Spiritual Life, Worldview by rossrohde — 1 Comment
January 9, 2012

What do you think is the key to success?

Below are all the verses in the New Testament which mention the word “success.”

No, that is not a typo, I’m making a point. The New Testament does not even mention a common Christian obsession, successful ministry. Yet, in my 40 years as a Christian and with about 30 years of “professional” ministry under my belt, I can tell you that success is a pretty hot topic in ministry circles. We talk about people who have had “successful ministries.” We admire “successful ministries.” We buy books which may give us three or five or even THE one key to success. We long to have a “successful ministry.”

So, what are we talking about? Stop and think about it, what are we really talking about? In other words, how do we really measure success, what are its metrics?

I would submit that the underlying driving logic of those seeking success is really the admiration of others.   When we talk of successful ministries are we not most often really talking about ministries that impress other people? And how do ministries become admired by other people? They usually have big, measureable numbers of people involved. They often have a lot of flash and hype associated with them. Are not many of those seeking a successful ministry really not just seeking the approval and attention of others?

Jesus told us to bear fruit. He told us that the way to bear fruit was to abide in him. He never told us to use a marketing campaign. He never even suggested or modeled the 1st Century Palestinian equivalent. Jesus wasn’t afraid to do public ministry. But he was quite prone to making unpopular statements which made him look much less successful. Jesus was much more likely to go off and pray by himself than he was to try to impress anyone or look for a bigger crowd. At one point he made such an unpopular statement that many of his disciples left him.

A story and two questions

When I was a missionary in Guatemala I heard about a missionary who had left years before I got there. His entire career was devoted to discipling five Guatemalan men. When he left Guatemala that was all he had accomplished, training five young Guatemalan men how to follow Jesus. I’ll bet he had a tough time writing prayer letters. Was he successful? What if I told you that all five of those men became very effective godly leaders? A number of them went on to plant whole denominations whose growth came from conversions, not just transfers from other churches. Now what do you think?

What was Jesus most successful moment? How did he gain his success?

  • Is fruitful ministry the same as success? How do we measure fruit? Is it always obvious to others?
  • Agee or disagree: Aiming for success is aiming for the wrong thing. If not success, what should we seek?
  • Why do you think we talk about success so much in ministry circles?
Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Fixing vs. Loving

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Church History, Evangelism, Spiritual Life, Worldview by rossrohde — 10 Comments
November 2, 2011

Fixing isn't as helpful as loving.

In my last post, Deep Presence, I talked about an experience our simple church had with God in a café patio. What I didn’t mention was that at the same time there was a gay and lesbian group meeting on the patio. In essence they were having the functional equivalent of simple church but focused on gay/lesbian issues. I’m not saying they were looking for God; I have no idea one way or the other. I mean they were meeting together in community to have a meeting that was more than the sum total of its parts.

My friend Lyle (a member of our simple church) and I have discussed on and off what it would look like if our group became more proactive in ministry. What would it look like for our particular group to follow God into ministering to the community around us? In reflecting on this question, I came back to the gay and lesbian group. Here are some observations I’d like to note. It looked like this was a regularly scheduled group. Further, it seems like we took ‘their spot.’ They didn’t say anything, nor did they get huffy, it was just noticeable by some glances. Instead, they very graciously just sat in another location and had a happy, animated conversation. Our group was very ‘evangelical.’ Like it or not, I’m sure they could ‘smell’ our evangelicalism a mile away.

Now, what would it take to minister to that group? Stop for a minute and really think about that question. I asked you to stop because I’m sure most of our first reactions would have created serious problems but done little good toward moving the members of that group toward Jesus. Think about this passage:

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

I didn’t bring up that passage to note that homosexuals were wicked and won’t inherit the kingdom of God (as it is commonly used in evangelicalism). Nor to note that homosexuality is no less wicked than greed, which homosexuals often bring up with Christians. I brought it up for these two sentences: And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

The early Church was filled with ex-homosexuals (and ex-greedy people). The Greek world of that time had a much greater population of homosexuals than does our culture. Yet somehow the Christians found a way to minister Jesus to them to the point that they were washed, sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. Further, they felt loved and welcomed among the Christians. Do you think those of us who are current Western evangelicals could pull that off? Did you ever wonder why for the Early Church this was normative and for our expression of Christianity it is as rare as hen’s teeth?

Let’s go back to our church meeting on a café patio next to a gay/lesbian group. What would we have needed to do to minister to them? Let me posit this. Our whole ‘way of being’ would have to focus on loving them and not fixing them. Do you like it when people you don’t know or trust try to fix you? Do you like it when people you do know and trust try to fix you? I’ll bet your answer is no to both questions. Here’s another question. Do you think Jesus’ golden rule applies? You know, the one where he says “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

So how could we have loved them (or love them the next time)? We could have noticed that this was their spot and graciously relinquished it to them. We could have made kind eye contact with them. We could have smiled. We could have asked them if we could get anything for them as we were going to get a refill on our coffee. We could have just focused on looking out for their good…loving them. No fixing. No agenda other than love.

What would God have done, or could God do, with that? I don’t know. But I do know that it is Christian; truly, deeply Christian. It is based on Jesus’ value system of loving others and considering them as more important than ourselves. It is based on inclusive love, not based on merit but grace. It is based on not judging others. And it is based on humility knowing that I’m not really any better than anyone…anyone, else. But I’m in the process of being washed, sanctified and justified. That’s not my doing, its God’s. I’d like to share that with others, but only from a platform of love; not with a wrench in my pocket.

  • Have you ever had someone try to ‘fix’ you? How did you like that? Did it feel more like love or judgment?
  • Are there other types of people, besides gays and lesbians, our Christendom has separated us from?
  • Have you ever approached others with a wrench in your pocket? How’d that go?
  • How did we get to the point where the name “Christian” is more likely to illicit fear of being judged than a strong reputation for loving others?
Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

An Adventure with Jesus

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Discipleship, Jesus is Lord, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — 4 Comments
August 28, 2011

Are you ready to go on an adventure with Jesus?

In my last post We Haven’t Arrived Yet I suggested that we in the Western organic house church movement have a lot yet to learn. I view this whole situation positively. In fact, I think of what has happen in the Western organic church movement as being on an adventure with Jesus. I’d like to point out one of the issues I think we need to grow in.

One of the areas where I think Western culture in general and the Western church in particular is broken is in the area of teaching and learning. Instead of following the clear examples of Jesus in the Scriptures, we actually follow the Western teaching methods; what I call the university model.

What do I mean by this? We treat teaching as if it were a classroom experience. We download a bunch of information. We hope that those who are being taught catch some of what we are teaching and then we hope that they will go out and put it into practice. This is in stark contrast to what Jesus actually did. When Jesus wanted to teach a skill he modeled it, then he discussed it with his disciples, and then he immediately allowed those he was discipling to put it into practice. He didn’t send them home and hope they would put it into practice. He sent them on an immediate learning adventure. Next, after the disciples had gone on adventure with Jesus, he gathered them again and debriefed them to make sure they had learned their lessons. For an example of this read Lk 10:1-24. Repeat cycle as often as needed.

This is incredibly effective teaching. It is teaching through doing, not teaching through talking. I believe we need to get out of our Western taking heads mode of teaching and start replicating what Jesus actually modeled to us in the New Testament. Which is more important and powerful, Jesus’ model or the Western university model? Which is more practical? Which is most likely to lead to changed lives? Are the foundations of our learning with Jesus based on Jesus or Greek philosophy (which is the wellspring of the university method)? Personally I want my ministry behavior to be modeled on Jesus not Plato and Aristotle.

Further, I believe, and have experienced, Jesus actually leading this type of learning adventure in real time. What does that look like? Here are some suggestions.

  1. Gather as a group of friends and ask Jesus to lead you into his harvest.
  2. As a group listen intently to what you believe he is saying to you. Be ready to obey immediately.
  3. Use discernment (see I Cor. 14:29-33).
  4. Go out in pairs (Lk 10:1).
  5. Do whatever Jesus tells you to do.
  6. Immediately gather again and allow Jesus to debrief you (see points 1-3). If you are stuck in how to get the debrief started, here are three questions (What happened? How did you feel? What did you learn?).
  7. Repeat the process as often as necessary.

This is intended to be a cyclical learning process. It is intended to be learning by making mistakes (see Making Mistakes with Jesus). And, it should be fun. I personally believe we learn best by doing instead of learning by talking about a bunch of good concepts. And I believe it will lead to fruit much earlier and the learning will be much deeper.

  • Have you ever gone on an adventure with Jesus and some friends?
  • Are you as frustrated as I am about talking but not doing?
  • Have you ever noticed that we always want a little more information before we feel we are ready to actually do something? Where do you think that comes from?
  • Why do you think we are so reticent to make mistakes? Why don’t we welcome them as a learning experience?
Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Prophetic Lifestyle

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Evangelism, Spiritual Life, Worldview by rossrohde — 3 Comments
August 19, 2011

We need to make lifestyle choices that reflect the life of our King.

From this title one might assume that I’m referring to going about prophesying; but I’m not. I’m talking about living a life which is not only distinct from “the normal” but calls into question foundational principles of our society which God would call sinful.

Sadly, in my opinion, few Christians actually live like this. I’m not sure I do; certainly not to the level I can. But I do believe that God, and the Bible call me to be moving ever closer to that ideal. To do so I believe we need to look at two concepts that I very seldom hear Christians talking about beyond a doctrinal level. In other words, we talk about it; we just don’t put a lot of effort into putting it in to practice. Both are plainly stated in the New Testament.

Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will (Rom. 12:1-2).

Issue #1: Altruism (Rom. 12:1)

Our lives are to be a sacrifice for others and the ultimate “Other,” God. In fact, we can’t serve God unless we live for others. Jesus himself said, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.” (Matt. 25:40). And again, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me” (Matt. 25:45). Our lives are to be lived for serving others, particularly “the least of these,” or we are not really serving Jesus at all.

This kind of life has a secular name, altruism. Here is the dictionary definition of the word, “unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others.”[1] Imagine if we Christians actually took this to heart as a central focus of our lives. Imagine if the vast majority of Christians actually lived like this even if it ended up causing them to live a lower standard of living or harmed them in some other way. The early Christians were famous for this. What would our society today think of Christians if this was what we were known for? What would our society think of God? Currently in the US God himself, only gets a 52% approval rating. Yet Jesus was the ultimate altruist, sacrificing his life for many; and his life is the model for our lives. So is 48% of our society really angry at God or what they perceive about God based on the behavior of his followers.

Issue #2: Not Buying the “System” (Rom. 12:2)

We are warned a number of times in the New Testament not to buy into the values of the world. Besides Rom. 12:2, we have Col. 2:8, for example, “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” The word translated here “basic principles” is the Greek word stoicheia. It is also translated “foundational principles” in other passages.

There are basic rules that the world system works by. One, just as an example, is that we take care of ourselves and our own; the rest can look out for themselves. This is one of the basic or foundational principles of capitalism. That’s how our economic system works. But does that mean we, as Christians, should buy it lock, stock and barrel; or should we be living a different lifestyle, where we are “in the world but not of the world?” Here’s an interesting study that speaks to that very issue.

We Christians need to be very careful we don’t get sucked into a system; political, economic, social or moral, which compromises our basic Christian values. We are seldom actually faced with either/or choices. We do not have to choose strictly between the Democratic or Republican viewpoint (or the Conservative, Labour or Liberal parties, if you are in the UK for example). We do not have to make a simplistic choice between capitalism and socialism, branding one as an ultimate good and the other as an ultimate evil. We should be critical of the Democrats and call them to task. We should do exactly the same to the Republicans and the Libertarians, for that matter. We should be wisely critical of capitalism and communism and socialism. All are worldly systems based on evil principles. Our lives should stand in prophetic contrast to all of these worldly systems; which are all based on the foundational principles of the world. Further, we should do so with grace and love. We shouldn’t be calling others who are different than us highly charged labels like pinko or capitalist pig; even “crazy tax and spend libs” or “tea party wing nuts.” Our words should be seasoned with salt; and our lives should be different, very different.

  • Do you think we Christians in the West are adequately critical of our social, political, moral and economic values?
  • Do you think the average non-Christian knows many Christians whose lives really reflect Jesus, being living sacrifices, living lives that are deeply altruistic?
  • Living to gain money is one of the foundation principles of capitalism. How does that square with I Tim 6:10: For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs?
  • If we question where our society has strayed from moral values but fail to question social, political and economic values, will we be living a prophetic lifestyle? Should, for example, your neighbor be impressed if you are faithful in your marriage and greedy and selfish with your money?
[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/altruism

Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Is Organic Church a Fad?

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Christendom, Church History, House Church, Organic Church, Simple Church, The Viral Jesus Book, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — 8 Comments
July 25, 2011

Is organic church only a fad?

Is organic church just the latest fad, in restless Western Christendom, to find a way out of our decline? When I was in Spain, every new idea was greeted with a roll of the eyes. The Spanish church leaders had “had it up to here” with the Americans coming with the next new fad that was going to revolutionize the church. Some missionaries wanted to introduce rock music or at least electric guitars. Others assured them that their para-church organization had the cool technique that would change Spain from resistance to responsiveness. Others were sure that if we could just go against the current, and adopt some of the look and feel of the emergent church, Spanish youth would flock to them. And cells, let’s not forget about cells. If we just have cell groups in our church we can change the situation over night. All of this was met with a shrug of the shoulders, a roll of the eyes and a rather cynical puff of breath…and with good reason.

We Americans have a bad habit of jumping on bandwagons until the next more colorful, exciting bandwagon comes along. We loved the new, the exciting, the trendy. Just give us the new technique in three easy steps, and we are ready to take it to the world…until it doesn’t work as advertized. Then we just look for a bandwagon that will go from zero to sixty miles per hour in 6 seconds flat, or one to which we can just add water and have an instant effective church. In other words, we just look for the next cool technique. My Spanish brethren had us Americans figured out and they were pretty tired of it.

While I am sensitive, and more than a bit in agreement with my Spanish brethren, as well as others around the world who have “had it up to here” with the faddish, the trendy and the instant; I’d like to offer another perspective. What would happen if we stopped looking at changes in the Church in the last 200 years, or so (more particularly in the last 40), as a series of unique changes and looked for the hand of the Holy Spirit in a long term trend? What if cell church didn’t stand alone from emergent church or the rise of para-church organizations? What if all of this was really a step by step process under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? In other words, what if the Holy Spirit is moving us in a direction, not skipping around randomly?

Here’s the long term trend I see in Western Christendom’s response to the Holy Spirit (at least some important steps along the way).

  • The 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings (1730-40’s – 1800-1820’s): Beginning of the easing of the clergy’s stranglehold on all ministry and the awakening of the heart to supernatural power in religious experience.
  • The foreign missions movement and the rise of para-church organizations (1780’s to present): re-acknowledgement of our role and responsibility in the Great Commission.
  • The Pentecostal Movement (1906-Present): Recognition of the, importance, intimacy and power of the Holy Spirit.
  • Cell Church (1970’s to present): recognition of the power of small intimate groups.
  • Emergent Church: (1990’s- present) recognition of the need for an expression of Christianity that makes sense in the postmodern world.
  • House Church (1950 [China], 2000 [West]-present): a return to New Testament’s simple ecclesiology and the God given organic design of the Church. This gives an adequate structure to allow for sustained viral movement of the Gospel.[1]

Note how each step builds on the predecessors to for the needed structure, insight, practice or behavior to accomplish what God is asking those involved to do. I don’t believe any of the subsequent steps could have occurred without the previous ones already in place.

As with all movements of God, these are both divine movements and human. Each has its strengths while reflecting human frailty and error. And, as with any time one tries to note historical trends; this is an over simplification. I’ve expressed these in simple steps for clarity; not for pinpoint historical accuracy. Nevertheless, I believe God is at work and we need to take a long term historical perspective and join with Him in what He is doing.

  • Has it ever occurred to you to take a long term perspective of what God may be doing in history?
  • Did you ever notice how any of these historical trends were related to each other?
  • Denominations often tend to get stuck in the forms and practices associated with their foundation. What happens when this happens?
  • Where do you sense God moving you in this overall movement of the Spirit?
[1] This is the premise of my book Viral Jesus: Recapturing the Contagious Power of the Gospel. The book will be released 2/2/12 by Chrisma House.

Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Apex

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Christendom, Church History, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — 9 Comments
July 11, 2011

We thought we were the very pinnacle of Christianity.

When I was a relatively young Christian studying in Bible College, I was led to believe that my expression of Christianity was the apex of all Christian expressions. Some may be asking what “apex” means. I’m using the word according to Merriam-Webster On-Line Dictionary’s second definition of the word: the highest or culminating point.[1] In other words, I thought that the Christianity I was experiencing at the time was as good as Christianity gets. We had Christianity nailed. The way we did things was the right way. Our doctrine was the right doctrine. Any errors from history had been corrected. And anybody who did things differently were not quite up to snuff; if not completely wrong or even worse, heretical.

We weren’t quite arrogant enough to say it quite like that…I take it back. Yes we were. And even if we didn’t say it, we certainly thought it explicitly, or believed it tacitly. We were certainly critical of everyone else; after all, we were the truest, purest branch of Christianity.  We had read the Scriptures and understood their true meaning.

It never occurred to us that the cultural glasses we were wearing affected the way we read the Scriptures and therefore twisted the meaning of what we were reading. It never occurred to us to ask any questions about this whatsoever. But, in reality, our hermaneutics came from our cultural understanding of how reality worked and how reading texts worked.

Where did that understanding of reality come from? We’d like to think it came from the Bible, but anyone who has honestly studied worldviews (including knowledgeable Christians) would tell us it came from the Western cultural worldview called the Enlightenment. And where did the Enlightenment get its understanding of reality? This is going to be painful, prepare yourself…pagan Greek philosophy. The hermaneutics I was taught in a good, honesty sincere conservative Evangelical seminary, which believed that the Bible was the God breathed Word of God, had more to do with Socrates, Plato and Aristotle’s way of seeing things than Jesus’. Ouch. Those who have studied the Enlightenment will even tell you the arrogance described in the first two paragraphs is a tell tale sign of the Enlightenment.

Right now some of you are probably boiling mad. Sorry, I’m not trying to annoy you; but I am willing to ask honest and important if painful questions. If you don’t believe me go do some extensive study on this yourself. Read how the Enlightenment views texts and then honestly think about how you’ve been taught to read and discern the truth of the Bible. Read how the Enlightenment views the world and how you’ve been trained to understand reality. Then find out where these values came from. Don’t trust me on this, go find out for yourself. Just be honest with yourself. If you’ve never done this it might be painful, it was for me.

The Enlightenment itself is only about 250 years old (although its roots do go back to ancient Greek philosophy). The Early Church thought the Bible was the inspired word of God, but they most likely didn’t read the Bible like you do. They certainly didn’t have the same worldview you do. Yet God blessed them. God had a relationship with them and God bore fruit through them. And those Christians that got off track in history; do you think they did that on purpose? How did they get off track? Mostly by trying to conform what the Bible said to their erroneous worldview instead of changing their worldview to match what the Bible said. In other words, they did the same thing we are doing and it created problems. All human philosophy, including the Enlightenment has a basic core value: we can figure it out for ourselves, deep down, we really don’t need God. That’s why Paul told the Colossians: See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ (Col. 2:8).

We desperately need the Holy Spirit to lead us to the truth: But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come (Jn. 16:13). Our human hermeneutical schemes might be somewhat helpful, but without the Spirit, we can’t really understand God or his word. We don’t need Philipp Melanchthon, John Calvin, John Wesley, Martin Luther or Menno Simons to tell us what the truth is. For that we need the Spirit and a dose of humility. They all saw the truth partially, and so do we. They were all wrong partially, and so are we. Paul himself said: For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known (I Cor. 13:12). So, let’s have a little humility and a little respect for those who came before us. But, let’s never assume that we or they are the apex of Christianity. We are a bunch of imperfect people who God can still use and desperately loves. In the mean time, let’s trust the Spirit to use us and help us understand what we really need to know.

  • For those of you who have studied the Enlightenment, and how it has affected current Western Christianity, what would you say are two or three things we need to be careful of, or honestly question?
  • Have you ever wondered why our current practice of Christianity doesn’t much look like what we actually read about in the New Testament? Have you ever asked yourself why and what that might mean?
  • Do you think that church practice (ecclesiology) is tied to worldview, doctrine and our view of God? Or, is ecclesiology absolutely neutral and just a matter of personal preference?
  • Do you think things like the Enlightenment and non-biblical ecclesiology could affect our relationship with God? Why or why not?
[1] Definition of Apex, Merriam-Webster On-Line Dictionary, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apex?show=0&t=1310404166.

Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

Spiritual Blindness

Filed Under: Biblical Meditation, Christendom, Organic Church, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — 5 Comments
July 6, 2011

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

In John Chapter 9 Jesus heals a man born blind. It’s an incredible miracle. One would think that everyone who found out about it would be amazed and rejoice at what God had done. That’s not what happened. The religious leaders of the time ended up becoming very angry at the man who had been healed. They even hurled insults the previously blind man (v. 28). How could they not see what was right before their eyes? In a subsequent conversation with the healed man, Jesus accuses those who think they see as being blind, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (v. 39).  This really angered the religious leaders which precipitated Jesus final statement on the subject of spiritual blindness, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains” (v. 41).

It is very easy to condemn the Pharisees; how could they not see what was going on before their very eyes. But this same kind of spiritual/psychological/emotional blindness is going on every day. So I’d like to give my answer on how religious people can be blind to what God is doing before their very eyes, and when it is brought to their attention, why they become angry instead of rejoice.

We humans are creatures of habit and we tend toward mental laziness. Once we have come to believe that something is true, and have developed an internal logic to explain it; we are loath to change our minds. This “internal logic” is called a plausibility structure. It is a mental framework that has reasonable answers for all the questions we ask ourselves. Our plausibility structures give us plausible, i.e. seeming reasonable or probable, answers. The problem is that plausibility structures may have seemingly reasonable or probable answers to all the questions we ask, but the structure itself may not be completely aligned with reality. But, since our structure has a plausible (and satisfying) answer to our questions, we mistake emotionally satisfying plausibility for truth. They are not the same thing.

Consequently, when someone comes along and asks a new question or demonstrates a reality that doesn’t fit our plausibility structure, we find ourselves in a very uncomfortable situation. To change our plausibility structure requires a lot of emotional energy. Further, when it is challenged we find ourselves in a place of ambiguity or confusion, which is very uncomfortable. Worse, we might have to admit that we were wrong; and nobody likes to do that.

The normal but fleshly response to all of this is to lash out in anger. The deeper, and frankly lazier the acceptance to a plausibility structure is, the hotter the anger. The Pharisees had a plausibility structure which helped them understand the Old Testament Law and their relationship with God. The problem was that while it had a clear internal logic, it wasn’t perfectly aligned with God’s reality in the Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus came along and through his life and actions completely disrupted their plausibility structure. The majority lashed out in anger because their plausibility structure was disrupted. A few, like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea suspended their plausibility structure, and endured the pain of ambiguity and potentially being wrong, long enough to really listen. It was life changing.

Here’s how to tell if plausibility structures exist and are being threatened; look for hot, angry arguments. This is as true in religion as it is in things like politics and worldview. Modernists argue with postmodernists because plausibility structures are being questioned. Republicans argue with Democrats (and vise versa) because plausibility structures are at stake. Calvinists argue with Arminians (and vise versa), not necessarily because of reality, as much as plausibility structures. And organic church people end up in arguments with more traditional Christians (and vise versa), because plausibility structures are being exposed. Very little of this honors God.

So what’s the solution? Do we stop challenging plausibility structures? No, Jesus was pretty good at that. I think the solution is to not act like the worst of the Pharisees. We need to not be so lazy and volatile that we refuse to graciously pay attention to statements that challenge our plausibility structures. That’s what Nicodemus did, and it was wise. To do so does not make us wishy washy. It doesn’t mean we don’t believe things firmly. It means that we are truth seekers, who are willing to readjust our plausibility structures to accommodate new ideas and new questions if they honestly take us closer to God’s reality. That’s wisdom, and it is painful.

  • Should those who believe the truth be offended by new observations or questions?
  • Do you believe that any human has a complete lock on the absolute truth?
  • Can someone be mostly right but still need to readjust their understanding of truth?
  • What’s the best way to discern truth when a new observation or question is asked?
Did you like this? Share it:
Comment

The Man in White

Filed Under: Evangelism, Spiritual Life, Supernaturalism, Viral Christianity, Worldview by rossrohde — Leave a comment
June 18, 2011

For most of us Westerners, even Christians, dreams are just a nightly phenomenon which has no real connection to our spiritual life. For anyone actually familiar with the Bible, this should seem strange. The Bible is replete with stories in which God uses dreams to communicate to people. Let me give you just a few examples: Jacob’s dream of a stairway to heaven, the dreams associated with Joseph in Gen 37:1-10 of sheaves of wheat and sun moon and stars bowing to him, as well as the cup bearer, baker and Pharaoh’s dreams Gen. 40-41. These just begin to scratch the surface. God used dreams to communicate with Gideon, Solomon, Daniel, Joseph, Jesus’ stepfather and Pilate’s wife. In fact, dreams and their conscious counterpart, visions (think Cornelius and Peter), are a major way for God to speak to his people. So much so that God explicitly promised of such communication through the prophet Joel which Peter used to encourage the early Church.

So why do many modern Western Christians dismiss with contempt such communication from God? It certainly isn’t because God is afraid to communicate with humans in such a way. To believe such a thing would be to deny major portions of the Bible as false. Nor is it because God used to do it but doesn’t any longer. God continues to communicate with people all over the world through dreams and visions. Those in the West, who are open to such communication receive them. And, it is a common way for God to speak to people outside of the West who haven’t had their worldview corrupted through false scientific modernism[1]. Those who have not been corrupted in their thinking to limit themselves merely to what can be measured (called scientific rationalism or just rationalism), receive communication from God because they haven’t tried to limit God in how he can speak to them.

However, I’d like to focus on one important way that God is using dreams and visions to communicate to people today which is dramatically affecting the Great Commission. It is called dreaming of the Man in white. More specifically, God is using dreams to communicate to spiritually open people in the Muslim world to direct them to Him. He often does this through giving them a dream of Jesus dressed in white who gives them specific personal instructions so they can come to Him.

A personal story

I once met a Muslim born believer[2] at a party. I asked him how he came to Christ. He got very nervous; he was afraid I wouldn’t believe what he had to say. He started to tell me about a woman who was also a Muslim born believer who had led him to the Lord. I asked him how she came to Christ. Now he was really nervous. He started to hem and haw about some experience she had once had. Finally I asked him if she had experienced the dream of the Man in white. “How did you know!” he exclaimed. I’m not a mind reader. I just know that God is doing this around the world to reach Muslims.

This dream of the Man in white is not a rare occurrence. It is one of the major ways God is bringing Muslims to Jesus. This is powerful, it is supernatural and it is common.

The following is based on questionnaires of over 600 Muslims who became Christians:

“Though dreams may play an insignificant role in the conversion decisions of most Westerners, over one-fourth of those surveyed state quite emphatically that dreams and visions were key in drawing them to Christ and sustaining them through difficult times[3].

If you want to read some of these stories here is a place you can read just a few of thousands.

  • Do you agree or disagree with me that some Western Christians doubt dreams, visions and other supernatural events because they have had their thinking impacted by scientific rationalism?
  • Has God ever communicated with you through a dream or vision?
  • Do you know Muslim born believers who have seen the Man in white?
  • Do you believe Western Christianity’s relative lack of supernaturalism is a good thing which makes us wiser and less gullible or weaker because we don’t have the full experience of God’s reality?
[1] Don’t take this statement as a fear of science or scientific thinking. I believe science can bring both much good and harm to us humans. The scientific process is very useful for exploring the natural world. God is just beyond the mere natural world of atoms and molecules. We should not think in terms of science vs. spirituality; we should just be clear on what science can teach us and what spirituality can teach us and not confuse the two.

[2] Muslim born believer is a missiological term for a person born a Muslim who has converted to Christianity. It is used to distinguish such people from Christian born believers in the Muslim areas such as Coptic Egyptians, Iraqi or Syrian Orthodox or Palestinian Christians.

[3] This material is a portion of an article originally published in Mission Frontiers magazine, March 2001. www.missionfrontiers.org.

Did you like this? Share it:
Comment
Powered by WordPress | Theme: Motion by 85ideas.