A politician can go around saying he stands for God, when what he really stands for is racism, and so racism becomes equated with Christianity. This is idolatry, it is turning things inside out. And it is the same with nationalism – people say we will equate our national outlook with Christianity, and suddenly all these things which have nothing at all to do with Christianity become identified with Christianity. This is a serious problem because it is a great scandal to people who have trouble with faith today. They say, “If this man is really a Christian, how can I be a Christian?” – Thomas Merton
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Why We Live in Community
Anyone interested in the fellowship and community building should read this book. It is short and it is free. And it is powerful.
Why We Live in Community, a free ebook to download by Eberhard Arnold
Sunday, February 13, 2011
What Does It Mean to be in the Image of God?
God himself is relational in the Trinity, and because we are created in the Image of God we are thus also relational. This is actually a topic which is dear to me because I have come to understand the Church as the presence of God on earth. A statement about Imago Dei that informs and accurately reflects my thinking on the subject is found in Emil Brunner’s Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption published in English in 1952. Here Brunner argues that being created in the image of God means
…that man should really give the answer which the Creator intends, the response in which God is honored, and in which he fully imparts Himself, the response of reverent, grateful love, given not only in words, but in his whole life. The New Testament, in its doctrine of the Imago Dei, tells us that this right answer has not been given; that quite a different one has been given instead, in which the glory is not given to God, but to man and to creatures, in which man does not live in the love of God, but seeks himself. Secondly, the New Testament is the proclamation of what God has done in order that He may turn this false answer into the true one.
Here, therefore, the fact that man has been “made in the image of God” is spoken of as having been lost, and indeed as wholly, and not partially lost. Man no longer possesses this Imago Dei; but it has been restored through Him, through whom God gives and glorifies Himself: through Jesus Christ. The restoration of the Imago Dei, the new creation of the original image of God in man, is identical with the gift of God in Jesus Christ received by faith.
The Imago Dei in the New Testament, “material” sense of the word, is identical with “being-in-the-Word” of God.[1]
If the image of God is love, it follows that it must be relational, because even God cannot love without an object of love. If there is no beloved, there can be no love. This relational aspect is hinted at in Genesis in the words “Let us create” (Gen 1:26, emphasis mine). The Trinitarian God consists of an everlasting relationship of love between the persons of the Godhead. The intended relationship of God to man is that same relationship of love, but because man was created with freedom, and man did not use that freedom rightly, the image was lost. When through faith man becomes identified with God in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the proper relationship is restored. But even more, because the image is universal in humans, the love of God that is reflected in man must be reflected to man as well, in the form of love toward our fellows. If the image of God in man is a reflection of the love relationship of the Trinity, then the relationship between man and man must also reflect that.
Another piece of the puzzle is put in place by the Biblical assertion that the Church is the body of Christ. This idea is foundational in the New Testament and summarized by Paul in 1 Cor. 12:12-31 where he compares the Church at Corinth with the parts of the human body. One of the weaknesses of that church was that it was splintered and schismatic, leaving the individual members to seek their own aggrandizement rather than the common good. So it is not by accident that Paul turns from the descriptive image of the body to the prescription of the solution in 1 Corinthians 13, love, which it will be noted is not a prescription to feeling but to action. The problem was that the Church in Corinth was not acting as a community but rather as a collection of competing individuals and thus was not reflecting the divine image but rather a human cacophony, and the solution was to self-sacrifice for the benefit of all.
In modern times both Dietrich Bonheoffer and Martin Luther King have voiced this understanding of the Church in community as the presence of God on earth. In his work The Cost of Discipleship Bonheoffer argues that the follower of Christ has been called out of the world but must give visible proof of his calling by living in fellowship and community.[2] Martin Luther King did not imagine justice as being either accomplished by or visited upon individuals but by and for the “Beloved Community,” which he imagined to consist of all peoples and to constitute God’s image on earth.
The last piece of the puzzle finally falls into place when we ask what does it mean in practice to be the Image of God on earth? In considering this question I think we have to call upon the basic premise that as Christ followers we are called to do what Christ did. Christ is our model. Thus, though in community we have concern for the welfare of each other, corporately we must have concern for the world. Why does the Church exist if not for continuing God’s work of redemption and reconciliation as Jesus commanded (Mt. 28:19-20)? And how is this better accomplished than by following the model of Jesus: to teach, to preach, to set a good example, to heal, to comfort, to reward devotion and to rebuke sin, to extend God’s love to everyone especially our enemies, to be the light of the world (Mt. 5:14), and to remain whole-heartedly and steadfastly obedient to God’s call for justice, righteousness, and love regardless of the cost (Phil 2:6-8)?
So the “Preferred Approach” of Spirituality in Community sings to me because I feel deeply that it is essential and vital to what it means to be a Christian. I believe that the Imago Dei is the reflection of God’s love in his creatures, that that reflection is obscured when mankind directs his love inwardly rather than outwardly, and that the image is restored only “in Christ.” To be “in Christ” means to be in community because the Church is the body of Christ. I think that the Christian community resembles the Trinity in that it is comprised of individuals in a relationship of love, which is not emotional but active, but that it exists at the same time as a unity. Jesus tells us explicitly that to be his follower we must follow him to Calvary (Mk. 8:34), and that means sacrifice for the sake of the world as a reflection of God’s unfathomable love for the world (John 3:16)..
[1] Emil Brunner, Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1952), 61.
[2] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, (New York: Simon &Schuster, 1995), 258.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Who Do You Say That I Am?
And Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi. And on the way he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that I am?” And they told him, “John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others, one of the prophets.” And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered him, “You are the Christ.” (Mark 8:27-29 ESV)
I absolutely believe that the incident described here is accurately reported by Mark; that it is an actual historical event in which Jesus asked his disciples specific questions about who others and they thought him to be. The context of this passage within the gospel according to Mark is the revelation of Jesus as the Messiah. Within the preceding narrative Jesus himself had deliberately downplayed the messianic nature of his mission. The reader knows from the first verse that Jesus is the son of God (Mk. 1:1) and the demons Jesus’ cast out knew (i.e., Mk 5:7) and there is a hint that those Jesus healed at least had suspicions (because he warns them to tell no one of the miracles he has performed). But the disciples are clueless (Mk. 4:41). Even after Jesus had performed such miracles as calming the storm at sea, walking on water, casting out demons, raising from the dead, performing many healings, and satisfying the hunger of large crowds with almost nothing, the disciples still did not understand (Mk. 8:21). The turning point of Mark’s narrative comes with Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ.
In the narrative Jesus does not dispute what Peter says, but he does warn Peter and the other disciples to say nothing about it. This may seem rather odd to us. One would think that if Jesus’ mission involved rescuing people he would be glad to be correctly identified. But I think he is careful to reveal himself as the messiah because he knows that in general people neither know what they need to be rescued from nor what the cost of being rescued would be. He indicates this in the next few verses after Peter’s confession by describing what his task was to mean for him personally, in the form of suffering, rejection, crucifixion, and resurrection (Mk. 8:31), and then what it would cost those who had been delivered: “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” (Mk. 8:34)
There is plenty of evidence to indicate that the messianic expectations of first-century Jews focused on the return of a conquering hero who would rescue the nation from earthly oppressors. The idea that the messiah must suffer and die for the sins of the people was not unknown (Is. 53, Lk. 24:27), but it appears not to have been common. If Jesus had announced himself as the expected Messiah, particularly considering his growing popularity, he risked having his mission mistaken as a political rather than a spiritual one. Thus as soon as it dawned on the disciples who Jesus really was, he started to teach them about what it really meant.
Jesus asks this question of us as well. Who do you say that Jesus is? Everything depends on our answer. You cannot possibly read this account (Mk. 8:31-38) without concluding that Jesus considers both his messianic mission and the cost of discipleship to encompass everything. Mark’s treatment of the disciple’s obtuseness in coming to grips with this fact is instructive for us, demonstrating that Jesus does not expect instant and perfect understanding. But if we are to call ourselves followers of Jesus, we must eventually come to realize it will cost our lives: not just in some metaphysical spiritual way, but our whole lives. Jesus is not some wise and kindly sage who offers tips and insights on how to get along in life; he is in fact the incarnation of God. C.S. Lewis states this masterfully in his book Mere Christianity:
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.[1]
To be a follower of Jesus does not mean to have a rich daddy who spoils us, helping us to avoid suffering and making our lives on earth comfortable. Nor does it mean to have a profound teacher of philosophy who gives us insight on how best to conduct ourselves. It means to surrender to his messianic mission. It means, in the end, to give up our entire selves, body and soul; to allow Jesus to live through us (Gal. 2:20). Jesus is either everything or else he is nothing. Who do you say that he is?
[1] C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1960), pp. 40-41.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
