#40DaysofQuestions

[faithisaverb]

What happens right after death? [40 Days of Questions, Q22]

Q. 22: What happens to us right after death?

In all of the questions that I got from folks, the most frequent topic was what happens after we die.  They all have a slightly different nuance to them, so I’m going to address a few of them on other days.  This one was the most straight forward, so it’s a good place to start.

What happens to us right after death?  I don’t know.  No one really does.

The Bible gives us a good sense of what happens after death eventually, but it doesn’t ever really talk about what happens immediately.  Nothing about walking toward the light or hovering as a spirit outside of our bodies.  There are a lot of books about things like that, but nothing really from scripture.

So if we don’t know much about where we go right after we die, what do we know about Heaven?

Again, I don’t know.  As we already talked about in an earlier question (question/day 9), when the Bible talks about heaven, and especially when Jesus talks about heaven, he usually compares it to things here in the physical world – a new earth combined with heaven - not things off in some ethereal realm.  

Which makes me think of EPCOT.

Right after my wife and I were married, we lived in Florida.  She wasn’t able to take much time from work for a honeymoon, so we decided to take a five-day honeymoon to Walt Disney World.  It was only a five-hour drive for us, and since we were Florida residents, it was cheaper for us to simply buy annual passes than a five day pass.  I had been there for a band trip in high school, and Adrien had been there when she was a kid, but neither of us were prepared for how much we would love it.

Disney almost instantly became my favorite place.  In the time that we lived in Florida (which was less than two years), we ended up going to Disney about a dozen times.  There was even a few times that I went on my own when Adrien was away at a conference (which is way more fun than that sounds).  Even today, it remains one of my favorite places in the world, and over the last fifteen years, one of the most familiar places in my life, even if we only can go every fiver years or so.

My favorite park at Disney World is EPCOT.

EPCOT stemmed from a dream that Walt Disney had of building an actual city that was a futuristic vision for how we can live together.  It wasn’t going to be an amusement park, but a fully functioning metropolis.  

He called the project (which he was working on and about to reveal just before his death in 1968) was called EPCOT.

EPCOT stands for Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

The project died with Walt, but they used the land to push on and build Walt Disney World’s Magic Kingdom, an expanded version of Disneyland from California, which opened in 1971.

Ten years later, in 1981, the dream of EPCOT was reclaimed in the form of a second amusement park at Walt Disney World.  This park captured a spirit of hope and excitement about the future that was full of pure optimism and energy.  There is nothing cynical or ironic about EPCOT.  It is a place that honors a spirit that believes we can make the world better if we work together.  It almost feels like a time capsule in that way.  We don’t quite seem to feel that way anymore.  There is more doubt, more fear or dismissal of science, and more antagonism.

One of my favorite things about EPCOT is that acronym: Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

I think that is a perfect definition of the church.  When we are at our best, we are trying to show the world a glimpse of what it will look like when we are all able to live together in love, to be people who have be freed from death by God, and can live lives of gratitude, lives that draw others in rather than pushing them out.  It is a community that is open to all, and a community that draws us in to a family.  It is centered around a God who knows us, who loves us, who saves us, and who makes us new.  A God who wipes away every tear, destroys death, and reconciles all things.  That is the Kingdom of God.  That is what’s waiting for us at the end.

Jesus told us that the kingdom of God was near, but he also said that the Kingdom of God was here.  In the community of believers that Jesus was forming, the Kingdom of God was starting to be glimpsed.  When the church is functioning as the body of Christ, as a community of diverse parts with different skills, purposes, and functions, coming together in unity around the mind of Christ to take part in what God is doing in the world – that is when we are most the church.  That is when we are reflecting the Kingdom of God.  

That is when we are an Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

Let us be a community that represents the hope of God, the hope of tomorrow. Let us be a community that people see as one that is filled with optimism and energy. Let us be people of hope, faith, and love – who are doing our best to live out God’s kingdom here on earth.

When we make mistakes, that’s okay, we’re still experimental. When we need to make adjustments and changes, that’s okay, we’re a prototype. When we mourn together and rejoice together, that is when we are truly a community. When people see that we are filled with hope and optimism, it is because we believe that this is not the end, that there will be a tomorrow.

[faithisaverb]

The church & LGBT community [40 Days of Questions, Q21].

Q21: Why do people in 2019 take the Bible so literally when it comes to a person’s sexuality?  Shouldn’t we practice acceptance and tolerance above 2000 year old beliefs?

First a simple and direct response: people take the Bible so literally with regard to people’s sexuality because they are told the Bible is very clear about people’s sexuality (when, in fact, it is not very clear about it at all).  There is a lot in those passages which are most often used to condemn other’s sexuality that have an interpretive nuance that make the meaning less clear, especially in a context outside of first century Palestine.  There’s a lot to unpack in that which I won’t get into in this post (but invite conversations with those who want to explore that more).  

There are few issues in the church and America right now that people are as fundamentally divided on right now than LGBT rights.

Many in the church are willing to debate it, but it feels like we aren’t willing to talk about it.  We don’t need to debate it.

We need to talk about it.

We need to know about this issue, which is not an issue over ideology or even theology.  It is an issue about people.  The real issue that the church is struggling with is about people – how do we best love our LGBT brothers and sisters?  

Do we love them by making them more like us?

Do we love them by accepting them as children of God as they are?

Or perhaps we love them when we stop thinking of them as a “them,” but rather including them as “us.”

On this issue, the church has been particularly difficult.  Whether we meant to or not, we have allowed ourselves to be a voice that has been used for hate.  We have allowed God’s name to be used to disparage and to disown people.  We have allowed Christ to be invoked in ways that assume one group of people is of lesser value, and undeserving of the same rights that others have.

This is what it meant in the commandment “to take the Lord’s name in vain.”  This commandment is not talking about swearing, or saying “Oh my God.”  That seems a bit silly when paired with the other commandments (and there are other passages elsewhere that talk about that.  This commandment is a command against using God as an excuse for prejudice, using God as a justification for hatred, using God as a rationale for devaluing, dismissing, and damning others.

When Jesus says, “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” he was not saying that we cannot hold each other accountable.  If I’m doing something wrong, I’d like you, as someone who cares about me to tell me that I am in the wrong – out of love.  

What Jesus is saying is that it is not our role to determine who is worthy of God’s love, who is worthy to be called our neighbor, and who is worthy to be invited into the Kingdom of God.  That is God’s job, not ours.

And God has deemed that none of us were worthy, but he loves us so much that he will take all our messed up stuff on the cross, and reconnect us to God.

If that Good News is for you and me, then that Good News is also for everyone that you will ever meet.  It is not our role to determine that.  We are commanded instead to LOVE.  This is not saying that we just let everyone do whatever they want, a huge part of love is holding each other accountable, but it is saying that we need to be in real relationship with people.  We need to see the value that God has give each person AS THEY ARE, not simply as we think they should be.

Regardless of your understanding of the LGBT community, we need to see the LGBT community as part of God’s community, as brothers and sisters that God has good news for, and that is the same good news that is for all of us.

It is good news with only one precondition – believe.

Live your life from here on out as though you truly believe that God has rescued you.  Live your life as though you believe that Christ has given us a hope, and that this is not the end.

Let us not allow the church to be used to destroy people.

Let us not allow the church to be used as a mechanism for hate.

Let us not be silent when we see people who are being devalued by anyone, especially the church.

Let us be reflections of a savior who is brighter than all of the darkness. 

Let all of the word that come from our mouths be the words of Christ – the words of love.

Let us truly listen to our brothers and sisters in the LGBT community.

Let us see God in and through them.

And let us never be known by our hatred, but solely by our love.

[faithisaverb]

How do we forgive people who continue to hurt us?  [40 Days of Questions, Q20]

Q 20:  How do we forgive those who have mistreated and continue to be wicked to us when they are parents and siblings who are supposed to love us?  How to we restore Christian joy?

This is a powerful question.  Ultimately, it gets to the question of relationships.  We are called to love God and to be in relationship with God.  We are called to love one another and to be in relationship with each other.  But how can we live in loving relationships with others when so many of those relationships are toxic and broken?   We’ll answer that in a moment, but first, let’s talk about Lady Gaga (it’ll make sense, just trust me for a bit).

Lady Gaga is a compelling character.  She does nearly everything explicitly and with passion.  If you are not familiar with her work beyond her Oscar nominated role in A Star is Born this past year (though I think most people know who Lady Gaga is at this point), you’ve probably heard that she is pretty raunchy, but you might not have known the breadth of her talent.  She is confusing to a lot of people.  She is often compared to Madonna, which is an easy comparison given that both are dancers who used sexuality as a theme in their songs.  However, Prince is a better comparison.  Unlike Madonna, but much like Prince, Gaga writes all of her own songs, is a multi-instrumentalist, and has a deep faith in God.   Many see this as a juxtaposition, and she has been criticized for claiming to be a faithful member of the Catholic church she has held her whole life, yet releasing music that explores themes of sexuality in very direct ways.  This reared its head earlier this year when Gaga posted a picture on Instagram of her parish priest blessing her family’s new restaurant, along with a caption extolling her faith in God.   Even her song “Born This Way,” which is an anthem for the LGBT community is also an anthem for God’s having created us, and God’s love.   Christians often struggle with performers who claim deep faith, yet present a “morally questionable” lifestyle, yet seem to be fine with celebrity pastors who make political endorsements that seem to be at odds with the Gospel.  Much about art in general is trying to make sense of disparate parts of one’s self.  How can I be this and that at the same time?  Must I choose?  We talked about that more yesterday, and it will keep coming up on this list (as it will keep coming up in our own lives).    Can I live in such a way and still follow Christ?  We are quick to ask this of others, but not of ourselves.   Look at the song “A Million Reasons” from Gaga’s 2016 album Joanne (again, I know it seems like we are getting further adrift, but trust me – it’ll all make sense).   This album is a more stripped-down album for Gaga, and while her songs have often been personal, they have more room to breathe in this setting, less club dance song and more singer/songwriter tomes.

This song is about the struggle of being in a relationship that you know you should not be in.  Gaga is knowingly asking for one good reason to stay, when she has a million reasons to leave.  She prays to God, trying to rationalize as to why this terrible relationship isn’t as bad as it seems.   God’s role is that of a friend, a confidant.  The prayer is not asking for miracles, but asking for guidance, especially in the face of one’s irrational desire to remain in a broken relationship.   This song can hit us on many individual levels.  We have probably all been in broken relationships, and can relate to the sense of knowing you should leave something, yet trying to bargain with why it’s worth staying.  For some of us, this could simply be that middle-school romance that you stayed in too long because the person you were going out with was also friends with all of your friend, and the “bad relationship” was nothing more than a burden that you didn’t want to deal with.  To others, this song may speak to an experience of abuse, physical, verbal, or emotional.  It could be speaking to your past or to your present (or both).   Relationships are important, and it is a central part of how God designed us.  We are created to be in community, to be in relationship with one another.  That is why we have a longing for companionship, for approval, and for love.  Even if we are introverts or people who prefer solitude, we still have a longing for something beyond us, if only in brief moments.   Jesus tells us that when two or three are gathers, God is present.  Community is the way in which God wants us to experience life.   That is behind the rationale of persisting in the face of a damaging relationship.  We know, even if unconsciously, that we are meant to be together, yet our fear of being alone – or losing what we have invested in – can keep us in relationships that are unhealthy.  Like all things God designed for good, relationships can be corrupted into things that harm us, and pull us away from what God desires for us.   The other hard thing is that all real relationships require work.  They are hard.  Being in community means that we must care about the needs of the other, and that we cannot control how they behave or respond.  My being loving does not guarantee that you will love me back.  Your being trusting and forgiving does not entail that I will be loyal and gracious to you.  Relationship involves risk and vulnerability.    At their best, relationships allow us to love openly and freely, without the risk of earning love in return, but receiving it not because of what we have done, but because of who we are.  We can help the other because we love them – as a response to their love, not so they will love us – attempting to earn their love.  We are good at doing this some of the time, but not great at doing it most of the time.  We are selfish and broken, and we are hard to love.   Our brokenness means that every relationship you have – every single one – will fail you.  No one you ever meet will be perfect, and they will let you down at some point.  When we build our world around someone we love, invariably, they will do something to betray that love.  This may not be catastrophic.  It may simply be someone who gets mad at you when you are ill, or doesn’t like the same kind of movies as you.  But all of them will fail you at some point, just as we will all fail others.  Only God’s love will never fail.   The relationships that work are the ones that persist in spite of these failings, that are relationships that involve grace, forgiveness, and mercy, and allow for both parties to grow together, as separate people, but also to grow together as partners and supporters.   The relationships that are damaging are the ones that diminish us, the ones that place value upon us that is separate from God’s value.  These are relationships that do not have a mutual time for grace, forgiveness, mercy, and growth, but instead pull the two involved deeper into each other to the point where they cannot know their value apart from the other – even the value that is given to them by God.   If you are in a relationship that is hard, work hard at it to make it healthy.  A healthy relationship allows both people to be who God is calling them to be, but also has both people submitting to the mutual care and support of the other.   If you are in a relationship that is unhealthy, with a partner who is unsupportive, who diminishes and harms you regularly, it is important for you to get out.  We rationalize reasons to stay in places where we are being diminished and harmed, and we rationalize places where we are allowed to diminish and harm others.  Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for a person is to end a toxic relationship with them.  Relationships are difficult, but the relationships that God calls us into are ones the lift us up mutually, not ones that are abusive.  Sometimes the only way to break the cycle of abuse is to get out of the cycle.   God has does not call us into relationships that diminish who we are.  God calls us into relationships that take work, that are at times difficult or frustration, but ultimately are mutually beneficial, mutually supportive, and loving on a level that is a responsive love rather than a selfish love.

These are both romantic relationships and friendships. 

Talk to God as Gaga does – for guidance.  Open yourself to relationships that make you better, and involve yourself in relationships that lift others up, making them better.   Know that God desires you to be in healthy relationships, both with God and with others.   Know that those relationships take work, but that the work will ultimately help you to grow together into what God desires you to be.

[faithisaverb]

Why aren’t there modern-day prophets? [40 Days of Questions, Q19]

Q19:  Why aren’t there any modern-day prophets? (or are there?)

This is a great question, and there’s a little bit of nuance to it.  The simple answer is Yes, there certainly are modern day prophets.  The real question is where they are, and who actually recognizes them as prophets.

To really approach this, we have to first note two things about Biblical prophets: 1. Nobody liked them.  They were offensive, intentionally so, and had a message that challenged the established culture and those in power, so it was easier for people to dismiss them as crazy than to heed their prophecies. 2. Prophets weren’t around all the time.  Even in the Old Testament time of the prophets, there are large gaps where there are no known prophets listed.  The gap between Elisha and Jonah (the next chronological prophet) is well over 70 years.  The time between Zechariah and Malachi (the last two prophets named in the Old Testament is nearly 100 years.  Then there are no prophets (or anything) following Malachai until John the Baptist, which is 425 years later.  To put that into perspective, the time between the end of the Old Testament (with Malachi the prophet) to the beginning of the New Testament (with John the Baptist serving the role of prophet) is a greater span of time than the time between today and when the pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock.

So prophets, even in the bible were not a commonplace occurrence, and even when they were around, they were actively ignored or dismissed because of their offensive messaging.

But God is still speaking. And remembering that the prophets almost without exception were voices that spoke out against the cultures of affluence and systems of inequality in their contexts, I’d say that the prophetic voices today that are speaking truth to power are ones that are equally derided and dismissed, just as Biblical prophets were.

In our modern context, one of the places where these prophetic sounding voices are most prominent are in hip-hop and rap culture.  Artists like Chance the Rapper, Kendrick Lamar, and J Cole (and many others) often deal explicitly with Christian themes and struggles, even naming them as such.  The deal with themes struggles with how to be a Christian in the context of their everyday life.  How can my belief change my actions?  This is the struggle of all Christians.  It is relatively easy to believe in Christ.  It is hard to live a life that demonstrates that belief. The problem for many though is that they do this in an inherently explicit way, with language that reflects a truth of the pain and the struggles that one encounters in the midst of these challenges of faith.  

So, in the church, we do not want to hear these songs – at least not with this language. Many of these songs are blatantly about God, faith, and life, but it is not be endorsed by most Christians because the artists so freely employ profanity in their expressions of faith.

The problem with this type of dismissal of explicit themes and language is that the bible is full of explicit themes and language, yet we often read from translations that sanitize this language, and muting the emphasis of what the scripture is trying to say.  The prophets are offensive on purpose.

Paul literally says “sh*t” in Philippians 3. “If anyone else has reason to put their confidence in physical advantages, I have even more: I was circumcised on the eighth day.  I am from the people of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin.  I am a Hebrew of the Hebrews.  With respect to observing the Law, I’m a Pharisee.  With respect to devotion to the faith, I harassed the church. With respect to righteousness under the Law, I’m blameless.  But even beyond that, I consider everything a loss in comparison with the superior value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. I have lost everything for him, but what I lost I think of as [sh*t], so that I might gain Christ.” The Greek word he used (the New Testament was originally written in Greek) was “Skubalon” which is a word referring to human excrement, but in used in a shocking way to describe something that is not only worthless, but revolting.

So, sh*t.

Paul is trying to tell us how great he was, how much he had to be proud in himself, to brag about what he had accomplished.  But now, he sees that all of that was sh*t – not just “worthless” or “rubbish” or whatever innocuous word we usually translate it as, but “sh*t.” Paul wants us to be offended. Paul wants us to be shocked.  The list he gave is a list that anyone would be proud of, but Paul wants us to know how little all of that matters, that nothing we do is worthy of striving for if it is not of Christ.  Only Christ can save us – all else is, as Paul would say it, “sh*t.”

By the way, I do realize the irony of posting about how sensitive that we are to profanity in the church, while not actually posting the full swear words myself.  Alas.

Ezekiel and Song of Solomon are books that in their original Hebrew form were so sexually explicit that in Hebrew tradition, men were not able to read these books until they turned 30 (and women were never allowed to read them).  Ezekiel uses harsh language to tell a harsh message – to make a point about how big of a deal this is.  Song of Solomon uses explicit language to communicate a deep intimacy that only is shared between two lovers.  This is meant to be shocking and startling. We have lost the sense that the Bible is allowed to create a tension or make us uncomfortable with how frank it is.  We have softened the language enough that it is no longer something that is abrasive. The problem in the church is that we have not only done this with the language of the bible, but also with the challenge of Christ. We have allowed the Gospel to be something that has been shaped and manicured into fitting nicely into out American culture of success.  It has allowed us to read passages about caring for the poor, welcoming the stranger, and freeing the oppressed, and not see any conflict with our culture of affluence, security, and self-preservation. The Gospel should be offensive to our lifestyle. We should not leave church thinking “I knew it! We are the ones who have figured it out!  Thank goodness we are not like them!”

Church should challenge us.  As Paul says, the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but the power of God to those who are being saved. If you are living a life that is focused on building yourself and your family up as much as possible, about earning enough to have a comfortable life, to live without struggling, then Jesus call that you would “sell all that you have and give it to the poor” is not only foolish, it is offensive. So we have twisted the Gospel into something that is not challenging, not offensive. We have made it so our wealth is not something God has entrusted us with that we could bless others with, but a sign of God’s love for us that God wants us to keep for ourselves and enjoy.  This is called the “Prosperity Gospel.”  This is the gospel of American culture, that God loves you so much that he wants you to have private planes and mansions and a fleet of cars.  This is not the Gospel of Christ.

The Gospel of Christ is a challenge to that.  This is not to say that you cannot be wealthy or have comforts and follow Christ, but it is saying that the more that you have the more difficult it can be.  The more money we have, the more we can think that we deserve it, and the more we feel like we need to protect it. We then often use that money to protect ourselves rather than to use it to bless others. The offensive part of the prophets who are speaking through hip-hop is not the language. The offensive part is that we can hear this message of a true struggle to live a life of faith in an environment of sin, songs of lament for a world in which young men are killed because our world is broken – and all we take away is that the song says the “F-word.” We need to hear the voice of the prophets in scripture, even though those voices are more often convicting us than commending us.  We need to hear the voice of the prophets of today, standing outside our doors asking for help as we are bolting the locks for fear that this stranger would attack us or steal our fortune.

God is calling us to care about one another. God is calling us to take part in the change that God is bringing into this world.  We need to know that this change is as much about change our own hearts and minds as it is about changing the systems of oppression that we have created. The Gospel is not something that can be overlaid across our way of life.  It is something that will dismantle our paradigm.  It will ruin our plans and destroy our sense of value and control. It will show us that everything we have been building ad hoarding and saving up is garbage.

But what the Gospel offers in return is better than anything we have. It is life.  It is hope.  It is forgiveness.  It is relationship and reconciliation. And after all, as Paul reminds us, to gain Christ is worth losing all of that other bullsh*t.

[faithisaverb]

Are our days numbered? [40 Days of Questions, Q18]

First a brief word – in taking on these 40 Days of Questions, I was delighted at the response, as well as the enjoyment I’ve gotten from wrestling with the questions each day!  You have really asked some wonderful questions, and I’d like to find a way to keep this going in some form in the future.  I did not, however, anticipate the time it would take to give full responses to the questions.  They are thoughtful questions and deserve thoughtful responses.  So in both my weekend away last month and my time away with the WCPC Youth this past weekend, I’ve fallen behind.  Today marks the 24th of Lent (as we don’t count Sundays in the tally), and I’m on the 18th question.  I plan to get to all 40 by day 40 (which is Holy Saturday, the day before Resurrection Sunday), but will have to double up here and there to do it.  So know that all 40 questions are coming with responses.  And know that some days will have two responses in them (and perhaps you may have another day where I wasn’t able to get the response in).  Bear with me as we endeavor in this together!  This is good work, and sometimes good work takes on a different pattern than we first hoped for :)

Question 18:  Are our days numbered no matter what? (Should I eat desert every day?)

This question is a great question, and gets to the notion of predestination – effectively whether our whole lives are pre-destined by God, thus numbering our days, regardless of what we do.

The short answer to the question about is yes, but there's a lot more to it.

One of the biggest struggles in life is the internal struggle between fate and individual achievement.  Or to put it more theological terms, between predestination and free will.

Many years ago, I had a friend explain predestination to me in a way that finally made sense.  I realize that, like any analogy, there are flaws in this example, but it at least provides a surface level understanding of predestination and free will in a way that is digestible.

Imagine a maze in a laboratory for lab rats – one of those mazes with that’s a big table with walls, where the rat needs to get through the maze to collect a piece of cheese.  Like any good experiment, this environment is controlled.  This means that the scientist is completely in control of the maze – there are no variables outside of the mouse itself.  Anything added or removed from the maze are completely controlled by the scientist.  The scientist can choose to put new walls in so that the rat has no dead ends, so that the rat cannot get lost on the way to the cheese.  The scientist could choose to block the rat so that it can never get to the cheese.  The scientist can lure the rat in the right direction with the scent of cheese.  The scientist can pick the rat up and simply put them beside the cheese.  The mere fact that at any given time the scientist can control the maze or the rat means that at all times, even when not “interfering”’ at all, the scientist is completely in control.  Noting in the maze happens without the scientist allowing it to happen.

Yet from the rat’s perspective, the rat has complete free will.  The rat is not thinking, “Boy, I can’t wait for that scientist to tell me what to do!” The rat is making choices based on what it assumes is its own free will.  If the scientist only gives the rat two choices, the rat doesn’t wander why there aren’t three, it simply acknowledges that it has two choices, and it is choosing one of its own accord.  If the scientist blocks off one choice (so that the rat only has one choice) the rat is still thinking that it is making that choice on its own.  

From the rat’s perspective, it has free will.

From the scientist’s perspective, she is in complete control.

Being in control is not the same as controlling.  Being in control means nothing happens that you didn’t cause to happen or allow to happen.  Controlling means that everything that happens you are actively making it happen. The scientist in actually controlling the rat would be if the real rat were replaced by a robot rat which the scientist controlled via remote control.

Such it is with God.  God is in control, but not usually controlling.  The very fact that God could intervene at any time means that God is always in control (but choosing not to be controlling).

We long to be people who make our own destiny, who care out our success through hard work and dedication.  Yet we know that this is not how it really works. There are people who deserve success that will never achieve it, and those who do not “deserve” success, but simply fall into it.

The idea of predestination is not meant to make us feel futile, but rather to be a comfort to us.  That success that we can’t realistically ever achieve on our own, God will take care of that for us.  The choices that we make are not choices that God cannot correct, because God knows what’s going on.  Nothing that we can do will surprise God or ruin God’s plan.

Because God is in control.

But God also loves us enough that God wants us to choose to follow Christ, to love God. What gain would it be to make a bunch of robots “love you”?  If they are not choosing this response, is it really love?

God is in control, but God is not controlling. We are not in control of our destinies, no matter how much we long for that control.

This is because God knows that we cannot do it on our own.  No matter how hard we might try, we are all destined to fail.

So God decided that we didn’t have to do it on our own, and God did it for us.

Our successes point to God.  Our failures remind us that we need God.

God shows us that our relationship with God is more important that punishment or reward for what we have done.

God offers relationship.  God offers us a role in God’s story.  And God carries the best of us far beyond our failings.

God doesn’t discriminate between the sinners and the saints. Know that you are not in control, and take comfort in the fact that the one who is in control loves you, and is working all things for good.

Let us live our lives as a response to that truth – not trying to earn our legacy, but joyfully sharing and living out God’s story, in which we have a starring role.

[faithisaverb]

What about dinosaurs & evolution? [40 Days of Questions, Day 18]

Day 18. How can dinosaurs & evolution be explained with what the bible says? We have hard evidence of the existence of dinosaurs.

This is a great question, and an often asked one.  Dinosaurs have become a hot point for theological discussion amongst fundamentalists and young earth creationist – those who believe that the earth is only about 6,000 years old, based on some fuzzy math that has been gleaned from certain Bible passages.  The problem of what to do with dinosaurs has vexed young earthers to the point of making claims from “dinosaur bones were put there by the devil as a means of shaking our faith in God” to the mental gymnastics some have made to try to put dinosaurs on Noah’s ark.

The reality is that the Bible is not the story of dinosaurs, it is the story of God’s relationship with humans.  It’s not trying to tell us the story of how dinosaurs existed, or the story of how the science of everything came to be.  If that were its goal, it would have a very different focus.  So when we try to judge the veracity of the Bible based on something it’s not trying to do, then we run into trouble.  That would be like shopping for a new hat by filling it with water to see how much it could hold.  The hat may hold water okay or it may not, but that’s not what it’s designed to do, so it would be a silly way to gauge the quality of the hat.  Such it is with the Bible and science.  The Bible is not meant to be a book about science, so why would we measure its quality against is ability to teach us science?  And why would we question science based on its representation in the Bible?

One should not doubt that dinosaurs existed because they are not mentioned in the Bible (neither are duck billed platypuses, but they certainly are real – and super weird).

Again, the Bible wasn’t written to tell us about dinosaurs, it is to tell us about God, and God’s relationship with us.

Science is not the enemy of God, and God is not the enemy of science.  Whenever we present them as such, we show a lack of understanding of both.  The Bible is not meant to be a science book.  Even in its simplicity and poetic nature, the story of the creation of the world presented in Genesis 1 shows a system God is setting up where things move from chaos to order – which is the same process we see in evolution.  Evolution as a general fact (the idea that species evolve over time) is a provable fact – not only in flatworms, but also in every dog at the Westminster Kennel Club.  The theory of shared ancestry between humans and apes is not the same thing as evolution.  It is a theory that is derived from the notion of evolution, but it is not the same thing.

One can (and should) believe in the process of evolution because it is observably true. One can believe in evolution yet still doubt that humans have shared ancestry with apes. One can believe in evolution AND shared ancestry AND be a devout Christian. There is a force moving all things from chaos to order, and it a force that demonstrates elegance and perfection in places where they should not be.  That is observed by believers and non-believers alike.  That force can rightly be understood to be God without making any mental gymnastics to make science bend to certain dogmatic beliefs or compromising and deeper faith in God.

For thousands of years, religion fueled science, and science fueled religion.  The Big Bang theory was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest who was an amateur astronomer.  While there have always been those in power of institutions who have stifled learning about the natural world, the body of faithful believers have long been on the front lines of scientific exploration. It is our joy to explore the natural world, to marvel at the splendor not only of God’s creation but at the intricacy and elegance of the scientific systems which God uses to govern it, from evolution to the periodic table of elements, to the countless discoveries we have yet to make.

[faithisaverb]

How often should we have communion? [40 Days of Questions, Day 16]

Day 16: Why don’t we have communion more than once a month?

This is a very good question, and one that highlights one of the “freedoms” among different PC(USA) churches.  The Book of Order (which is the governing document – constitution – of the denomination) mandates that the session of the church must ensure that communion be offered “at least quarterly.”  There are many congregations that offer communion only four times a year, and many who offer it every single week.  WCPC offers it eight times throughout the year.

It has been said that communion is “too important to do every week,” meaning that the reverence that we should have toward the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper would be diminished if it became routine.  Likewise, however, if we only do it minimally, we are not giving enough opportunity to partake of the meal.

Communion is also called “The Lord’s Supper.”  Both are used interchangeably by Presbyterians, as is “Eucharist,” though we usually go with Communion or Lord’s Supper, as Eucharist (which comes from the Greek “εὐχαριστία” which means “thanksgiving”) often has more Catholic or Orthodox connotations to it.  But all three terms are appropriate and refer to the same thing.  Communion refers to our communing not only with God through the meal, but also with each other.  Communion is not meant to be taken alone.  Even communion with homebound members is served with at least two others (most commonly with the pastor and a deacon or elder).

For Presbyterians (and all protestants), communion is one of only two sacraments – communion and baptism.  We honor the other acts (confession, marriage, ordination, etc.) that make up the seven sacraments of the Catholic church, but we only uplift two as sacraments, as we think that sacraments ought to be available to all believers, and should have also been instituted by Christ.  So marriage, for example, while important, is not a sacrament for Presbyterians, as Christ was not married and getting married is not the goal of a Christian life.

Presbyterians have a particular understanding of the sacrament of Communion in that we believe that Christ is spiritually present in the meal, but not physically.  This means that the bread and wine/juice remain bread and wine/juice.  There is no mystical transformation into the actual body and blood of Christ (as Catholics believe, called transubstantiation) or a comingling of both bread and body, wine and blood (as Lutherans believe, called consubstantiation).  For us, the sacrament is not magical, but a sign and seal of what Christ has done and is doing in our lives.  Christ is present in spirit in the sacrament, but is also omnipresent spiritually in all things we do.

Donald McKim answered this question of how frequently Presbyterians are to take communion in his book Presbyterian Questions, Presbyterian Answers, breaking down some of the historical rationale behind the frequency of the meal:

In sixteenth-century Geneva, John Calvin wanted to have the Lord’s Supper celebrated in each service of Sunday worship, since he believed both the preaching of the Word and the sacraments were means of God’s revelation to us.  However, the city officials thought this would make the sacrament seem too commonplace, so they restricted the number of observances.  Calvin arranged for different Geneva churches to celebrate the Supper on different Sundays so that one could “itinerate” to a Supper observance each week. 

The Reformed leader Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531) advocated observing the Supper four times per year—once in the autumn and on Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost.  In Scotland, four times per year was a norm from 1562, but it later became only annually.  The Scottish and Zwinglian practices influenced the U.S. Presbyterians, who usually observed the Lord’s Supper once a quarter.  

Particularly after the 1960s, during the period of heightened liturgical interest, it became customary for Presbyterian churches to celebrate the sacrament more frequently.  The tenor of the service also changed, from the traditional somberness with its emphasis on sin and repentance to a mode of celebration as found in the Lord’s Supper liturgy in The Worshipbook (1970): “Friends: This is the joyful feast of the people of God.”  

Now it is common to have monthly celebrations of the Lord’s Supper, and in churches with multiple worship services, one service each week may include the Supper.  The Supper is also celebrated on other special occasions in the life of the church, and especially on Maundy Thursday.

It is appropriate for all Presbyterian worship services to include the Lord’s Supper, since Word and sacrament go together and are marks of the church (BC 3.18).  The Lord’s Supper is always preceded by the reading and proclamation of the Word.  The frequency of the Lord’s Supper is set by the session.  It should be celebrated frequently enough (not less than quarterly) for congregations to recognize its importance and vitality for worship and Christian life.

More Presbyterian Questions, More Presbyterian Answers, Revised edition (pp. 88-89). Presbyterian Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Communion is an important part of the life of the church.  It is a meal that celebrates the life of Christ in the church, and for Presbyterians, this meal is open to all people who put their faith in Christ.  It is open to all ages, all denominations.  We do not “fence” the table from children, but instead encourage parents to help children understand the meaning of the meal, so that they may be fully included in this part of the church’s life.  Even with the mystery around the meal, children should still know that they are part of the family of God, and fully part of their church family, which especially involves taking part in the sacrament.

[faithisaverb]

How does God work in math? [40 Days of Questions, Day 14]

Day 14: What is the largest number that can be represented in Hebrew and Greek numbers?

First, the simple answer to this question: I don’t know.   My knowledge of math within the languages of Ancient Hebrew and Ancient Greek are only about as good as my knowledge of John Wayne movies – I know they exist, I know the main characters and basic structures of them, but I’ve never spent any time with them personally.  In light of that, I’m including a number of links at the bottom of this post that come at the topics of Hebrew and Greek numbering.

One word of caution, though – mathematics can quickly lead to numerology, one being a hard science and one being a mystical chimera.  Much like someone can take a deep dive into the symbolism of Revelation and come out focusing on all the wrong things with some pretty scary beliefs, one can become obsessed with Biblical numerology, and start to see things that aren’t really there.  The Bible is this beautiful gift to us, the divinely inspired Word of God, but it is not a mystical codebook that will lead us to secret knowledge that is only for those who have cracked its hidden meaning.

There was a heresy based on that thinking – that the Bible was a secret code meant only to enlighten those with the key – called the Gnostics (the name derived from the Greek word for “knowledge” – by comparison, “Agnostic” means “without knowledge).  While we often point to our lack of understanding of the Bible, and that there is far more to the Bible than most of us realize, it is not designed as some big cypher.  The knowledge that the Bible gives us sends us out, it doesn’t obsessively send us down a rabbit whole of hidden codes and secrets.  That’s not how God works.

So, as you may find yourself curious about this topic, be careful in your further research.  The internet is a weird place filled with lots of people speaking with a deep sense of authority on topics of which they don’t have a stable knowledge.  There are a lot of websites with rants and “evidence” for things that can lead you to some weird place.  And “Biblical numerology” is a google search that comes back fraught with all sorts of conspiracy theory and paranoid voices.  So be mindful of what your sources are before you start working out math problems all over your walls to figure out he true meaning of the book of Amos.

This is an intriguing question in that is brings up the question of God in mathematics, and therefore God in science.

To say that Biblical Numerology is not a thing you should put much credence into is not to say that the numbers in the Bible do not mean anything, or that God isn’t working beautifully and elegantly through math.

God is not in opposition to math or science.  Rather God works in and through maths and sciences to help us understand the world better.  They do not refute God, but rather point to a world that is moving from chaos to order, a world that seems to have purpose and structure to it, with a beautiful elegance that is anything but random.

Perhaps my favorite example of this is the Fibonacci sequence, this perfect mathematical ratio that is found in nature (where perfection should not be found).  You can find more about here.

Math and sciences help us to understand the world more clearly, but without the illusion that we can fully grasp it all.  The more we discover, the more we discover that we did not know, and the more there is yet to learn.  Such it is with God.  The journey to learn more about God is inevitably a journey that yields more questions than answers, but those questions should inspire us with wonder, rather than discourage us.  Uncovering new questions leads us to deeper understanding, which fuels our wonder.  When Jesus says that we should have the faith of a child, this is what he meant – a faith that never stops wanting to learn, never stops wanting to explain, and never stops asking “why?”.  Questions are not a threat to belief, but rather are essential to it.  God has given us a world to explore.  So let’s go exploring.

Below are many links that can help you dive into this more if you are curious:

Mathematician seeing God in Math.

Greek Numbers: https://www.foundalis.com/lan/grknum.htm

http://www.hellenicaworld.com/Greece/Science/en/Counting.html

Hebrew Numbers: https://blogs.transparent.com/hebrew/counting-in-hebrew/

https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/hebrew-numbers/

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/gematria/

http://www.jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm

[faithisaverb]

Why don’t we pray to the Holy Spirit? [40 Days of Questions, Day 13]

Day 13. We pray to God & Jesus – prayers to the Holy Spirit seem limited.  Your thoughts?

This is such a great question because it highlights one of the biggest blind spots for much of Western Christianity - our uncertainty with what to do with the Holy Spirit.

We know the Trinity to be the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that each are co-equal parts of the Godhead - that there isn’t a hierarchy.  It’s not God as president, Jesus as vice president, and the Holy Spirit as the Speaker of the House.  All parts of the trinity are fully God.

So why don’t we pray to the Holy Spirit as much?  How are we supposed to approach the Holy Spirit?  I have some ideas, but none of them said as well as they are on the Presbyterian Mission site, where they provide three ways of considering the Holy Spirit.  Please go there and read those three articles.  It is a trove of information.

In the end, the Holy Spirit is (like many things in these questions) a mystery.  We can glimpse and idea of what the Holy Spirit is, but we cannot fully grasp it.  

To put it simply, the Holy Spirit functions a bit like The Force in Star Wars - an all knowing force that “surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together.”  

The Holy Spirit is the primary mover in Acts, actively guiding people, and at time straight up just making people do things.  The Spirit then can be thought of as God’s presence with us even when we cannot see or be aware of God in our presence.  God is with you right now, as you read this - in and around you.  The Spirit of God never departs from us.

One last thing to leave you with: one of my favorite things about the Bible is the simple fact that in both Hebrew and Greek, the word for “spirit” (ruah in Hebrew, pneuma in Greek) is the same word for “breath.”  When God breathes in to Adam, God is literally spiriting into him, giving of God’s Spirit.  Jesus does the same thing in the upper room after the resurrection, breathing/spiriting on all of the apostles gathered there.  From this, we can take the idea that the Holy Spirit of God is so omnipresent that it is in each and every breath we take.

That is mysterious, but it is also beautiful and comforting.

So try praying to the Holy Spirit tonight.  See how that feels.  You are praying to the same God you always are praying to, just in a different way.

If you didn’t already, go read those articles about the Holy Spirit from this site: https://www.presbyterianmission.org/what-we-believe/holy-spirit-3-views/

[faithisaverb]

What does “descended into hell” mean? [40 Days of Questions, Day 12]

Day 12 Where did the Apostles’ Creed come from?  Did Jesus really descend to hell or is that a metaphor for something? Why does Jesus descend into hell for 3 days prior to his resurrection? (Not discussed much) Why did Jesus descend into hell as we address in the Apostles’ Creed?

This question was the most asked of all the questions submitted – which I would not have anticipated.  It’s a great question, but I was surprised that so many people had it on their minds.  It’s a bit of a deep cut.

The Apostles’ Creed is one of the oldest creeds that we have in the church, and is traditionally thought to have originated with the original apostles from the the first Christian church.  It is a simple creed, highlighting the basic elements of belief of the church.  It was used to affirm faith, and to let people outside of the church know what it meant to have that faith.

To address the question of Jesus descent to hell, though we must now address the key question: what is Hell?

Much like the “What is Heaven” question, the answer is not as clear as we have been led to believe, and ultimately will leave you with a “huh…” kind of feeling. Much like Heaven, there is actually very little written about Hell in the Bible.  

The Old Testament’s vision of “Hell” isn’t even the same as the traditional Christian idea of Hell.  Every time in the Old Testament, when you see the word “Hell” written in English, the Hebrew word they are using is actually “Sheol.”  This word was understood as a netherworld of nothingness, separated from God – where everyone goes, both the righteous and the unrighteous.  There they reside as “rephaim” (essentially ghosts).  It is not really a place of suffering so much as it is just a place.  A bit like purgatory, but with no mechanism to get out.

The New Testament (originally written in Greek) uses the word “Hades” for “Hell.” This is borrowed from the Greek underworld and the god who ruled over it.  Sometimes it uses the word “Gehenna,” which is a reference to an actual location just outside of Jerusalem that was thought to be cursed (as it was a site that had once been used for child sacrifice), and was used primarily as a dump in Jesus’ time, and was constantly catching fire.  Nearly all New Testament references to Hell being filled with fire and gnashing of teeth are actually referring specifically to Gehenna, the dump that was always on fire.  Jesus is comparing the misery of suffering from being separated from God to that of what it would be like to live in a flaming pile of garbage for eternity.

Again, much like Heaven, most of our deeper understanding of the details around Hell come not from the Bible as much as they do from Western literature.  In this case, it is Dante’s Divine Comedy, and specifically the first book – Inferno.  The torture we think of when we think of Hell is practically all from Dante.  Jesus talks of eternal suffering, but that is different from torture.  We suffer as a result of an event, whereas torture requires agency by something other than you.  Thus, the devil and the devil’s minions are assigned the task of being master torturers.  Much was made in art of the Renaissance that show the fascination with body horror levels of torture, yet that level of specificity of how Hell operates is simply not in the Bible.

Little of the details in Dante come from scripture, as there isn’t really much about Hell in the Bible.   The best we can say is that Hell is where God isn’t.

So what does all of this have to do with the Creed??

Well, if we aren’t certain what Hell is, then what is it that Jesus did for those three days.

The definitive answer is this:  we don’t know.

Nothing is written in the Bible about those three days, just that Jesus came out alright on the other side of them.

Donald McKim’s More Presbyterian Questions, More Presbyterian Answers addressed the question of this phrase in the Apostles’ Creed directly:

This phrase did not come into most versions of the Apostles’ Creed until sometime between the sixth and eighth centuries. By the beginning of the ninth century it was part of the official version of the creed. Many early Christians believed it, but it became interpreted in different ways. This phrase clearly indicates the true death of Jesus. It comes right after “crucified, dead, and buried.” Jesus was fully human, and this included his genuine death.

One view is that Jesus descended to the realm of the dead (“Sheol” in traditional Jewish belief) to preach to those who had lived before Jesus’ time and were imprisoned there.

First Peter 3:18–20 speaks of Jesus’ preaching to “the spirits in prison” (v. 19). By the Middle Ages, a popular view was that Jesus preached to give the people who lived before his time the opportunity to receive salvation.

Another interpretation is that in his death, Jesus won victory over the powers of evil and descended into the realm of the death, the seat of evil, to bring forth the souls who were captive there.

Ephesians 4:8–10 (quoting Ps. 68:18) speaks of Jesus ascending and also descending to the “lower parts of the earth.”

Another view, favored by John Calvin and found in the Heidelberg Catechism, is the spiritual view. We do not interpret the descent literally but rather find it to mean that “during attacks of deepest dread and temptation that Christ my Lord, by suffering unspeakable anguish, pain, and terror of soul, on the cross but also earlier, has delivered me from hellish anguish and torment” (BC 4.044). This makes the phrase meaningful to us in an ongoing way. It assures us of Christ’s presence with us to redeem us—even in the deepest agonies of life.

More Presbyterian Questions, More Presbyterian Answers, Revised edition (pp. 43-44). Presbyterian Publishing. Kindle Edition.

So what are we saying when we say “descended into Hell” if we don’t even really know what that is?   What we are saying is that Jesus really died.  It wasn’t some stunt where God takes on a disguise as a human and just pretends to die (wink, wink) and then comes back in a few days, fresh as a daisy so that we can all believe in Resurrection.   Jesus wasn’t on vacation in those three days.   He was separated from God. We don’t know what Hell is, but we know that Jesus took on that suffering on our behalf, and something changed. Whatever that is.

We know that Hell is separation from God. And that is the greatest suffering.

[faithisaverb]

Why don’t Presbyterians kneel? [40 Days of Questions, Day 11]

Day 11: Why don’t we kneel in service?

This is a great question.  Often times the simplest questions can lead us to some of the best conversations.  

The question of kneeling inherently takes us to the matter of prayer, as in most circumstances within the Christian faith, kneeling is in the context of prayer.

Prayer is something that for many is perhaps one of the biggest struggles of their faith life.  Part of that is because there are so many questions about it. For example: How are we supposed to pray? Is it less or more of a prayer when we pray together in unison? Is it preferable to have pre-written prayers (like the Lord’s Prayer) or are extemporaneous prayers better? Do they have to be well constructed and ornate? How long do they have to be? Does it count if I don’t say it out loud? Why do we pray with our eyes closed? How much do I need to pray for any one particular thing? Why do we fold our hands for grace, but not when we pray in church? If people pray for me in a language that I don’t understand, does it still count for me? Do we have to say “amen”?  (What does that even mean??) Do my prayers influence God?  If I don’t pray enough, does that mean God won’t intervene? How many prayers is enough before God will save someone miraculously? If my prayers are unanswered, why should I pray? And so on, and so on, and so on…

Prayer is a beautiful, important, and mysterious thing.  It is an essential part of our relating to God, the way that we show our trust and our willingness to ask God for help, as well as our humility and willingness to listen.

Prayer is not the same as ordering off a menu or asking God to grant us wishes.  All too often it is talked about that way, which all too often can lead people to lose faith when those orders aren’t fulfilled and those wishes aren’t granted.

Prayer, put simply, is our acknowledging that we need God – both being thankful for what we have been given, and making note of what we need help with.  God knows out needs and our thoughts before we even open our mouths, so prayer is not really for God’s benefit so much as it is for us.  This is not to say that prayer is something just to make us feel good.  God does hear out prayers, and answer our prayers.  They do matter and have very important, but in a way that is not as simple as we often explain them (i.e. “ask for this and get it”).

Jesus main instruction for us was to avoid showiness in our prayers, saying that we should not be like those who stand in the public square, going on and on and on with flowery language trying to impress people.  Rather, we should ask God directly, knowing that God hears even our simplest requests.

In the midst of all that is how we approach prayer externally, especially in worship.  Kneeling for prayer is often associated with Catholics today, as it is a prescribed posture for prayer in Catholic worship.  Protestants moved away from the more prescribed physical manners of worship in the years following the Reformation.  This was in large part to move away from the limits that such a prescription can bring.  The Bible identifies all sorts of manners in which to pray – hands up, facing the sky; prostrate on the ground; privately; publicly; personally; corporately, etc.  There is no one method for how to pray.

Kneeling is neither wrong nor right for prayer in worship.  It is not prescribed because we all pray in unique ways.  You may have noticed that I kneel when I pray before the sermon each week.  This did not come in a thought out way, but rather it is the natural way in which I most often pray personally.  I didn’t realize that I did that until a youth leader who was helping me to lead youth group several years ago asked me why I knelt down each time I prayed.  I honestly hadn’t noticed I was doing that (and may not have realized it if she hadn’t pointed it out).  I have found that the motion for me helps me to focus on the prayer.  But that is certainly not the only way that I pray.

Just as there is no prescribed way to pray in Presbyterian worship, there is hardly any wrong way to authentically pray either (understanding that there are certain ways of praying that are less helpful in corporate worship setting).  As we pray in worship, think about how we are praying together.  Is this posture the most helpful way for you to feel connected to the prayer?  If not, I invite you to try a posture that does.  Kneeling is certainly appropriate if that helps you to be present within the prayer.

You may just have to bring your own kneeling pad, though ;)

[faithisaverb]

Who is “Chosen”? [40 Days of Questions, Day 10]

Day 10. If we are chosen to save the world through Jesus Christ, how do Jews see themselves as “chosen”?

The word “chosen” is a tricky one in the Bible, as we often use it in the context of something grand and immutable, as though it is grand, it’s not a title that was meant to be an exclusive deal for all time.  God is often choosing people in the Bible for specific tasks and specific seasons.

Adam and Eve are chosen to take care of the garden. Noah is chosen to save the animals in the great flood. Abraham is chosen to have his offspring be a blessing to the entire world (see Matthew’s genealogy to find out who that is). Moses was chosen to lead the Israelites out of Egypt. Joshua was chosen to lead the Israelites into the promised land. Saul was chosen to be Israel’s first king. David was chosen to be the king of Israel that Saul was not able to be. Esther was chosen to save the Jewish exiles. Jonah was chosen to save the Ninevites (even though he really didn’t want to) Elijah, Elisha, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Amos, Malachi and many other prophets were chosen to serve as the voice of God.

John was chosen to foretell of Jesus’ coming. Mary was chosen to be Jesus’ mother. Joseph was chosen to care for Mary and Jesus. Mary Magdalene was chosen to be the first witness to the risen Christ. Paul and Peter were chosen to spread the gospel to the gentiles.

God’s choosing of people is nearly always about broadening the circle – chosing people to let others know that God loves them, too.  Even in selecting people to be set apart, God’s intention is to show the world that things can be better if they turn away from the sin of destruction that they had been following.

The Bible IS NOT a story of God choosing the Jews, the Jews failing to get the job done, God rejecting the Jews and choosing the Gentiles in their place.

The Bible IS a story of God choosing people to help others to know that God is bigger than we think.  It’s a story of people failing God, but God not giving up on them.

The story of the Gospel is not God’s rejection of the Jews.  That thinking has been used to justify all sorts of atrocities in the history of humanity (it’s was the Christian church that was on the forefront of antisemitism through this type of reading of scripture).

God is not rejecting the Jews.  Jesus is not a Plan B.

God is saying that humans could not accomplish what only God could.  The failings of Israel were not representative of Jews.  The failings of Israel are representative of all of us as humans.  On a long enough timeline, all human endeavors fail.

Yet God does not give up.

Paul says in Romans 1:16 that God came “to the Jew first, and then to the Greek.”  There is not rejection in that sentiment, but rather a broadening of the circle.

For Christians to be seen as chosen is not to say that the Jews are not chosen.

Chosen is not “God’s favorite” or “God’s protected.”  Chosen people are God’s co-workers, the ones whom God sends to do the work of the Kingdom.   And that work is mercy, it is peace, it is hope, and above all it is love.

God has chosen all who have ears to hear to love one another, to reflect God’s love in all that we say and do, and to help others to know that they are valued and loved by God.

You have been chosen to let others know that they are chosen, too.

[faithisaverb]

Why do we sing in church? [40 Days of Questions, Day 9]

Day 9: Why do we sing in church/worship?

The simple answer to this question is “because we are supposed to.”  The three indispensable elements for Presbyterian worship are: prayer, scripture, and music.  It recognizes that we come together in supplication before God with our needs, glorifying God/learning about God, and praising God.

It is also a way to express that which we cannot express though mere words.  There is a deeper resonance in human emotions than can rightly be expressed through talking.  It is a neurological fact that we naturally are moved by music (even if we are not singers or musicians) in ways that are significantly different that words.

While these offerings of music are not to be performances, trying to find praise or approval for ourselves, they are still meant to be enjoyable.  While worship should not seek to be entertaining as it’s main function, it is certainly okay if we are entertained by worship.  We should use a variety of music, in all styles and skill levels, as different kinds of music help us to hear God in different kinds of ways.

God’s richness cannot be relegated to one genre or instrument or style.  The more music we have, the more we can begin to glimpse God’s beauty through music.

The Presbyterian Mission Agency site has a great article about worship and it’s elements – particularly music.  It says a lot of what I would have said in this article, but even better.

Check it out here.

[faithisaverb]

What is heaven?  [40 Days of Questions, Day 8]

I apologize for today coming a little late!  We are taking a quick vacation in Chicago for the weekend, so I blame the time change ;)

Day 8. What is heaven?

This is a great question, as nearly everyone is curious about it, even people who aren’t necessarily “religious.”  There is even a sitcom on NBC called “The Good Place” which examines the concept of the afterlife, heaven & hell, and the ethical ideals that make a person “good” or “bad” (it’s a fantastic show – we could do a whole month-long series just breaking down each episode of that show… perhaps in the future).  

There is a human longing for things to be okay when we die, and so there is an unending stream of interpretations in culture of what that may be like, from the beautiful grandeur of the heavenly realms in Dante’s Paradiso to the lounge singing version of Heaven at the end of Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life.  From the old timey longings for bands of angels in the African American Spirituals and Appalachian folk tunes to the mundane image of angels on clouds holding harps (a particularly brilliantly executed trope of Gary Larson’s comic strip The Far Side).

As a result, most of us would have no trouble describing “heaven” or “hell” in general terms because we have been given such a strong cultural depiction of both of them.

The problem (as seems to be a running theme in a lot of our assumptions about the Bible) is that clear descriptions of heaven or here are not really in the Bible at all.

The closest we get for heaven comes in Revelation, which describes the heavenly realm of God colliding with the earthly realm, and the creation of a “new heaven and new earth” that exist in the same place – meaning that “heaven” at the end of all things is a restored earth.  An actual physical place where creation is restored to how God have made it to be, with no pain or suffering.  There is a city with pearly gates that will never close (an important point), streets that are paved with gold, and a river that runs out of the middle with two trees (the two trees from the Garden of Eden), and God will live there with us for eternity.  This is a beautiful image, yet not quite like the images we most often think of.  

It is on a newly restored earth, not in the sky (no clouds or harps), and it is a physical place (not just a spiritual realm). And yet, even this is not a definitive description, as Revelation is written in a hyper surrealist genre of writing, which is highly symbolic, so is not really meant to be taken completely literally.  So this is likely more of a symbolic description of heaven than anything.

Whenever people ask Jesus what heaven is like, he compares it to a man who found a treasure in a field, or a mustard seed, or a woman baking bread, of a man sowing seeds, or a merchant trying to buy pearls, of like fisherman casting a net.  All of these images are ordinary.  None of them reveal a majestic realm, but rather the everyday actions of life.  Jesus respond to the question, “what is heaven like?” with “well, it’s a lot like here.”

Scripture does point us to a clear understanding that heaven is a real place, and will ultimately include a restored version of our current physical reality.  The creation that is here now isn’t just a preshow, but rather the first fruits, a place in which glimpse of that heavenly reality can be witnessed.  Like the beginning of a parade.  One that glimpses a reality where everything is set back to right.  A kingdom of God that is not yet here, but has already started appearing.

So at the heart of the it all, the answer is ultimately that we don’t know what heaven is, other than it  is a place where there is no pain, no suffering, no sadness.  Even the memory of pain is erased.

Heaven is a place where God is, and will always be.

We know even less about Hell, other than it is where God is not.

And God’s desire is that we would be where God is.

[faithisaverb]

Is suicide unforgivable? [40 Days of Questions, Day 7]

Day 7: Is suicide (due to extreme pain and suffering) the unforgivable sin?

NO.

SUICIDE IS NOT AN UNFORGIVABLE SIN.

This is a really important question, because there has been a lot of poor teaching around this, and that poor teaching leads to a lot of unnecessary pain for a lot of people.

So it is very important that everyone knows this: suicide is not unforgivable.  If you hear none of the rest of this, please know that.

We’ll come back to suicide in a moment, but we need to dig into what sin is in the Bible a bit first.

There is, in fact, no unforgivable sin.  There is nothing that you can do that Christ does not wash away.  

Nothing.

There are some religious traditions that have ranked sins, and even listed specific sins that are unforgivable.  This idea does not come from scripture, but rather from the accumulation of dogmatic interpretations.

The bible does not rank sins.  There are no sins that are worse than others.

Sin is whatever separates us from God.  At its root, all sin essentially comes out or pride - thinking that our way is better than God’s way, or that my needs are more important than other people’s needs.  

Lying comes from thinking that my comfort (or ability to escape something I’ve done) is more important than my relationship with the person to whom I am lying.  

Murder is thinking ultimately coming from my feelings that my life is more valuable than yours.  

Lust comes from the turning another person into an object that can give us pleasure.

Greed comes from thinking that I deserve more wealth than others.

Blasphemy comes from my feeling that I can tell God what to do.

And so on.

Shame is that initial result of sin, and often leads us to even more sin as we try to hide or erase that shame (or to convince ourselves that we have nothing to be ashamed of).

It is a self perpetuating cycle.  And it destroys us.  

And God knows it, and that’s why God won’t let that be how things end for us.

Each sin, whether they are big ones or little ones, eat away at us, whether a catastrophic flood of shame, or a small leak that builds behind the walls, a shame that we can hide from others, but eats us from within.

That shame tells us that we are not good enough, that we are not worth saving.

Or even worse, that we cannot be saved.  It makes us hate ourselves, and makes it unable for us to see us as God sees us - as beautiful creations that are, at our core, made to reflect God.

God made us and proclaimed us good.  

We broke that relationship and convinced ourselves we were not good.

And God changed the story we were telling ourselves, changed the rules we had convinced ourselves we condemning us, and took away our sin.  Took away our shame.

But we forget.

The closest the bible gets to ever claiming that there is any sin that is any worse than any other is in Matthew 12:31-32; Marl 3:28-30; and Luke 12:8-10.  Each of these passages say essentially the same thing, which is this (Matthew’s version):

Therefore, I tell you that people will be forgiven for every sin and insult to God. But insulting the Holy Spirit won’t be forgiven.  And whoever speaks a word against the Human One will be forgiven. But whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit won’t be forgiven, not in this age or in the age that is coming.

Our friend St. Augustine interpreted this to mean that the only unforgivable sin would be disavowing that grace was truly offered by God - essentially not believing that God can save you leads you to forsake that salvation.

John Calvin (a reformation era theologian upon who’s teaching much of the Reformed tradition  - what Presbyterians believe - is built), disagreed with Augustine on this, as he pointed out that ignorance is not an unforgivable sin.  Those who do not believe cannot be judged against their ignorance because Jesus says in the passage above that that there will be forgiveness for them “in the age to come.”  So the only unforgivable sin, in Calvin’s reading, would be to know God truly in the age to come and still actively resisting God.

All that is to say, the only sin that cannot be forgiven it the sin that you refuse to accept forgiveness for in the age to come.

Suicide has often been labeled as the unforgivable because the person is not able to ask for forgiveness about it.  This belief, in many ways, has its roots in the Catholic belief in last rites, that one must confess their sins and be granted forgiveness before they die.  Protestants do not believe that we must go to our death with a clean slate, as the act of forgiveness happened not when the priest or minister proclaimed it for us, but rather it was given 2000 years ago on a cross, in a time shattering action that covers all people in both directions - all that had come before and all that will come after.  

So dying with sins that we have yet confessed to is not condemnable.  

Christ’s redemption covers it all.  

So to categorize suicide as unforgivable is both an underestimation of the power and breadth of Christ’s redemptive work of forgiveness and reconciliation, but also a toxic idea to perpetuate.

Suicide is the result of someone having completely lost their sense of what they are, of that goodness that God created in them.  They have stopped reflecting God, just as a mirror turned to face the wall.  They have lost their value.

Or it is the culmination of such pain that the person cannot see any hope anymore.  They are so surrounded by darkness that they cannot envision how the light will ever again break through.

Suicide is a result of the greatest suffering.

Suicide is a result of those who are feeling the most lost.

What God would punish that?

Not the God who came to seek and to save the lost.  

Not the God who went through death to give us life.  

Not the God who will stop at nothing to help us see what we were created for,

and what we can be.

We often list John 3:16 as though it is the most important verse to know.

But John 3:17 is perhaps even more important.

God didn’t send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

God came to seek and to save the lost.

And we are to do the same.

If you know someone who is hurting, help them.  Do everything that you can.

If you are lost, if you cannot find light anymore TELL SOMEONE.

There is light.  Sometimes we need others to help lead us back to it.

None of us go through this alone.  We are in this together.

And if you know someone who was not able to get help, someone who is not here anymore,

know that God has not given up on them.  

The story doesn’t end in the grave.

There is more.

(I leave you with a few pictures that my youngest son drew last year just on his own one day, reminding us of the light, and our responsibility to help each other see that light in all that we do)

[faithisaverb]

Why do we follow the lectionary? [40 Days of Questions, Day 6]

Day 6. What are the reasons to follow the lectionary?  How many denominations follow the lectionary?

This is a great question, particularly as we tend to follow the lectionary each week (and I make a point to mention it, reminding us we are on track with other churches.  The website PresbyterianMission.org is a wonderful resource for so many of these questions.  It is run by the Presbyterian Mission Agency, which is part of the General Assembly office of the denomination, but really functions as a great primer site for people wanting to know all things PC(USA) - even better than the actual pcusa.org website (which is terrible).

The Presbyterian Mission site actually addresses this exact question here, which is where the quoted text below comes from:

A lectionary (from the Latin lectio for “selection” or “reading”) is a set of scripture readings chosen for use in worship. Since at least the fourth century, churches have arranged selections of scripture to accompany the church year and/or to allow for continuous readings of books of the Bible from one Sunday to the next. The word “lectionary” can either refer to a simple table of readings or a book that includes the full texts of the scriptures for each day.

The Revised Common Lectionary, prepared in 1992 by the ecumenical Consultation on Common Texts, is modeled on its precursors, the Common Lectionary (1983) and the Roman Catholic Lectionary for Mass (1969). The Revised Common Lectionary is now used by many of the major denominations in North America. This lectionary provides for a broadly representative sample of Old and New Testament texts and themes, while taking into account the seasons and festivals of the Christian year.

For each Sunday and festival, The Revised Common Lectionary includes a selection from the Hebrew Scriptures, a psalm that serves as a response to that reading, a New Testament epistle, and a reading from one of the four gospels. From Advent through Trinity Sunday, the Old Testament lesson is related to the gospel reading (as a parallel or a contrast); from the Sunday following Trinity Sunday through Christ the King, the lectionary features semi-continuous readings of selected Hebrew Scriptures. During the season of Easter, the Old Testament reading is replaced by a reading from the Acts of the Apostles.

Following the pattern established by the 1969 Lectionary for Mass, The Revised Common Lectionary is arranged in a three-year cycle. Year A prominently features the gospel of Matthew, as well as a series of readings from the Pentateuch and Romans (after Pentecost). Year B features Mark, along with 1 and 2 Samuel, Job, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and James (among others). Year C features Luke, with semi-continuous readings from the prophets (particularly Jeremiah), Colossians, Hebrews, and 1 and 2 Timothy. Readings from the gospel of John are interspersed throughout the three-year cycle, especially during Christmas, Lent and Easter.

The primary intent of the lectionary is to encourage a disciplined reading of the whole range of the biblical witness in worship. The lectionary can also be an invaluable tool in the coordination of preaching, worship planning, liturgical art, music leadership and Christian education throughout a congregation or denomination. Furthermore, the widespread use of the lectionary allows for ecumenical conversation about the texts for the week (as at a gathering of local clergy) and a resource for personal reflection on scripture.

The lectionary is certainly not mandated, but it is very much recommended, so it is a good “default” position apart from when there is a compelling reason to deviate from it (such as doing a particular series).

Personally, I choose to follow the lectionary because it keeps us in conversation with other churches who are following the lectionary, but also it keeps me as the regular preacher from simply preaching on the texts that I gravitate toward, and forces me to focus on some texts that we often avoid.  It also keeps us telling the story of scripture.  

One of the most important tasks we have a Christians is to know the “metanarrative” - the overarching story that the Bible is telling us.  We need to know this story because it is a lens through which we can see the rest of the world.  When we know the story so well that it becomes our own, then we can see it playing out in the world around us, and we can bear witness to that story for others, helping them to see God at work in the world.  We follow the lectionary because it keeps us telling the story, and hearing the story.  It lets us know that the story is always worth hearing again, and that every time we hear it, it tells us a little something new.