RANT

[Larry]

I heard someone point out that Jesus went about teaching and preaching. So there is a need for the disciples of Jesus to do some teaching and preaching. But what else are we all supposed to do as the disciples of Jesus? We are called time and again to serve one another.

But teaching and preaching are suffering because the teachers and preachers are busy coordinating the serving (it's like the Acts of the Apostles Chapter 6).

So instead of teaching and preaching we pretend everybody is equal in Bible knowledge and wisdom. So we create random small groups so everybody becomes a teacher and preacher to share their ignorance.

We have the technology. We could bring in qualified teachers through DVDs, web feeds, etc. I'd love to have Jeff VanVonderen teach us through his tapes.

I may be putting up straw men to burn but it seems like the Christian experience I've seen has lots of specialization. We got the workers who feed the hungry, house the homeless, visit the prisons, etc. Then we have the worshippers who got to every service and do adoration. Then we have a bunch who study. They go to endless Bible studies. Then we have a bunch that only arrange the recreation and fellowship. There's a lot of talk about simple church but I don't see how we ever agree on how Christ expects Christians to spend their time. It complicates things that the people handing out the advice are most often professional Christians. They often don't remember what it is like to work full-time and have to squeeze what you can do for Jesus into your "spare" time. They envision lots of work time standing around the water cooler witnessing but you can't do that anymore without the risk of being fired. Lots of people are isolated in cubicles and don't get to move around. There are no private conversations where I work. Witnessing is through instant messages and they can be traced and used against me.

I don't think Jesus wants Christians to be a bunch of people in self-help groups either. It is good to know you are not alone and that others experience what you experience but I don't imagine Jesus would want us to focus on our own needs. Maybe they should not be called self-help groups but should be called Other-help groups. I attend to help others and as a by-product I get help myself. I guess the only problem with self-help groups is the name.

Going to Bible studies, worshipping and debating theological issues in the interest of "the truth" makes you feel like you've done some great thing for God but no suffering people have ever have their pain lessened as a direct result of all the hours we've spent in Bible studies, worship services and in the course of all the theological debates. NOTE: I said as a direct result. I also said "in the course of all the theological debates." Maybe as result of the theological debates some suffering was lessoned but for all the books written and web pages designed to get at the truth of the issues like reformed versus Arminian or Catholic versus Protestant the time and energy spent has not done much to alleviate the suffering in the world.

All these things, worship, Bible study, theological debate probably have an indirect result of alleviating suffering, but is what is the return on the investiment of time? Writing books about "the truth" of reformed or Arminian or Catholic or Protestant is a great way to feel like you are doing something great for God without getting your hands dirty.

[Forrest Curo]

Re small groups... You don't want people to learn that somebody else understands the Bible real well; that's okay but it's no use to them. What's of use to them is for them to study the Bible, and get interested enough that they'd want to learn more.

Words in a book are like canned food. They don't nourish until someone opens the book, takes them in, digests them.

Theology as a collection of disconnected sentences, even true sentences, is like that. Many people live by unexamined theologies which lead them into bad decisions and fail to serve to correct their courses--and there's really only one way for them to know good theology from bad: Ask the Source. To argue theology to prove oneself right is useless; the same practice as a way to better know that Source is a whole different matter. Even an essential one.

The subject matter of theology is a live, conscious Subject who can guide us to a life worth living... and life without knowing that Subject becomes increasingly unsatisfactory. But that guideance normally doesn't come along until a person has developed some inclination to follow.

[Steve Kimes]

I agree that too much time is spent on theological sidelines, such as a debate on Cavinism. It's entertaining, but does it really get to the heart of the gospel?

So often we ask "what is true?" when we should really be asking, "what is significant?" It is so easy for us to get caught up in Bible trivia, or theological interpretaitons. We really don't have time for that. There are people dying out there without the gospel, so we need to focus in on significant truths.

What are these significant truths? What needs to be done is rather than have "Bible studies" in general, we should focus on what is important to Jesus. After all, it is Jesus who is our Lord, not Calvin, not Augustine, not even Paul. And what is important to Jesus is that which He spoke about.

Jesus said that we should call no one "teacher" for we all have one teacher and that is the Christ (Matt 23). So a Christian Bible Study should be led by Jesus. And those who are the moderators should be those who are well versed in the teaching of Jesus, not the Law, not theology, not politics, not social reform. Let's let Jesus himself teach us about the True Law, the True Theology, True Politics and True Social Reform. We need to stop beginning with the world's ideas and just stick with Jesus.

Steve K

[Larry]

Well said.

I just happened to be reviewing Pete's blog and he also had an article about the misuse and overuse of theology at http://uk.geocities.com/oldpete66/theology.html

[nathan]

theology doesn't really cook my grits if i can be honest here. if someone want sto zing me with their reaons why i'm wrong i'll greatfully read it, but i don't get any satisfaction from studying who someone else thinks God is through over analyzing a re-defined rather than re-contextualized obscure passage. i only have a problem with theology when people start to worship their idea of who God is rather than God, the unknowable.

i am working very hard to make the best of this time when i don't have a full time job and i can walk carefully in the dust of my rabbi.

[Forrest Curo]

In Theology it isn't what you know, it's Who you know!

That Who is a source of ideas & wisdom for knowing Him better! As it says in James' letter, it helps to pray for more wisdom & understanding. We don't necessarily have enough otherwise!

I find a lot of people in the Quaker thing lately who don't think they should be praying for anything, but should be rather leaving it all up to God. But I don't think we're supposed to see God's will as altogether independent of ours. We need to ask so we can think about what's worth asking for. We need to ask so we can take our part in the process, practice our dependence on God and at the same time practice taking part in what God does with us. (God can give a person muscles, but there are reasons He normally makes doing something with them a requirement for that.)

A good theology is a kind of a poem, not a sort of tech manual! If you read it in that spirit, you can understand it better and have less risk of putting it to bad use.

The basic Quaker thing (& a basic Sufi thing, for that matter) is to recognize God as our teacher. God can teach us through the Bible, but also through anything else in our life. If you look for His classroom hints, they're there!

"You need to keep paying attention. If you aren't paying attention, you miss all the jokes!"

[Steve Kimes]

You hit it exactly right Forrest. This is why my next sermon series is about knowing God, but I'm going to talk about our relationship to God, how He communicates to us and we communicate to Him. The term "love" in Scripture that we are to have for God is the same word love as between spouses. Thus, there is an intimacy, a communication that is just missing in theology.

Theology has it's place, when done correctly, in giving us a short-cut to some basic principles of the Bible. But when theology takes the place of the relationship we should have with God it becomes a heresy, an abomination. God doesn't want to drop us tracts, He wants to dwell with us.

Steve K

[Paul]

The bottom line is: are you putting a loving relationship with God first in your life? God created us to have a personal loving relationship with Him, period. We are all infinitely different in who we are (genetically and through our experiences) so how this loving relationship manifests itself in our lives will unique for each person. Yes there will be lots of similarities and common ground with others. But God wants each one of us to choose to have a loving relationship with Him over all other things in our lives. Like Jesus said the greatest commandment is to love God with all your strength and second to love people. If you're putting that first then you will be living breathing witness to His love for us exactly where your at.

At the conclusion of our lives on earth each one of us alone will have to stand before God. So how you experience a loving relationship with God is ultimately between you and God. No one else can tell you how best to achieve this relationship in your life. Following Jesus' example is a pretty good way to go at it (after all wasn’t that why he was both God and human). But you alone are the one that makes the conscious decision in everything you do to cultivate a relationship with the Father. If the pursuit of that relationship is first and foremost in your life you’ll become more and more aware of and in alignment with His will for your life; then through the Spirit you’ll be lead to use all those gifts and abilities in various ways to glorify and serve Him.

The closer in alignment with God’s will you are the more likely you will be to “get your hands dirty” (which could manifest itself in numerous ways). But, because our relationships with the Father is as individual as we are, we have to be careful when pointing fingers at others. Again it’s between you and God how you glorify Him through the actions in your life; if that means you spend your days volunteering at a homeless shelter to ease some of their suffering then praise God. If it means you spend time discussing theological principals with other believers so they can gain some wisdom then praise God. If you’re walking in the will of God... then you’re walking in the will of God. However, I do think that looking at Jesus' ministry we can see there is a balance to strike in that he spent time "discussion theology" with the Pharisees as well as teaching as well as easing the suffering of the poor as well as praying as well as worshiping the Father. I think his example shows us that we will best be connected to the Father when we are using our gifts to glorify God in all these ways.

The bottom line is that relationship has to come first. Doing things like bible study, worshiping, discussing theology, easing suffering, serving the poor, etc, etc, etc should all be done because of a desire to serve God as a result of a loving relationship with Him. So glorify God in all that you do by loving Him and loving people.

Ahhh I could go on for paragraphs about this but I gotta get back to the water cooler ;-)

[Joe]

Hello, I'm Joe.

I think part of the problem is that we have a very shaky understanding of the dynamics of follower-ship. Depending on our tradition, we have quite a lot of received knowledge about leadership and a fair amount about the correct form of 'biblical discipleship'. But when it comes down to it, we're not really ready to consider how different people 'follow' a leader.

For example, a lot of people like to be told what to do and think. They like the structure where a defined leader says 'jump' and everyone jumps. On the other hand, there are a significant proportion of people who do not cope at all with that. They want to know who this person is saying jump, how he is coming to decisions and feel more comfortable in a more equitable model where decisions are made by consent.

And something of that is expressed in our forms of church. Sometimes we want a person of authority telling us what to think and sometimes we want to work it out for ourselves in small groups. And I think some of the reason people respond to those methods differently is because we follow in different ways because our minds work in different ways.

Ultimately the problem is not thinking about theology or spending time together. Jesus said that those who love him follow his commands, and given that most of our churches are not interested in outsiders beyond trying to convert them, we clearly do not. This is true theology: the theology that enables, strengthens, comforts and upholds us as we spend ourselves on behalf of those around us, knowing that the only person who we're trying to please is God and the standard and example he sets is total sacrifice.

[sagely]

concerning specialization: a few weeks ago i spent a great deal of time reading through some documents from vatican ii in preparation for an exam in my degree program. as i browsed through them, i was struck by the way in which different parts of the church concern themselves with different tasks--you have religious orders concerned with social justice and religious orders concerned with theological critique, priests investing in the care of souls and bishops guarding the orthodoxy of the clergy. at least ideally.

this is quite different from the hectic and harried way i live out my faith. i never feel like i am doing enough, like i'm doing all the right activities, that i'm hanging out with people in my poor-er neighbourhood and quietly seeking to love and know God (not to mention making a living to pay for all my education and a place to live). my church fully embraces a communitarian vision of the gospel, believers getting together every night of the week, and then having various outreaches, housing initiatives, refugee work, etc., and then getting together some more. and there's absolutely no way that i can be involved in all of this. i'm lucky if i make to more than sunday morning worship each week.

but i wonder if this is the consequence of a disconnected vision of the larger church. if my church is all on its own, it can't depend on other christians to be carrying out other parts of the gospel. but if we're all in this together, then (with a great many important provisos) i can be a theologian and let someone be the social worker and another be the artist. more, this church can invest itself utterly and wholely (again, with important provisos) into being Jesus to the guys who hang out on the street corner while another church can delve faithfully into the mystery of God and another can explode with artistic creativity.

and this works because the kingdom Jesus brings embraces all of us--both you and me and all of you and me.

[simplyonelife]

I agree that there is way too much emphasis on studying the Bible when we should really spending our time living the Bible.

Many preachers aren't really there to teach the Bible, they are there to teach their version of the Bible.

I've often heard very important parts of scripture left out because it is inconvenient to our way of life.

When I read the Bible I believe we need to follow every word that Jesus said, not just the ones that are convenient.

-Melissa
www.simplyonelife.org

[Joe]

I've often heard very important parts of scripture left out because it is inconvenient to our way of life.

True, but unfortunately I'm not sure I am prepared to take on the cost and face the demands of Christ in my own life.

[Paul]

Whenever you or anyone reads the bible they are interpreting meaning. The bible is a translation of a translation of translation (which is why so many versions of the bible are in print). The meaning behind what it says only means something to you based on who you are and you're experiences. This can also be applied collectively too for a group of people with common experiences (such as ethnic groups, cultural groups, or even as a body of believers). This is one of the beautiful things about the bible and it's teachings; you can read the same passage over and over and find new meaning in it not because the text changed but you've changed and have new or different experiences that you bring to your understand of the text. This is also why each one of us can actually "live the bible" because it's meaning is unique to who we are. If it were not, then Christianity would not have stood up over the vast array of people, places and time periods that is has; it had to be dynamic because human beings are dynamic.

I do agree with you Melissa, if you are in a position where you are teaching lessons based on the bible to others, simply omitting something because it's not convenient doesn't make any sense. If people disagree or find that it’s not meaningful to them based on what they’ve experienced then that’s between them and God but who is that teacher to say that God won’t use that message to change someone or bring a new understanding to their lives and subsequently change or affirm how people think and act (which is the point in the first place).