yesterday at the winds we received a special offering for our pastors as a christmas gift.
from carmel and i, i'd just like to say thanks to all of you who gave (and gave generously) to us and to our staff. it is very touching to receive such a tangible demonstration of your appreciation for our ministry.
you are too kind.
thanks, too, to all the staff at westwinds who (along with our heroic elders) have walked through fire with us. i think it's safe to say we've put our ghosts to rest, our past behind, and are looking forwards to increasingly wonder-filled days of serving jesus in a one-of-a-kind church.
everything we've won through together has come at a personal cost to you and your families. i am proud to serve with you.
again - thanks to everyone who has made this year at westwinds such a fantastically monumental year of advance.
d.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Sunday, December 7, 2008
A Russian church for a Saudi mosque?
This delightful story just came in thanks to getreligion.org: The Saudis have recently asked permission to build a mosque in Moscow, a city where there are only four mosques and 2 million Muslims. The Russians, however, are saying they want, in return, an Orthodox church in Saudi Arabia.
As we all know, the Saudis have a habit of constructing mosques in dozens of world capitals while forbidding houses of worship for any religion whatsoever outside its Wahabist brand of Islam. They've gotten some bad PR locally for some of the hate language in textbooks at the Saudi Academy in northern Virginia. Not only are hapless Christians terrorized and jailed for daring to hold private prayer services in Saudi Arabia, but God help them should they try to convert someone to their religion. And that's for a fellow People of the Book: One can only guess at what the treatment of Buddhists and Hindus must be like.
Wouldn't it be so ironic if the Russians were the first Christian body to win acceptance of the right to build a church in, say, Riyadh? (Some of the Russians are calling for a church in Mecca, but the chances of any other religion getting a foothold within walking distance of the world center of Islam is less than zero.) Of course we all know the Saudis aren't about ready to let Bibles or other religious literature, let alone a church, anywhere near their homeland, but all the same, it's amusing to see the Russians give the Saudis a taste of their own medicine.
As we all know, the Saudis have a habit of constructing mosques in dozens of world capitals while forbidding houses of worship for any religion whatsoever outside its Wahabist brand of Islam. They've gotten some bad PR locally for some of the hate language in textbooks at the Saudi Academy in northern Virginia. Not only are hapless Christians terrorized and jailed for daring to hold private prayer services in Saudi Arabia, but God help them should they try to convert someone to their religion. And that's for a fellow People of the Book: One can only guess at what the treatment of Buddhists and Hindus must be like.
Wouldn't it be so ironic if the Russians were the first Christian body to win acceptance of the right to build a church in, say, Riyadh? (Some of the Russians are calling for a church in Mecca, but the chances of any other religion getting a foothold within walking distance of the world center of Islam is less than zero.) Of course we all know the Saudis aren't about ready to let Bibles or other religious literature, let alone a church, anywhere near their homeland, but all the same, it's amusing to see the Russians give the Saudis a taste of their own medicine.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
open source theology
the theology we need is like an OPEN SOURCE OS
open source OS (like linux or ubuntu) is a user-interface created by geeky guys in their bedrooms that will do everything you want on your computer for free. it will run every program (including making programs - for free - that typically cost upwards of $1000) and any problem you ever have can be solved by receiving free advice from other open source users.(they help because they are sooooo excited that yet one more person has discovered the wonder of an open OS.)
open source OS will do anything you need it to. it will run anything you need it to. it's harder to understand...waaay harder to use...but the rewards are infinite.
unpacking the metaphor: we need to be less concerned about making everything "fit" into one system of thinking and more concerned with being open enough to embrace the movement of god...even (or perhaps especially) when it's confusing, mysterious, or unexpected.
we need to read ALL of the bible in its original context in mind of its original audience...not just pieces of the bible that say things we like, or bits of the bible that seem (at first) like they were meant just for us and our friends.
we need to read the bible with our traditions, allowing scripture to edit those traditions when we discover that some of our favorite things actually have no basis in scripture.
above all? we need to realize that the WHOLE POINT of any OS (read "theology") is so that we can use the programs (read "gifts"and "fruits" of the spirit)...so we need to constantly be evaluating ourselves (and our OS/theology) on the basis of whether or not we're loving people better, serving god more wholly, and being more useful in god's mission to save the world.
and dangers? are there any big dangers to this open source theology? YES...absolutely. the biggest danger comes from anyone who latches onto an idea that is neither biblically substantive nor open to testing by other leaders and thinkers (i.e. their idea is complete crap but they refuse to acknowledge it...so they become a cult leader). without systemic accountability anyone can run with any idea regardless of how kooky it is...the only way to avoid this danger is to open ourselves to dialogue, attend to our critics, and lean on the creeds as pillars of our orthodox confidence.
but - even with this very dark danger in mind - the rewards for faithfully following jesus are worth the risk of turning into a weirdo.
it's better for us to uphold the values of studying the scripture and opening ourselves to a more robust and deep-feeling experience of god through prayer and the guidance of the spirit...than simply memorizing a bunch of retread theology done by the swiss and the germans five centuries ago (or the italians and the french one millenia ago).
contemporary examples of the good OS: rob bell, tom wright, peter rollins, michael frost & alan hirsch, len sweet
historical examples of the bad OS: david koresch, jim jones
open source OS (like linux or ubuntu) is a user-interface created by geeky guys in their bedrooms that will do everything you want on your computer for free. it will run every program (including making programs - for free - that typically cost upwards of $1000) and any problem you ever have can be solved by receiving free advice from other open source users.(they help because they are sooooo excited that yet one more person has discovered the wonder of an open OS.)
open source OS will do anything you need it to. it will run anything you need it to. it's harder to understand...waaay harder to use...but the rewards are infinite.
unpacking the metaphor: we need to be less concerned about making everything "fit" into one system of thinking and more concerned with being open enough to embrace the movement of god...even (or perhaps especially) when it's confusing, mysterious, or unexpected.
we need to read ALL of the bible in its original context in mind of its original audience...not just pieces of the bible that say things we like, or bits of the bible that seem (at first) like they were meant just for us and our friends.
we need to read the bible with our traditions, allowing scripture to edit those traditions when we discover that some of our favorite things actually have no basis in scripture.
above all? we need to realize that the WHOLE POINT of any OS (read "theology") is so that we can use the programs (read "gifts"and "fruits" of the spirit)...so we need to constantly be evaluating ourselves (and our OS/theology) on the basis of whether or not we're loving people better, serving god more wholly, and being more useful in god's mission to save the world.
and dangers? are there any big dangers to this open source theology? YES...absolutely. the biggest danger comes from anyone who latches onto an idea that is neither biblically substantive nor open to testing by other leaders and thinkers (i.e. their idea is complete crap but they refuse to acknowledge it...so they become a cult leader). without systemic accountability anyone can run with any idea regardless of how kooky it is...the only way to avoid this danger is to open ourselves to dialogue, attend to our critics, and lean on the creeds as pillars of our orthodox confidence.
but - even with this very dark danger in mind - the rewards for faithfully following jesus are worth the risk of turning into a weirdo.
it's better for us to uphold the values of studying the scripture and opening ourselves to a more robust and deep-feeling experience of god through prayer and the guidance of the spirit...than simply memorizing a bunch of retread theology done by the swiss and the germans five centuries ago (or the italians and the french one millenia ago).
contemporary examples of the good OS: rob bell, tom wright, peter rollins, michael frost & alan hirsch, len sweet
historical examples of the bad OS: david koresch, jim jones
wesleyan theology is like WINDOWS OS
wesleyan and lutheran theology are like windows.
there's a widerange of availability. the old OS versions often work better than the new ones. it becomes frustrating to upgrade all of the time, but the payoff is pretty good because there is always newer and newer software that works on virtually every computer.
however, the OS crashes all of the time, when you need the OS to solve a problem you've caused by overloading it.
to unpack the metaphor: there is great freedom in wesleyan churches...freedom to grow, to learn, to discover christ and the freedom that he brings
but there is also a great deal of confusion...people often feel like there is no "one truth" or that any reading of the scriptures counts as a valid interpretation. grace is often taken for granted and transformation typically ends right after a single sinner's prayer is prayer.
contemporary examples of the good: greg boyd, earl creps,
historical examples of the bad: dennis rader (infamous serial killer), leni riefenstahl (nazi propaganda filmmaker)
there's a widerange of availability. the old OS versions often work better than the new ones. it becomes frustrating to upgrade all of the time, but the payoff is pretty good because there is always newer and newer software that works on virtually every computer.
however, the OS crashes all of the time, when you need the OS to solve a problem you've caused by overloading it.
to unpack the metaphor: there is great freedom in wesleyan churches...freedom to grow, to learn, to discover christ and the freedom that he brings
but there is also a great deal of confusion...people often feel like there is no "one truth" or that any reading of the scriptures counts as a valid interpretation. grace is often taken for granted and transformation typically ends right after a single sinner's prayer is prayer.
contemporary examples of the good: greg boyd, earl creps,
historical examples of the bad: dennis rader (infamous serial killer), leni riefenstahl (nazi propaganda filmmaker)
reformed theology is MAC OS
catholic and reformed theology are, in my mind, akin to MAC OS.
they are easy to use and quick to learn. the OS is intuitive and you always know where to get answers. they only work with their own software, however, and much of their energy goes towards advertising the flaws in other operating systems. plus, they prohibit you from doing anything other than exactly what they want you to do.
to unpack the metaphor: these theologies have got everything figured out. they sew up all complexity neatly and tidily. they leave no stone unturned.
or so they think
in actuality, there are a million little questions for which these theologies have no good answer...and you'll be damned straightaway is you start asking them. furthermore, if you ever find some of their "perfect" answers less than perfect, you'll be considered a heretic and promptly be subjected to church discipline.
when these theologies work, they work great - lives are transformed, people find faith in christ jesus, etc.
but when they don't work things fall apart fast - leading to violent and harsh beliefs, lack of love, and love of religion instead of the way of jesus.
contemporary examples of the good OS: pope john paul II, ronald rolheiser, mother theresa, ed setzer, john piper
historical examples of the bad OS: hitler, tsar nicholar II, sam bowens (founder of the KKK)
they are easy to use and quick to learn. the OS is intuitive and you always know where to get answers. they only work with their own software, however, and much of their energy goes towards advertising the flaws in other operating systems. plus, they prohibit you from doing anything other than exactly what they want you to do.
to unpack the metaphor: these theologies have got everything figured out. they sew up all complexity neatly and tidily. they leave no stone unturned.
or so they think
in actuality, there are a million little questions for which these theologies have no good answer...and you'll be damned straightaway is you start asking them. furthermore, if you ever find some of their "perfect" answers less than perfect, you'll be considered a heretic and promptly be subjected to church discipline.
when these theologies work, they work great - lives are transformed, people find faith in christ jesus, etc.
but when they don't work things fall apart fast - leading to violent and harsh beliefs, lack of love, and love of religion instead of the way of jesus.
contemporary examples of the good OS: pope john paul II, ronald rolheiser, mother theresa, ed setzer, john piper
historical examples of the bad OS: hitler, tsar nicholar II, sam bowens (founder of the KKK)
theology is an OS
because of some personal junk i've been thinking through lately (see my last 2 blog posts), i've come to think of all systematic theology as being an operating system.
an operating system allows you to access the programs installed on your computer.
in our little metaphor here, the operating system is our theology and the "programs" are the gifts of the spirit and the fruits of the spirit.
(remember...this is just a metaphor)
anyway, i think we forget that our theology is really just a way for us to better understand how god wants us to live and to whom we owe our allegiance.
god wants us to live self-sacrificially (kenotically...for you theology dorks)
and god wants our total and complete allegiance to him and his kingdom at the expense of everything else.
our theology SERVES THE PURPOSE of transforming us into people who shadow god in every moment.
if, then, our theology does not lead us into this kind of life it is useless and flawed (jesus said: you'll know a tree by its fruit...ergo, if your theology doesn't produce fruit that transforms you into a more loving, self-sacrificial, penitent follower of christ then your theology is broken).
ok...more later...
an operating system allows you to access the programs installed on your computer.
in our little metaphor here, the operating system is our theology and the "programs" are the gifts of the spirit and the fruits of the spirit.
(remember...this is just a metaphor)
anyway, i think we forget that our theology is really just a way for us to better understand how god wants us to live and to whom we owe our allegiance.
god wants us to live self-sacrificially (kenotically...for you theology dorks)
and god wants our total and complete allegiance to him and his kingdom at the expense of everything else.
our theology SERVES THE PURPOSE of transforming us into people who shadow god in every moment.
if, then, our theology does not lead us into this kind of life it is useless and flawed (jesus said: you'll know a tree by its fruit...ergo, if your theology doesn't produce fruit that transforms you into a more loving, self-sacrificial, penitent follower of christ then your theology is broken).
ok...more later...
retraction...and frustration
i've removed my most recent post (formerly titled "pathetic") in which i said some pointed things about another pastor.
i was angry - having just finished reading 4 of his books in which he blasted other church leaders by name - and felt like i needed to steer our people (and many of my friends) away from his ministry and his influence.
anyway - carmel (my wife) told me i'd committed the same sins i was frustrated with this pastor for making by virtue of writing this angry blog post.
she was right.
so, i've removed the old post; but am feeling a little frustrated about how to interrupt the growing influence of this other pastor whose theology is good and clear (though narrow and strictly reformed) and whose preaching is exceptional (though angry and frequently slanderous).
i just don't want the people i love and am called to serve to think that right theology is somehow more important than right behavior, right relationship, or right missional activity. those four things go together (or at least they should) and when somone emphasizes 1 over the other 3 things get very much out-of-balance and can cause serious real-life damage.
historically, we have many, many examples of people whose theology was perfect but whose lives were almost the exact opposite of christ. everyone from the inquisitors to the crusaders and the nazis to the klu klux klan used pristine, biblical theology to justify dehumanizing other people, using violent rhetoric that erupted into violent action.
theology, then, is obviously not the only thing we need to consider while following jesus.
truth be told, though; most of the justification for acting like an ass comes from an overemphasies on pauline theology.
paul was brilliant, inspired by the holy spirit, and has taught us much about how to be the church.
but he's not the only author in the new testament for a reason.
his harshness (and that of james') must always be read alongside peter (who taught us to suffer well) and john (who taught us to love always) and jude (who warned us against teachers whose lives misrepresented christ jesus).
not to mention jesus' own words which - above anything else - taught us to love god and love one another self-sacrificially.
so - i'm frustrated...frustrated that many good and godly people who are becoming excited about theology for the first time may very well miss the forest for the trees.
they'll get their reformed (regurgitated) calvinist (calculus) doctrine perfect...
...but end up following the example of their teacher and becoming hateful, prejudicial, and unchristlike.
and that makes me sad.
i was angry - having just finished reading 4 of his books in which he blasted other church leaders by name - and felt like i needed to steer our people (and many of my friends) away from his ministry and his influence.
anyway - carmel (my wife) told me i'd committed the same sins i was frustrated with this pastor for making by virtue of writing this angry blog post.
she was right.
so, i've removed the old post; but am feeling a little frustrated about how to interrupt the growing influence of this other pastor whose theology is good and clear (though narrow and strictly reformed) and whose preaching is exceptional (though angry and frequently slanderous).
i just don't want the people i love and am called to serve to think that right theology is somehow more important than right behavior, right relationship, or right missional activity. those four things go together (or at least they should) and when somone emphasizes 1 over the other 3 things get very much out-of-balance and can cause serious real-life damage.
historically, we have many, many examples of people whose theology was perfect but whose lives were almost the exact opposite of christ. everyone from the inquisitors to the crusaders and the nazis to the klu klux klan used pristine, biblical theology to justify dehumanizing other people, using violent rhetoric that erupted into violent action.
theology, then, is obviously not the only thing we need to consider while following jesus.
truth be told, though; most of the justification for acting like an ass comes from an overemphasies on pauline theology.
paul was brilliant, inspired by the holy spirit, and has taught us much about how to be the church.
but he's not the only author in the new testament for a reason.
his harshness (and that of james') must always be read alongside peter (who taught us to suffer well) and john (who taught us to love always) and jude (who warned us against teachers whose lives misrepresented christ jesus).
not to mention jesus' own words which - above anything else - taught us to love god and love one another self-sacrificially.
so - i'm frustrated...frustrated that many good and godly people who are becoming excited about theology for the first time may very well miss the forest for the trees.
they'll get their reformed (regurgitated) calvinist (calculus) doctrine perfect...
...but end up following the example of their teacher and becoming hateful, prejudicial, and unchristlike.
and that makes me sad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
