Tuesday, November 9, 2010

social media detox


so this last week i took a complete break from any and all forms of social media (facebook, twitter, blogs, etc.)  there were a number of reasons i felt like i needed this detox, one of which is a seriously disturbing new york times article on how social media affects your ability to focus.  another was a documentary i watched about some effects of constantly being connected, but ultimately i just wanted to unplug.  after a week w/ no social media i came to a few conclusions:

1. experience lines up with research from the article: social media really does mess with your ability to focus.  i found myself at the beginning of the week randomly wanting to check in during studying or some other task i was doing.  by the end of the week i was already much more single-track and able to stay focused without that random impulse to check a billion different snippets of whatever (the previously linked NYT article explains how social media can actually create a chemical addiction in the brain).  this probably ought to seriously trouble anyone who is concerned with productivity in themselves or their employees.

2. NO ONE uses email anymore for personal interaction.  seriously.  i think its only use is for business these days.  upon reflection, i find this to be somewhat troubling, but not because i'm old school and think the newspaper or printed books or the postal system should never be trumped by e-formats (though i really do think there's something different about holding a book in your hands. call me sentimental. :)  i think what it says is we are losing the art of communication.  we try to trump quality and depth with volume (always a bad philosophy in my view).  it is a rare skill to fit anything meaningful into 140 characters.  i also believe the way we present ourselves is different when we think "the collective web-consciousness" is watching than we do in a real, personal interaction with one or a few people.  this inevitably leads to a degree of superficiality (that hopefully does not take over how we relate in general).  i wrote a lengthy blog post on this idea a couple years ago (back when facebook had less than 100 million users if you can imagine that! :)  you can find it here. (however, social media is very effective and time-saving.  then again, so is a microwave, but i question the side-effects both might cause with over-exposure.)

3. most of what gets posted on facebook or twitter is, well, trivial at best. :)  no offense to anyone.  i post as much as the next guy.  but seriously, read through a couple scrolls of your facebook homepage or twitter feed and ask yourself what that really added to your day.  i'm guessing the majority (not all) of the time the answer is "not much".

4. detox is a good thing.  i do not plan to quit using any of the forms of social media i'm plugged into.  it is very convenient and like i said, no one uses email anymore.  plus i use it to get church info/resources out.  however, i think i'll probably continue to have occasional detoxes so as not to be over-exposed to the social-media-radiation that is the 21st century.  if you can't remember the last day you didn't check facebook, twitter, your blog feed, etc. that may be a good sign it's time for a break.  seriously, take a day, two, a week, whatever and just unplug.  read, pray, enjoy real communication with living people.  you'll be glad you did.

Friday, October 22, 2010

you might be a pharisee if


i've been reading through the gospel of matthew lately and recently came to chapter 23.  this chapter always blows me away and challenges me each time i read it.  it's the chapter where Jesus goes off full-force on the pharisees and "woes" them in one of the most passionate and what must've been emotion-filled moments in His earthly ministry.  i thought i'd take the "woes" and put them into a list form (how pharisaic of me :) and re-phrase them to a more modern context as a way to allow the Holy Spirit to challenge the pharisee that dwells in all of us.  so, you might be a pharisee if:

1. you consider yourself a spiritual authority qualified to dictate to others. you see yourself as the mediator between God and men.
2. you talk a lot about God but do not live it out.
3. you like to tell others what God expects them to do but aren't willing to do it yourself.
4. you do your religion so that others will see you and praise you.
5. your spirituality is defined by external things (think bumper stickers, keychains and other Jesus-paraphernalia, christian radio on the pre-set buttons, etc.) rather than by inward reality of relationship with God and love of others.
6. you come to church to be seen there by others rather than to meet with Jesus.
7. you crave recognition from people for whatever ministry you might be doing.
8. you really love whatever title it is you have in the church and want people to use it as much as possible. (i.e., "Pastor" is now your new first name).
9. you present Christianity as an exclusive club rather than open to anyone. people who are not in your clique can't come in: people who don't dress like you, talk like you, vote like you, etc. can't really be "good Christians".
10. your religion hasn't made you any more compassionate or generous toward the needy/broken.
11. you pray long and sing worship loud because others are listening, not because God is listening.
12. when someone new comes into the church, rather than rejoice for God's grace, you set about to "fix" him.  you burden him will all of your legalism and turn him into a graceless, obnoxious zealot (like yourself).
13. you have falsely dichotomized your life into spiritual/secular categories.  you relegate God to a certain corner of your life, not seeking to know Him in all of life.
14. you are strict and hung up on the little external matters of obedience (smoking is the unpardonable sin, your movie collection would be approved by mickey mouse and your vocabulary sounds suspiciously like ned flanders') but you are completely content with your own greed, lack of grace to others, indifference towards those who are suffering, and pride and contempt in your heart towards anyone who doesn't follow your rules.
15. you are very careful to hide your self-indulgence under a thick layer of looking holy.  as long as you can schmooze at church with the right people, you think you're getting away with it. (you're not.)
16. you compare yourself to people in much harder situations than yourself (divorced, single-parent, unemployed, abused, recovering addict, poor, etc.) and look down on them and tell yourself you'd do better in their shoes, though you've never been in them.
17. lastly, you might be a pharisee if anything on this list made you mad. :)

happy repenting!

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

the Holy Spirit's cross


 
[this post has been revised from the original version for greater clarity]

... is me.  (before you get out the heresy sticks to beat me with, a) it’s an illustration and b) read the whole explanation :)  i've recently been praying over some challenging ideas from In the Name of Jesus (which if you have not read, it's a must).  the Lord has been convicting me on a lot of things through this.  one of these is how i often allow deep and intimate prayer to slip between the cracks of a thousand other things i think i have to do, the majority of which are completely unnecessary and none of which are more important than He whom i sacrifice for them.  as i have reflected on and been challenged concerning the source of my ministry, the source of my identity, there was a phrase from the book that struck me, "my lack of contemplative prayer... was a sign that the Spirit was being suppressed."

"how exactly could i be capable of suppressing the Spirit?" i thought.  as i considered the Cross, it all became clear (as usually happens when we focus on the Cross).  when Christ was on the Cross, His greatest suffering was not physical.  there has been many a sermon on the much deeper spiritual anguish Christ endured beyond His bodily wounds.  sometimes this is posed in a strictly individual sense: that Christ, the sinless Lamb of God suffered the spiritual anguish of becoming sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21).  while that's true, the Gospels themselves paint a slightly different picture of the source of His anguish.  they record that right before His death, Jesus cries out, literally screaming while He’s suffocating "my God, my God, why have You forsaken Me!?"  what rent Jesus' heart, what caused Him such agony that He is screaming with His dying breath were not the nails, or crown of thorns, but His separation from His Father.  it was nothing less than the rending of the eternal unity and fellowship of the Godhead.  it's something we will never be able to fully comprehend in this life or the next.

but here’s where we come in.  God has put His Holy Spirit in us.  the third person of the Trinity has taken up permanent residence in those of us who believe in Christ.  this is, in some sense, another incarnation of God.  (put those sticks down and let me finish! :)  obviously not that Christians become God in any sense (sorry, mormons), but that God is now dwelling "in the flesh"; as Scripture says, our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor. 6:19)  now, i think because we as Christians are so familiar with the idea of the Spirit of God living inside us, we don’t really contemplate what that means.  i believe this relates especially to prayer.  we typically see prayer as being a sort of point-A-to-B communication from us to God (or both directions if we’re really spiritual. :)  however, we forget that the desire and ability to commune with God is obviously not from our own selves originally, but from the Spirit of God in us (as “no good thing dwells in our flesh”).  prayer, if truly inspired and begun by the Spirit of God in us, may be said then to be not merely A-to-B (us to God), but A-B-C, from the Holy Spirit through us to the Godhead.  for the sake of not writing out a whole phrase to explain it each time, I’ll call this “A-B-C” communication: “transcommunion” (copyright! :) - that is, the Spirit of God communing with the Father and Son through (trans-) us.
 

how does all this tie together?  in this: similar to how the Incarnation of Jesus placed Him in a position where He could be cut off from the Father, so in the Spirit's indwelling of us, God has opened Himself up to another breaking of His fellowship; specifically the breaking of the Holy Spirit’s transcommunion in us with the Godhead.  the Bible says that we as believers in Christ are capable of "grieving" or "quenching" the Spirit.  but what does that mean?  i figure it's like this: the greatest joy and delight God has is His own glory, enjoyed eternally among the members of the Trinity.  when Christ was incarnated, He was cut off from that eternal bliss because of our sin and experienced the anguish of separation at the Cross.  now God dwells "in flesh" again; the flesh of those who believe in Jesus.  but sadly we once more subject God to deep grief in hindering His fellowship through us by our sin.  the Spirit in us, who longs above all things to enjoy unity with the Father and Son, is kept, as it were, at a distance from the transcommunion He desires with the Godhead by our lack of prayer, by our decision that our work, our comfort, our games, our glory are more important than His divine fellowship.  it's a sick irony.  our self-seeking and neglect of God was the cause of that awful rupture in the Trinity at the Cross.  now our same selfishness causes a break in His transcommunion because through prayerlessness we deny the indwelling Spirit the intimacy He desires to have through us with the Godhead.  we cut off our own fellowship with God and so we cut off the Spirit's who dwells in us.  in that sense, we become a "cross" to the Holy Spirit in breaking His fellowship through us with the Lord.  to use the biblical phrase, we "grieve" the Spirit in us.

you may or may not be squirming as you read this now (though i hope you are :).  the fact is, it makes us uncomfortable to think that we could have this kind of effect on the Godhead.  we like to think that He is completely impervious and unaffected by our neglect of Him.  though in no sense does He depend on us or "need" us, yet He has chosen of His own will to make Himself vulnerable to us.  He has willingly linked His own being with those of us who have received Christ, even so much as to be in us.  but maybe this thought of our hindering the fellowship of the Godhead* is uncomfortable for us most of all because we like to think that our prayerlessness doesn't really affect anyone except maybe ourselves (and even that we try to talk ourselves out of).  when we choose to neglect intimate fellowship with God we tell ourselves, "well, i might be a little less chipper today, but i'll manage."  but the truth is it’s not merely an issue of “i’m not in the mood to pray.  i can get by without it.”  this would be a logical statement (though not an accurate one) if prayer were strictly A-to-B.  but when we realize that it’s primarily the Holy Spirit in us who desires that communion with the Father and Son and who is prompting us to pray, then this statement becomes out of place, irrelevant, absurd.   the question then becomes, “if the Holy Spirit has taken up residence in me and desires above all to enjoy fellowship among the Godhead, and that through me, who am i to stand in the way?”  the truth is that not only do we affect ourselves negatively when we neglect fellowship with God, we affect everyone around us negatively (and i don't just mean with a bad mood, but by stopping our ears to the ways the Spirit would want to use us to bless others that day).  what is most unsettling though is to realize that not only do we affect others by our lack of intimacy with God, but that we grievously affect God Himself.  He has put His Spirit in us so that He may draw us into the glorious fellowship of the Trinity, not so we can be the roadblock in His transcommunion.  i know it's something i am guilty of and am glad that God is convicting me of it so that i can repent and allow His Spirit  to rejoice through me in the fellowship of the Godhead; a decision i am glad i make each time i do. 



"Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?  For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's."
- 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

[ * footnote/disclaimer: i am not implying that we as individuals or even as the corporate church as a whole are capable of "stopping" God's fellowship among Himself.  this complete rupture happened once at the Cross and never again.  the Spirit, however, is grieved over the loss of fellowship through us with the Godhead.  this loss of “transcommunion” is on a subjective and personal level as concerns us.  this does not equate to the Spirit being deprived of union with the Godhead on an objective and complete level, in as much as the Holy Spirit is not bound exclusively in the Church in the same way that Christ was bound in His body at the Incarnation.]

Monday, August 30, 2010

serving the city

this ukrainian independence day (august 24th) we continued the tradition we began last year of a church picnic / beach clean-up day.  our desire in doing this is to "seek the good of the city" (Jer. 29:7) and to show people the love of God in a very tangible way.  we believe that such community service is a vital part of reaching the city for Christ.  we have also been going out this summer and doing street witnessing every week, but the fact is that those whose hearts are not yet open to the gospel, though it is the greatest "good" we could do them to share Jesus with them, do not yet perceive it as such.  in taking on projects to practically do good on a level people who are not yet saved can recognize, we are able to show them the love and care of God in a way they can understand it.  since in ukraine there is really no concept of "littering" or "pack it in, pack it out", the parks and beaches all look about like this:



after a little of this...




(and by little i mean over 1,000 gallons (4,000 liters) of trash collected...)
the beach looked like this:



we had quite a number of people stop us and say, "this is great!  i wish everyone cared about our city like this.  why are you doing this?"  we were able to answer them simply "because Jesus loves this city and we love Him."  a few of the responses were ones of shock: "really!?  you guys are from a CHURCH!?  that's the kind of church i'd visit."  our desire is to take on other community improvement projects as God leads us and resources allow.  one thing we've had on our hearts for a long time is to repair some of the dilapidated playgrounds around the city and in so doing serve the mothers and young children that play there.  please pray with us that these seeds of simple service would grow in people's hearts to the glory of God.

Sunday, August 22, 2010

eco-indulgences


on my very long flight back from america, i couldn't help but notice an ad for the next stage in development of earth worship.  now delta has teamed up with the nature conservancy to add a "purchase carbon offset" option when you buy your airline ticket.  what this works out to being is essentially an "indulgence": you know you are about to commit transgression by jet fuel in purchasing an airline ticket, however, in order to placate your guilty conscience and appease the wrath of mother earth against you for such a heinous crime, you can now purchase ahead of time a "carbon offset", or as i like to call it, an "eco-indulgence". (copyright! :)  of course, just as the indulgences of the popes were really just excuses to line their pockets and licenses for people to sin, i can't see how buying a "carbon offset" is much more than an excuse to continue polluting "guilt free" and i can't help but wonder who's pockets are getting "greener" off the green guilt-trip.  i'm all for being a good and responsible steward of the creation God has entrusted to us (for a fascinating, Biblical basis and approach for being "green", listen to this.)  but the avatar-esque, can't-breathe-without-feeling-guilty-for-your-carbon-output mindset has led to a very interesting brand of religion.... and like any religion has led to its own brand of self-righteousness.  and in this case, i guess righteousness is for sale.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

ukraine is a land like no other (except maybe russia :)

from time to time as i walk around the experience that is my life in ukraine, i run into things that i realize are very bizarre to people who are not from here.  since i've been living here for over 8 years now, i have to force myself to remember that these things strike most foreigners as very odd, since i have just come to accept most of them (granted, not all of them).  so for your education and amusement purposes, just a few pictures from the last month or so:
this picture probably doesn't explain itself well unless you've seen one before.  for those not familiar with ukrainian ritual, this is a funeral.  you'll notice that the crowd is gathered right outside the apt. building.  no, this is not a wake.  the body is in the coffin right there next to the stairwell (didn't get a close-up out of respect for the friends and family of the deceased).  the colorful bars off to the left are the playground equipment (abby was swinging on an incredibly squeaky swing before we made her stop so as not to provoke the ire of the crowd).  the most interesting part about this is if you live in the stairwell where the person died, you get to walk right up to and past the coffin with bags full of groceries as babuska's cry over their loved one.  this might all seem very tasteless, but i have to say i prefer it.  death here is not tucked away and denied the way it is in america (or i imagine western europe?).  it's right there in your face (outside your kitchen window, actually) ... a reality to be reckoned with.  it is not disguised and sanitized:  no funeral homes, no formaldehyde (hence same or next day burials) and a simple pine box. 

on a similar note: the morgue.  (don't ask me why i was there). 
these are shots of our local morgue.  the first shot shows that in the waiting hall, there is a typewriter from i'd guess about 40+ years ago.  i'm not sure if they're keeping it around until it attains "antique status" and then hock it to provide for a lock on the door to the "dissection hall" (seriously, there wasn't one.  just a sign that said "no entrance without permission!").  or maybe it's just a statement that the typewriter itself has met it's end.  ah, modern art... nah, probably the first option.

the second picture is a soviet style plaque of a woman weeping over the grave of a loved one.  the great part is that these metal figures are nailed onto the door of an old wardrobe.  you can still see the old hinges at the top.  nothing says "our condolences" like dismantled furniture.

next, a sign on the doctor's office door:
the working hours of the doctor in this particular section of the hospital are from 8:00 until 14:36.  yes, that's right, 14:36 (2:36pm).  the funny part is i'm willing to bet he never sticks around that late anyway. 

the last picture would be the funniest if it weren't real.  below is the sign that you see as soon as you step onto the property of a certain church here in ukraine:
for those who don't read russian, it says: "we do not allow: smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages, improper language, walking on the grass, picking flowers, walking dogs, leaving trash."  seriously, is that really the first statement you want to make to visitors?  if i were not a Christian, i'd turn around before i ever hit the door (i'm a pastor and i almost turned around anyway).  sadly, this sign typifies the attitude and bent of the majority of churches in ukraine; in a word, rules (and mostly petty ones at that).  it's all about what you cannot do, about ridiculous codes, and little to do with the heart of Jesus.  the sad part of course is that this is the way a lot of Christians present themselves to the world (not just in ukraine either) and the way a lot of non-Christians perceive the church (ned flanders, anyone?).  the fact is a lot of "Christians" have no idea who Christ really is (and pass their ignorance on to non-Christians).  i bet if they let Jesus make the sign at that church, it would say something more along the lines of, "we do not allow: self-righteousness, arrogance, gossip, walking on people, picking fights, barking at others, and trashing your neighbor."  the more Christians i meet here, the more convinced i am how desperately this country needs to hear the Gospel of Grace: that Jesus didn't come to make more Pharisees, but to rebuke them, and to make lovers of God instead.

Monday, May 3, 2010

four principles for christian unity

(if you're confused as to why there is a picture of bacon here, a) keep reading but b) why not!? :)

a few weeks back, we went through Romans 14:20-24 and looked at how to deal with your convictions and those of other believers.  i thought i'd share the principles from that passage on how to rightly hold and use your personal convictions as a Christian and how to treat another person in his convictions:

1) "all things indeed are pure."  in other words, if the Bible doesn't say something is sin, you can't universally define it as sin.  if the Bible is silent on a particular issue, or gives freedom, or doesn't set forth a specific stance, then no Christian (no matter how insightful he thinks he is) has the right to declare it as sin for all people.  there are plenty of things the Bible does say are sin, and pride is one of the most often repeated.  as soon as you take any of your personal convictions and try to force it on others, you have become a proud pharisee.  this includes areas like drinking alcohol, birth control, watching harry potter, eating bacon, playing cards, listening to secular music, using electricity (thanks amish! ... and no, i'm not worried about offending them.  they shouldn't be using the internet anyway. :), etc.

2) "whatever is not from faith is sin."  if you are personally convinced God doesn't want you to do something which the Bible is silent on, don't do it.  for you it would be sin!  the reason it would be sin is not cause the thing/action itself is wrong, but because, in as far as you are convinced, it would be disobedience to God, and that is sin.  keep your convictions.  live by them.  just don't force them on others because then you'll have a much bigger problem than eating bacon and watching harry potter. 

3) "it is good not to do anything by which your brother stumbles."  that is, if the option is between using your freedom to do what you want and serving your brother, go with the later.  we are given great freedom in Christ, not so we can do what we want, but so that in surrendering it for others, we may become more like Him.  the Cross of Jesus proves without a doubt that serving others is more important than standing on your rights.  but does that mean we have to stop drinking coffee, eating bacon, watching TV and using electricity just cause it might stumble someone?

4) "do you have faith?  have it to yourself before God."  to serve others with our freedom doesn't mean that we become as strict as they are.  it does mean that we use our freedom with discretion and readiness to surrender it for others.  the principle is not "if this might stumble someone somewhere, i shouldn't do it."  love doesn't exist in "theory", only in practice.  the principle is: "if this does stumble the person i'm with right now, then in his presence i will refrain."  use your freedom in places and ways it won't stumble others (at the least just before God... it won't stumble Him if you eat bacon. :)  does this mean we stop using freedom all together?  no.  does it mean we surrender it for the good of those who are stumbled by it?  yes.

if Christians would all apply these simple Scriptural principles, there would be a lot less petty fighting and contentions among the body of Christ. 

one disclaimer should be mentioned at this point:  if a person is attempting to set up their own convictions as law for others (which really means they are trying to set themselves up as god), we should contradict and break their convictions boldly.  if they are contradicting the will of God through their man-made convictions, we should ignore them.  Jesus often practiced this when the pharisees attempted to thwart the work and will of God by their extra-biblical convictions.  Jesus' response was to boldly contradict them and continue anyway with the work His Father was doing.

well, hope that was beneficial for someone out there.  feel free to share your thoughts in the comments.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

ministry is a whore

yes, you heard right.  i've been thinking lately about this idea.  it's no coincidence that the "whore of babylon" mentioned in Revelation is specifically a religious system. but why "whore"? ("and why does he keep using that awful word!?" :)   first of all, it's offensive.  and that makes it the right word.  if we had even the slightest idea how sickening and offensive it is to God when we replace relationship to Him with a system, we might see that this word is probably not vile enough. 

secondly, it paints a very accurate picture (and i'm about to get a little vivid, so be warned).  a whore is, in some twisted sense, a "wife-replacement".  that is to say, she gives the impression of intimacy without real intimacy.  she looks like she might satisfy, she goes through the motions of satisfying, but leaves only emptiness in her wake.  there is just enough similarity to distract a man from seeking true intimacy with a wife; to fool him into thinking he's got what he wants when in reality she is only drawing him further away from what he truly longs for.  this is a perfect picture of religion and, too often, of ministry.  it looks like we're serving God, while in reality we are replacing Him with our service.  it has the appearance of intimacy, but is really only a superficial act that widens the void.  it looks just enough like a relationship with God to keep us fooled, to keep us from seeking the real thing, while leaving only emptiness in our hearts.  we begin to think that maybe doing all these things is spiritual intimacy, but it is only a cheap whore. 

as we recently studied through the books of Kings in our Old Testament survey class, i was struck by an interesting detail.  after the kingdom of Israel was divided, the people almost immediately fell into idolatry (described by God through the prophets inevitably as "playing the whore").  now, in the northern kingdom, it says that Jeroboam, the first king after the division, set up two golden calves for the people to worship.  this, of course, was hearkening back to Aaron's rebellion while Moses was on Mt. Sinai when he also formed a golden calf for the people to worship.  Jeroboam made the same statement that Aaron did then: "behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt."  the fascinating thing is that this was not a claim to worship another god.  it was a claim to be worshiping the true God, the God of Israel... only it wasn't Him!  it was a substitute.  later, when Jehu (the best of the northern kings) wiped out the false god Baal from the north, it says that, nevertheless, he left the golden calves.  in all the idolatry of Israel, it seems that the idol that had the strongest hold on the people was the one that was closest to the real thing.  

the interesting thing about these golden calves is that they are an appropriate picture of ministry.  the very first calf was made from the golden earrings the people offered to Aaron.  they literally made a god out of their own sacrifices.  the "calf" or bull is a work animal.  they symbolize work, productivity, etc.  and, they were much easier to worship than a God who couldn't be seen, who was apt to move His pillar of fire at a moment's notice.  they could always be measured (2 of them), and always kept where you want them.  

this is the temptation before many Christians today, especially before many ministers.  how many of us have replaced God with our service to Him?  it is a subtle trap, and therefore all the more dangerous.  we content ourselves to substitute true intimacy with the forms of intimacy: church attendance, ministry, perhaps even reading and prayer.  we have made a god of our own sacrifices and called it the God of the Bible.  ministry can so easily become that golden calf, that scarlet whore, because it looks so similar to the real thing and anyone looking on from the outside probably can't tell the difference.  but we know the difference in our hearts, because emptiness is the result.  it is the subtle replacement of Christ with Christianity. 

as a minister myself, i believe that it is vital to understand this.  if i do not constantly keep my heart in check, constantly return to true intimacy with my Savior, i will slowly allow ministry to take the place of God.  ministry provides a substitute spirituality, and usually no one else knows the difference except myself and Jesus.  i once heard a quote by C.H. Spurgeon that has stuck with me "the worst [temptation] is the temptation to ministerialism—the tendency to read our Bibles as ministers, to pray as ministers, to get into doing the whole of our religion as not ourselves personally..."  i am convinced that anyone who is enthralled with being in ministry should not be in it.  that is, if they think that ministry will somehow fulfill their longing for intimacy with God.  yes, when we remind ourselves of this ever present danger, and maintain our hearts in right relationship with Jesus, then ministry is a wonderful privilege and truly presents a unique ground for experiencing Jesus.  but without understanding the inherent danger in it, we will simply whore out our true intimacy with God until there is nothing left.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

washing feet and loving others

(btw, don't you just love that Jesus is washing feet in what appears to be a german bar, complete with beer maids? :)

well, i thought i would share a little excerpt of what we talked about in today's study in Romans. it really spoke to me as i was preparing and i hope to others as we studied today. we looked at the phrase in chapter 13, "owe no one anything except to love one another". the word "owe" in the original greek is most frequently used of financial debt. it implies an obligation. (i'm tempted to start a rant on how Christians often ignore this and are as apt to live in financial debt as the next shmuck, but i'll restrain myself. :) the thing is, Paul says there is one thing we are obligated, indebted to give, and that's love to one another.

Jesus also uses this word in a very unique way at one point (most times he uses it in the financial sense, too). in Jn. 13, right after He humbled Himself to do the menial task of washing the disciples' feet, wiping them with the towel wrapped around His waist, He says to them, "You call Me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought (are obligated) to wash one another's feet." now, we get that it's a good example and all, but why exactly does Jesus choosing to humbly serve these disciples obligate them and us to do likewise?

Jesus Himself gives the answer in emphasizing His role as "Teacher and Lord". the ancient, eastern culture that Jesus lived in was an "honor culture". if a person was in a position of honor, there was certain protocol. for example, if a king were to kneel before someone else in the presence of his subjects, the subjects would also immediately kneel before that person (i'm sure we even recognize this from a number of movies.) if a rabbi, a "teacher", were to humble himself through fasting, it was expected that his disciples would do the same. if a slave were to see his master, his "lord", begin to do some menial task, he would without hesitation come along and take over that work. the subjects/disciples/slaves were never to position themselves above their master (Jesus Himself states this in Mt. 10). if their superior were to humble himself in a given way and they did not, it was tantamount to saying "i am above my master/teacher/king", which in reality is a rejection of his position as lord. therefore, Jesus says, "if I, as your Lord and Teacher, have done this, you have a direct obligation to Me to humble yourself and serve in the same way, thus honoring Me."

this is vitally important to grasp in living out the Gospel. we often think of our love and service to others as what we give to them. Jesus completely contradicts this understanding. the fact is, our love and service to others does not tell primarily what we think of them, but what we think of Christ! our attitude towards another person, as disciples and servants of Jesus, reflects foremost our evaluation of Him, not of that person. to use the the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Life Together, "among Christians there are no direct relationships. all relationship exists in and through Christ... any direct relationship is ultimately sinful." that is, as Christians, each one of our human relationships is mediated by and reflects upon our relationship with Jesus first and foremost. this is why we have a debt, an obligation to love one another, because it is a question of honoring or insulting our Lord. when we refuse to love and serve another person, we are essentially saying, "Jesus, i know you think he/she is worth dying for, worth Your life, but they aren't worth mine." in this way we are boasting against, insulting our Lord and, in some sense, denying His relationship to us as Sovereign.

the reason we do such a crappy job of loving and serving people so often is in part because we have failed to realize this truth. we attempt to love a person for his own sake, and of course fail when we realize that he is not capable of sustaining our effort to love him/her. we put that pressure on him and ultimately crush him with it. this is why Bonhoeffer said that all "direct" relationships are ultimately sinful (and as sin always is, ultimately destructive). relationship to someone who is unworthy can only be sustained and empowered if it is mediated by One who has the resources to command and inspire our love on His behalf. and since there is only One who is worthy, all relationships must exist "through Christ". to attempt to create or maintain relationship directly is to ensure our failure in this endeavor and to crush the recipient of our "love" under a burden he cannot bear.

it is this understanding that led John, who recorded the footwashing scene, to later write in his 1st epistle "If someone says, 'I love God,' and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also." in other words, if a person thinks he loves God but is holding hatred, refusing to love his brother, he is lying to himself! the truth is that how we treat our brother has much more to do with Jesus than it does with our brother. in a very real sense, based on Jesus' position as Lord and His humble love, if we do not love our brother, we are not loving God. Jesus said that the 1st commandment was to love God with all your being and the second like it; to love your neighbor as yourself. as it turns out, the 2nd is so much like the 1st that we could really say they are the same commandment. loving our brother is not optional to loving God, nor even secondary to loving God. it is the same thing from a different angle. there is really only one commandment: love.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

McNazis, Religion and the Gospel


well, i figured i'd write about my latest adventure in a string of very unusual spiritual attacks. i was invited to teach at a men's conference for calvary chapel of kiev this weekend. i headed up to kiev on friday and as i was leaving mcdonald's, a guy, mid-twenties, rather "aryan" looking, stares at me and asks me if i've ever read mein kampf (hitler's autobiography and ideological treatise). i was shocked by the question and didn't even know what to say. he proceeded to call me a "friggin' jew" and pushed me a few times. i'm pretty sure he was on some kind of drugs. i tried to explain to him that i'm not jewish (though i do look it and would be completely proud to be jewish). he didn't listen and began to punch and kick me. i was able to block most of his swings, though he left a few good bruises on my legs from kicking. i yelled to the manager to call the police. this is all happening in the middle of a very crowded mcdonald's.... and NO ONE even stood up to help. for all their tough-guy facade, men here are generally pretty cowardly. the police arrived in a few minutes and put him in their car to take to the station.

now, besides the obvious warfare right before the conference (which actually encouraged me because it made me even more sure that God wanted to do something important there if satan was going to such lengths to stop it), there was another very interesting aspect to this event. tomorrow we will be in Rom 12:13 and discussing the phrase "given to hospitality". the word "hospitality" here in greek is "philoxenia". it is basically the opposite of "xenophobia": a fear or hatred of strangers/foreigners. interesting timing for my first ever xenophobic attack.

but the idea of "philoxenia", friendship or love of strangers/foreigners, is much wider than race. the phrase in verse 13 literally translates to "pursue, chase after friendship with those who don't belong, who are outcasts and rejected". what it got me thinking about was how so often this is the last thing people would describe christians as. in fact, it is sadly "christians" (who often for some reason that i cannot comprehend feel that fox news is on nearly the same level of spiritual authority as the Bible) who demonstrate a dislike and even disgust of people who do not fall into their club; democrats, illegal immigrants, muslims, homosexuals and the like. sure, they would not likely take to violence, but there is a certain animosity that nevertheless some "christians" hold against those who don't belong. sadly i've heard too many rants against illegal immigrants, homosexuals, democrats, and others perceived as somehow doing damage to "traditional society" coming from the "christian" pulpit.

the reason i keep using the word "christian" in quotation marks is because people who hold this xenophobic attitude (in more than the racial sense) have really very little that is Christ-like about them. the fact is that christians who avoid or even disdain those who are other than themselves, christians who do not pursue the outcasts of society/culture have really forgotten the Gospel (and may not be more than culturally christian or just religious in the first place). in the epistle to the Ephesians in chapter 2 Paul says that we were once aliens and foreigners (xenos) to the promises of God and without hope in the world. but because God is full of "philoxenia", He pursued us and brought us into His family, made us part of His kingdom. He did not shun us in high-minded disdain, but came to earth, became one of us, and humbled Himself on the Cross that we might be brought near by His precious blood. therefore, if the Gospel means that we have received this love of God as outcasts, it only follows that we would pass this along. a "christian" who is high-minded and hateful towards those who do not fit into his understanding of the world have forgotten that they are no less "alien" by nature than the one they now disdain. the Gospel must necessarily produce in us the same kind of "philoxenia" that God has shown to us in Jesus Christ, otherwise there is reason to question if we have experienced the Gospel at all and instead are merely religious.

[disclaimer: the image at the top of this article is a not a production of the national socialist german worker's (nazi) party nor of the mcdonald's corporation, neither is it meant to imply that ronald or any of his friends is a fascist (except for possibly the hamburgler) or for that matter that adolf would have clogged his aryan arteries with bigmacs. it is merely meant to illustrate my experience on friday... so now i can't get sued. :) ]