Currently Reading If God Is Love : Rediscovering Grace in an Ungracious World (Gulley, Philip) By Philip Gulley, James Mulholland see related

In the previous chapter the authors discuss the problems with fear based theology, how so often appeals are made to the unchurched to scare them into the doors.  In this chapter they tackle the other end of the spectrum, reward based theology.

"As a young pastor, I was asked to lead a midweek children's program that had about 15 children attending.  Dissatisfied with such low participation, I developed a system, modeled after one from my own childhood, whereby children could earn points for attendance, memorizing Bible verses, inviting friends, and completing projects.  They lost points for bad behavior.  When they had accumulated enough points, they could turn them in for prizes.  We soon had as many as a hundred children coming on Wednesday nights.  Since this approach was working, I seldon questioned whether it was healthy.

By this time I had largely rejected fear as a ministry tool, but I was more than willing to build a religious program based on reward.  I began to read church growth books that suggested what I had done at a children's level was transferable to adults.  Canvas your neighborhoods, discover what people want, and fashion your church to meet these expectations.  Appeal to self-interest and downplay self-denial.  The point system and prizes were more subtle, but the intent was the same -- get large numbers of people through the door.

Since this approach works, may don't question reward-based theology.  Proponents make the same kind of justifications that many used for fear-based theology -- the end justifies the means.  So what if people come to church initially because we offer the best day care, aerobic classes, and youth ski trips, if in the process they hear the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Having made such arguments, I know their attraction.  Unfortunately, in the end, churches begin to look and act like malls, and church members are trained to be consumers of religious products."

I found the insight to be striking, in more ways than one.  What drives the institutional church to hunger for greater numbers?  Is it a quest for relevancy or validation, mixed with a view of conversion as a process of getting others to conform to us?  It just seems so sad that the church in America seems to be so inwardly focused.  We've got books giving us 7 steps to everything, and how to pray effectively, and so on and so on.  My only consolation is in the sovereignty of God.  He has allowed things, dare I say willed things, to be in the state they are.  Maybe just as Israel was hardened to allow the Gentiles into the kingdom, so now the "church" has been hardened that we may see God's abundant grace to all of his creation.  This is my hope.

Yesterday a question was asked of a group of people who I worship with.  The question was an icebreaker, but after some thought, I am a bit sad about some of the responses.  The question was "If you could control (predestine) one thing in you or your family's future, what would it be?"  There were some funny answers, but many people answered seriously that they would determine that their children would be saved.  This response can be taken 2 ways.  The first, and maybe the most likely, is that what is meant is that they would make sure that their kids choose God, living their lives for Him.  I am wholeheartedly in agreement with this, I hope that my child wants to live for God.

The second way that this could have been meant, in light of Romans 8, is that the parents would control the "election" of their children.  In other words, "we love our children so much that if we could control God, we would make sure that they are on his list of  the "elect"."  This is the thought that saddens me.  That we could possibly believe that we love our children more than God does.  That we would have our children in right relationship with God, but He might not.  How sad an opinion of God. 

I'm at work now, but I'll add more later.

Currently Listening Echoes: The Best of Pink Floyd By Pink Floyd see related

First, let me say that my current listening selection is not my own, and I'm not currently listening to it.  Not that I would mind owning it or listening to it, but it happens to be the music my neighbors chose to wake me up with at 2:30 am.  No, I don't live in an apartment...their house is 80 feet away from mine, but apparently their volume knob is set to "HIGH"!  So, since I was awake and started thinking  here are some more thoughts...

My friend is teaching our class through the book of Romans.  We’re halfway through the third year and are on chapter 8.  Last night at dinner we were discussing the inevitable approach of verses 29 and following and the subject of predestination.  Let me say at the outset that I am glad it’s not me teaching, but here are some thoughts.

Let me see if I can summarize the standard view of predestination and election, it goes something like this: God, before he created man, knew that man would sin and that He (God) would have to step in and do something to right the situation.  All mankind became rebellious and deserved “death.”  He knew these two things; that He would send His Son to “pay the price” and that man could not choose God on his own.  God then chose those whom he would save (a very small percentage), and everyone else is lost, which is a nice way of saying that they will burn in hell, forever tormented (damn them!).  This is OK because God is still being fair to “the lost” by sending them to “hell,”; they deserve death, and that’s what they get.  The (s)’elect’ few are shown grace, which is good too.  This way we have God being both fair and gracious, but unfortunately, both his fairness and his grace are not given to the same people.  To those who go to hell, God is simply being fair, for they have sinned and deserve as much.  To those whom He has chosen, He is not being fair (for they are not getting what they deserve), but is being gracious.  This, in some form or other, is one of the basic tenets of Calvinism, a popular theology in modern American Christian religion. 

Before I go further I want to state that I am not criticizing Calvinism only.  The opposing view, Arminianism, believes that there is no way God would only choose a few to be saved, and that God gives us all “free will” and it comes down to man’s choice.  God really wants all mankind to know Him and He provided a remedy that is big enough for all mankind, but most haven't even heard of the remedy or they don’t choose it.  In essence, by giving us "free will" He tied his own hands and can't get what he wants. 

Calvinists are pretty strict and can come across as really opinionated, similar to today’s perception of political right wing conservative Republicans, and Arminians are a bit looser; they would say that really God wants everyone saved, and it's kind of an emotional plea… they are kind of like Christianity’s Democrats.  Just as in politics, there are some “Christians” who identify passionately with one view or the other and don’t have much grace for those of another opinion (someone actually made the statement, "You cannot be a christian and vote for John Kerry!").  Then there are a lot of people who really don’t know all the technical differences and kind of blend them together, not realizing that in many cases the two opinions are diametrically opposed.  The way I see it though is that the main difference between Republicans and Democrats is rhetoric (i.e. hot air) and they really don't live their lives much differently from each other. 

So it is in theology.  Most of the time people are just regurgitating someone else’s opinion and they really haven’t thought about it.  They’ve memorized some bullet points and a few verses ripped out of context and that’s a lot of hot air.  The die-hards

on both sides typically have a pat answer for any problems with their position.  Even if they are willing to see that their opinion has numerous flaws, they are usually so invested in it that they are willing to overlook the flaws or they believe the other position has more or bigger flaws, so they must be right.  What this means is that in the big picture of Christianity, faith has become a position, not a relationship.  It has become a negotiated deal, a contract so to speak, instead of a heart-stopping leap off of the high dive into the infinite "pool" of God.  

I think too much time is wasted in battles trying to think correct theology in the “church” today and not enough time is spent trying to live correct theology.  Sure it’s important and fun to think about these things, and we shouldn’t be satisfied with opinions about God that are chock full of holes.  If Calvinism doesn’t work, and Arminianism doesn’t work, we shouldn’t just accept that it has to be one or the other, we should be willing to dig deeper, throw away some preconceived notions and try to find the truth.  Here’s an example:  a Calvinist holds that God is sovereign, that God is Love, and maybe even that God desires all men to come to know him.  But he also believes that God has already chosen who will come to know him and the rest will be damned.  And, even though it is God who saves, and God will save the “elect,” we should still be out trying to “evangelize” our neighbors, co-workers, etc.  Well, this doesn’t make sense.  Either God wants everyone saved and will do it, or he has only chosen a few, so he doesn’t want everyone saved.  Maybe we are starting at the wrong place.  What if our American christian definition  of "salvation" is wrong?  What if our definition of "election" is wrong?  What if our definition of "believe" is wrong?  What if our understanding of "justice" is incomplete?  What if God's goodness is better than the absolute best possible thing that we can imagine? 

We've taken the beauty out of faith when we reduce it to theological truisms or formulas.  Does it stir your heart to read the following actual excerpt:

Now I want to be clear, I don’t have any bad feelings toward anyone who holds these opinions, and that is what they are, opinions.  I'm pretty sure I don't have all the answers and that I am wrong in a lot of my opinions.  No one is saved on the basis of their opinions.  I’m pretty confident (and hopeful) that it is God who does the saving and He really cares more about what we are doing for others and how we are showing our love for Him by loving our neighbors than He cares about our opinions, theologies, and what we typically call our beliefs. Most of the time the things we say we believe are really just opinions.  True beliefs drive us into action, and most of the opinions within the “Christian religion” don’t really result in any action, they’re just fun to argue about. I include Calvinism and Arminianism, as well as most other theologies, into the category of opinion.  Take Mother Teresa for example.  There are some die-hard fundamentalist evangelicals who think that there is no way that a catholic can be saved, catholics have too many wrong beliefs (as if God is keeping a scorecard).  All I can say is this, Mother Teresa loved others, and sacrificed her entire life in the care of others and by doing so proved that she loved God(see Matthew 25:34-45).  She was the only "Jesus" that thousands of people ever knew in their lives.  If that’s not the point of the gospel, well, I’ll just throw my bible away cause I really wouldn’t want to read any more of it anyway. 

 Now, I'm not saying we're all called to go to India, but it's probably safe to say that none of us are doing all we can for others.  My point is that we, as a church in America, have become institutionalized and stale.  We've taken the most beautiful story ever told and decided to use the cliff notes version.  We've turned "mental assent to the formula" into the standard of Christianity, rather than living a passionate life for others and for God.  We tend to get bogged down in the details when it would be better to get bogged down in relationship.  Thanks be to God that He loves us!

So, all this to say to my friend, I am with you as you teach through this stuff, and no matter what opinions are expressed, I love you, and your friendship means more to me than any opinion or theology.  Maybe I’ll take this stuff a bit further in a future post, it makes good conversation, and hey, who doesn’t enjoy being called a heretic.  So, if in your study you have unresolved questions, just give me a call, you know I have all the answers (ha!).

"One day when George MacDonald, the great Scottish preacher and writer, was talking with his son, the conversation turned to heaven and the prophets' version of the end of all things. "It seems too good to be true," the son said at one point.  A smile crossed MacDonald's whiskered face.  "Nay," he replied, "it is just so good it must be true!""

This is a quote from a book called "Disappointment With God", by Philip Yancey and when I read it I thought it made a great summary of some recent conversations and teachings done on the subject of heaven. 

Currently Listening Gord's Gold By Gordon Lightfoot see related

Xmas is just around the corner and I found this article to be an interesting read...http://www.gods-kingdom.org/when_really_was_jesus_born.htm

Nothing like a cold winter night, a good article, and Gordon Lightfoot...life is good.