The Friday just gone (2/5/10) we had another talk on the beatitudes. I spoke on Matthew 5:5. "Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth." (NIV).
It was flipping difficult to communicate my understanding of this verse. The way I understand meek was based on the Greek- 'Praus' which is another word for mild (by implication) or humble. The way I interpreted the verse was by looking at what wasn't meek. And who inherits or possesses the earth now. From what I can see those who inherit the earth (greek- 'ge'- soil, by extension a region or the solid part or the whole of the globe) at this moment in time is those in power, those who have influence. The politicians, the land owners, the billionaires, the oil companies, the CEO's, the "super sweet 16's" (if you've ever seen that program!), etc... The earth is carved up and distributed to those who can grab a hold of it. Domination, force and sometimes oppression are how we 'inherit' the earth.
So how is it that Jesus can say the MEEK inherit the earth. My experience of it is the opposite. I imagine in Jesus' time the same rule applied as it does today or at least looked somewhat similar. The earth was carved up and the Romans had most of it. The disciples who Jesus was teaching would believe that they were the rightful owners of the land, that they were given the land by their fathers before them, that if God was really God, and they were God's chosen people then He would want the very best for them.
Rob Bell helped me to understand that what Jesus may have meant was based on Psalm 37. Bell explains in one of his sermons (http://marshill.org/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=57_38&products_id=560) that when Jesus was speaking, what He was saying wasn't new. Throughout the Psalm there are the words 'meek', 'inheritance' and 'earth'/'land'. The disciples will have been familiar with if not knew Psalm 37. By using words like meek, inheritance and earth, Jesus was doing was what Bell calls 'Remez': a hint, a reference to something else.
Have a look and see that the Psalm speaks of how the evil in this world will wither away. "For like the grass they will soon wither, like green plants they will soon wither away". All the imagery in the Psalm speaks of how God will oppose evil. How God will stand with the meek and oppressed. That God walks with the meek, the righteous. It is a Psalm of hope and comfort for the oppressed.
And that is what Jesus is pointing at. Jesus is saying that you don't need to gain power, gain status, and force your way to the top, you don't need to fight for your land, you don't need to pick up your sword and start swinging, because by doing that (even if you do it in the name of God) you will only be opposing God. Jesus taught to turn the other cheek when struck (Matt 5:39), to walk two miles when forced to walk one (Matt 5:41)... to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matt 5:44).
It's a very radical, very revolutionary idea... "To our most bitter opponents we say: "Throw us in jail and we will still love you. Bomb our houses and threaten our children and we will still love you. Beat us and leave us half dead, and we will still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory." - Dr Martin Luther King Jr., "The American Dream".
I think the point is not about who actually 'inherits" the earth but what will last. Psalm 37 says that evil will wither away... empires will rise and fall, oppressors and dictators will have their time but eternal things will live on for... well, eternity - things that are creative and reproduce, things that we all connect with and deeply desire. Things like love, things like acceptance, peace, joy, kindness, and so much more. Maybe when Jesus points to eternal life He is pointing to what is already created, what already exists and IS will last forever. But evil will not go on forever. Better to invest in what is eternal than to invest in what will wither away... right?
On Friday I spoke about how we draw distinctions, divisions and lines. Not necessarily physically on the earth but socially speaking there is plenty to define our differences, there is plenty of room for a crisis of identity in an individual today. There are different races, religions and cultural and generational divisions. The meek are the oppressed. I can see now that I might have been wrong when I said that "everyone is meek", because I imagine that there are people who believe that they have it all together, that they have what they want and can do whatever they want to whoever they want. But does anyone actually believe this, or does everyone still have at least a niggling feeling that they don't have it all together or that they aren't keeping up... after all, don't those who do strive for having it all together only do so because they believe that they don't yet?
Meekness is this recognition that we don't have it all together.
I don't know about you, but I don't think meekness is drawing up a constitution or policy and getting the biggest number of followers. Neither do I think it is forcing our thinking onto someone else, nor is it "fighting terror with terror" (George W. Bush Jr).
Maybe meekness can be recognizing that we don't have all the answers to saving the world.
Maybe meekness is knowing that without God we are screwed.
Maybe meekness is trusting that God has it all sorted regardless of race, religion or denomination.
Maybe meekness is dying on a cross asking "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"...
I think that we would be very blessed if we recognized that we share the same needs, and actually acted to help each other to meet these needs. But naturally, as I spoke on Friday in church there was a whole plethora of complicated discussion over humility, whether everyone was meek, how everyone was or could be meek especially when I when I said that "everyone is meek". Somehow, it led to a discussion on heaven, hell and eternal life, which led to a discussion on unconditional love, which led to a discussion of truth and interpretation of the Bible, which led to subjective and objective truth, which led back to the interpretation of the Bible, which led to aspects of eschatology, which led back to heaven and hell, etc...
But I'll end with a joke.
So there's this massive queue of people outside the pearly gates of heaven ready to go in and Peter is standing there with the book of life ticking people off as they go inside. An admin angel with a full-on suit comes up and taps Peter on the shoulder saying, "hey Peter, there seems to be a bit of a problem. There are more people inside heaven than there are recorded in the book of life." and Peter says, "that's strange..." The angel says, "but don't worry about it, I'll go check it out and see what's going on." The angel returns a little later saying to Peter, "Yeah, we found the problem... Turns out Jesus is on the other side of heaven pulling people in from the other side."
It is a wonderful thought isn't it? The thought of Jesus pulling people over the walls of heaven saying to the homosexuals, the murderers, the liars, the thieves, the pedophiles, the Hitlers and Stalins "Come in, there's plenty of room for you here. Don't worry, you won't mess it up. My grace is enough."
Monday 5 July 2010
Saturday 26 June 2010
"Finding Faith"- Peter Rollins.
"There was once a fiery preacher who possessed a powerful but unusual gift. He found that, from an early age, when he prayed for individuals, they would supernaturally lose all of their religious convictions. They would invariably loose all of their beliefs about the prophets, the sacred Scriptures, and even God. So he learned not to pray for people but instead limited himself to preaching inspiring sermons and doing good works.
However, one day while travelling across the country, the preacher found himself in conversation with a businessman who happened to be going in the same direction. This businessman was a very powerful and ruthless merchant banker, one who was honoured by his collegues and respected by his adversaries.
their conversation began because the businessman, possessing a deep, abiding faith, had noticed the preacher reading from the Bible. He introduced himself to the preacher and they began to talk. As they chatted together this powerful man told the preacher all about his faith in God and his love of Christ. He spoke of how his work di not really define who he was but was simply what he had to do.
"The world of business is a cold one," he confided to the preacher, "and in my line of work I find myself in situations that challenge my Christian convictions. But I try, as much as possible, to remain true to my faith. Indeed, I attend a local church every Sunday, participate in a prayer circle, engage in some youth work, and contribute to a weekly Bible study. These activities help to remind me of who I really am."
After listening carefully to the businessman's story, the preacher began to realize the purpose of his unseemly gift. So he turned to the businessman and said, "Would you allow me to pray a blessing into your life?"
The businessman readily agreed, unaware of what would happen. Sure enough, after the preacher had muttered a simple prayer the man opened his eyes in astonishment.
"What a fool I have been for all these years!" he proclaimed. "It is clear to me now that there is no God above who is looking out for me, and that there are no sacred texts to guide me, and there is no Spirit to inspire and and protect me."
As they parted company the businessman, still confused by what had taken place, returned home. But now that he no longer had any religious beliefs, he began to find it increasingly difficult to continue in his line of work. Faced with the fact that he was now just a hard-nosed businessman working in a corrupt system, rather than a man of God, he began to despise his activity. Within months he had a breakdwon, and soon afterward gave up his line of work completely. Feeling better about himself, he then wnet on to give to the poor all the riches he had accumulated and began to use his considerable managerial expertise to challenge the very system he once participated in, and to help those who had been oppressed by it.
One day, many years later, he happened upon the preacher again while walking thorugh town. He ran over, fell at the preacher's feet, and began to weep with joy. Eventually he looked up at the preacher and smiled, "Thank you, my dear friend, for helping me discover my faith."
COMMENTARY. (By Rollins).
In this story we begin to gain an insight into how religious belief can itself be a barrier to living the life of faith. It is all too easy for us to think that religious beliefs express the deep truth of our inner life while what we do on a daily basis in work is only a mask, a necessary evil that must be endured in order to get by in today's frenetic, consumerist world.
In this way we think that it is our commitment to prayer groups, church meetings, and Bible studies that reflects the essence of our inner lives. Our religious groups on the weekends and in the evenings are thought to be sites of resistance that provide us with the strength to question our work and avoid getting fully caught up in it.
However, could it be that these activities are in fact the very things that allow us to fully engage with the world? What if we need our prayer groups and Bible studies because they act as a type of safety valve that actually allows us to release the tension and stresses of our work so that, the next day, we can return again? If this is so, then the activities that we think critique the unjust world are really the very activities that this world requires in order to run smoothly. Our church activities are then nothing more than a type of air vent in the machine.
This logic is beautifully expressed in The Matrix Trilogy, directed by the Wachowski Brothers. In the first film we learn that there is a city where people are free from the AI prison where the majority of humans are held and that Neo (Keanu Reeves) is the hero who can bring freedom. However, in the later films we learn that there have been many cities before Zion (the free city) and that Neo is just the latest in a long line of messiah-like individuals who have risen up to challenge the machines.
Furthermore, we learn that the machines are actually behind what initially seems to be the very force that would threaten them: they are behind the development of Zion and they provide the necessary conditions for Neo (and the other freedom fighters) to arise. Why? Because they understand that, for the oppressive system they have constructed to work, the Matrix needs to include a site of resistance.
In daily life there are reams of activities that are publicly disavowed by the government and society at large, yet are privately permitted. Among these are turning a blind eye to prosecution in certain areas, and the fact that we can all go ten miles per hour over the speed limit without too much fear of getting fined. These acts allow people to disobey the law in ways that are actually unofficially sanctioned by the law. We who engage in such state-sanctioned transgressions are otherwise law-abiding citizens. Indeed, our ability to break the law in small ways is part of what keeps us law-abiding the rest of the time. If we were not able to engage in small acts of transgression, if the law were absolutely unbending, then we would begin to rebel against it in a fundamental way. By creating leniency within the law, the law is not experienced as oppressive and is thus more likely to be accepted with all its flaws.
In the above story I attempt to explore and critique this problem by putting into fictional form insights of the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Letters and Papers from Prison. Here Bonhoeffer rejected religion because he felt that it places God on the outer edges of life as the example to our current ignorance (for example, as the name we give to the one who created the world) or as the one we turn to in private sphere (such as the church and in the home). Bonhoeffer rejected this and refused to give God a place in the world, because when God is given a place, God is confined to a specific location (and that location is usually on the edges of life). Instead he advocated an existence fully immersed in the world, utterly taken up by the concerns of the world, one that pours itself out in the joys and suffering of the world.
Such a move could of course be misunderstood as a way of actively denying God. It could be described as a humanism in which people are encouraged to take responsibility for their own lives rather than looking for some divine answer. Yet for Bonhoeffer this was not the end of the story. If religion gives God a place, and humanism denies that place, then he claimed that Christianity fully embraces this humanism, not as a way of denying God, but as the way of fully affirming God - denying God a place so that God is affirmed in every place. Here one fully lives in the world as a way of fully living before God. Hence he wrote, "Before God and with God we live without God." (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Selected Writings, ed. John de Grunchy (London: Collins, 1988), 291.)
The result of such thinking is the affirmation of a faith that permeates all our actions rather than being exhibited only when faced with something we cannot understand, or at some prayer meeting, or in some weekly service to the poor. Such an expression thus strikes against the very roots of inauthentic resistance and demands a truly radical reconfiguring of our social existence.
To put this in religious language, the above story asks if perhaps the devil, far from hating our multitude of church activities, positively loves them, for it is in these very activities that we are able to become such productive agents in carrying out his insidious desires - making changes in the world that fundamentally ensure everything in the world remains the same."
- Taken from part 1, chapter 11 in "The Orthodox Heretic and other impossible tales" by Peter Rollins (London: Canterbury Press)
----
I was really struck by this story Rollins wrote and I wanted to share it with you guys. I hope it challenges you to ask questions, engages your thinking and perceptions of religion and life. I want to welcome thoughts, comments and discussions so please leave something. But you don't have to. If you don't want to. It is up to you :)
However, one day while travelling across the country, the preacher found himself in conversation with a businessman who happened to be going in the same direction. This businessman was a very powerful and ruthless merchant banker, one who was honoured by his collegues and respected by his adversaries.
their conversation began because the businessman, possessing a deep, abiding faith, had noticed the preacher reading from the Bible. He introduced himself to the preacher and they began to talk. As they chatted together this powerful man told the preacher all about his faith in God and his love of Christ. He spoke of how his work di not really define who he was but was simply what he had to do.
"The world of business is a cold one," he confided to the preacher, "and in my line of work I find myself in situations that challenge my Christian convictions. But I try, as much as possible, to remain true to my faith. Indeed, I attend a local church every Sunday, participate in a prayer circle, engage in some youth work, and contribute to a weekly Bible study. These activities help to remind me of who I really am."
After listening carefully to the businessman's story, the preacher began to realize the purpose of his unseemly gift. So he turned to the businessman and said, "Would you allow me to pray a blessing into your life?"
The businessman readily agreed, unaware of what would happen. Sure enough, after the preacher had muttered a simple prayer the man opened his eyes in astonishment.
"What a fool I have been for all these years!" he proclaimed. "It is clear to me now that there is no God above who is looking out for me, and that there are no sacred texts to guide me, and there is no Spirit to inspire and and protect me."
As they parted company the businessman, still confused by what had taken place, returned home. But now that he no longer had any religious beliefs, he began to find it increasingly difficult to continue in his line of work. Faced with the fact that he was now just a hard-nosed businessman working in a corrupt system, rather than a man of God, he began to despise his activity. Within months he had a breakdwon, and soon afterward gave up his line of work completely. Feeling better about himself, he then wnet on to give to the poor all the riches he had accumulated and began to use his considerable managerial expertise to challenge the very system he once participated in, and to help those who had been oppressed by it.
One day, many years later, he happened upon the preacher again while walking thorugh town. He ran over, fell at the preacher's feet, and began to weep with joy. Eventually he looked up at the preacher and smiled, "Thank you, my dear friend, for helping me discover my faith."
COMMENTARY. (By Rollins).
In this story we begin to gain an insight into how religious belief can itself be a barrier to living the life of faith. It is all too easy for us to think that religious beliefs express the deep truth of our inner life while what we do on a daily basis in work is only a mask, a necessary evil that must be endured in order to get by in today's frenetic, consumerist world.
In this way we think that it is our commitment to prayer groups, church meetings, and Bible studies that reflects the essence of our inner lives. Our religious groups on the weekends and in the evenings are thought to be sites of resistance that provide us with the strength to question our work and avoid getting fully caught up in it.
However, could it be that these activities are in fact the very things that allow us to fully engage with the world? What if we need our prayer groups and Bible studies because they act as a type of safety valve that actually allows us to release the tension and stresses of our work so that, the next day, we can return again? If this is so, then the activities that we think critique the unjust world are really the very activities that this world requires in order to run smoothly. Our church activities are then nothing more than a type of air vent in the machine.
This logic is beautifully expressed in The Matrix Trilogy, directed by the Wachowski Brothers. In the first film we learn that there is a city where people are free from the AI prison where the majority of humans are held and that Neo (Keanu Reeves) is the hero who can bring freedom. However, in the later films we learn that there have been many cities before Zion (the free city) and that Neo is just the latest in a long line of messiah-like individuals who have risen up to challenge the machines.
Furthermore, we learn that the machines are actually behind what initially seems to be the very force that would threaten them: they are behind the development of Zion and they provide the necessary conditions for Neo (and the other freedom fighters) to arise. Why? Because they understand that, for the oppressive system they have constructed to work, the Matrix needs to include a site of resistance.
In daily life there are reams of activities that are publicly disavowed by the government and society at large, yet are privately permitted. Among these are turning a blind eye to prosecution in certain areas, and the fact that we can all go ten miles per hour over the speed limit without too much fear of getting fined. These acts allow people to disobey the law in ways that are actually unofficially sanctioned by the law. We who engage in such state-sanctioned transgressions are otherwise law-abiding citizens. Indeed, our ability to break the law in small ways is part of what keeps us law-abiding the rest of the time. If we were not able to engage in small acts of transgression, if the law were absolutely unbending, then we would begin to rebel against it in a fundamental way. By creating leniency within the law, the law is not experienced as oppressive and is thus more likely to be accepted with all its flaws.
In the above story I attempt to explore and critique this problem by putting into fictional form insights of the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Letters and Papers from Prison. Here Bonhoeffer rejected religion because he felt that it places God on the outer edges of life as the example to our current ignorance (for example, as the name we give to the one who created the world) or as the one we turn to in private sphere (such as the church and in the home). Bonhoeffer rejected this and refused to give God a place in the world, because when God is given a place, God is confined to a specific location (and that location is usually on the edges of life). Instead he advocated an existence fully immersed in the world, utterly taken up by the concerns of the world, one that pours itself out in the joys and suffering of the world.
Such a move could of course be misunderstood as a way of actively denying God. It could be described as a humanism in which people are encouraged to take responsibility for their own lives rather than looking for some divine answer. Yet for Bonhoeffer this was not the end of the story. If religion gives God a place, and humanism denies that place, then he claimed that Christianity fully embraces this humanism, not as a way of denying God, but as the way of fully affirming God - denying God a place so that God is affirmed in every place. Here one fully lives in the world as a way of fully living before God. Hence he wrote, "Before God and with God we live without God." (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Selected Writings, ed. John de Grunchy (London: Collins, 1988), 291.)
The result of such thinking is the affirmation of a faith that permeates all our actions rather than being exhibited only when faced with something we cannot understand, or at some prayer meeting, or in some weekly service to the poor. Such an expression thus strikes against the very roots of inauthentic resistance and demands a truly radical reconfiguring of our social existence.
To put this in religious language, the above story asks if perhaps the devil, far from hating our multitude of church activities, positively loves them, for it is in these very activities that we are able to become such productive agents in carrying out his insidious desires - making changes in the world that fundamentally ensure everything in the world remains the same."
- Taken from part 1, chapter 11 in "The Orthodox Heretic and other impossible tales" by Peter Rollins (London: Canterbury Press)
----
I was really struck by this story Rollins wrote and I wanted to share it with you guys. I hope it challenges you to ask questions, engages your thinking and perceptions of religion and life. I want to welcome thoughts, comments and discussions so please leave something. But you don't have to. If you don't want to. It is up to you :)
Wednesday 16 June 2010
Friday Fellowship- The Beatitudes.
So the Friday just gone Joei began our series on "The Beatitudes" (Matthew 5). Personally I thought she did an excellent job. She looked at verse 3. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of God". I think one thing that struck me was when I understood that The Beatitudes is not about us, or those who are poor in spirit but its more about God and His character.
We discussed who the "poor in spirit" were and its really funny the way we get so caught up in defining how someone can be "poor in spirit" that we forget that Jesus wasn't necessarily focusing on the poor in spirit, He was more focused on displaying God's character. (In fact, we couldn't define the "spirit" because we we're confused as to whether it meant the Holy Spirit, or a person's spirit or whatever, thus defining "poor" was equally impossible). Maybe The Beatitudes is all about God's all inclusive grace? My assumption is that "poor in spirit" is US. You, me, and every other stranger in the world. No matter which "spirit" is poor, be it us, or anyone else... "Theirs is the Kingdom of God". Its universal... If a man is in prison and is "poor in spirit" theirs is the kingdom of God. If a man is not in prison but is "poor in spirit" theirs is the kingdom of God. I think God's kingdom is a lot more inclusive than we can imagine and more tolerant than our theology teaches us. I think God's Kingdom is more universal, more accepting, more gracious and loving than we can ever experience. But is SO close! It is here... "Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God would come Jesus replied, "the Kingdom of God does not come by your careful observation, nor will people say 'here is it,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17: 20-21) (Read the whole section... its more than interesting!)
I love God. I love that His love accepts me and welcomes me in. That His love surpasses and somehow covers all my faults and failures. There I go again... me, me, me... haha... But, I wonder if I will ever be able to love like Jesus loves. To be so radically inclusive that its scary. To live the life of love and obedience through and through even if it meant dying on a cross. I feel we have a long long way to go.
Next Friday we'll be looking at the next verse in The Beatitudes! Come join us because there is so much to learn! Plus, we'll be organising the BBQ for the week after and other events over the summer (like the inter-church sports day)! There's plenty to get excited about :)
Lets continue to encourage one another to live to "touch heaven and change earth".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)