Stan Grenz Has Died

in

Again, from Doug Pagitt's blog: "As hard as it is to comprehend, Stan Grenz has passed away. I have seen an official statement from the family, but my understanding it that it was a brain aneurism. He went to sleep Thursday and never awoke. He officially died at 4 AM. His wife and family are in great pain from what I have heard. Stan was not only a leader in thinking, and a great benefit to me and many of us, but he was a really good man. He really was a good man. He will be deeply missed."

More on Dr. Stanley Grenz

in

The latest..."Stan had a serious heart attack and is not expected to live. He hasbleeding on the brain."

For those of you who don't know about Dr. Grenz, I wanted to provide some info. 

You can visit Dr. Grenz' website to learn more about him.  It says there, "Stanley J. Grenz is a leading evangelical scholar.  Based in Vancouver, Canada's Carey Theological College and Mars Hill Graduate School in Seattle WA, Dr. Grenz has written prolifically and lectured throughout the world."

Here's his bio and a list of his books.

Please pray for this brother in Christ and his wife Edna, and children, Joel and Corina.

Landmines and the Real Jesus

in

Land_mines_soccer_2_1"What would you do if you had to worry about landmines every time youwent to the store, took a drive in the countryside or went to see your doctor?"

"That’s the reality for millions of people in about 80 countries. With such large numbers of people affected by landmines in countries that may seem very far away, it’s sometimes easy to forget about the problem."

Please visit stoplandmines.org to learn more and watch a powerful commercial. 

I think it's the responsibility of Jesus-followers to do something about problems like landmines.  But because so many evangelicals consider themselves conservative Republicans, and because social issues are usually taken up by liberals, and because conservatives and liberals (politically) don't much like intermingling, evangelicals have often lost the Jesus-centered approach to world problems and social issues in our neighborhoods. 

One of the first things recorded in the Bible that comes from the mouth of Jesus is the reading of Scripture in the synagogue in Nazareth at the beginning of His ministry.

Luke 4:18-19, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor.  He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

I've read this passage numerous time over the years and I've always spiritualized it as only meaning preaching the gospel to sinners.  But you cannot get past the terminology he read from Isaiah 61.  This proclaiming is more than words to the poor, the captives, the blind, and the oppressed of the year of the Lord's favor.  He lives it and breathes it and becomes what he has said by healing and helping and serving and loving. 

Shouldn't our lives be like that?  Doesn't taking up our cross daily and following Jesus mean that we are still in that year of the Lord's favor and our job is to proclaim these same things to the world?  And doesn't that come not only in huddling in our churches/hide-a-ways and saying biblical things but by actually finding the poor and serving them and responding with a call for justice to the oppressed? 

There is rarely a time when the verbal proclamation of Jesus isn't tied to a physical healing or serving or some loving act.  And if we are going to help with landmines on the other side of the world or with the oppressed in our community, we need to know the real Jesus and love as He loved.   Speaking isn't enough.

Stories as Hospitality

in

"Story is the most natural way of enlarging and deepening our sense of reality, and then enlisting us as participants in it.  Stories open doors to areas or aspects of life that we didn't know were there, or had quit noticing out of over-familiarity, or supposed were out-of-bounds for us.  They then welcome us in.  Stories are verbal acts of hospitality."

Eugene Peterson in Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places, page 13.

Emergent and the Conversation

in

The Emergent conversation is at a critical point, in my opinion.  You can gather some of my personal thoughts about the conversation in previous posts.  I would categorize my own position as emergent-minded and thoughtfully sympathetic.  That said, I don't want this post to be about me. 

I want to turn a little bit of the focus to the extra-emergent conversation, the conversation about the conversation between evangelicals and emergent types. 

I think right now is the time when a lot of evangelicals are getting scared.  I don't mean that as a put down.  They see a movement coming and react in a way consistent with an evangelical mindset.  Some have characterized the emergent movement as problematic.  Others as heretical.  Most claim it is a sellout to postmodernism. 

I think most who consider themselves in the emergent conversation will say they are trying to get back to the historic Christian faith.  Postmodernism has provided a wonderful opportunity to reclaim and redeem in Christ that which the Church has allowed modernism to steal away.

I also know there are more extreme positions among evangelicals and emergent types.  I don't want to discount that.  But I think that emergent is more of a conversation than a movement and evangelicals are more of a movement than a conversation.  And that matters when we try to critique and judge and pigeonhole people and issues and movements.

So to try encourage more conversation between evangelicals and emergent types (of which I consider myself both), I want to offer some links to the extra-emergent conversation.  Some of you will have already read or listened to these resources.  Others of you will be getting some new things to think about.  Even others will be introduced to the conversation for the first time. 

I hope that some of you who have access to resources not mentioned here will comment and add to the list. 

R. Albert Mohler weblog
-Truth-Telling is Stranger Than it Used to Be Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
-"A Generous Orthodoxy" - Is It Orthodox?

Doug Wilson weblog
-Theology to Make the Teeth Ache
-Postmodernism category blog posts

Brian McLaren website - many interactions with the conversation throughout including...
-A Brotherly Critique and Response
-Dialogue section   
-Annotation of "The Emergent Mystique" article by Christianity Today (found below)
-Open Letter to Chuck Colson on Colson's Christianity Today article "The Postmodern Crackup"
-Various other articles

White Horse Inn
-Emergent Church Movement, Part 1 - free streaming currently available   
-Interview with three young members of an Emergent Church congregation
-Interview with Shane Rosenthal, producer of WHI, on emergent experiences

Christianity Today - emergent conversation resources
-The Emergent Mystique - Christianity Today article

Books
-Becoming Conversant With Emergent by D.A. Carson - due out in April 2005
-The Church in Emerging Culture - Five Perspectives: Leonard Sweet, Andy Crouch, Brian McLaren, Erwin McManus, Michael Horton

You can also Google search various issues, names, or words like "emergent" or "emerging church" and you will find other articles, links, interviews, and a billion blogs and posts that add to the conversation.  Helpful emergent blogs found at Planet Emergent.

I hope these links are helpful.  I don't put them here because I agree with everything said, but because I value the conversation.  Please feel free to add something you find helpful.

Organic Prayer

in

We love to teach our 2 year old new words that he will begin to piece together into new sentences.  One of the first sentences we teach our kids is "I love you."  There's nothing like hearing your toddler say "I love you."

But it usually starts like this.  "Daniel, say 'I.'"  "I."  "Say 'Love.'"  "Wub."  "Say 'you.'"  "You."  "Good boy, now say 'I love you.'"  "Wub you."  Man, that's a great moment.  But I'm not so naive as to think that by repeating my words he is expressing love.  Using those new words meaningfully comes later.

This helps me think about prayer.  We have been indoctrinated to believe that prayer is like the ACTS acrostic (Adoration Confession Thanksgiving Supplication) repeated in sequence.  We think that if we can make it through the formula and approach God in the "right way," we have prayed rightly.  As if God demands to be told the right things at the right time. I don't think that's how God wants us to pray. 

ACTS is a tool, a learning device for baby Christians.  The most biblical model for prayer is the prayer of Jesus in Matthew 6.  Jesus said, "Pray then like this..."  Maybe if we pray this model, all will be well.  But, then there's His prayer that's similar but not the same in Luke 11.  Well, which model is best?  Which one do we follow?  If we follow formulas, we have to find one "right" one.  If prayer is more natural than that, then we should not baptize a model into becoming a formula and the "right" way to pray.  We should focus more on relationship.

I believe that prayer is organic.  Models and examples are to be thought through and digested, and then our prayers will be informed by them.  But just going through the formulaic pattern is artificial, like my son saying "Wub you" when prompted.  God doesn't want us to repeat formulas, but to respond to His character.

The Apostle Paul gives us another thought on prayer.  "Pray without ceasing."  That's an expression of the organic nature of prayer.  It's not that Jesus didn't get this...He lived it!  But we are so eager to find Scriptural formulas so we can put God in our box and treat Him like a cosmic vending machine, that we can't see it. 

Formulas and artificial patterns are an abuse of models and examples. They might make prayer seem easier, but they can quickly quench a real relationship with God.

Prayer should spring from our lips and hearts at all times and places.  It's a cry for help at the moment of need.  A plea for forgiveness when we fail.  A request for provision when we realize we have not.  It should be a response to the character of God more than mimicking a model of prayer.

My son has already mastered this kind of relationship and communication.  He runs for a hug and comfort when he's hurt.  He asks for juice when he's thirsty.  He smiles when he sees me happy with him.  He yells "stuck!" when he can't get out of a tight place.  He wants me to hold him tight and protect him when he's scared.  Daniel knows how to trust his daddy.  It's organic and natural.   

I want to live in continual faith and talk to my heavenly Father.  He hears me.  He loves me.  He smiles at me.  He helps me.  He forgives me.  He comforts me.  He guides me.  He is trustworthy and good.  I should communicate with Him much like my son communicates with me.

Christian Life

in

"Writing about Christian life...is like trying to paint a picture of a bird in flight.  The very nature of a subject in which everything is always in motion and the context is constantly changing -- rhythms of wings, sun-tinted feathers, drift of clouds (and much more) -- precludes precision.  Which is why definitions and explanations for the most part miss the very thing that we are interested in.  Stories and metaphors, poetry and prayer, and leisurely conversation are more congenial to the subject, a conversation that necessarily also includes the Other."

Eugene Peterson in Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places, page xi.

House Churches

in

Jim Elliff has been a encouragement in ministry for me in a number of ways.  I have heard him preach and speak.  I have heard his radical ideas on evangelism.  I have read many of his materials.  I have read many articles on his website.  All of it has been helpful in one way or another, even when I haven't fully agreed. 

One of his newest articles has intrigued me.  I haven't fully thought it through yet, or even mulled over all the difficulties and questions in my mind.  But his idea about starting house churches to extend sanctuary-style churches is worth reading.  I think he may be onto something biblical and wonderful and radically simple.

Spiritual Theology

in

Peterson_christ_playsFor the most part, I'm putting aside the other books I'm reading to dive into Eugene Peterson's new book, Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places: A Conversation in Spiritual Theology.  I plan to blog on it all the way through.

A recommendation from Marva Dawn...

"There is no pastor in the world that I trust more than Eugene Peterson, and this book offers us Eugene at his best -- poet, storyteller, wonderer, biblical scholar, sage, practiced disciple, and lover of God.  He woos us into exquisitely perceptive Bible readings, diagnoses the dangers of our common shortcuts, and immerses us in the community of those who live the truth of the Trinity in Jesus' way.  This is a life-transforming and liberating book.  I pray that many people will give it thoughtful, reverent attention."

Who is My Brother?

in

I've had a lot of thoughts lately on the difference between believing something and living something.  It's a problem probably best explained by turning to the letter of James in the New Testament.

In my own life and in much of my observation of many evangelicals, we seem much more concerned with the doctrinal underpinnings held by a person, church, or Christian organization than the life they live and works they do.  I used to judge a good church by their doctrinal statement.  I used to judge a good Christian by their particular understanding of salvation or the Trinity, or some other doctrine.

I'm not questioning whether or not right doctrine is important.  It is of critical importance.  But it isn't of only importance, and maybe not even ultimate importance.

James writes, "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" (2:19)

He is claiming that the demons are orthodox.  Their doctrinal statement is right.  They believe God is One, and to say God is One is to agree with the most crucial statement of belief in the Old Testament, the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4. 

This verse is in the context of James' claim that "faith without works is dead."  So James is using the demons as a powerful illustration: though the demons have their doctrinal ducks in a row, that isn't enough.  James insists that a saving faith, a living faith, is also a working faith.  That doesn't mean that works must be added for people to be justified before God, but that one must possess the right kind of faith to be justified before God.  And the right kind of faith is active in mercy, love, compassion, service, preaching and so on. 

Typically this teaching is brought up to point out that some people claim to be Christians but really aren't unless they live like it.  That's true.  When reversed it makes sense too.  People who do good works of some sort but don't hold to a faith in Christ aren't Christians.  Another helpful application.

But something seems wrong. 

There are people who claim to have a real faith in Jesus and who live consistently kind of life Jesus lived and taught.  They are loving and merciful and they are also passionate about Jesus, God's Son.  But because they might waver on a doctrinal point or two, evangelicals will deem them unsaved.  Or maybe they view an ethical application of biblical teaching differently, and so evangelicals will judge them as maybe not truly Christian.

Yet in my experience, one of the chiefest of sins of evangelicals is our lack of works.  We claim our "eternal security" all day long, but fail to grab the ladle that serves the poor or open our homes to those in need.  Our understanding of works too often consists of tithing, not doing a ton of things (including many things that aren't prohibited in Scripture), and on occasion trying to give a tract to someone or invite them to church.

And so the question comes: Who are our true brothers or sisters in Christ?  I believe where it isn't obvious, we should be accepting of all who claim it and live it (faith that is fruitful). We may disagree publicly with doctrinal error, and point out ethical discrepancy, and open our Bibles to argue for the best explanation of the truth.  But that doesn't mean we shouldn't consider ourselves One Body in Christ.

Understanding

in

James, the Lord's brother, wrote in his letter in the New Testament,

"Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness that God requires." (1:19-20)

All too often, I'm an angry guy.  I like to fly off the handle, give knee-jerk reactions, jump to conclusions, and all sorts of things angry people do.  Now, if you know me, you probably don't know me as an angry guy.  That's usually because we associate anger with loudness (screaming) and fuming.  Honestly, I do that more than I would like to admit.  But at least it isn't usually seen by most of you.

But I think anger, as James means it, is more than that.  I should say, it's deeper than that.  In my brief study of the Greek word (I've studied Greek, but I'm no Greek scholar) the word anger here means 'acting on impulse with displeasure.' 

As James brings up anger in his unimprovably practical letter, he seems to point to a kind of anger that comes quickly without first understanding.  That makes sense when we see he puts anger in the context of other things.  Be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger.  (Open your ears, shut your mouth, and restrain your impulse to freak out.)  Isn't James making it clear that a quick anger is wrong because that person has failed to listen and understand before reacting impulsively?  I think so.

I think this fits well with my post on Christian cultural commentators, who all too often react impulsively.  No, they may not seem angry as we often describe it, but the impulsiveness of their displeasure is the kind of anger I think James is talking about. 

It's like jumping down our kid's throat about spilling their cereal instead of realizing they are just little kids who make mistakes and don't have the same kind of control and thoughtfulness about their cereal as adults do.  When we understand that first, we can teach them control calmly and compassionately. 
God doesn't react over our "spilled cereal" with anger, and we shouldn't respond to the culture, our friends and family, new ideas, or most anything else that way.  We should restrain impulses, which are so often based on misunderstandings, and try to listen and understand. 

Understanding before making judgments produces the righteousness God desires in us and our churches.

The Jesus Creed

in

Joe Thorn and I have been thinking about an interesting modern creed called "The Jesus Creed."  I would like to see what some of you think about it.

We have confidence in Jesus
Who healed the sick, the blind, and the paralyzed.
And even raised the dead.
He cast out evil powers and
Confronted corrupt leaders.
He cleansed the temple.
He favored the poor.
He turned water into wine,
Walked on water, calmed storms.
He died for the sins of the world,
Rose from the dead, and ascended to the Father,
Sent the Holy Spirit.
We have confidence in Jesus
Who taught in word and example,
Sign and wonder.
He preached parables of the kingdom of God
On hillsides, from boats, in the temple, in homes,
At banquets and parties, along the road, on beaches, in towns,
By day and by night.
He taught the way of love for God and neighbor,
For stranger and enemy, for outcast and alien.
We have confidence in Jesus,
Who called disciples, led them,
Gave them new names and new purpose
And sent them out to preach good news.
He washed their feet as a servant.
He walked with them, ate with them,
Called them friends,
Rebuked them, encouraged them,
Promised to leave and then return,
And promised to be with them always.
He taught them to pray.
He rose early to pray, stole away to desolate places,
Fasted and faced agonizing temptations,
Wept in a garden,
And prayed, “Not my will but your will be done.”
He rejoiced, he sang, he feasted, he wept.
We have confidence in Jesus,
So we follow him, learn his ways,
Seek to obey his teaching and live by his example.
We walk with him, walk in him, abide in him,
As a branch in a vine.
We have not seen him, but we love him.
His words are to us words of life eternal,
And to know him is to know the true and living God.
We do not see him now, but we have confidence in Jesus.
Amen.

New Theology

in

"To say that the church on the other side needs a new theology is not to suggest heresy.  It is simply to distinguish between the message (God's truth, revelation, action, and expression) and theology (our task, our work, our language, our search to understand and articulate God's message).  In the old church we too often forgot that the two are different....In the new church we will try harder to remember that God is God and we are mere creatures, and that our attempts to understand and articulate his message and truth are always approximations."

Brian McLaren in The Church on the Other Side, page 65.

Thinking Differently About God

in

"In my life, God is always changing the way I think of Him.  I am not saying God Himself is changing, or that my theology is open and I blur the lines on truth; I am only saying I think I know who He is, then I figure out I don't know very much at all....And that's one of the things you notice about Jesus in the Gospels, that He is always going around saying, You have heard it said such and such, but I tell you some other thing.  If you happened to be a person who thought they knew everything about God, Jesus would have been completely annoying."

Don Miller in Searching for God Know What, page 21.

Hey, I'm Right Here!

in

I consume enough cultural commentary from conservative Christians (I'm a bit "c" happy right now) to begin to get a feel for where they are coming from.  That includes things like commentary on books, movies (like the ones I've read on Million Dollar Baby), ethics, music, and politics, just to name a few. 

When I read most cultural commentary, why do I get the feeling that most Christians are treating the culture as if they are a disobedient son?  We talk about them as if they aren't in the room, as if they can't hear us, and we say how worthless and horrible and wrong they are.  But we know they hear us and we are glad they hear us.  Actually, that's the point. 

I think thoughtful people in the culture realize we are doing this to them (like Green Day in their newest CD, American Idiot).  And they are saying, "Hey, I'm right here!  Stop talking about us as if we aren't in the room.  I'm worth something.  I have feelings.  This is what life is like for me.  Stop looking down your nose at us as the morally superior and smug know-it-all's and try to see the world from my perspective."

In some respect, isn't that what it means for us to be incarnational?  To stand in their shoes?  We don't read about what it means to be a sinner so we can point our fingers at the world and say, "Ha!  Sinner!"  We learn about sin in order to better explain grace and love and joy and peace and hope.  I don't find many conservative Christian cultural commentators who think and talk like that.  I don't think the world reads the things our commentators write and say like the woman at the well, "Listen to this guy who knows me."  Maybe they think, "Don't listen to this guy.  He doesn't know me as well as he thinks he does, and he doesn't think much of me."

God help us, so that when we meet the woman at the well we will tell her about the Savior with compassionate words seasoned with grace instead of leaving quietly and quickly to write our articles about a culture engaged in sex outside of marriage and divorce.

Refrigerators and Redeemers

in

I recently saw a slide-show mission presentation featuring an isolated people group in Mexico.  I was moved by it and felt the desire to support this work and get the gospel to these people.  Nothing I'm about to say changes my desire, but it does change the way I desire the mission work to be done.

It struck me during this presentation that most mission presentations I have seen (if not all) focus more on the need for Americanization than spiritual need, yet they never say this explicitly.  And usually the spiritual need is couched in physical need.  Something like this: "There are few believers in this group, but just look at how they live!  The tiny church building is leaky, the floors in their houses are dirt, here is how much money they make a year, and they have to salt their meat to preserve the little bit of meat they have because they don't have refrigerators."  Is your heart melting yet?

Do you see the problem?  It's as if, "They need Jesus and don't know Him, and haven't heard of Him," isn't enough for us.  They need to be like us, they need tile floors and ice machines and blue jeans.

My concern isn't over meeting real needs vs. telling the gospel.  I'm not talking about the social gospel vs. the gospel preached.  Biblically speaking, social needs and spiritual needs are very close friends and intertwined.  My concern is that the line between the gospel of consumerism and the gospel of Jesus has been blurred.

Is the biggest problem of these people that they don't know Christ?  Or is it that they don't get to live more like us in the West?  Is their biggest problem their lack of a refrigerator or a Redeemer?  Or better yet, is their lack of a refrigerator really a problem, or just a cultural difference?  I'm afraid our emotional heartstrings and deepest desires in mission are tied too much to our mindset as Americans and not to our redeemed mindset.  And yes, these two mindsets are at odds.

Look in the front of most churches and you will see where most of us stand.  The American Flag is standing right there with the Christian Flag.  We Christians are still too American.  And don't get me wrong.  I'm all for helping with real needs.  What a joy it is to serve others in the name of Jesus!  But we get real needs mixed up with the American lifestyle, and it's no wonder that our churches are full of people deeply in debt and deeply in love with the ways of the world.

What do you think?

Friendly or Friendship?

in

    "Closed friendships are upsetting initially because they do not offer friendliness to outsiders, but open friendships are far more disruptive because they invite outsiders in.  Life at work, in the neighborhood, at home, in the schoolyard, or among our best companions and allies might go on smoothly and in a friendly way without the intrusion of friendships.  Friendliness is safe and stable, and therefore more common and acceptable than captivating friendships.  Lively friendships form when two or three in the neighborhood or workplace start thinking and seeing things together.  They start talking and become captivated by an idea or vision of what they can do and where they can go together.  They will begin to form a place in the world together that is deeper and richer than it is when each goes about his or her business alone.
    Friends start to do more than just spend time or cooperate at work.  They start to live, struggle, and move forward side by side with the same way of envisioning the future.  Friends conspire.  They plan.  They want to make a difference.  They seek a goal that is beyond each and attainable only together.  Together, they are able to imagine a different kind of world, and together they are able to act in it.  Such friendship can be closed in upon itself or open to any who are captivated by the same journey.  Friendship brings either withdrawal or an offer that will change us.  When friendship brings an offer of hospitality, it is an intrusion upon our safe and smooth-running world."

David Matzko McCarthy in The Good Life, pages 36-37.