Reflections on Waiting

Today is a day of waiting. I don’t like waiting.

In fact, I don’t think any of us like waiting very much. Just look around next time you are in line at the supermarket and observe how uncomfortable people are with waiting… incessantly checking their smart phones, fidgeting with items in their cart, glancing at pointless magazines.

Right now I am in a season of waiting. I finished seminary in May and enjoyed a nice summer of relaxing and visiting friends and family. Now I am waiting for the right opportunity to serve in pastoral ministry. It is certainly not an idle waiting, but waiting nonetheless. Did I mention I don’t like waiting? There are certainly more job boards to check, contacts to be made, emails to be sent, and lines of the resume and cover letter that could be tweaked. But today I pause for a moment to reflect on waiting.

Sometimes I wonder why it seems that we have to wait on God so much. If God is all-knowing and all-powerful and present everywhere, then it seems that He should be busy all the time and we should never feel bored because we are constantly trying to keep up with Him. Deep down I know that he is always acting redemptively in the world, and that he never slumbers nor sleeps (Ps. 121:4), but even in that he sometimes calls his people to a time of waiting. I think of the Israelites wondering in the wilderness for an entire generation, waiting for God to act on their behalf. I think of Israel waiting for hundreds of years of (relative) prophetic silence for the arrival of Messiah. I think of the disciples waiting for three long days, wondering what went wrong.

Throughout the Scriptures, the people of God have been called to seasons of waiting. I take comfort in the fact that many of them engaged that calling as poorly as I am. They wavered in their trust in God. They acted impulsively because they tried to take matters into their own hands. They struggled to find joy and were restless and discontent. I am like those people; I am one of those people.

The good news is that God is faithful even when his people are not. God has demonstrated his faithfulness time and time again. He is at work in the world and he is at work in my life. Again I resonate with a line from Scripture, “Lord I believe, but help my unbelief!” (Mk. 9:24)

Hebrew Class and Facebook Mark

Last night I caught a portion of the 60 minutes interview with Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg. The interview was thoroughly interesting to say the least, but I was especially shocked when they informed viewers that Mark's personal net worth is nearing 7 billion dollars. [insert awkward silence] That's right, B-I-L-L-I-O-N with a capital "B," and not just one, but seven big fat billion dollars. This does not represent the value of the entire company (much higher), just his personal assets.

First of all, I can't even conceive of this much money. I can't image what it would look like if you brought that much money together and stacked it in $100 bills. Maybe something like this...

Can you image what it would be like to have this much money? You could afford to buy more products and services than you could ever want or need: the latest cell phones and tech devices, cars, clothes, houses, vacations anywhere in the world, perhaps your own private jet, assistants to wait on you hand and foot...In fact, I'm not sure most of us would even know how to spend it all up if we wanted to.

So, you might be thinking, "I read your title and I am still wondering what on earth Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook have to do with Hebrew class?" I am glad you asked.

This morning in Hebrew we were looking at Psalm 119:72 which says, "The law from your mouth is more precious to me than thousands of pieces of silver and gold." (NIV) I immediately thought of Facebook Mark, and how deep down my greedy materialistic self couldn't help but wonder what it would be like to have great wealth like him.

I was forced to ask myself a tough question. Is God's Word more precious, more valuable to me, than any amount of money I could ever possess? Is it more valuable to me than all the things I can and do buy with money? Will I spend as much time thinking, pondering, strategizing over how I can know and obey God's Word, as I do thinking about material things and wealth, and how I might acquire them. Lord help us, for it is more difficult to inherit the kingdom when we are drawn by the lust of our wealthy existence.

God, may we value your Word infinitely more than the stacks of bills pictured above.

Body Gospel

The latest Christian marketing ploy is a "new" workout program called Body Gospel. That's right, I am not making this stuff up. When I first saw it advertised on television I could hardly believe it. This post could easily turn into a long rant, so I will try to articulate a few of my greatest concerns about this product.

First of all, the name choice bothers me. The word gospel has a very sacred meaning (or at least it should) in the Christian context. Now, I realize in the Greco-Roman world this term originally carried a political rather than spiritual meaning. However, the Gospel writers took this term and gave it a new, more profound meaning when they employed it to refer to THE good news regarding Jesus Christ. Therefore, I think we tread dangerous waters whenever we imply that there is any other good news anywhere close to being as important as THE good news. Saving money on your car insurance, or perhaps loosing some weight through a workout and diet program, is indeed good news. But this is not gospel, and by calling it such I think we diminish the importance of the gospel.

Second, this product is another example of an unnecessary product that is a replica of similar products on the market. This product was created to capitalize on the Christian subculture which likes to buy "Christian" products. This phenomena deserves a post (or series) of its own, but that is for another day. Their material claims, "Body Gospel is different because it has a variety of workouts. There's muscle conditioning, cardio, stretch, resistance training, circuit, and the foundation of the workout is God." Let me reiterate that this product is offering nothing new. There are an endless number of diet and exercise program out there, all with their own claim to fame. Furthermore, they are implying that other programs might not allow a Christian to workout to the glory of God because they are "secular" and not labeled Christian. Hogwash. I don't need Christian running shoes, Christian vegetables, Christian sweatbands, Christian hiking boots, a Christian water bottle or any other product or service to understand the importance of caring for my body (1 Cor. 6:19-20). Why don't we use the creativity God has given us to generate new ideas rather than repackaging a Christian version of what has already been done.

Finally, this product is yet another example of the distortion caused by the prosperity gospel. They claim, " [...] with Body Gospel, if you believe, you will succeed." They are implying that if you have enough faith, you will meet your weight and fitness goals. This is simply not true. The Bible never promises that we will succeed at everything we do. Secondly, we must recognize that our definition of "success" might be different from God's plan. I am not saying that God doesn't want you to loose weight, it is certainly possible that one way you could be honoring God in your life right now might indeed include eating better and exercising. However, we must move away from the sense of entitlement with which many Christians approach God. He is not a vending machine. You cannot simply say the right words and have enough faith with the expectation that God must give you what you want. 

So, go for a long walk. Join the local gym. Play some ball with your kids. Pull the dusty workout program off the shelf you bought last year. But don't feel like you need this product to have a "Christian" workout.

Postmodern Mutilation of the Bible

The following dialogue is from a CNN interview between Larry King and Jennifer Knapp. I am not picking on her because she recently came out that she is gay. I would like to share some thoughts on this but that conversation is for another day in another post. The reason I am sharing this interview is because it is yet another example of a Christian (or at least someone claiming to be a Christian) going on the Larry King show and completely misrepresenting the faith. In this case, she is articulating a thoroughly postmodern, relativist approach to the Bible which should not be held by any orthodox Christian. She presents an absolutely mutilated viewpoint of the authority of Scripture. Furthermore, she tries to act like she is knowledgeable by mentioning the Greek text of Scripture, but clearly she does not have a orthodox view of the Bible. You cannot just "read your own interpretation" into the Bible.

Finally, if any of you talk to Larry King...tell him I would love to come on the show and finally present an accurate view of what it means to be a Christian. I don't presume to represent Christianity because I am without sin, but precisely because I acknowledge I am a sinner. Larry please have me on your show and I will tell you how much of a mess I am, and how great my Savior is. Please, Please....Larry, bring a Christian on your show who can actually articulate the gospel.

------------------------------------------------------------
KING: No problem for you to be Christian and gay.

KNAPP: Not with myself personally, no.

KING: You don't feel that your Bible speaks against it. Or, do you?

KNAPP: Well, I think there's plenty of evidence in my exploration of my faith through the sacred text of the Holy Bible that I have definitely recognized that we are somewhat at the handicap of our own interpretations of a sacred text. Let's take for example the original Greek translation of which I am no academic scholar of. Yet, you know, we all know that any time that we read a book or we read any kind of word, that it becomes the interpretation of our life's experience, what we want to bring out of that.

And so, I mean, in the long run, I don't have the greatest deal of problems with it because there are other -- there are not -- I'm not the only person in the universe that's ever, you know, looked at, you know, a different interpretation. We have --

KING: We can read things into any things.

KNAPP: Yes, doesn't make the truth any less the truth or love any less love.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This portion of the transcript from the show was taken from: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/23/lkl.01.html

"Do you feel pressure to be good all the time?"

I don't want to make a habit of this, but I want to provide a link to a post I just wrote on my personal blog. I think the story might be interesting/relevant for readers of Faith Comes Though Hearing who might not read my personal blog. Read it here: "Do you feel pressure to be good all the time?"

Thesis/Summary of the story: "The gospel has been covered up by far too many layers of secondary issues"

Giving up on the church...but not on God?

It is becoming increasingly popular among Christians today to officially announce that they have, "Given up on the church, but not on God." In other words, they still consider themselves to be Christians, but they are no longer participating in a formal Christian community. Is this a problem? The short answer is yes.

Some might go so far as to say that it is impossible to be a Christian without being a part of a church. One of the early Church Fathers, St. Cyprian had this to say, "He cannot have God for this father, who has not the Church for his mother." St. Augustine and other church fathers were noted for teaching that outside the church there is no salvation. I would not go that far, because I believe that we are justified by faith through grace (Eph. 2:8-10). However, I think the New Testament teaches very clearly that our faith is designed to be lived out in the context of community.

Some would argue that this concept of community could come from a small group, a family unit, or some other substitute for a formal church. While it is true we can find certain aspects of community in the context of these relationships, it is unlikely all the necessary components of "church" will be fulfilled through these informal mechanisms. Churches are designed to preach the gospel, offer accountability and fellowship, teach the Scriptures, meet practical needs, and commission and empower the people of God for gospel mission. (That list is probably not exhaustive I realize.) If your "small group" is accomplishing all of these aspects, maybe you are really functioning as a type of church.

One of the major issues with substituting a small group, or in some instances a house church, for participation in a formal congregation, is the issue of false teaching and heresy. (To be clear: I am not completely opposed to the idea of house churches, but they should be done carefully, biblically and with the awareness of inherent weaknesses/problems.) There must be accountability for what is taught, and formal churches generally have structures in place to make sure the congregation doesn't "accidentally" find itself forming a cult. If churches don't have accountability, they need to get it...like, yesterday.

Furthermore, we must address the issues of why one might want to give up on the church. The issues are many and complex, so I will only attempt to address two big ones.

1.  Many people want to disassociate themselves from the church because of the mistakes Christians and churches have made in the past and the common perception that all Christians are hypocrites. To me, this is the easier issue to address. Let's make this clear: all Christians are hypocrites if we mean they are unable to consistently live out their beliefs or ideals. This is true of all people, regardless of what religion they are or what they believe. We are all hypocrites. The Bible offers a good reason for this, it is called sin. Secondly, we must ask the question of who the church is pointing to. We are not telling people to believe in us, we are pointing them to Christ. We are not perfect, but Christ is perfect. Ultimately our imperfection should not be an issue. If anything it should be expected and points all the more to the need we all have for Christ.

2. Some people give up on the church because they find it boring, irrelevant, failing to meet their needs, they don't like the music or any other number of reasons that ultimately reveal our identity as consumers of worship. When this becomes our perspective, we have made church about us. We see the church as something to make us happy, enrich our lives, improve our social status, etc. When it no longer serves one or more of these functions, naturally we give it up. It's like a hobby, sport, or club. What if church was about more than this. What if the point of church was to have an encounter with God. Who? You mean church is not about me? Well...in a way. But what if church was not so much about what God is doing for us, as it is about what he is doing in us and through us. What if it was about knowing and worshiping God more than what we can get from out of it. For to be sure, when our focus in worship is on God, we will get a lot...perhaps more than we bargained for.

Alright, this post is getting too long...more on this topic later.

Further Reading:
Ask not what the church can do for you but what you can do for the church by Craig Blomberg

The Era of "Spiritual but not Religious"

It is becoming more common for people in American culture to describe themselves as spiritual but not religious. The problem is, it is not always clear what people mean when they claim this "status". Generally, this sounds good and most people consider it a positive sentiment. I would like to offer a sampling of what I think people mean when they use this term, as well as an assessment of some positive and negative implications of this idea.

"Spiritual but not religious" could apply to the following groups:

1. Those involved with the New Age movement, divination, astrology, Satanism, magic, the occult, or any other non-Christian spiritual practice. It seems common for these people to describe themselves as spiritual but not religious. In this instance, the phrase is used to describe religion as a bad thing, while still embracing the idea of being spiritual as positive.

2. Nominal Christians- Those who have some association with the Christian faith, but are not regularly involved in a community of faith and do not engage traditional Christian practices regularly. The term is used to communicate that the individual has some belief and connections to the Christian religion, even though they are not very faithful in practicing.

3. Lazy Christians- Similar to the above category, but often used by those who are simply too busy or lazy to serve and participate in a church community.

4. Hurt Christians- Those who have been disenfranchised or wounded by a church, religious group, or even by a fellow Christian. These people want to distance themselves from organized religion and institutions because of their woundedness.

5. Carnal Christians- Those who are not living a lifestyle worthy of the gospel who are convicted/embarrassed by their behavior and feel reluctant to associate with the Christian religion because of their lifestyle.

6. Reforming Christians- Those who are embarrassed by the current state of Christianity in America and use the term to try and distance themselves from the negative aspects of the Church and organized Christian religion.

All of the above are potentially bad reasons to claim the title "Spiritual but not religious." The sole exception might be the last (#6). However, I still think there are dangers with the last category. It is not necessarily bad to want to distance ourselves from mistakes the church has made in the past. But we cannot give up on the church just because she is not perfect. What if, rather than distancing ourselves from the problems of the past, we simply admit the mistakes, repent for them, and move forward with a more biblical, authentic, pure version of the faith.

The church is God's idea. God created us to live in community and practice our faith in community. We have been so affected by the western exaltation of individualism that we view our faith through this lens as well. It is all about our personal relationship with God. Yet, the people of God throughout the Bible, and the majority of Christians throughout the centuries have not viewed it this way.

The Bible does not give us the option of being a "lone ranger" Christian. 1 John 1:7 says, "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin." (emphasis added) To be a follower of Jesus Christ requires us to participate in his body. If you are a Christian who has cut yourself off from the Church, falling back into this idea of being "spiritual but not religious," I encourage you to search the Scriptures, pray and seek God, and ask him to guide you to a church where you can serve, grow, and practice loving God and others.

Moral Relativism: The Rise of a "Be Nice" Culture

Some time ago I was riding on a plane reading "The God Who is There" by Schaeffer and "Truth Decay" by Groothuis, weighing the implications of truth decay in our postmodern culture. There was a young boy and his father seated next to me. I always try to mind my own business while traveling, but the close proximity limits one's ability to avoid eavesdropping. The interaction between this father and son was quite entertaining, yet I could not help filtering their dialogue through the books I was reading.

The boy was talking about aliens, and how, if they found our planet they would probably invade us. The father interjected that if aliens did exist, they probably would not be inclined to invade our planet. To prove his point, the father reversed the scenario on his son. "If we (humans) discovered another planet with life on it, we would not invade them for no reason." The son remarked, "Well, I would." The father smirked slightly and replied, "Well, that's not very nice son."

I find the use of the word nice intriguing. Ultimately, I think the truth the father wished to convey was that his son's action would be wrong (It would be wrong to invade someone for no good reason.) The problem is that our culture no longer recognizes objective moral truth. Any judgment of right or wrong is considered subjective, and our language has merely morphed to snychronize with this trend towards moral relativism.

The problem with a word like nice is that it is neutral. It does not convey an absolute standard. Something could be the right thing to do and not be considered nice at all. Alternately, an action could be considered nice in gesture, but be entirely morally bankrupt. You see, nice has a subjective quality that depends on the perspective of the observer or recipient.

I am not suggesting that we remove the word from our vocabulary altogether. My point is to show an example of the subtle increase of moral relativism in our culture. Philosophical shifts always manifest themselves in art, music, and especially language. We will at times disagree with one another as to what right and wrong ought to be, but we must never reject absolute moral standards altogether. This would lead to total anarchy and is existentially unlivable in a sane world. On a secondary note, we should all take great care that the words we use reflect our values. To the gentleman on the plane that day: If you are not a moral relativist, I suggest you carefully consider how you employ your words. We all should do likewise.