Category: Church

  • Has the multiplicity of interpretations made the Bible incomprehensible? —YES

    [EDITOR’S NOTE: This post is part of our series on controversial questions. A NO post will normally follow a YES post. Join in by posting your comments.]

    by Steve Kindle

    Head-Brown smallFor those of us in the West, once the Roman Catholic Church lost its hegemonic hold on the content of the faith, it’s become “every man for himself.” Or in the words of pope of the Reformation period, “With every man his Bible, soon every man his own church.” Quite prophetic, wouldn’t you say?
    The Reformation’s emphasis on the right of every believer to interpret the Bible soon became warrant for any old interpretation that suits the interpreter. Who is there to suggest otherwise?
    Add to this that the scholarly biblical academy can’t seem to come to a consensus on, well, you name it. We’ve arrived at a point where biblical inquirers are presented with a smorgasbord of options, and we pick and choose as it suits us, with no better reason than choosing a Ford over a Chevy, merely personal preference.
    This all begins with the complicated nature of the Bible itself. In order to make sense out of the 31,102 verses, 1,190 chapters and 66 assorted books, it is necessary to employ a schema, or template, to organize its contents into a manageable whole. This is truly a “can of worms,” as the options for this are mind boggling. Additionally, the Bible is a product of people with a worldview quite different from ours. It’s a very difficult task to enter into that ancient world and think as they did. It requires immersing ourselves in cultures two to three thousand years in the past. Many bypass this step and just read it like the daily newspaper. This “what it means today must be what it meant then” approach is sure to yield disappointing results.
    What this has done to the church is create oases of partisanship based not on what is found to be the highest truth, but on, as we know from H. Richard Niebuhr on down, economic and political confederacies. It means, “I belong to my denomination because I was raised in it,” or “The people were good to me and so nice.” No matter that you are led by a Jim Jones (Peoples Temple), or a Martin Luther King, Jr. People who, indeed, attempt to find the church closest to the Bible soon learn that it is a fool’s errand. Even the New Testament churches present a wide range of doctrines and differ in many ways. What would the doctrinally perfect church look like? The fact that there are hundreds of options (if not thousands) reflects the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of making sense of the biblical data to anyone but the interpreters.
    The classic creeds from the Nicaean forward were attempts to cull the basics from Apostolic Christianity to bring order and clarity to the church. All they did was divide the church then, and today make understanding them as difficult as understanding the Bible. Homoousios anyone?
    A literal understanding of the words in the Bible is no help either. Whether the literalist understands it or not, there is no such thing as an uninterpreted text. Whatever lens we view the Bible through will control the outcome. And we all wear lenses.
    Now, as to the meaning of incomprehensible. The dictionaries basically define it as “unable to make sense.” My overall point is this: Because the Bible does not speak with one voice, but covers a variety of points of view, and even contradicts itself from time to time, one can’t expect its interpreters to do any better. This cacophony of interpretations is bewildering and finally debilitating to the average Bible reader who ultimately surrenders to what seems best, unable confidently to sort out the best among its many contenders. “This makes sense to me,” serves as the final judgment, because we make it make sense.
    Any “sense” made from the Bible, is a derivative sense, derived primarily from the approach taken in the reading. There is no obvious sense lying on the surface for any fool to see.
    None of this is, of course, the Bible’s fault. It has the inconvenience of being made up of words. Words are, after all, symbols, and symbols are capable of wide meaning, especially when read by people with different backgrounds and experiences. The meaning taken from the Bible varies greatly among women, minorities, third world, poor, oppressed, and oppressor (to name only a few). The meanings are so dissimilar that one sometimes wonders if they are reading the same book.
    The real question is, is this a problem? Not if you understand that diversity of interpretive outcomes is inevitable. In fact, diversity of interpretation, for those who remain tentative in their work, is welcome. Why? Because it acts as a corrective. If we remain humble before the text and are willing to listen to others, inch by inch, we may actually come to a more suitable outcome than simply camping on what seems good to us.
    This diversity of interpretations is also good for us. Paul’s advice that we “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling,” puts the burden on seeking and finding for ourselves, but not just by ourselves, but in community with other seekers. Only in community can we be exposed to correctives and also the motivation to live out our discovered truths. Even though we may never find the ultimate answer (we see in a mirror, darkly), journeying together has its own rewards. In a very substantial way, the enigma of the Bible is also its greatest good.
    Now I know what you’re thinking. I may be right about some of the more difficult areas of biblical interpretation, but the Bible is very clear on what we need to know for our salvation. Oh, really? Is Paul the authority that we are saved by grace through faith–not of works? Or is it James who says that we are not saved by faith alone? Or are the Restoration churches correct in insisting that baptism for the remission of sins is necessary for salvation, or the Baptists who believe that baptism follows salvation? And all are against the Calvinists who insist that humans have nothing to do with the decision! (We could go on, couldn’t we.)
    Therefore, in the words of Micah,
    “With what shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? Or, as Ecclesiastes would say, “This is the end of the matter.”


    Steve’s books can be viewed and ordered here: https://energiondirect.info/authors/authors-d-k/steve-kindle
  • Is God Schizophrenic?

    by Chris Surber

    Journey coverIf it is true that the Church is the visible witness to the glory of God in this world then it must surely follow that God is schizophrenic; at least, if I were an unbeliever, that’s what I’d think. In John 17:11 Jesus prayed to the Father for His disciples saying, “And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.” (ESV)
    If God is one and Jesus prayed that His disciples would be united as one, why is the Church so utterly replete with divisions of every kind? Some people say that God desires variety and that’s why we have so many different denominations. Others say that the division we see in the Body in the Christ is healthy as people live out different expressions of Christianity.
    We may attempt to redeem the division in the Church by resorting to labeling division diversity but that doesn’t really solve the basic reality that the Body of Christ is divided. We are not at all reflective of Jesus prayer in John 17:11.
    Commenting on broad divisions among the brethren, Puritan Pastor John Anderson wrote,
    “Immanent lights have arisen and shone forth among Independents and Episcopalians, but yet their defenses of Gospel truths, and their distinguished piety, do not make these different forms of religion any more agreeable to the word, but only show that we know in part, and prophesy in part; and that we ought to call no man master, nor follow any man, no matter how learned or pious, any farther than he follows Christ.” (Overcoming Division and Unifying the Visible Church: A Rebuke Against the Sin of Occasional Hearing 1794)
    God is one in Himself. He is unified in principle, personality and purpose. He is not at war with Himself, though His followers are often at war with one another. This should not be so, and we should fight against division by engaging in intentional acts of unification. The world is on the offensive against the Body of Christ.
    To varying extents, persecution is commonplace in most of the world. Meanwhile, we make of ourselves a soft target for the enemy because we are like a soldier with an auto-immune disease: We are busy attacking our self. There are practical ways to fight against division and that’s what it’s going to take to bring about unity.
    Here are three really practical ways you can seek unity in the Body of Christ:

    1. Start thinking more in terms of the Body of Christ in your community and less of the Body of Christ in terms of the denomination your individual church belongs to. I’ve seen God do miracles for unity by being a part of the local community of followers of Christ and letting go of denominational anxiety to protect the “brand.”
    1. Actively seek out fellowship with multi-denominational Bible Studies, benevolent societies, men’s and women’s groups, and Christian awareness projects. I’m not implying you abandon biblical truth to fellowship with folks who are Christian in name only, only that you start to see the Body of Christ a broader than your “clan.”
    1. Do your part to create a culture of reconciliation healing in your local fellowship. If a local church doesn’t seek unity within, members of that church are very unlikely to seek unity with other believers without.

    God isn’t divided. We shouldn’t be either. We won’t see pure unity among the faithful until Jesus returns for His bride. But in the meantime we can’t let religion of a denominational and divisive sort define the nature of our interaction with one another as followers of the master of mercy.


  • Tainted Love

    by Chris Surber

    GomorrahI was on a long drive recently while thinking about denominations and division in the Church when the song “Tainted Love” by Soft Cell came on. (Ya I get it… I’m a theology nerd stuck on 80’s pop…) I’ve heard those lyrics a thousand times but I heard in a new way. One part of the song goes like this:
    “Once I ran to you (I ran). Now I’ll run from you. This tainted love you’ve given. I give you all a boy could give you. Take my tears and that’s not nearly all. Tainted love (oh). Tainted love. Now I know I’ve got to. Run away, I’ve got to. Get away, you don’t really want any more from me. To make things right. You need someone to hold you tight. And you think love is to pray. But I’m sorry, I don’t pray that way.”
    There was a time when I loved religion. I once found a great deal of comfort in the sights and smells of religion. I found the charm of incense irresistible. Big steepled church buildings enthralled me for their grandeur and seeming connection with the divine. Formal liturgy once made me feel connected to something bigger than myself. I used to meander into the oldest church buildings I could find to pray and contemplate Christ. My intentions were good but now I don’t pray that way.
    I don’t pray in dusty sanctuaries because they feel holy. I still love church history but for different reasons now. I no longer pray as a way of feeling connected to the past but as a way of understanding more fully what God is doing today. Religion of a dry and dusty kind is tainted love. It’s seldom even a vehicle for the living breathing love of Jesus put on display in real terms.
    Religion of a light show and smoke filled auditorium isn’t any better. It’s just a new wave of love tainted by the sights and smells of modern culture. Just because you get rid of the pews and the oak pulpit doesn’t mean you got rid of religion. You just changed the methods, but the motivations and means are very likely exactly the same as they’ve always been – getting our way.
    In my book, Gomorrah was Religious Too, I wrote, “We have it backwards in the Church today. We venerate the church sanctuary built by human hands while we denigrate the sanctity and the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. We rely on our religion rather than His provision. The more modern local church is not less idolatrous in our day. In places where we have traded out stained glass for folding chairs, we elevate the method of ministry over the purpose of ministry. We rejoice over things that are not worthy of rejoicing.”
    Religious love is tainted love. If we want to have the power of God in our life in a way that really matters we’ve got to get beyond religion – whether it is of a dusty pipe organ or a contemporary rock variety. Tainted religion is tainted religion. Authenticity doesn’t come from taking off a suit and tie, and reverence to God doesn’t come as a natural result of wearing them.
    Religion that pleases God and brings real transformation power into our lives is a matter of the heart. It’s a matter of our heart connecting to God in Christ by faith and to fellow followers of Jesus by the presence of the Holy Spirit in us. Run from religion into the arms of Christ and the fellowship of other followers of Christ.
    Spit out the Kool-Aid of tainted religion and get back to those most basic principles of authentic Christianity. Pick up your walking stick, get shoulder to shoulder with some other people whom God has saved by faith in Jesus, and get busy following Him in this tainted world.


  • Getting Along with the Exes

    Getting Along with the Exes

    by Henry Neufeld, Publisher

    No, no, no! Not the ex-spouses. The ex-faiths!
    You see, while Jody and I were both members of a United Methodist congregation when we got married, we had both come to that place by leaving other churches. Jody was ex-Catholic, and I was ex-Seventh-day Adventist.
    These are both groups that have a bit of trouble with someone being ex. Ex-SDAs are viewed by more traditional Adventists as apostates. Having learned the important doctrines of the Sabbath, and understood the apostasy of fallen Protestantism, evidenced by their disobedience of the Sabbath command, and having once seemed to be a part of God’s true remnant people, the apostate has chosen, instead, to become God’s enemy and deny the true faith.
    There are those who don’t believe one can even be ex-Catholic. For a completely different set of reasons, an ex-Catholic is often seen as apostate, having left the one true, holy, and apostolic church for some sect. Their one hope, of course, is that they can be brought back into the fold in some way.
    Besides often having a hard time dealing with ex-members, there is another problem with an ex-Catholic/ex-SDA combination. SDAs are a step past protestants. They not only protest Roman Catholic doctrine. They protest the protestants who aren’t far enough away from Catholicism. If you talk to SDAs now, you will find that many have shed this prejudice and have admitted that the Catholic church of today is not the same as the church of the 15th and 16th centuries. History moves on and so do people. But there are still SDAs who think that distributing Ellen White’s book, The Great Controversy, is a good way to recruit new members. Evangelism, they would call it, as in evangelizing Christians who don’t have their doctrine right. The Great Controversy is a book that paints the Roman Catholic church in a very bad light with the Pope as the Antichrist. Indeed, demonize would be quite literally true of this description of Catholic life.
    Catholics, in turn, can hardly be happy about a group that sees them as heathen in need of evangelization. One of my professors, from whom I took both some French and also Patristic Latin, was an ex-Catholic priest. His conversion was considered such a coup that there was a story book for young people about his experiences and how he had moved from the false religion of Catholicism to become part of God’s remnant people. (Note: I have written in some detail about SDA doctrines on my blog Threads from Henry’s Web. Just put SDA in the search box.)
    I’ve painted a stark picture of the separation between our previous faiths for a reason. Neither of these descriptions is accurate for all members and even for all officials of these two churches.
    I recall two interesting encounters I’ve had. The first was with a Catholic priest at a local church. I had taken a very good friend to Mass there, always mildly uncomfortable for me as I must stay seated as the Eucharist is offered, while people struggle to get around me. I seem to never find a good place to be both there, and out of traffic, especially when I’m accompanying someone who is participating. When I was leaving the church, the priest was shaking hands and, being a rather friendly fellow (and I must confess an excellent preacher), he cornered me, welcomed me, and shook my hands. Regarding my home church I said with a smile, “I’m from the heretics down the road.” He laughed, slapped me on the back and said, “Please! Separated brethren! You’re a separated brother now!”
    The second was while taking one of my authors to a book signing and speaking engagement at a Seventh-day Adventist Church. (Energion Publications has several Seventh-day Adventist writers on its author list.) As the author signed books, I was accosted by a young man who said he worked at the conference office. He wondered how it was possible that one could have doctrinal problems with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and was determined to ask me about it. He was somewhat less determined to hear the answer.
    The pastor of that church, his wife, and a few of the leaders in the congregation took us to dinner following the event and apologized profusely for having let this happen to me. They didn’t think of me as an apostate and were quite happy to be in fellowship and ministry with me.
    I can certainly balance any incident of unkindness or discourtesy from either of our former faiths with incidents of kindness, dialogue, and Christian fellowship. I don’t want these positive aspects to be forgotten. But I want to focus on the negatives and how we can work through those negatives to a more positive result.
    Not every Methodist is the same, nor is every Baptist, nor every Presbyterian, nor every Seventh-day Adventist, nor every Catholic. Not even every Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, or—wait for it!—Muslim is the same as every other.
    What each of us need is a bit of reorientation.
    First, we need to reorient ourselves and find a new perspective on groups. Think for a minute about what I’ve said about these two groups. You should see a very clear similarity between them. Yes, there it is. Both groups tend to think of themselves as the true church and so see those who leave as departing from the truth and descending into falsehood.
    You should have caught a phrase I just used that’s off-kilter. If you didn’t, work on that reorientation. I said “both groups tend to think.” But really people, individuals, in both groups tend to think in this way. And that suggests a different way of carrying out relationships. Multiply the friendships and avoid cases of enmity.
    But, you may think, the authorities within the group encourage such negative thinking.
    But, you should think instead, the friendships and good relationships remain possible.
    As long as we define another group solely by its negatives, it will remain negative. In fact, by treating the group as a negative, we will tend to reinforce the negative attitude we, and they, already have.
    So while Jody’s family and mine questioned our respective backgrounds, Jody and I just went ahead and looked for the positives. What was it that we both knew because of our background that would help us as we moved ahead? And in fact we both have found positive elements from our upbringing, many of them common elements. We can both point to family members whose strong faith has been an encouragement to us. There is a depth to our understanding of who we are now that comes, in part, from our experience of where we have been.
    Neither of us are inclined to go back to our former denominations. But we can appreciate things about them.
    Respecting people, learning from them, finding positive elements of their belief systems, and making friendships does not mean that one has to approve of everything or accept everything. One can still recognize the negative. I find, for example, that the more authoritarian elements of both the Catholic and SDA systems are not conducive to spiritual growth. That’s one of many reasons I’m not going back. But that disapproval doesn’t mean that I can’t be friends.
    When Jody and I got married it was in a church that, at the time, was divided between an 11:00 am crowd and an 8:30 am crowd. The 8:30 crowd was contemporary and more spontaneous in worship style. It was also charismatic in theology as a general rule. The 11:00 crowd was traditional about its worship forms and generally Methodist mainstream in its theological positions. I had been, for some time, considered a member of the 11:00 crowd, but I had started attending both services. I did so because, as a teacher in the church, I felt it was my duty to be aware of “both” sides. (Note for further discussion: There are rarely just two sides to any two-sided issue.)
    So when Jody and I chose to get married and scheduled the service for right after church, people from both services came together, many for the first time in years. Our wedding music included contemporary praise and traditional organ music. We expressed, as we joined our lives together, our hope that all could come to appreciate the value of the contribution of others.
    It wasn’t just the exes that needed to be reconciled. It was the present. But the method was the same. It was by looking at and learning to appreciate what we could that we could bring together the best of streams of tradition within a single congregation, just as it is by learning to appreciate, building relationships, and bringing the best of our past faith communities together that we can build greater value from them.
    This is not toleration but celebration. It is not compromise, but growth. I believe it is also not being overcome by evil, but overcoming evil with good (Romans 12:21).


  • How do we treat testimony and the witness?

    by Doris Horton Murdoch

    Testify coverJohn 9:24-25, NASB: So a second time they (Pharisees) called the man who had been blind, and said to him, “Give glory to God; we know that this man [Jesus] is a sinner.” He then answered, “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know that though I was blind, now I see.”
    John 1:46. NASB: Nathaniel said to him, “Can any good come out of Nazareth?” Phillip said to him, “Come and see.”
    Jealousy and fear led to the accusation of Jesus being a sinner and not of God. Does unbelief and worldly desires cause division? What must the “believing body” be very careful of? Does the church question change in a person’s life when a testimony is shared? Does the body truly forgive others and find joy in one’s redemption? Does the body encourage and nurture the new believer to live out the shared testimony? What is our response to John 1:46?
    Check out Part I of the book, Testify: By the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of our Testimony.


    Order Testify: By the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of Our Testimony here: https://energiondirect.info/christian-living/testify
  • The risks of testifying in one's own congreation

    by Doris Horton Murdoch

    Testify coverJohn 8:31-32, NASB: So Jesus was saying to these Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth and the truth will make you free.”
    Is it culturally risky to share one’s testimony? Is it more difficult to share with church family than the unbelieving world? How does the church body respond to testimonials?
    When one has made a drastic change in life and shares a personal testimony, it may be difficult to share the testimony with long-term believers. One may be living in an environment that is not approved of by the congregation or may be in a job that requires Sunday obligations. The new believer may be marginalized by the congregation due to economics, education, disabilities, racism, misjudgment or misunderstandings. Persecution may come to the person who chooses to testify to the Truth of Jesus Christ. John 8:31-32 speaks of spiritual freedom through the Truth, Jesus Christ.
    Has the congregation that persecutes or segregates truly found freedom through the Truth? Does God expect us to damage our worldly reputation to become reputable witnesses for His Kingdom?


    Order Testify: By the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of Our Testimony here: https://energiondirect.info/christian-living/testify

     

  • YOU ARE GOD’S POEM

    by Nancy Petrey

    Habitation of HoneyAfter my book, Habitation of Honey: Poems and Songs, was published this May, I continued to write poems, and they came in quick succession. God would inspire me with a thought or a verse from Scripture, and the words would flow out in rhythm and rhyme. Writing a poem or a song is more fun and easier than writing prose. The advantage of poetry is that it isn’t complicated, it takes less time, and it encapsulates truth that can fly like an arrow to the heart.
    I wrote a poem, “His Shaft of Light,” as a poetic response to the shooting in the AME church in Charleston, South Carolina, and the subsequent controversy about the Confederate flag. Here is an excerpt of that poem:
    Ramping up the rhetoric, accusations rife,
    Doing all they can to get you into strife.
    Please don’t take the bait, and let your temper flare.
    Behind it all is Satan, of whom you’re not aware
    Principalities and powers, fanning flames of hate,
    People rush to judgment, but God calls out to wait.
    Pause and say a prayer to the One Who sees it all.
    Be a source of healing, be ready at His call
    .….
    Look for opportunities to be His shaft of light,
    When anger smokes and voices rage,
    His Spirit scatters night.
    Warfare is our portion, so it’s best that we obey
    Our Commander, the Messiah – He will lead the way.
    The next morning I awoke with a big question mark in my soul. Was this poem really from God or just my own “take” on the situation? I asked the Lord and then turned at random in the Bible to see if He would answer with a certain verse. It so happened I opened at Ephesians 2, and my eye fell on the little boxed-in section at the top right of the page, “Word Wealth,” with the definition of the Greek word for “workmanship” from the 10th verse: “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.”
    This is what I read: “Poiema (poy-ay-mah): from the verb poiea, ‘to make.’ (Compare ‘poem’ and ‘poetry.’)” OH! I GASPED! It was obvious God was speaking to me! I held the Bible to my chest and began to worship and thank Him for answering my question and convincing me that my poem was indeed from Him! Then I read on: “Poiema emphasizes God as the Master Designer, the universe as His creation and the redeemed believer as His NEW creation (Eph. 2:10). Before conversion our lives had no rhyme or reason. Conversion brought us balance, symmetry, and order. WE ARE GOD’S POEM, HIS WORK OF ART.”[1] Wow! Just to think that I am God’s work of art, His poem!
    Satan had tried to squelch my creative endeavor, but God graciously affirmed me as a poet. I was scheduled to speak at a women’s meeting a month later, and I shared my testimony about how God spoke to me in the midst of my doubts. Then I recited a new poem God had given me from Ephesians 2:10 just for this group of women, “God’s Poem.” Here is an excerpt:

    Put on His whole armor, quote His word out loud,
    You are God’s poem, of you He’s very proud.
    Maidens on the march, publishing His word,[2] As you speak in love, know that you’ll be heard.
    God wants a multitude, a wedding is His goal –
    Jesus and His bride, His poem to unfold.

    All my poems and songs in my book, Habitation of Honey, are based on Scripture. The recurring theme is the destiny of the Church as the Bride of Christ, her highest calling. I think of these poems as helping to prepare the way for the return of the Lord. John the Baptist did that the first time the Messiah came to earth. Remember, he ate locusts and wild honey in the wilderness. To be ready for the Bridegroom, the Bride needs to continually eat the honey – read and study the Scripture. These scriptural poems and songs can serve as daily devotionals. They are varied, some calling for action, some extolling the awesomeness of God in creation, and some contemplative. I need this one, “Sit Quietly” (an excerpt):
    As the butterfly flitting from flower to flower,
    You’ve tasted the nectar in this world’s hour.
    Your wings have shimmered with light from above,
    But I would tuck you under my wing, little dove.
    You’ll never want to fly away,
    Nestled by Me, you’ll want to stay.
    You will hear my heart, if you lie very still,
    And you’ll have my power working in your will…
    There are seasons in life, and you’ve run the race,
    But nothing is better than seeing My face.
    Sit quietly now, look up at My smile.
    I’ve been gazing at you a long, long while.
    What kind of poem is God making of your life? What truth is He displaying through His workmanship in your life? What facet of His beauty, power, and love is He showing forth in the poetry of your life? You are God’s poem! Rejoice!

    [1] Jack W. Hayford, Gen. Ed., Spirit-Filled Life Bible (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, New King James Version, 1991), p. 1789.
    [2] Psalm 68:11 – “The Lord gave the word, great was the company [feminine noun] of those who proclaimed it.”


    Order Habitation of Honey: Poems and Songs here: https://energiondirect.info/christian-living/habitation-of-honey
  • 3 WAYS TO TELL IF YOU’RE A MODERN “BELTER”

    3 WAYS TO TELL IF YOU’RE A MODERN “BELTER”

    by Nick May

     Cover1When I wrote MEGABELT, the “Bible Belt” South had the market cornered on funny traditions, religious stereotypes and condemnation disguised as good-natured child rearing. Back then, it was easy to tell if you were a Belter. Like Gil (my main character), you attended a gospel sing followed by an ice cream social, you knew not to use a lowercase “g” when referring to the God of Abraham, and you may have even fooled around in the back of a church van. Things are nowhere near as black and white as they used to be. We live in a very different version of the Belt today. Here are 3 ways you can tell if you’re a modern Belter.
    You’re not exactly sure what the protocol is for saying the blessing anymore.
    In MEGABELT, I poked a lot of fun at the idea of “blessing” meals or people who just sneezed. The question was never “Who’s gonna do it?” Instead, it was “Really, what’s the thought process behind this?” Now that my little novella has liberated so many from these empty traditions (I also started the YoYo craze of 1998), the question has morphed into the panic-stricken uncertainty of “Should we even cast a magical spell over our food at all?”
    Church is something you occasionally give yourself a break from.
    In Gil’s South, church was what you did. It was what everyone did. And if you didn’t do it, you lied about it and said you did. Today, church attendance is something you feel the need to purge yourself from every now and then. You post an Instagram of yourself “Worshiping the creator at the beach today. #blessed” It’s something we do as much as working, and something we get as shifty with as our three hour night classes at the community college.
    You sometimes miss the simplicity of your parents’ Jesus.
    Gil couldn’t wait to get away from his parents’ church. There was nothing to get excited about; nothing to work towards (other than perfect attendance). Today, Belters are so much more aware of what’s behind the curtain. They know the ins and outs of churches that appear to be fruitful and busy. The things that used to leave you dissatisfied (like a lack of programming, serving opportunities and easily understood sermons), now seem like precious commodities.
    Whether you admit it or not, chances are you can identify with one or more of these things. If you’re familiar with all three, well then ring a bell, you’re a Mod Belter. Maybe you were offended by one or more of these statements. That would be swell. Let’s hear it. Tell us what is that you miss about the old Belt, and let us know what other designations you think fit on this list. Until next time, god bless.


  • How is the church to interpret the cross of Jesus today?

    by William Powell Tuck

    CrossWithout question, the cross is the central symbol of Christianity. But the centrality of the cross is far more than symbolic; it represents finality– an act of God. As Paul is bold to claim, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” (II Cor. 5:19). Through the central act of the cross, Jesus died once for all for the sins of humanity. Paul and other New Testament writers put the cross t the heart of their preaching and teaching. Paul declared that he delivered to the churches what he had received from earlier Christians how Christ died for our sins (I Cor. 15:3 and 11:23).
    Many today wonder what the death of a prophet from Nazareth, who lived two thousand years ago, has to do with them. “What could be its relevance for me now?” they ask. But I think F. W. Dillistone is correct when he boldly states in his book, The Christian Understanding of Atonement, “Indeed I am confident that there is no doctrine of the Christian faith which has more points of contact with life in the modern age.” The cross of Jesus addresses our emptiness, aloneness, suffering, pain, rejection, sins, alienation, and the questions arising out of God’s silence.
    The variety of images which Paul used to write about the death of Jesus shows that the cross touches life at many places. It is my prayer that those who read these pages about the cross of Jesus will sense anew the point of contact which this cross makes with their lives. The cross of Christ is not merely an ancient event which occurred two thousand years ago, but curiously affects our present situation today.
    William law, captured the truth of the centrality of the cross over 200 years ago in the following words from A Serious Call to A Devout and Holy Life:
    The Christian’s great conquest over the world is all contained in the mystery of Christ upon the Cross. It was there, and from thence, that He taught all Christians how they were to come out of, and conquer the world, and what they were to do in order to be His disciples. And all the doctrines, Sacraments, and institutions of the Gospel are only so many explications of the meaning, and applications of the benefit, of this great mystery.
    The New Testament is filled with many images which the various writers employ to depict the power of God which was revealed in the cross of Christ. Paul used the image of justification which he took from the law courts. He drew pictures of redemption and emancipation from the slave market, reconciliation from the image of friendship, adoption from family life, propitiation or ransom from the sacrificial system of Judaism, sanctification from their worship practices, and the view of setting person’s account right from the accounting system. Many theologians have built their theological system around one of these pictures.
    But the New Testament does not give just one interpretation of Christ’s death on the cross. There are many. A casual glimpse into the New Testament discloses images of Christ’s death as sacrifice, substitution, metaphors drawn from the law courts, expiation, forensic, satisfaction, example, revelation, deliverer, representative, suffering servant, lamb, and many others.
    No single one of these images contains all of the truth about what God has done in Christ’s death. All of these images underscore the great mystery involved in the God who has loved and redeemed us on the cross. The cross can never be reduced to images of legal, judicial, transferring of guilt, paying off a debt, contracts with the devil, appeasing an angry God, etc. All of these images are just illustrations of the power and mystery of what God has done in Christ on the cross. No one of these pictures can contain the whole of the mystery.
    In my book, The Church under the Cross, I seek to examine the unfathomable meaning of the cross for the church today.


  • The Church of Every Place, pt. 2

    by Darren M. McClellan

    CoverAnd now, for a continuation on a previous post regarding a theology of mission. Specifically, I invite you to reconsider the stereotypical notion of the church as a “place.” I get it, you say. The church is not a building, the church is not a steeple…the church is the people. Hand motions are optional.
    Most of us get the idea, but reality is another matter. What is the consequence of failing to execute the practice of church and settling for the mere existence of place?
    In his work The Missional Church: A Sending of the Church in North America, Darrell Guder explains that

    This perception of the church gives little attention to the church as a communal entity or presence, and it stresses even less the community’s role as the bearer of missional responsibility throughout the world, both near and far away. ‘Church’ is conceived in this view as the place where a Christianized civilization gathers for worship, and the place where the Christian character of a society is cultivated. Increasingly, this view of the church as ‘a place where certain things happen’ located the church’s self-identity in its organizational forms and its professional class, the clergy who perform the church’s authoritative activities. Popular grammar captures it well: you ‘go to church’ much the same way that you might got to the store. You ‘attend’ a church, the way you attend a school or theater. You ‘belong to a church’ as you would a service club with its programs and activities. (p. 80)

    It should be noted that the missionary movement of the nineteenth century did little to alter the western churches’ self-conception that the church was primarily a place. As David Bosch went on to say, it was not until the twentieth century that this self-perception gave way to a new understanding of the church as a body of people sent on a mission.
    Again from Guder,

    Unlike the previous notion of the church as an entity located in a facility or in an institutional organization and its activities, the church is being reconceived as a community, a gathered people, brought together by a common calling and vocation to be a sent people….From the mid-twentieth century on, biblical and theological foundations for such a communal and missional view of the church have blossomed…A now global church recognized that the church of any place bears missional calling and responsibility for its own place as well as for distant places. The church of every place, it realized, is a mission-sending church, and the place of every church is a mission-receiving place. (p. 81, italics mine).

    I am struck by Guder’s influence here, as evident in my own work Out of This World. There, I examine this missional mindset through the lenses of John Wesley and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. The task, if I may borrow a line from John’s little brother Charles, is to reassess what must be done “to serve this present age, our calling to fulfill.”
    What would it mean for us to be the “church of every place”? What change would be necessary?
    To what degree are we both a mission-sending and mission-receiving church?


     

Energion Direct
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.