Archive for the ‘21st Century Faith’ Category

Awesome Christ

June 16th 2008

This entry is part 4 of 4 in the series What Kind of Man Was Jesus?

I gave this 30 minute talk at Colonial Harbor in York County, Virginia on June 15, 2008. The point is simple: Jesus Christ is the most awesome person of history. To be specific: people in all times since he walked this earth have had to deal with him. Many have tried to mold him into an image that fit their desires, or felt comfortable to them. He has always been uniquely who he has been, however. Never, no matter what the pressure applied to him, did he conform to what others wished he would be, for he knew his identity and his mission. And yet in spite of this solid stature, he always served others.

July 6, 2008 note: I’ve updated this talk on another blog entry.

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith & New Atheism | No Comments »

Who Is My Neighbor?

June 13th 2008

From “The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life In God” (Dallas Willard) (p. 111); on the parable of The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37):

The story does not teach that we can have eternal life just by loving our neighbor. We cannot get away with that nice legalism either. . . . But in God’s order nothing can substitute for loving people. And we define who our neighbor is by our live. We make a neighbor of someone by caring for him or her. . . .

Jesus deftly rejects the question, “Who is my neighbor?” and substitutes the only question really relevant here: “To whom will I be a neighbor?” And he knows that we can only answer this question case by case as we got through our days. In the morning we cannot yet know who our neighbor will be that day. The condition of our hearts will determine who along our path turns out to be our neighbor, and our faith in God will largely determine who we have strength enough to make our neighbor.

(Emphasis added)

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | No Comments »

Jesus: Who Was He, Really?

June 13th 2008

This entry is part 3 of 4 in the series What Kind of Man Was Jesus?

There sure are a lot of versions of Jesus out there. Can we know the real Jesus? How?

It’s almost embarrassing–yet not the least bit surprising–how many different views of him the world offers. Dallas Willard writes in Divine Conspiracy of one such opinion (p. 134),

Far too often [Jesus] is regarded as hardly conscious. He is looked on as a mere icon, a wraithlike semblance of a man, fit for the role of sacrificial lamb or alienated social critic, perhaps, but little more.

A well-known “scholarly” picture has him wandering the hills of Palestine, deeply confused about who he was and even about crucial points in his basic topic, the kingdom of the heavens. From time to time he perhaps utters disconnected though profound and vaguely radical irrelevancies, now obscurely preserved in our Gospels.

That’s one picture. There are others:

  • To many political liberals, and especially to many Latin American theologians in the 20th century, Jesus was above all one who came to free the oppressed, often by redistributing wealth but also by showing a new vision of justice.
  • To Mennonites, Jesus was a pacifist. (To many conservative American Christians, his way supports a strong defense.)
  • To the Muslims, he was a great prophet.
  • To followers of the Bahá’í faith, he was one of the many prophets, one of many manifestations of God who “have the same metaphysical nature and the same spiritual stature.”
  • Various cults – Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unification Church followers, members of “The Way” (now defunct? I haven’t heard much of it lately), and others – accord him various levels of high prominence but deny his full unique godhood in the classic Christian sense.
  • Whatever unity Unitarian-Universalists may believe in, there is no unity regarding their views of Jesus. Any view seems to be okay; though one Unitarian Universalist pastor once remarked to me that “The resurrection is a goofy doctrine.” (My response: that’s not the issue. The question is, “did it happen?”)
  • New agers likewise have multiple views of Jesus, but tend to emphasize his love, his sensitivity, and above all his non-judgmentalness; and to call on him in support of their belief that everything is going to be just fine for everyone, especially if we could just realize we’re all really on the same path after all (see one example here).
  • To at least one Buddhist, his true significance is hard to pin down. The one thing that’s clear is that it’s both appalling and repugnant to suggest he is the only way to God.
  • Secularists consider him an interesting and probably important historical figure, whose actual significance as an individual (if he even existed) has been blown out of all proportion by his followers, many of whom now are rather annoying in their insistence that Jesus really matters.
  • Many millions of us believe he is the Divine Son of God, Second Person of the Trinity, God with us, the sinless and perfect teacher and example, God’s own self-sacrifice for our sins, risen from the dead, now ruling in the heavens and coming back to claim and manifest his rule over all creation; the one who loves all, the one who rescues from sin and death any who will let themselves be so rescued. Given half a chance we would go on with even longer descriptions of his greatness and glory.

Even 2000 years later, he cannot be ignored. His influence isn’t going away. Everyone who knows about him has to make sense of him. This is certainly the reason you find so many versions of Jesus: everyone wants him on their side. In my observations it appears that he gets remade constantly into the image of whoever wants to claim him on their side. He’s a conservative, he’s a liberal, depending on whether you yourself are conservative or liberal.

Is there a way to sort out who he was, really? Is there a way to know the real Jesus, not one molded into our favored version? If there was some such method it would have to meet at least these standards:

  • Absolute reliance on the primary sources. We know nothing reliably of him except what is in the Bible, especially the New Testament. Apart from that, every view of Jesus is pure fabrication.
  • Attention to context: Jesus lived in a particular setting: a Jew among firmly monotheistic Jews, many of whom gave great credence to their Scriptures, including its prophecies of a Messiah. He lived in a land oppressed by an unwelcome occupying army, where certain religious leaders became his enemies.
  • Great care given to guard against making Jesus a member of our own party.

I believe these standards can be satisfactorily met. Take the third one, for example. While I don’t believe in a Hegelian dialectic truth – we do not create new truths, about Jesus in particular, through dialogue – I certainly recognize the value of a kind of dialectic in how we interpret truth. Among people who take Jesus Christ and the original documents seriously, there are definite cultural and geographical variations. As C.S. Lewis reminded us, these variations cut across time. We have to test our views in relation to each other’s views. Philip Jenkins’ work on The Next Christendom (review) shows that we in the West ought to be learning from Christians in the South and East.

Ought we even to take the original documents seriously, though? Well, why not? Don’t we usually take source documents seriously? What is it about these, the New Testament biographies, history, and letters, that would lead us to treat them any differently? Well, of course they make some unusual claims. And of course they are controversial. As documents, though, it is more than well established that they stand out far, far above others in their attestation and reliability (see two very brief sources here and here). Not to mention that they have changed the world!

In the context of his time, most of the above listed options regarding Jesus are simply impossible. Not to put too fine a point on it, but they are just wrong, and necessarily so. Jesus could not be an impersonal God-force; the Jewish religion and culture would have none of that sort of thing, and he gave no indication of being that sort of thing. For the same reason he could not have been one of many equally valid manifestations of God. He couldn’t have been a completely non-judgmental teacher of love who only wanted everyone to get along: they wouldn’t have killed him for that, would they? And the picture Willard presented of an incompetent, confused rambling teacher seems hardly likely for the founder of the world’s most largest and most enduring social movement!

To make the record clear (and to avoid the N.T. Wright trap): I am thoroughly committed to the trustworthiness of the documentary record–also known as the Bible. My own concern is not whether it can be trusted, but what it takes for us to be trustworthy ourselves in the way we understand it. We have more we can count on, of course, than just comparing one opinion with another. We have God who intends to communicate, whom we can trust to be successful in doing so. He promised guidance by the Holy Spirit.

But I’m interested to know, what do you think? Who was Jesus, really?

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith & Just For Fun | No Comments »

“How to Pick a President”

June 7th 2008

I have a policy of not posting on politics here, but Daniel Taylor and Mark McCloskey (a former colleague of mine) have an article in Christianity Today that needs the widest possible readership. Other than its heavy emphasis on American history, it could just as well have been titled “How to Pick a Member of Parliament.” Since it is completely non-partisan I can bend my policy for once.

It’s not about whom to elect. It’s about how to be wise in choosing whom to elect.

Near the beginning they write:

But grave decisions of war and peace, life and death, prosperity and privation—on the domestic and international fronts—are made by Presidents during their time in office. At election time, we the people decide who our decision makers will be. And we too often decide poorly, because we ask the wrong questions.

Taylor and McCloskey ask the right ones.

[Link: How to Pick a President | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction]

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | No Comments »

Future Grounded in the Past

June 1st 2008

Future and past were juxtaposed in my life this weekend. Yesterday our family spent an hour or two together talking about goals for the summer. My son is hoping to gain some web design clients, my daughter has some music goals in mind, my wife wants to find ways to deepen her relationship with Christ while the kids are home (including another teenager coming for an extended stay early in the summer). I am wrestling with some very interesting opportunities that present some challenging choices. We all have other goals in mind besides these. Obviously all of this is for the future.

Which is something we really know almost nothing about. To say the future is murky, dark, foggy is to put too gray a cast on it. How else, though, can one convey its mysterious unknowability? There are only two certain things, it is said, neither of which is very welcome. James 4:13-16 (ESV) puts a realistically cautious cast on it:

Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil.

The future is a dangerous destination to travel to. Even more dangerous is going there with the assumption that we know what it will hold.

And even more dangerous yet is going there without a firm stake in the past, to give us knowledge to guide us as we travel. My reminder of that came this morning at church, where we partook of Communion together. In our church we do this once a month. This time was different in that we had a lengthy discussion in our Sunday School class about it, so we had additional time to reflect on this act of reflection.

That’s what Communion is about, in Protestant theology, at least in the theological circles in which I’ve spent my life. It is an act of remembrance, an intentional stopping of activity so that together the church can recall the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us. The bread and the cup are strong symbols of the broken body and shed blood of Jesus Christ. It’s a remembrance that has been observed uncountable times for 2,000 years. It is very much about ancient times.

So there we were in our brightly lit modern church, where I had to slip out of my seat during the sermon to help the sound tech (whom I had trained) solve an unusually difficult and technical audio problem. Family goals and decisions for the future were still strongly on my mind. And in the midst of this we paused to remember something from a far distant place and a time very long ago.

In spite of their incongruity on the surface, though, past and future very much fit with each other. I said a moment ago that our safe journey into the future depends on having a firm stake in the past. I am specifically speaking of being grounded on what Communion represents. Jesus Christ experienced everyone’s two unavoidables: he paid taxes and he died. He added another possibility to them, though: resurrection. To these two unpleasant outcomes he added hope. This is not hope after the manner of, “I hope my team wins the championship,” but rather of this sort: “whatever happens now, I have a well-grounded and certain hope that things will ultimately turn out well.” This is why “murky, dark, foggy” are too gray, for those who have their hope truly placed in Christ: the future may not follow the path that we would choose, but it leads to a good place in the end.

And what is a good ending, after all? Where should we seek to go on our trek? We are all “boldly going where no one has gone before.” What new planet will we land on? Will it be good? Who knows? Particularly in a world such as we live in today, where right and wrong, good and evil, are completely up for grabs–where it is supposedly each person’s responsibility to invent their own good. With no one to guide, we walk blindly into the dangerous dark.

In The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God (p. 8), USC philosopher Dallas Willard quotes from Leo Tolstoy’s A Confession:

“The faith of the majority of educated people of our day,” Tolstoy observes, “was expressed by the word ‘progress.’ It then appeared to me that this word meant something. I did not as yet understand that, being tormented (like every vital man) by the question how it is best for me to live, in my answer, ‘Live in conformity with progress,’ I was like a man in a boat who when carried along by wind and waves should reply to what for him is the chief and only question, ‘Whither to steer,’ by saying, ‘We are being carried somewhere’” (p. 12).

There has been no advance beyond this position since Tolstoy’s day.

“Whither to steer?” How can we know? But Jesus Christ is not actually all about the past, for by his resurrection he still lives. He speaks wisdom from the past, and through his teaching and his continuing presence he still guides today.

I don’t know how many of our family’s goals we’ll reach. I don’t have any assurance we’ll even reach the end of the summer together: anything can happen, even tragedy. I don’t expect that, and we’re certainly taking optimistic, personally stretching steps forward. We have a strong sense of a good direction to head together. With all who follow Christ, though, we have an even stronger promise that whatever happens, the ultimate destination will be very, very good.

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | 3 Comments »

Christianity in China: Hope of Freedom

May 31st 2008

An outsider’s view of the West can be enlightening, especially when that person’s view moves him toward spiritual answers. Here is one such voice from China. The source is a Christianity Today article, “Great Leap Forward.”

Hsu, a former television journalist for the state-sponsored CCTV, is a telling example of how a member of China’s educated elite moves to Christianity.

Hsu told his story to CT over a meal at a crowded Beijing KFC. It began with his search for freedom—politically and personally. The search led him to European history. “Westerners are not more interested in freedom than anyone else,” he says.

Yet the West has achieved and sustained a greater degree of liberty than any other culture. Hsu wondered what the West had that China didn’t. “Before freedom comes, you have to have a foundation. In the West that foundation is Christianity.”

Hsu’s vision for a new China parallels his readings on the march of freedom in the West. From the 10th to 12th centuries, Hsu reasons, Europe developed legal studies, hospitals, and universities, all of which grew out of the church. These developments resulted in breakthroughs in human liberty, as seen in the Reformation, the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment. Today, Hsu says, the church is an incubator for similar developments in China.

“After the country adopted Western science and philosophy, it left a value vacuum,” Hsu says. “After Tiananmen Square, some scholars lost hope. They wanted to start asking the ultimate questions about the purpose of life. People in China have lost faith in human wisdom. The Cultural Revolution was a disaster, but this spiritual awakening is an unexpected result.” Hsu’s quest led him to the Bible. There, he learned that “faith in God as the Lord is the beginning of freedom.”

Recently, he delivered a paper on freedom to a local gathering of the American Political Science Association. In it he wrote, “The more I knew about the growth of freedom in the West, the more I was captivated by the role of faith in God as the Lord.”

“You need a standard of absolute truth,” Hsu told CT. “You have to convince people that the God of the Jews and Christians is the God of the universe.”

The rest of the article, by the way, is filled with encouragement for those of us who have been praying for China.

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | No Comments »

“Do Hard Things”

May 29th 2008

Pre-Review

I’ve never before now offered a book review on a book I hadn’t even started to read. Call this a pre-review instead.

Do Hard Things: A Teenage Rebellion Against Low Expectations by Alex and Brett Harris arrived in the mail yesterday. I showed it to my sixteen-year-old son and told him I’d like us to go through it a chapter a week. Jonathan will spend a lot of time reading things that interest him, and no time at all on anything else.

Well, he stayed up so late reading it last night that he was late getting up for school today. If that isn’t a good sign, I don’t know what is. Now I’ll have to fight him for my chance to read it.

The authors have a website for the book.

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | 2 Comments »

Unconditional Love

May 23rd 2008

We’re on the leading edge of a long weekend here (Monday is Memorial Day in the United States). I’m the last to leave my office today; the boss gave us all the afternoon off, but I decided to stay a while, to read and write in the quiet. It’s not, I’m sad to say, as quiet within me as it is around me. So much to do! So much to catch up on! And why?

Christianity’s chief heresy down through the ages has been legalism: seeking to earn favor with God by what we do. It is a Christian fault because it is a very human fault. What confusion surrounds this whole matter! We do not understand unconditional love as God offers it. We want to earn his love; we want to be the sort of thing that could earn his love. We want to show that in ourselves we deserve his love, that he owes it to us, for the special things we do in particular. We are, in fact worthy, but not by our own works or goodness. We are worthy because he has deemed us so.

There is - - though this is dangerous to say - - something of an insult in the way God loves us. 

If we could stand before him and say “thank you very much, God, for your love, and we can all certainly see what I’ve done to earn it;” if we could say that, then that would be something to be proud of. That’s not, however, the way it is. One might almost say it’s regrettable that’s not the way it is. Except for this: for us to be able to face him that way, God would have to be shrunk down to our size. He would no longer be the object of our worship but the subject of our manipulation.

I think to a great extent that’s actually what legalism is about. It’s about manipulating God,t rying to get on his good side, so that we can get good things from him, or to feel good and special about ourselves. It’s about controlling God, or at least our relationship with him. Even a teenager can sense manipulation a mile away, though. How much more do you suppose God will always resist it?

But here’s the astonishing thing: though we try to shrink God to our size so we can impress him - - and how God must laugh at that! - - yet he emptied himself, and in a sense shrunk himself down to our size. He was born a babe in a stable, grew up in a craftsman’s home, wandered for a few years and taught a small band of followers. In the course of all this he met two kinds of responses: those who insisted on being impressive before him, he defeated by argument and by his works. Those who saw the grandeur of God in him, he set on a course toward a Kingdom.

He still says that those who humble themselves before him will be lifted up. For many of us, the hardest part of that is knowing it is because of his own goodness, and not ours, that he gives us his love. We need not earn it, largely because we could never earn it. But for those who want real love, it’s there in abundance, without measure and with only the condition that we accept it on his terms and not on our own.

Yes, of course there is an answer to the “why” question I opened with. Understanding God’s love, and that we cannot earn it by our work we still work because it is good to do so, to be fruitful and productive, to serve, and obviously to make a living. God worked for six days and rested on the seventh; we work to follow God’s own example. 

But our work is not a way of scrabbling toward the light of God’s love. It is a way of basking in that light.

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | 29 Comments »

New Age and Its Contradictions

May 20th 2008

I lived in Southern California for 13 years, where it was a regular occurrence to run into New Age spirituality almost anywhere I went. My wife and I were talking a walk in the hills above Anaheim one day, and were intrigued to hear the sound of a drum and voices, out of sight among the trees ahead of us. I thought maybe it was a Boy Scout group. Our path took us right by the source, and I was wrong: it was 13 people in a circle chanting praises to earth, air, fire, and water. We vacationed in places like Carmel, California, and Sedona, Arizona, Sedona, AZ Center for the New Age both of which are hotbeds of this kind of spirituality. We passed more than one ritual fire circle along a trail above our campsite in Sedona, and the town itself is full of interesting places like this Center for the New Age. Of course we had friends who were avid followers of New Age.

Here in southeastern Virginia it’s been different. The dominant employers here are the military (all five services including the Coast Guard, plus whatever they do at Camp Peary) and shipbuilding. We have the Jefferson Lab accelerator facility, and lots of historical tourism and research revolving around Jamestown, Williamsburg, and Yorktown. California is, well, California; and this has been different, either because of the forms of industry, or because things are generally more conservative here on the East Coast. I have had very little contact with the New Spirituality lately.

oprahandeckhart.jpg

New Age Resurgence?
Until the last year or so, that is. One reason for that change has been the way Oprah Winfrey has been promoting Eckhart Tolle. Tolle has one book ranked at #2 at Amazon today, and another ranked at #20; and he and Oprah claim viewership in the millions for their combined advocacy for the message of “A New Earth” and “The Power of Now.” One of the most common search phrases by which visitors have been finding this blog lately is “the church of Oprah.”

Contradictory Beliefs
Part of the New Age message is that many paths lead to one goal, even if these paths are in many ways contradictory. This morning I heard a talk by Ravi Zacharias that is very germane to this topic. He was born and raised in a high-caste family in India, but now travels and speaks as a leading Christian thinker. The talk I’m referring to here is on pantheism and its contradictions: the contradictions really do matter, in spite of suppositions that there is an “Eastern” sort of logic in which they are of no consequence.

ravizacharias.jpg

His website’s design does not permit me to give you the URL for the page where his talk is linked. You would need to begin at the Just Thinking page, and navigate through the archives to “Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality, Part 3.” I trust, though, that they will not begrudge my providing you some shortcuts. You can:

Download the mp3 directly here, or
Listen online with RealAudio here.

His main point is that even in Eastern religions, with which he is very familiar, contradictory statements cannot both be true at the same time in the same relationship. That’s the dry version. You’ll his telling of it to be far more entertaining than that!

(I strongly recommend all of Zacharias’s talks, so once you listen to this one, I suggest you go back for more; even subscribe to his podcast.)

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith & New Age | 96 Comments »

Generosity of Religious Americans

May 16th 2008

From OneNewsNow.com:

A new study shows that people of faith in America have a huge heart in terms of giving to Third World countries — and the study cites a surprising dollar figure.

Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute cites the information in a study done with Notre Dame University. “We didn’t realize it would be as large as it was, and we came out with a number of $8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing countries,” she points out.

That figure represents nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region — and the money from churches is apparently doing a lot of good, says Adelman….

Posted by Tom Gilson under 21st Century Faith | 2 Comments »

« Prev - Next »