Kiln of the Soul

Advent 11

2009-12-11T18:24:00.000-06:00

We need a Messiah to make us strong in spirit.

The LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" She replied, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate..." To the woman He said, "I will greatly increase your sorrow and your conception. In grief you shall bear sons, and your desire shall be toward your husband, and he shall rule over you." (Genesis 3:13, 16)

The woman was deceived. She open admits confusion about the matter until after the choice was made. Rather than picking over the details of the curse, it would be wise to recognize the underlying point: She was fragile in spirit, so would her body and soul be fragile, too. She would remain dependent, and would not be able to function independently without the spiritual headship of her man. The spiritual truth is what counts here, and the rest is symbolism. This is the reason Paul cites in discussing spiritual leadership in the church (1 Timothy 2:12-15). This is the order of things because of the Fall.

Good Religion

2009-12-11T09:57:00.002-06:00

When you and I observe the manifestation of God in the life of another human, we properly call it "religion." We might also call it "spirituality." The brother of Jesus, James, talked about it in no-nonsense terms.

If anyone among you considers himself religious, yet does not bridle his tongue, he deceives his own heart; his religion is empty. Pure religion, undefiled before God and the Father is this: to reach out to orphans and widows in their sorrows, and to keep oneself unblemished from worldly concerns. (James 1: 26-27)

As people age, they are less and less able to do things they once did. Some people are born less able. It is a specific burden on my heart, a direct calling, to do this genuine religion James wrote about.

In previous posts here, I've mentioned wanting to serve as God's hands for helping. Because I have yet some physical ability, and a strong inclination, I still want to build up a larger work -- a ministry -- around such things. Too often government regulations get in the way, hindering God's will, so I'm hesitant about signing up for some existing organization.

My current friendship with my aging blind friend keeps me pretty busy, but he won't live forever. As his need for my help declines, I want to seek out other ways to reach people who suffer from limitations in helping themselves. I don't have to know what's around the corner to be ready. What I would really hate is to find I can't share this work with anyone else. The field of harvest for blessings is too rich for me alone.

Pray with me as I seek the Lord's face on how to offer this to others, how to organize this by His Word, because no existing model seems right for me. Having surveyed every organization already working in this field, I find each demands things I cannot in good conscience agree to, and I know from experience many would reject what I must do.

I can't say whether this will be the core of the emerging church ministry I sense coming upon us, or just a significant element. I don't yet see how they will converge in what I do, but I feel burdened with both.

Advent 10

2009-12-10T18:51:00.001-06:00

We need the Messiah to crush the Devil's head.

And the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all cattle, and more than every animal of the field. You shall go upon your belly, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He will bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel." (Genesis 3:13-15)

When God saw He what He had created, it was all very good. That included snakes. So obviously wild suppositions about literal snakes are simply proof of ignorance, both intellectual and spiritual. The word "serpent" is merely symbolic of Satan. For whatever reason, he was not happy with his place in the scheme of things, nor what God had done. So he got involved in tempting Eve. By seducing mankind into the Fall, Satan was condemned. Just as people instinctively hate snakes, and snakes crawl on the ground, so Satan was debased from his former high position. He was doomed and damned. The nature of his damnation included being confined to human space. In the end, those he sought to destroy will be the channel of his destruction.

StT: Matthew 13:14-15, 35

2009-12-10T08:58:00.001-06:00

The context starts in verse 10, where the disciples ask Jesus why He consistently used parables. As background, we know the Hebrews understood God was ineffable, as was His truth. It was not out of reach, but only God could open it up, since all revelation is His free choice alone. You can know intellectually something about what God demands of fallen humanity, but you cannot really know God on that level. It must of necessity be a mystical experience, a "knowing" from a different faculty somewhere beyond the boundaries of intellect. This is what lies under Jesus' answer.

He tells His followers they have been granted by God the appropriate mystical insight, though we note they seldom engaged it until after the Resurrection. While the Greek text of Matthew uses the word we translate "mystery" (musterion), we might have a tough time reconstructing what that word might be in the common Hebrew tongue of that day. Assuming Matthew chose the best translation possible, we find ourselves facing a word which carries the image of shutting the mouth. It might mean something secretive, but it could also mean something for which there are no words -- ineffable.

Either way, the term indicates something is not easily accessed. Given what we know of God and His declarations, we know this means the initiative to reveal rests with Him. Further, it always rests with His wise decision when, where and to whom revealing Himself is appropriate for purposes we can hardly grasp. Jesus goes on with parabolic speech, indicating His Father wanted to polarize things, to clearly divide between those who are enlightened, and those who are not.

There is a vast gulf between what the senses perceive and what the heart can decide it must do to serve God. The fundamental philosophical question is not what we are, nor what we do, but to what or whom we are committed. In the Hebrew mind, the heart is the seat of the will, that part of us which commits. So it is the quote from Isaiah 6, the Call of Isaiah, warns him his mission will appear futile, because appearances were all the nation cared about. Their hearts excluded the inputs of the spiritual-mystical sources from which God spoke. They had cut off the very voice of God, and the Law did them not a bit of good, because it was a mere manifestation of things far higher. It was tantamount to denying God, by denying the existence of things outside the grasp of mere intellect. This shift had begun subtly, well before the introduction of Hellenism.

Were they still spiritually attuned, the Jews of Jesus' day would have immediately recognized Him as Messiah. All the prophets had hoped for this final manifestation of God in the flesh, but the Jews were looking for a mere change in human government. While Jesus demonstrates in teaching His disciples it is possible to help the spiritually aware with human language, it is not possible for words alone to create that awareness. Parables are a way of distinguishing between these two worlds. The mystical mind makes sense of parabolic language, because it is looking for something beyond the specifics of the narrative. Those who can't see beyond the narrative words will be driven away from faking it.

Matthew then records Jesus' explanation of the one parable, and adds three more parables which address the same basic subject of parable telling. There will always be fakers in any crowd of believers, and it takes an eternal viewpoint to distinguish. Eventually, the fakers will show themselves. But the smallest thing can be used by God to move men across that barrier. Once moved, the understanding of things expands beyond measure, and changes everything.

Then Matthew explains things further with another quote, this from Psalm 78:2, written by Asaph. The point there was to note the Law was a shadow, a "dumbed down" version of higher truths. If you can't grasp the mystical nature of things, at least God wants you to know what it looks like. The Law was a specific application to the circumstances of those people, in that land, in that time. But if you can't even embrace that, how can you hope to please God? There is a bit of sarcasm there, where Asaph is mocking the complaints of those in every generation who whine it's all too complicated and fuzzy. They demand spoon-feeding so they don't have to commit themselves fully. God does not operate on those terms. The mysteries of God are secrets only to the morally blind. The Law of Moses made perfect sense to those with a spiritual logic, a mystical mindset. Thus, repentance under the Law was the proper path to real faith for Jews, but they didn't really want to know the Law.

In the narrative, Matthew shows us Jesus continued working with them on the mystical logic of parables.

Advent 9

2009-12-09T18:43:00.000-06:00

We need a Messiah to give us back the Heavenly vision.

And the eyes of both of them were opened; they knew that they were naked. Sewing fig leaves together, they made aprons for themselves. When they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God in the middle of the trees of the garden. (Genesis 3:7)

What had changed? They were still in the Garden, and God still sent down His personified Voice to walk with them at the same time of the day He always came. What had changed was their vision, their understanding. Suddenly, they were struck by the intellectual fact they were naked, which had not previously mattered. But it was not simply nudity, but nakedness of sinners before a Holy God. They did their best to obey some code of conduct to cover for their sin, but it was not enough. So they hid from the God who made them, loved them and wanted to commune with them. It was not God who was limited, but their perception. They knew God not as eternal souls viewing the world from an eternal perspective, but fallen souls who had only their broken and inadequate intellect.

Advent 8

2009-12-09T18:33:00.001-06:00

We need the Messiah to teach us our weaknesses.

And when the woman saw that the tree was edible, and that it was attractive to the eyes, and a tree desirable to sharpen intellect, she took of its fruit, and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. (Genesis 3:6)

Trees have always been important symbols in Hebrew literature. If all you see here is some strange fruit tree, or worse, an ordinary apple tree, you missed it all. What really counts here is the nature of temptation. We see it again in the Wilderness Temptation of Jesus (Luke 4:1-13) and explained bluntly in 1 John 2:16: Lust of the Flesh, Lust of the Eyes, and Boastful Pride of Life. Further, the particular flavor of Boastful Pride in the case of Eve was the arrogance of human intelligence. She already had from creation a mystical mind, able to see the world as God did. She preferred mere intellect to her natural ability to see truth beyond the intellect.

Yet Another Biblical Paradox

2009-12-08T08:46:00.003-06:00

In being accountable to my few readers, I want to note in passing this business of mysticism -- actually a rather poor, but familiar label -- is by far the major theme of what I'm doing right now.

I've always wanted to understand better Jesus the man, the guy who left his footprints in the soil of Palestine, his sweat in the waters of Galilee and the Jordan, the heat of His body on the hundreds of places He slept as He wandered this earth. Painting the details of His human existence with a massive aura of holiness merely obscures the most important truth about Him.

The spiritual approach to understanding the world which stood as the foundation stone of all Jesus said uniquely informs the Christian part of "Christian Mysticism." Across the Eastern world, mysticism typically calls for a withdrawal from the daily grind of human existence, but Christ leads the way into direct involvement. For all the many words He spoke, there was a greater volume by far of things He did to give those words meaning.

It was the lack of a genuinely mystical approach in Hebrew culture at that time which made His actions and words so hard to follow. The men who walked with Him, heard His most private words, slept next to Him on the ground, could not get it. After three years, they were still locked in the prison of mere intellect. They were still looking for a political solution to a spiritual problem, waiting for their Messiah to somehow take over the government of Judea.

For all my efforts in writing to portray the truth of things in Scripture, I know most who read it won't quite get it. The full richness of what I have, the vast sense of confidence, power and clarity, along with the unspeakable joy which is too deep for any overt expression of body or words -- I can't give that to you. Even if I were a much better writer, I couldn't really pass it over through my words. If there is one thing which brings home to me every moment how I am fallen, it is this inability. My flesh is too deeply stained to convey the truth.

God uses broken vessels because there aren't any other kind. All are broken. By embracing mysticism, or whatever we call it, I find more of that treasure in my broken vessel leaks out. Maybe I can't tell you, but something in what I have now so much better informs my actions. All the more so can I guarantee my fumbling efforts will not always be socially acceptable, but we all know the real truth isn't socially acceptable itself. On a purely objective basis, Jesus Himself was pretty rude at times. Not because rudeness was the intent, but it was the natural result of a huge disparity between social expectations and God's will.

Thus, along with all the emergents and their post-modernism in religion and spirituality, I find myself altogether willing to go places and associate with things at which most mainstream Christians would shy away. I'm going to be labeled a sinner, because I don't balk at hanging out with Philistines, as it were. I'm not spooked by entering places where demons rule, because I truly understand the limits of their power against me. The deeper I delve into mysticism, the less superstitious I am.

I'll keep trying to tell what I know. That is, I'll keep offering explanations of how the mystical spiritual approach varies from what we have all been told is the Christian way of doing things in this world. Perhaps my words will catch on something in your soul, and you'll gain something. I can't even pretend you'll get what I'm trying to share, specifically, but I press on in full confidence God will use these things somehow. I don't really have to know. It's nice when folks post comments to indicate a reaction, but I'm too powerfully driven from inside to stop, even if no one ever comments again. If nothing else, the efforts to tell will clarify what I can do with all this.

The mysticism of Christ drives you directly into the world, even as you are less and less comfortable with the world as it is. Every conflict gets easier and easier to handle. Even if I can't answer directly, the flaming darts of temptation and sorrow simply don't stick nearly as much as they did once. I can easily afford to face a lot more evil. It's not just words when I say, "I'm at peace."

Advent 7

2009-12-07T15:39:00.001-06:00

We need the Messiah to show us God's peace.

On the seventh day God was finished with His ministry; He had accomplished it. So He rested on that seventh day, doing no more work. God blessed the seventh day and set it apart, because in it He had fulfilled all He set for Himself to do. (Genesis 2:2-3)

Making of this nothing more than a law about controlling human behavior in seven day increments, or some justification for requiring everyone bow the knee to a literal six-day Creationist mantra might be accurate, but misses what really matters. This prevents the rich and powerful from working their servants and slaves without a break, enforcing a time for recovery. This prevents us getting so wrapped up in getting stuff we forget why we exist. When the Messiah came, He clarified the Sabbath was made for the needs of people. Even Sabbath observance can become an excuse to work people harder by oppressive legislation and enforcement. People need peace, a time to hear God's voice.

Advent 6

2009-12-06T18:33:00.001-06:00

We need a Messiah to show us our place in the order of things.

God said, "Let the earth produce creatures within their own species, both large and small, and all manner of living things which keep their pattern..." Then God said, "We will make mankind as a shadowy image of Us, and grant them management over the fish in the water, birds in the sky, and the land animals great and small; indeed, everything on the earth which moves..." Then God admired His handiwork, and saw it was truly very good. (Genesis 1:24, 26, 31)

We share much with the land animals God made, but we are altogether different in one thing: We also share much with God. Nothing else in all Creation bears the mark of God's image. It would be all too easy to analyze to death what the precise words mean, but the only thing which matters is we can commune with God because we derive an eternal soul from Him. Whatever else it means to be "in His image," that is the primary reason it was mentioned here. Naturally, it also means we can commune with others who are shadows of the Divine. Communion implies a oneness, an affinity, and not least of all, a measure of love and grace. It is what equips us to conduct the management of His Creation. Lacking that wont to commune, we are unqualified to manage things in this world.

Bottomless Pit

2009-12-06T17:28:00.003-06:00

The coin of the Realm of the Spirit is sacrifice. Jesus died for you; will you live for Him? It has meaning. Abraham left behind everything in his life which mattered to men in those days. His heritage, culture, inheritance, comforts, national identity, all of it. All he got to keep was movable property necessary for sustaining life. Had God demanded of him walking out naked down the ancient King's Highway, I'm sure he would have done it. Paul tells us this sort of commitment and loyalty is called faith.

As we begin our own personal journeys of faith, our gifts and callings vary. Abraham had one, Job had another. Each made mistakes, but each grew to better apprehension of what faith demanded. This was not aimless sacrifice, but sacrifice which had a divine purpose, inevitably tied to showing something about God to the world. All our very existence, individually and combined, is to reveal God. A life of faith is the revelation. It's not mere conduct, nor is it trying to find ourselves. It's commitment to the mission and calling.

Critical in that commitment to revealing Him is dealing with other people. There are no lone rangers in Christ. He has many servants, and while you may not be required to serve alongside every single one of them, you don't get to choose who serves Him. You are obliged to treat them as fellow heirs. Not because they are "born again" -- no one can prove that to anyone else. It's purely on the basis of what you can observe as the mark of God's Presence. You have the burden of testing by spiritual means, not entirely cognitive and intellectual: Can I share my God's blessings with this one, and treat them as an equal heir of Heaven?

Even in plain old behavior science, we are aware of something typically called "emotional energy." It refers to investing your favor, interest and attention in another person. The Bible calls this "love." It's a bit of sacrifice for the welfare of another. It would be nice if all our emotional energy was invested in something which paid off. Most of the time it does, though the return may not represent a profit. But because we are people who tend to regenerate that energy one way or another, we tend to be less than purely mercenary about it. Otherwise, we can't call it "love." But it does take resources, and there are times and places where you realize you are drained and have nothing left. There are various ways to recharge, and that's another matter.

The point is, the resources are limited. God isn't, and He grants the strength to commit ourselves to draining experiences and sacrifices, but He chooses not to perfect us in that way here on this plane. So the body eventually poops out because the love has been all sucked out of us. Having a reliable friend or spouse rebuilds better than anything else; frankly it need not be any kind of sexual relationship. God works any way He likes, and the primary expectation is interacting in love with others who give some back. Sometimes we might get more than we give; most of the time it's not something anyone can measure. But a huge disparity is nonetheless obvious.

There are folks you will encounter in this world who are a bottomless pit. You'll invest your sacrificial energy in them, and it seems to accomplish nothing, even as they demand more. In colloquial speech, we call them "clinging vines." God does not exempt us from loving them. It is the same with those who can't make themselves cling, but they are so empty they try to fill it with misery. They exhibit a singular devotion to hurting others, and it never seems to be enough. There are differences between the two, but it's another post for another time. The point is, they suffer some of the same malady, some of the same failure to develop as a human. You are required by God to face both kinds and not run away.

The more you develop toward maturity, the greater is your capacity to give. So long as you are unable to sacrifice, even when you know it's utterly pointless, you aren't quite following Jesus. Do cut it off before it destroys you; go back and recharge when the Lord grants you times of peace and recovery. You can be just a foolish as the bottomless pit.

Advent 5

2009-12-05T18:46:00.001-06:00

We need the Messiah to come and show us what matters most to God.

God spoke. "Let the waters be filled with swimming creatures, and let us have birds flying above the earth in the skies." He blessed them with these words: "Be fruitful and multiply, fill the water of the seas, and let birds proliferate on the earth." (Genesis 1:20, 22)

We could make noises here about how fowl and fishes fit into the taxonomy of zoology, but it would miss the point. Having established the principle of DNA for living things, He builds upon layers of revelation, life for life. First were insensate things rooted in the soil; then a sequence of tidings for their growth. Now we have sensate creatures which still don't really interact much with intelligence. These aren't facts of science, but moral principles. These are steps on the way to a fuller revelation of God.

Romans 4

2009-12-05T18:17:00.000-06:00

The Jews proudly proclaimed, "We have Abraham as our father!" Legally accurate, it was not necessarily the truth. Abraham came before the Law of Moses, which put him under the Laws of Noah. But in Abraham we have the birth of something new, and it was not simply the foreshadowing of the Nation of Israel. It was the birth of a covenant which rose above Laws, anchored in the Spirit Realm of Heaven. Paul explains the Covenant of Abraham by correcting twisted Pharisaical logic.

In human terms, Abraham was the grandfather of Israel. He was a mighty sheik in the Land of Canaan. Yet he was the vassal of God Almighty, according to a covenant offer extended by God. His standing before God was not a matter of performance, but something entirely within the whims of God's own mind. We make a grave error when we propose it is either works or faith, if by faith we mean some abstract trust, some cognitive process. It is not a matter of being nor doing. We cannot ever really know the nature of things, including our own nature (being). It is surely not a matter of performance, because no man is perfect (doing). If it were the latter, Abraham could boast of an achievement, and make claims on God's blessings. But such lawful performance would not grant him standing before God.

Abraham was granted that standing by God's unilateral choice. Abraham's part was to seize upon the offer, to trust God and commit to Him as Lord. A labor contract has wages which are earned, but to receive something you could not earn requires total commitment of the self. That commitment is the true work of righteous standing.

Even under the Law of Moses, David notes one thing had not changed since the time of Abraham. Right standing before God was a matter of God forgiving those who cannot help but sin. Do you suppose David could claim that forgiveness simply because he was a good circumcised Israeli? Can not the uncircumcised find that forgiveness? The Scriptures said Abraham was considered righteous by his complete loyalty to God. At what point in his life did it say that? It was before he was circumcised. So that sign in the flesh followed behind the change in his heart. Literal father of the circumcised he may be, but what really matters is his spiritual fatherhood of the committed, regardless of signs in the flesh.

The Covenant of Abraham was not about his lawful heirs seizing ownership of the physical land, nor primacy over the people of the earth. That covenant made him Father of the Faithful. The blessings of Abraham are for those who embrace his brand of faith. So if the Jews are by Law heirs of Abraham, then the man's faith meant nothing, and God's promises were just pretty talk. The purpose of Laws was to bring a consciousness of sin, the need for redemption, so mankind would not be eternally lost thinking everything was alright with God.

The Covenant inheritance of Abraham is faith, which opened the door to God's grace on the earth. The Law was not part of the provisions of that covenant. Quite literally, Abraham was father of several other nations on this earth, but the point was spiritual kinship. This was proclaimed while Abraham stood in the very Presence of God Almighty, to whom Abraham was personally and totally committed. By His words He calls into being things which had not previously existed. This is why Abraham was able to come to such commitment, because this same God was the one who said Abraham would have countless direct descendants. Abraham considered his advanced age, and Sarah's long quiet womb, as minor details compared to the promise of such a God.

Upon the basis of such faith, commitment and loyalty do we see it said of Abraham he was considered and declared by God as righteous. God made sure this was published long after Abraham's life. If we can seize upon such loyalty to God, who gave a child to a couple nearly dead, and embrace the idea the same God can raise His own Son from the grave, after that awful price was paid for our sins, then we can walk in His life and receive His justification.

Thus, Paul counters all the perverted notions about the Covenant of Abraham, showing it is the first Covenant of Faith. Then he shows how Jesus renewed that covenant, gave it new meaning and new life in Himself.

Advent 4

2009-12-04T18:37:00.001-06:00

We need the Messiah to come and mark end and beginning of epochs, according to His divine wisdom.

God said, "Let there be luminary bodies in the space of Heaven to signify the difference between day and night; and let them be regular in their appearance to mark festivals, days and years. Let them serve simply to bring light to the earth." So it was. (Genesis 1:14-15)

Even under a permanent cloud cover you can tell the difference between the sun and moon. We don't conceive of the atmosphere extending into space, nor is the moon quite restricted to night time, but often shows up in the daytime instead. We also have a hard time explaining light (Day 1) before you have a source. Again, a literal rendering is beside the point. God provided the markers to note the passing of time, since it is such a major element in the human experience of life even before the Fall. We are mortal. It shows again our utter dependence on God, who stands outside the framework of time.

Why Emergent: Explaining the Choice

2009-12-04T09:39:00.003-06:00

The word "character" means something distinct from others of a similar nature. We refer to characters in type setting and fonts, because if you can't tell what the marks mean, they don't mean anything beyond some nebulous decorative purpose. For words to have meaning, they must exclude things they don't mean. Though Heaven's language is indicative symbols, there are lots of things we have to do to make the symbols work, and that means having human language with sounds and character combinations which take on meaning by narrowing down what it indicates. Degrees of precision may be the subject of debate, but the basic principle stands.

By choosing terms such as "mystical" and "emergent," we naturally exclude things we don't want associated with our ministry. That we would also find ourselves including things we may also not want is another matter. The process of communicating is presenting pools of meaning, then pointing to the place where those pools overlap. Two words each meaning very broad ideas will then together winnow out the chaff.

It is likely we could never be a part of the Emergent Village -- the original emergent ministry -- because we are frankly not inclusive enough. For them to include us would dilute or tarnish the branding, as it were. But we cannot easily avoid the connotations of what they are. There comes a point where you don't waste too much effort chasing down every possible meaning, defining and defending it every time someone asks. This remains a fallen and imperfect world, and part of being emergent surely includes embracing and tolerating things unsettled, as a part of the on-going conversation with God and His Creation.

This is precisely the point. No one of us, nor any group of us is fit to be all things to all men. We would love it if God would do that, but He made it pretty obvious He would not. Only Jesus gets that privilege. The rest of us are the multitude of expressions of Jesus who take Him to little parts of God's Creation. Choosing the label "emergent" means we exclude folks who don't like that label. We do add to the pool of meaning, but we hardly control how it registers in the minds of others. Accepting the very real limitations, we seek God's face for definitions to our service in His Realm, and it seems He has led us to this choice. We are called now to work with those who won't choke on the term "emergent." We let go in peace those who don't like what they feel "emergent" means.

The baggage we do have is now pretty easy to start identifying. Mysticism, which we have already embraced long ago, is an obvious part of that label. In some ways, I feel our justification for mysticism is probably stronger than I've seen offered by most emergent writers. I'm not sure how to go about sharing that with them, but I would gladly. Meanwhile, there are a host of other associations.

We don't do suit and tie, nor any part of the subculture which calls for it. Feel free to wear one, but don't ever pretend it's important to what we do. We don't do settled and predictable, so organization will always be fluid, contextual. While ideas surely matter, people matter more. We place the burden of adjustment on ideas to meet the needs of people. That hardly excludes some things being settled in Heaven before God. At the same time, we quickly take issue with what most people assume is settled in Heaven.

Most obvious, and most perplexing to non-emergents, is our actions tend to follow a wholly different logic. We utterly reject the notion conversion is a cognitive process. It surely has cognitive results, but redemption is born -- is rooted -- somewhere else in the human soul. If your definitions of things forces that to mean "subjective emotions" then we can't offer you much help. That is, we discern you lack the spiritual equipment to hold a discussion. In our minds, there is such a thing as heresy, and Aristotelian/Enlightenment epistemology is that.

Thus, or actions will make no sense to folks still rooted in human rational "theology" which declares a "propositional truth" in God's Word, since Jesus Himself eschewed such a thing. We aren't selling a cognitive decision, but offering eternal grace, a mystical gift which will always defy human understanding. We can walk among the sinners of this world making no demands whatsoever unless absolutely critical to our own witness. We don't care about keeping our personal boundaries intact, because we are nothing in ourselves; our only value before God is our commitment to Him. We draw that circle of defense much closer to ourselves. We don't believe keeping yourself "unspotted by sins of this world" means public relations maneuvering, and we don't believe keeping yourself from "the appearance of sin" means a shallow pretense.

We expect to earn the privilege of being heard, but demand the right to be seen. We'll stick out not because of our subcultural expressions of artistic and stylistic tastes, but by the graceful personal interactions. To a large degree, we choose to absorb a lot of abuse just for the sake of the Cross. We let splash on us lots of filth because appearances mean very little, but persistence means a lot. So, yes, I call homosexuality a sin, but I can't do much good to gays if I don't remain friends with them in the long term. They need to know grace from Heaven is stronger than all their other gay friends, and what bonds me to them is not some sexual preference, nor merely an acceptance of it, but something deeper. If they never catch on, that's not my problem, because only God can reveal Himself. Yes, it will surely lead to some misunderstandings, but I'm sure Mary faced a lot of them, as did Jesus regarding His paternity.

So we defy convention, not merely for the sake of defiance, but because it is broken. The very definition of convention is whatever people come up with to reduce complexity and increase convenience and comfort. Convention is fundamentally a product of avoiding difficulties by nailing things down in neat categories and procedures. The Truth of God cannot possibly come to us in that framework, since He is ineffable. God always colors outside the lines, and even redefines color itself. Man is utterly unable to grasp order on God's level, so he mocks God by creating his own pitiful caricature of order, and thereby rejects God entirely. How else can we bear that mighty grace to you if everything we do is what you already expect? Your god is too small.

I love Classical Music, but I'll put up with almost any artistic acoustic expression if it gets me closer to people who need Jesus. I'll make friends with tax gatherers, prostitutes, queers, traitors, commies, thugs, dope dealers, pedophiles -- I'm not afraid to be seen with them. It's no different from helping the blind, burn victims, broken hearted, poor and anyone else who is suffering. It won't matter how they got there; they need to get out. I can't help them if they can't touch me.

That's the choice, and giving it the label "emergent" is simply a measure of accuracy.

Advent 3

2009-12-03T19:03:00.000-06:00

There had to be a Messiah so we could see God's hand.

God called for the waters under Heaven to be broken up into pools so that dry land might rise. So it was, and God called the dry land "earth" and the pooled waters "seas". God was pleased with the results, but also called for earth to sprout, flora which bears its own seed, consistent DNA transference, in fruit and seed so that it could grow afresh from the earth. So it was. (Genesis 1:9-11)

Again, this is more than mere subsidence and uplift of the flat seabed to create oceans and dry land, but God shaping the order of things. Thus, DNA manifests God's ideas about life, ideas no man can truly grasp. And while this should serve as a warning not to muck about with God's prerogatives, it's much more. God had a plan and provision for life. To believe we can improve on His Creation is blasphemy. It's less about the fooling with Creation, and more about the desire for things God did not provide, as if we could tell Him His business. God's created order constrains us morally. We need a Messiah because we would reject His order of things.

Obligatory: What Is an Emerging Church?

2009-12-02T19:07:00.002-06:00

Everybody who embraces the label of "emerging church" has to explain how they use it. The logic is fuzzy. Don't expect to find a precise checklist because one of the major elements in the movement is non-conformance. The fundamental awareness of need which gave birth to the emerging church movement was breaking with all the cultural assumptions which adhere to the mainstream churches we all know. So, on the one hand, emerging means addressing the modern culture, which has drifted far, far away from where most churches are. We recognize we are in a Postmodern world. The very epistemology of what constitutes truth and knowing are different. Most of the modern world -- quickly becoming the "old" world -- arose from the Enlightenment, an all-encompassing emphasis on the cognitive, making no room at all for the mystery which is clearly fundamental to Scripture.

This pulls away from the evangelical emphasis on a cognitive view of salvation, a decision theology. We don't harass people about deciding to be born again, but we press them to consider what they are committed to, what matters most in their lives, as reflected by their conduct. We acknowledge the Postmodern culture; we reject the old evaluations of sin identified by concrete cognitive structures, and seek to identify sin by a standard of personal loyalty to Christ. Don't tell me what you are ("born again") or what you do (rules, etc.), show me what matters most to you.

The mission of the emerging church is not to rack up high membership registers, big budgets and invest in massive facilities. The mission is to carry Christ wherever you normally go. It's living a narrative of God speaking to the fallen world, "Here I am, and I care about you." We don't artificially create targets for missions, but we live the missional life itself. God chooses the mission field by bringing into our paths those whom He has sent us to love. This typically calls for expressions of concern for the needy, so it often feels like dealing with the social justice crowd. But it's not agitation and advocacy, it's direct action. Don't give money; give yourself. Don't organize a budget and hire a missionary; take your talents and calling and go yourself. Go where you normally would go and do what you would normally do, but place it all in the loving concern of the One who healed the broken, fed the hungry and died on the Cross. Only then can you rightly understand how to help someone else by supporting their mission.

There is nothing sacred about human authority, regardless how traditionally dressed it may be in some organization called "church." True spiritual leadership makes room for folks to accept the shared yoke or take up their own. True leadership assumes the Spirit of God has His own agenda in any human heart, and welcomes any who simply want to be around. The only people pushed away are those who make all the foregoing impossible. A great deal more room is made for human foibles, and an expectation things won't always be neat and pretty, because God is not confined to our reasoning and sense of order. It may look like chaos to some, but the Spirit must be given more room to work. We are willing to explore all sorts of different ways of doing things, particular as we seek the meet the culture around us.

For the sake of brevity, a list I stole from someone else and modified.

Modern church relies upon a pastor system and lecture. Dependent upon the traditional bible class established over a century ago as an evangelistic tool while teaching English to America's illiterate.
Emerging church prefers a facilitator and narrative, with plenty of room for respectful interaction.

modern = rationality -- emerging = mystical
modern = precise -- emerging = fuzzy and undefined
modern = apologetics -- emerging = conversation
modern = linear, orderly -- emerging = circles, unstructured
modern = learn then do -- emerging = learn while doing
modern = budgets and organization -- emerging = strategic giving
modern = attractional evangelism (come-to-church) -- emerging = crosses border and engages the pre-Christian on their turf, allowing them to live by their own code of conduct. More non-Christian friends than Christian friends. Recreates the court of the Gentiles.
modern = purpose driven -- emerging = commitment driven
modern = looks for a resume -- emerging = looks for vision and excellence
modern = established routes -- emergent = trailblazers, a cultural cartographer
modern = evangelism (take God to the people) -- emerging = incarnational (Realize that God intersects the life of an unbeliever before we arrived. Prefer to walk along side the people they know, sharing and waiting for permission to offer spiritual guidance.)
modern = freighted terminology -- emerging = changing the lexicon of Christian language

Anyone who has been following this blog recognizes this is what we've been doing all along.

Advent 2

2009-12-02T17:25:00.001-06:00

Messiah came to fulfill the purpose of Creation by insuring Creation knew Him.

Then God spoke, "Let there be space in the waters, separating some here and some there." So God made sky which divided waters below from waters above. He called the sky "Heaven." Thus passed evening and morning, a second day. (Genesis 1:6-8)

The mere physical fact of earth shrouded in clouds and covered in liquid waters is not enough. Sky is conceptual to the ancient cultures and the place of the spirits. Calling it "Heaven" confirms this symbolism. It is the place where man breathes, the source of human souls, and abode of God insofar as man can know Him. The stuff of human life comes from the hand of God.

Advent 1

2009-12-01T16:40:00.001-06:00

Why did Messiah come? To reveal in human flesh what God desired for mankind to know of Him. All revelation has one central purpose -- to clarify our duty to the Creator. It begins with knowing beyond all doubt He is our Creator.

For the first week of this Advent season, we review the Seven Days of Creation.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1)

Meditate on the fullness of this basic fact of our existence.

Then God said, "Let there be light." There was light. Seeing the light, that it was good, God distinguished the light from the darkness. The light was called "day" and the darkness He called "night." Thus, evening and morning, the first day. (Genesis 1:3-5)

If all we see here is the mechanical act of making day and night, we miss it all. We have a symbolic declaration God is the One who defines good and evil, truth and deception, revelation and obscuration. All things are whatever He says they are. This is the foundation for all that follows.

StT: Matthew 12:18-21

2009-12-01T09:42:00.001-06:00

(We continue our study showing how "spiritualizing the text" is the proper way to understand God's Word.)

Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, while inside a synagogue, no less. The Pharisees had long before declared such a thing as breaking the Sabbath, because it was "labor." That such an attitude was contrary to God's intent was so obvious, we have to wonder how they managed to say it with a straight face. Such a twisted notion is sheer madness. So, Jesus having pointed this out with impeccable Hebrew logic, but violating all Hellenized rules of analysis then ascendant among rabbis, the leaders of the synagogue began discussing how they might kill this troublesome fellow. Jesus, of course, was aware of this plotting, and simply took His ministry out of town.

Naturally, the people in need of healing and proper teaching of the Law followed Him. With such a large crowd, it became necessary to seek large open areas where teaching and healing could be managed. That sort of manpower could easily have started a revolution, and His disciples surely expected it. They still could not make the transition away from the Hellenized Messianic Expectations, calling for the Messiah to change the political system. The crowd was the same; they would have willingly followed Him back to the synagogue and tossed out the leadership, even to the point of executing them all. Then they could gather an even larger crowd of peasants and partisans and challenge the obviously corrupt Sanhedrin itself. It would be so very easy, even the Romans could not stop this powerful miracle worker.

Instead, Jesus told them not to even talk about it. It was not because He feared persecution, nor was He plotting anything in particular with savvy political thinking. The whole point was denying the importance of politics at all. It had nothing to do with His mission. Matthew quotes Isaiah 42:1-4 to explain. As usual, Isaiah was speaking symbolically. First, the prophet identifies this person concerned as the Chosen-Anointed ("Messiah") who bears the very essence, the Spirit of God Himself. Isaiah paints an image of this quiet and unassuming Servant. It's not as if Jesus never cried out or yelled, but it symbolizes the lack of interest in what men typically seek. Instead, this one will carry God's justice to the Gentiles, as Israel was supposed to do, and He won't do it by seizing the government of Israel and reforming things.

A reed had certain uses, being very light and stiff. If you bend it in the middle, it's not so useful. But Jesus wasn't going to break off the bent reed of Israeli government. Flax was sometimes used as a wick in oil lamps, but if the oil ran dry, the flame would go out, leaving a smoking wick. The light of Israel had gone out, because they had ceased to draw on the spiritual flow of God's revelation. Jesus would not bother to quench the stinking wick of failure, but would replace it by the light of God's glorious incarnation -- rather like sunlight over lamplight. So He wouldn't bother to fix what was wrong with the political system of Israel, but would operate on a wholly different level. Bypassing the badly corrupted civil order, He would simply and absolutely establish God's justice on a totally different plane, one which made no reference at all to human government. It would cover all the earth, because it would be rooted in a place earthly things cannot touch, but which surely touched earth.

Now, this is obviously not a place where literal rendering would make any sense, as even a Fundamentalist would admit. But too many of them would restrict analysis to simple allegory or metaphor. In so doing, they create a simplified, mechanistic -- need I say, Hellenized -- one for one equivalence which destroys the deeper richness of Hebrew symbolic associations. In so doing, they would miss the point entirely.

Time to Organize: Emerging in Choctaw, OK

2009-11-30T08:22:00.003-06:00

The time has come. We need a fellowship, a church by any other name you choose, here in Choctaw, Oklahoma. Not the same old stuff which has no life, but something which does not yet seem to exist. For the time being, let's call it an emerging church type of fellowship.

I have no idea where this will go, or whether it will go, but I have a vision and a drive to try. Isolation served a very strong purpose in my life until I knew who I was and what I was supposed to be doing.

I'm not the pastor. That means we need to link up with someone who is the pastor. My own calling is more administrative and educational. I'm not going to be the spiritual leader, but the facilitator and enabler. Maybe you can think up some other words for it, too. As I understand it, the biblical term is probably "elder." I'll be keeping my eye on seeking a spiritual shepherd called to lead in the pastoral sense.

Pray with us. If you live near enough to feel comfortable joining this effort, let us know by leaving a comment here, or chasing down the contact information from my resume.

Truth in the Land Without Words

2009-11-29T10:30:00.003-06:00

Somewhere in my reading in times past, I seem to recall running across a scholar who said Paul's writing in general, and Romans in particular, was tortured. Paul made up Greek words, flogged the syntax and strung out long sentences in a desperate effort to say things almost impossible to put in words. Many English translations of Romans vary widely in places, because scholars are sometimes at a loss over this very thing. If it was so hard to say in a language Paul knew so well, how do we say it in a language which did not yet exist in his time?

Yet, the Letter to the Roman Christians is a majestic monument to a rather orderly explanation of this faith in Jesus Christ. We must be very careful how we read it. As we move forward, I will offer what must very obviously be a dissenting view on many parts of it, versus the mainstream of Protestant Evangelical interpretation, and even from many other traditions. It's because I feel certain we have too long been trapped by the very thing Paul condemns here: A sinful reliance on human logic.

The truth is not grasped with the mind, but the spirit. The mind must be trained to accept the leadership of this other faculty. This faculty operates in the Land Without Words.

Romans 3

2009-11-28T18:51:00.000-06:00

It's not as if God granted no particular privileges to the Nation of Israel. The thread of Heaven's narrative, the revelation of God, came through them. Though they failed to live by it themselves, the revelation is still binding on all humanity. Their failure was not God's failure, but forms the spiritual paradox of proof God is just and all humanity are sinners, seeing His very own People failed Him. Based on human reason, this seems quite unfair. If it took the failure of the Jewish nation to manifest God's righteousness, why are they still held accountable? This is part of the same foolish human reasoning which claims Christians actually promote sin, as if that would make God's holiness even more evident. Such logic is from Hell.

So Jews have some advantage, but does it make them superior? By no means, since they are sinners, same as all humanity. Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament passages which it seemed many Jewish leaders forgot: No one stands before God on his own righteousness. Yes, He revealed His Laws to both Gentiles (Covenant of Noah) and Jews (Covenant of Moses). But the Laws were not aimed at establishing righteousness before God, but to establish the unmistakable knowledge of the Fall. Man is sinful and cannot instinctively know what's right, so the Laws were necessary to keep humanity alive.

Spiritual redemption was another matter. The righteousness God seeks is not from the Laws, but merely indicated by Laws and prophecy. That righteousness is found now in commitment to, and trust in, Jesus Christ. It is the same for everyone, since all are fallen, and all can be redeemed by making Jesus their Lord. His blood paid the final price for all sin, and this is the same justice of God still at work. Indeed, God had been more patient with Gentiles than with Jews, because Gentiles didn't have the revelation of God in their heritage. Now they do, in the person of Jesus Christ.

So what is the point in boasting about obeying the Laws? Jews felt having the Laws gave them an excuse for boasting, but God's requirement of faith in Jesus Christ destroys it. Mere ritual precision and fastidious legalism, the best human logic can make of God's revelation, accomplished nothing for the Jews. It was always a matter of full personal commitment, and that obviates any laws. It's not as if God denied making Gentiles, too. All mankind comes from His hands; all must face Him on the same terms. But only in foolish human reasoning would this make the Laws pointless. The only way to obey the Laws truly is faith, so faith is the best support for Laws.

Prayer Request: Transportation

2009-11-27T09:55:00.002-06:00

The minivan we bought last spring is coming apart. The sliding door never did work. Then the passenger front door broke through at the lower hinge. Now the transmission slips above first gear.

There was a time when I could dive right in and start fixing things. That was when cars were simpler, and I didn't have arthritis. These days, we cast adrift on the grace of God. I have utter confidence in how that will work out in the end.

It's not as if we can't get where we need to go, but it will be eminently inconvenient. That's okay, too. The question is less one of "we gotta have wheels" but a matter of what God has in mind. There are random events in our lives which really don't mean much, but I sense this is not one of them. That is, I feel certain God is signaling something as yet unseen.

Pray with us we are not so hard-headed as to miss it until we are hit over the head. We would like to have another vehicle, as the typical costs for repairing this one are greater than we paid for it. It's intrinsic value is very low, so unless God requires we invest in keeping it, we won't.

Advent Season Is Next

2009-11-26T07:30:00.004-06:00

Immediately after Thanksgiving, while most of the secular world awaits the Black Friday sales, people who love Jesus will be thinking about Advent. For those who belong to churches without any strong European roots, that's the 25 days of December leading up to Christmas.

Traditionally, it's all abut the Baby Jesus, and the events leading up to His birth. Now, there is strong historical evidence He was not born in winter. There is even stronger evidence the Early Church never bothered to celebrate His birthday as the pagans did other gods. Most likely, this winter celebration was instituted by church politicians who wanted to displace some pagan winter festival. Or maybe it was just an accommodation of a certain emperor's pagan habits by adding Jesus like a paint job. So all this sanctimonious blather about "keeping Christ in Christmas" is just that -- sanctimonious blather. A great many human traditions are not rooted in genuine holiness.

In keeping with my emphasis on the Hebrew nature of our faith, I propose to celebrate Advent as the symbol it should be, even as I acknowledge I can't do much about the choice for time of year. Viewing it as symbolic of the coming of the Messiah, it's about Creation, the Fall, the failure of Israel to embrace the Law, and why it all serves to explain why there had to be a Messiah.

In other words, in my peculiar mystical approach, I'll be re-writing the church calendar. Not in the sense of a Latter Day Reformer come to correct wholesale all the abuses, much as that is needed, but simply applying my own best understanding in defiance of something which has drifted far, far away from truth.

I can't promise to have one for every day, but I'll try to post my peculiar Advent meditations here.

StT: Matthew 11:10

2009-11-25T19:48:00.001-06:00

(We continue our study showing how "spiritualizing the text" is the proper way to understand God's Word.)

Jesus is discussing His cousin, John the Baptist. He quotes Malachi 3:1. There's not much controversy here what that means. Malachi has been hammering the Jewish leadership for straying from the intent of the Law of Moses. This, while they talked endlessly about the Messiah coming to set things aright, and restoring their importance in the world as in the days of King David. So he begins chapter 3 quoting God, with a warning there would be a messenger who would prepare the way. Jesus said that was the reference to John the Baptist.

That being the case, Jesus obviously refers to Himself as the Messiah for whom the Messenger came to prepare the path. John called for repentance. Jesus preached the same message: "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." In the minds of most people, that meant the long sought restoration of the House of David. Jesus fulfilled that little part about being of the House of David, but He meant nothing of the earthly political changes the Jews were seeking since before Malachi. Thus, Malachi mentions the ultimate and final Messenger of the Covenant, the Messiah, whom they were so longing to see. Jesus was saying that was Himself.

Then Malachi goes on to warn the Jews they were not ready for Him, so it was rather odd they should claim to desire it. But He would purify the nation, as it were, and how painful it would be! Jesus did make things painful, in that He pointed out how utterly mistaken the Jewish leaders were about the Law. His teaching was a correction of their false, Hellenized and literalist interpretation, and the heretical Talmudic extensions. As they missed the point in Malachi's day, so they were hardly any better in Jesus' day. Malachi notes if they were to embrace the teaching of this Messenger of the Covenant, they would be able to offer sacrifices God would accept. Was it God who moved? No, it was the Jews.

But somehow, most evangelicals want to jump from John the Baptist to Jesus in His Second Coming. That does violence to Malachi's message. There is nothing in Malachi's words to justify that, nor in those of Jesus as He explained that passage was all about the Jewish nation of His day. When Jesus taught the Law, it was the Law as God had given it. That's not part of some eventual Second Coming, but was His ministry during those three years on earth back around 30 AD. Does anybody want the blessings of the Covenant? Only in Jesus Christ, in particular His teaching of the Law -- love God and respect your neighbor. Do that and you'll have, as Malachi promised in his eleventh verse, God rebuking whatever on earth devours the provisions and blessings He promised so very long ago. Indeed, Jesus would have called to mind the whole passage from Malachi 3 and 4. It prophesied what He did that very day.