Christian history in a nutshell?

Recently on a discussion board I came across this quote which is both inaccurate and annoying:

"Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it went to Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business."

I know this quote is posted up all over the internet. It is an attempt to sum up Christian history in a very convenient, very protestant, very individualistic nutshell. Hopefully this blog will be read by someone to put this lie to rest:

FINDING YOUR STORY IN HIS STORY

A Sermon For Year A, Second Advent

Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Isa. 11:1-10; Rom. 15:4-13; Mat. 3:1-12; Psa. 72
With special thanks to CS Lewis, NT Wright, and Brian McLaren

What is your favorite story? I'm not looking for the Sunday school answer. But really: What story captures your imagination so that you read it, or see it, or listen to it, time and time again? What story gives shape to the narrative of your life?

HOW TO WIN THE CHRISTMAS WARS

A Sermon For Year A, Advent 1

Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Romans 13.8-14

Ahhh! Advent! The beginning of our Church year. The time when Christians all over the world begin to prepare themselves spiritually for the arrival of our Lord.

In the Church, our color is purple. Purple is the color of Royalty. The color of Kings. The color for King Jesus, the God who became human. Our candles are lit awaiting his arrival.

Outside of the Church, the color is green and red. It is the color of ancient pagan revelry, the celebration of winter solstice.

Our garlands are wrapped, our trees are trimmed, our credit cards are getting maxed out.

You know what time it is: It is time for the cultural Christmas wars!

CHRISTARCHY

A Sermon For Christ the King Sunday, Year C

Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Jeremiah 23:1-6, Colossians 1:11-20, Luke 23:35-43

Not so long ago, in a suburb not so far away, there lived skater-punk, who rode around on his well worn skateboard, with hair in his eyes, a concert t-shirt, ripped up jeans, half destroyed converse shoes, and something between a smirk and a sneer constantly glued on his face.

And if you looked close at his skateboard, or his shoes, or his jeans, or his notebooks, or the back of his hand, you would see scrawled a circle with an "A" in the middle of it:

The international punk rock sign for ANARCHY.

Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out?

Today, a friend named Jake facebooked me this question:

-----------------------------
From Today's English Version Good News Bible: Deuteronomy 3:3 So the Lord also placed King Og and his people in our power and we slaughtered them all.

SLAUGHTERED.

Slaughtered seems a bit rough dontcha think? Why was God getting his people to be so violent and if it weren't God's intentions to be so gruesome dontcha think he would have stepped in? Continued in that chapter verses 6 and 7 speak of having put to death men, women and children and then taking livestock and plundering the towns.

Something about that seems wrong. If it were huge sinners that God ordered to be killed that might be different, but then we probably wouldn't be taking their livestock because I would think them to be "plagued by the sin of their owners" or something of that nature. So what's the deal?
-----------------------------

My Answer:

Anglican versus Andersonian Ecclesiology

Alright. I am just as tired of "conservative" schismatics, as I am of "revisionist" heretics. I need a little ranting room, if you don't mind. I do not know what to post first here, so I will let you (the reader) decide. This article is about an email I received from David Anderson of the American Anglican Council (one of the soon-to-be schismatic groups vying for American conservative Anglicans and their money).

I have pasted the email at the end, with my own paragraph markings [] for easy reference. Anytime you see a number inside [ ], that is a reference to Anderson's letter. The people referred to in the article are Rowan++ (the archbishop of Canterbury) and John Howe+ (the bishop of Central Florida).

Anderson writes an odd, and somewhat unconnected letter about what is wrong with the way Rowan++ perceives the Church, and underlying his critique, there seems to be a radical revision of Anglican ecclesiology going on in Anderson's mind. Ecclesiology, if you do not know, is the doctrine of the Church (ekklesia), what the Church is, how She is led, and what She does. This article is an attempt to tease out this new, revisionist "Andersonian" ecclesiology (and why it is neither Biblical nor Anglican).

MY ADDRESS TO DIOCESE CONVENTION 2007

Well, this weekend was the annual convention for the Diocese of Dallas. There was a possibility of things being really contentious (with everything going on in the National Church, and the Anglican Communion). But, I have to hand it to our bishop and our whole Diocese family: We all did a good job of holding it together. I am proud of us.

At the convention I was elected to be one of our representatives to our Province. For those who are Episcopal-challenged, here is an outline of our Church organization, and what a Province is: The basic unit of the Church is the Diocese, which is the entire Church in a geographic region (think of it like this: When Paul writes to "The Church in Rome" or "The Church in Galatia", he is writing to every Christian in that entire area, whether or not they meet in several locations or not. This region is a Diocese).

Within each Diocese are dozens of parishes, or local manifestations of the Church (think of it like this: At the end of Romans when Paul speaks of individual house-churches within the entire Roman Church, this is like a Parish). Now, for the purpose of organizing together, Dioceses are usually grouped in Provinces, which are made up of multiple Dioceses. And provinces make up national churches (like the Church of England, Nigeria, or the United States). Then all of these national Churches make up the whole Anglican Communion. There are some exceptions to this rule (hey, we're Anglican, and there's always exceptions), but this is the general outline.

So, it goes like this from small to big: Parish - DIOCESE - Province - National Church - Worldwide Communion. Make sense?

SOLDIERS, FARMERS, AND ATHLETES

A Sermon For Year C, Proper 23
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

-------------------------------
2 Timothy 2:3-15
-------------------------------

SERMON: I was wondering: Just between you and me, do the Bible readings on Sunday ever make you uncomfortable? Do you ever feel like you come to worship for joy and encouragement, only to be confronted with ideas that are uncomfortable and perplexing?

I mean, we have had a difficult month of readings. Last week, we heard the prophet Habakkuk get angry and ask God hard questions about how he could let the wicked prosper and the righteous perish.

The week before that we heard Jesus tell a story about a rich man suffering in the flames of hell. And the week before that Jesus told us a parable about how an embezzling manager not only got away with embezzlement, but was rewarded for his shrewdness in doing so!

These readings do not leave us with a warm fuzzy feeling. They often leave us with more questions than answers: questions about God's justice, about God's goodness, about the purity of our own motives, and about our eternal destiny. These are hard questions. Disturbing questions.

ANGRY WITH GOD

A Sermon For Year C, Proper 22
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

-------------------------------
Based on Habakkuk 1:1-13;2:1-4
-------------------------------

SERMON: Quick quiz: As followers of Jesus, what is the proper range of emotions to express in our relationship with God? What are the "correct" emotional responses to feel toward God?

Well, as Jesus followers from the Episcopal tribe, we are very comfortable with reverence. We like to be reverent toward God, with a sort of muted awe, silent admiration, and inward appreciation of God's beauty. We know what it means to "worship the Lord in the splendor of holiness".

We also value thoughtfulness. We like to meditate on God, without being given the "answers", as we look at ideas about God in our imagination. We truly value asking difficult questions, and deeply pondering the possible answers. In fact, sometimes we so deeply value thinking ABOUT God, that we fail talk TO God!

But, that's another sermon...

ONE HELL OF A SERMON

A Sermon For Proper 21 Year C
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

-------------------------------
Based on 1 Timothy 6:11-19; Luke 16:19-31
-------------------------------

After hearing a Gospel reading like that, I bet I know what many people are thinking "Is he really serious about all of this eternal torment stuff?"

And it is not Jesus who we are talking about. Many of us assume that Jesus' "hell parables" are either over-exaggerations intended to make us behave, or simply deluded holdovers from a backwards world-view, that believes in eternal torment.

Now, since most of us want to make Jesus into the prototypical enlightened humanist, we prefer to say that he was not deluded. Instead, he was just exaggerating. His is giving us a carrot and a stick to make us into nice people. The carrot is heaven, and the stick is the threat of hell.

T.E.C. TAC TOE: Who will win in "The Episcopal Church"?

2018 UPDATE: I disagree with much of the content in this blog now, and am keeping it online only as evidence of how I have evolved and grown in Christ.  

I want to start out with a bit of honesty. I have hesitated finishing this article because I did not want to say anything negative about Christ Church leaving the Diocese of Dallas. But, I cannot help it. I feel shocked, saddened, and betrayed by the actions of Christ Church. I feel hurt, like a man whose friend flees when the fight gets too tough. I feel more hurt by them than anything New Hampshire or the national church has ever done, because what they did is more personal. CS Lewis says that the devil sends error into the world in twos, so that by avoiding one you fall into the other. Well, Christ Church has answered the heresy of the national church with schism, and last I checked neither is pleasing to Christ. May God have mercy on us all.

Before Christ Church went into schism; many people asked me what my take is on the crisis in the national church, and what I think our response should be. The words I emailed them then are even more appropriate now in light of recent events. And I want to begin by saying that I have real problems with many people on the "extremes" in the debate. In this debate, there are really four sides, not just two. Here are the key players:

A TALE OF FOUR GOSPELS

A Sermon For Year C Proper 18
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Luke 14.25-33

SERMON: What is the best news you have ever had? Can you remember a time when you sat around, waiting, wondering, hoping… Just to hear some news- some GOOD news- about something or someone you cared about deeply?

What was that good news? Was it news that someone you liked, liked you in return? Was it news that someone survived, made it through, and made it home? Was it news that all the tests came in, and it wasn't as bad as everyone thought it might be?

On the Difference Between the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Church

2021 Disclaimer: This post is now 15 years old, and a great deal has happened with Anglican separatist groups splitting and merging in the United States over the last decade and a half. My understanding is that this has shifted the theology and practice of the Reformed Episcopal Church away from their reformed roots (outlined below), and toward traditional Anglo-Catholicism, which is very interesting considering the founding principles of the REC. Understanding the basics of this shift can be helped by understanding the overall history and theology of Anglicanism.

In 2007, one of my college students asked me the following question:

I went to a reformed Episcopal church on Sunday. The church was beautiful but the service was so different. I noticed that the BCP 1928 seemed to be a lot different than what I was used to. whats up with that? Just wondering.

My answer is as follows:

INTOLERANT ABOUT HOSPITALITY

A Sermon For Year C Proper 17
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Hebrews 13:1-8 and Luke 14:1-14

SERMON: Did you ever watch cartoons on TV when you were a kid? How about last night on cartoon network?

I loved cartoons. Every afternoon in third and fourth grade I would race home after school to watch my all-time favorite cartoon series: G.I. Joe- a REAL American Hero!

Like most kids growing up in Arkansas at the time, I loved guns, tanks, bombs, and explosions. And G.I. Joe supplied that yearning with an endless conflict between "the good guys", and bland, non-descript, faceless enemy called Cobra.

They were always locked in a properly-neutered, politically-correct, no-one-ever-really-dies war which never seemed to end… but which did seem to spawn the production of really cool gadgets and playsets, which my dad would pay hundreds of dollars to buy.

Looking back, it was kind of the macho equivalent of "Barbie Dolls".

AN UNWELCOME SERMON

A SERMON FOR Proper 16 Year C
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Hebrews 12:18-29 and Luke 13:22-30

As I stand here, I can't help but grin because of the situation. Here I am on the first Sunday back after a summer break, and I am nervous about getting Canterbury going again. Lots of things to get done. Tons of new people to meet, including many of you.

And there you are. You are beginning a new school year with tons of courses, and a to-do list a mile long. For some of you it is your first time away from home. For others it may your first time to walk into an Episcopal worship service.

And I am supposed to preach a welcome sermon. A sermon to help you get acclimated to your new semester, and hopefully to your new family of faith away from home.

CELEBRATING IN-DEPENDENCE DAY

A SERMON FOR YEAR C, 5th Pentecost, Proper-8
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian
Scriptures: Galatians 5:1,13-25; Luke 9:51-62

What was your favorite holiday as a kid? Which holiday did you enjoy the most, regardless of whether or not you got presents?

For me the answer is simple: The Fourth of July. Independence Day. Perhaps it is because in the town I grew up in, it was the one day of the year when it was legally sanctioned to BLOW THINGS UP.

As a kid, I had this ritual leading up to Independence Day. I would build models of tanks, and jeeps, and even balsa wood airplanes for weeks before the fourth of July. I would collect armies of little green army men. And the week before, I would prepare the battlefield by building fortresses, and digging trenches, in our front lawn.

Then the day would come. I had positioned my soldiers. I had attached bottle rockets to my balsa wood planes. The tanks and jeeps were filled with miniature explosives. I had a lighter in one hand, and fists full of fireworks in the other.

A Short Lexicon of Probabilistic Epistemology

This article is about epistemology: the study of how we know what we know. The main thesis here is that we do NOT come to know things by becoming absolutely certain of them, so that we do not need faith to believe them. I do not believe- due to the noetic effects of our own finitude and the corrosion of sin- that we can have absolute certainty. Such certainty only applies to God's own knowledge. Instead, we can only have degrees of certainty… Or, put better, degrees of probability that any explanation [A, B, or C] actually conforms to a given Reality [X].

To Matt on the Problem of Petitionary Prayer

My buddy Matt Tapie recently wrote a blog that deals with faith in God and the problem of petitionary prayer (i.e. Prayers that ask God to DO something to help us). The central problem is always this: Why does God help some and not others? A few major solutions have arisen to deal with this problem:

Are all "miracles" just coincidences, completely explainable by scientific cause and effect? In this case, God is like a scientist who made this huge science fair project we call "creation", and then sits back passively to watch it run. This, by the way, is called Deism, and it leads directly to Atheism, because if God is nowhere involved in Creation, then there is no need of using God as a causal or explanatory factor at all.

Or, is God bound by the processes of the Universe to evolve along with it, growing and changing as the Universe grows and changes, like a soul that grows with a body? In this case, God cannot do anything other than what is already happening, because what is happening- good and bad- is God's personal evolution. God is doing the best God can. This is called process Theism, or panentheism, and because it leads to a view in which God never intervenes in Cration to express His personality, it usually leads to pantheism. Pantheism is the view that "God" is really the impersonal life force of the universe, source of good and evil, and unknowable to any personal being (like us).

So, all of the major solutions seem to deny key features of the Biblical revelation of God we find epitomized in Jesus Christ, who is God incarnate. This God is personal, does "intervene" on some occasions, does do "miracles" (but infrequently), and does seem to be moved by petitionary prayers. But, why is God not moved by EVERY petitionary prayer (if, indeed, he loves everyone)? Here is what I wrote to Matt:

Does Atheism Cause Child Abuse?

[An essay on the logical implications of one's worldview on morality]

I recently had a discussion with a young atheist who could not believe in God because of all the pain and suffering in the world. In particular he pointed out child abuse and the death of innocents as a key stumbling block. I pointed out that without God, he had no basis to call such things "evil", since there is no evil in a materialist framework, only personal values and opinions. He had no clear answer to this, other than to say that he did value moral goodness, and he did believe that children are necessary even in an atheist worldview for the "continuation of the species". I simply retorted that he had no basis for such values from within his worldview, and he had to "back door" such values into his system from Christianity. Then we moved on with the discussion…

Cacophony or Communion

Exploring the Open Question of Identity, Authority, and Unity in Anglicanism
Copyright © 2007 Nathan L. Bostian

"[T]he Church exists for nothing else but to draw men into Christ, to make them little Christs. If they are not doing that, all the cathedrals, clergy, missions, sermons, even the Bible itself, are simply a waste of time. God became Man for no other purpose." -C.S. Lewis, "Mere Christianity", book IV, ch. 8

"However we judge the theological concept that the divine became human so that the human could become divine, it is a philosophical, even a metaphysical concept. It is not concrete and will not 'preach'… [It will not] cut the Gordian Knot of human bondage to guilt and stress." -Paul F.M. Zahl, "The Protestant Face of Anglicanism", p. 37

"[W]e do not believe that Jesus leads us to break our relationships… We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children… are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church… we proclaim a Gospel that welcomes diversity of thought and encourages free and open theological debate…" -Navasota Statement by the Episcopal House of Bishops, March 20, 2007

I. Introduction: Standard Anglican Typologies of Church.

Subverting Submission: A Rhetorical Analysis of Ephesians 5

Most of the scholarship surrounding Ephesians 5 revolves around the "revisionist versus traditionalist" axis. One side, hating the idea of unqualified female submission to a Jewish form of male chauvinism, reject the passage as spurious or semi-spurious. They develop possible literary hypothesis upon possible literary hypothesis, without hard evidence, to prove that Paul did not, in fact write it. And then, based on their leaning tower of hypotheses, they reject it as non-apostolic, therefore non-canonical, and therefore non-binding on Christians.

The other side, convinced of the much more probable hypothesis that Paul indeed did write it- or if he did not, one of his close disciples did- rightfully side with the catholic Church and accept it as canonical. They believe that God is, in fact, speaking through it to the Church today, and we need to listen to it as a foundational document for the Church. But, they read it in such a way that it supports something close to a ancient Jewish "second class status" for women.

One side wrongly approaches Biblical authenticity, but rightly discerns the Gospel message of liberation. The other side rightly approaches Biblical authenticity, but wrongly discerns the message. What shall we do?

Body and Bones, Coaches and Parents

A Theological Sermon on Ordered Ministry and the Structure of the Church. Copyright 2007 © Nathan L. Bostian.

[1] Our Cultural Problem with Authority.

In an age when many consider putting on a belt and a button-up shirt "dressing up", it an be quite a culture shock to walk into a sacramental church and find a priest wearing a tab-collar, a robe, and a stole that drapes down off of her neck. If a bishop is present, wearing his flame-shaped, miter hat, and carrying his large shepherd's staff, it can be an even greater shock.

Our natural reaction, as folks living in a consumer culture with a democratic government, is to ask: Why on Earth are they wearing THAT? Why are they standing up front, preaching, teaching, and praying? Who do they think they are?

LOVING TRUE IS HARD TO DO

LOVING TRUE IS HARD TO DO
A SERMON FOR YEAR C, SEASON EASTER 5
By Nathan L. Bostian

Wow. The last Eucharist of 2007. The end of a year together. It has been a year of triumph: For some of us, this has been our first successful year on our own in the big world, with all of the stupid mistakes, and fun times that come with it. Others of us have arisen victorious over the evil forces of tests, projects, and papers to receive our diploma. And me… I survived becoming a college chaplain. A year of triumph.

ARE YOU SHEEPISH?

ARE YOU SHEEPISH?
A Sermon for Year C, Easter 4
By Nathan L. Bostian

In the interests of Orthodox Christianity, I would like to start off tonight's sermon in a very unorthodox way. I want to ask you a silly question, and I would like your silly response:

When you were a kid (or an adult!) what animal did you want to be, and why? [ASK AROUND FOR ANSWERS]

I have to admit that I never really fantasized about being an animal. An astronaut, or a knight, or GI Joe, yes. But animals: not so much.

However, I thought that it would be really cool to be a huge, ferocious bird of some type. An Eagle, or a Falcon: Something with huge talons and that blood-curdling scream that would make your prey wet itself. And yeah, the idea of flying was pretty cool too.

But there is one animal hardly anyone fantasizes about being: A sheep.

Restoring or Distorting Christianity?

[The following is a letter written to some hokey heretics who run a website called http://restoringchristianity.com. Their ideas stem from a familiar hyper-protestant assumption that they are "restoring" the "true Church" after it has been corrupted for 19 centuries. This, of course, assumes that God allowed His Church to be lost for nearly 2000 years without doing anything until he raised up this new group to restore everything! Anyway, the three keys to the website are:

1. They claim there is no Trinity, Jesus is not God, and the only God is the Father. But, if you wonder why Trinitarianism makes sense (and they don't!), and why Jesus is God, read CS Lewis "Mere Christianity", Peter Kreeft's "Handbook of Christian Apologetics", Thomas Oden's "Systematic Theology", Athanasius' "On the Incarnation", and Augustine's "De Trinitatae".

2. They claim that salvation is conditional, and we must be baptized into Christ to be saved. But, of course, one may ask: How would baptism save us if Christ is not divine, since we are being included in Him? It would seem that only God could save us and bring us to God, and if Christ is not God, he is a created being like us who needs to be saved just as we do.3. They claim that their anti-Trinitarianism is a new idea, and unknown for most of Church History. This is utterly bogus too. Read on to find out more!

So, I wrote this letter to mock their assumptions, in a tone which makes it sound like I approve of them. Everything here is tongue-in-cheek. But note, I never actually use words of approval. I wonder if they will catch on…]

DRAMA AND DOGMA

DRAMA AND DOGMA
A Sermon for Year C, Easter-3
By Nathan L. Bostian

I have to admit it: I love the 80's. One of the reasons why my wife and I got rid of cable TV, is because we wasted literally whole days of our lives watching the various VH-1 renditions of "I love the 80's" and mockumentaries of hair bands and all-time worst rap songs.

I am a child of the 80's, and in many ways I will always be stuck in the era of Reaganomics, female shoulder pads, Tom Cruise bomber jackets, acid washed jeans, and t-shirts for "The Cure". Sometimes I still listen to Synth Rock, Punk Rock, Hair Bands, and rap songs performed by guys who wore enormous clocks around their necks.

And, its not just me. It seems that everyone I know has a fascination with some era in history, whether it is the one they grew up in, or an era much earlier than that.

And that leads me to a question: Why do we have such a love-hate relationship with history? Because it seems like culture is schizophrenic on this subject (and a hundred others!)

SOME METAPHYSICAL CAUSES OF THE REFORMATION

In response to one of my posts, my buddy Matt asked a great question:

I have one question: You mentioned that if the Catholic Church would have listened to Aquinas, Augustine and others the Reformation may have been avoided. However, many Protestants believe that a major part of what sparked the Reformation was the scholastic synthesis of faith and reason achieved by Aquinas and exaggerated by Averroes and Ockam. Some believe that the problem of the Reformation was caused by Aquinas's "secularization" of faith. What would you say about that? Just curious.

In response to Matt:

THE REALITY YOU CAN BET YOUR LIFE ON

THE REALITY YOU CAN BET YOUR LIFE ON
A Sermon for Year C, Easter 2
By Nathan L. Bostian

Have you ever been lied to? I mean, right to your face lied to? How did you know they were lying?

My wife, Kim, has a child in class who consistently forgets homework, forgets to get report cards signed, forgets to come to school, and forgets to treat other people like human beings. And she always has an excuse. Well, my uncle died… And when Kim finds out there was no funeral, it is Kim who somehow misunderstood her.

What she meant to say was that her grandmother has DIE-abetes and had to go into the hospital… And when Kim finds out that's not true, then it is the student's sister who went to court. That's why she didn't get it done. She piles up lie upon lie upon lie, until she is so deep she can't get out. Then she cries and cries. Its never her fault. You've met folks like that… Maybe you've been someone like that.

So, how do you tell someone is lying to you? Other than gut feeling, I think we depend on three major things to tell us if someone is lying: First, does their explanation fit the facts? Is their excuse the most probable, reasonable explanation of what you see?

WILL THE DEAD RISE UP AND PRAISE YOU?

WILL THE DEAD RISE UP AND PRAISE YOU?
A Sermon based on Psalm 88
By Nathan L. Bostian

This is the week after Easter. The week after the event that changed history forever: When a dead and discredited Messiah defeated death itself and declared the dominion of a Love that cannot die! Jesus has triumphed over the grave! Let the whole Earth rejoice! The old has passed away, behold all things are new! Halleluiah!

Except… of course… for those who DON'T see all things new… Because, let's be honest, Christ's victory over the grave doesn't seem like such a victory for everyone. In fact, even if someone believes in the historical reality of Christ's bodily resurrection (like I do), the event itself raises legitimate, heart-breaking, questions for two types of people:

First, there are those who are still living with the reality that reality inside their soul has not changed. Jesus is risen, but they are still dead inside. If the resurrection is such a victory, how come they are not feeling the love?

The Real Head of the Anglican Communion

All Hail the floating head of Archbishop Rowan Williams!

Whatever you do, do not look directly at his eyebrows... He will own your soul forever!

WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH DEATH?

WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH DEATH?
A Sermon for Year C, Easter 1
By Nathan L. Bostian

Let us pray: Come Lord Jesus: Fill us with your Spirit, and drive far from this place anything that would distract us from you. Let your Word transform our mind, reform our heart, and conform our will: That we may know you more clearly, and love you more dearly, and follow you more nearly: So others may see your light shining through us, and they too may share in the abundant life of our God. Amen+

What do you do with death? Seriously… WHAT do YOU do with death? Have you ever mourned the passing of someone close to you? A Grandparent? A Parent? A Sibling? A Friend? Have you ever had to face your OWN death? How did you deal with it?

JESUS AND GTD

JESUS AND GTD

A Sermon for Passion Sunday, Year C

I. INTRODUCTION: Today is the day when we come face to face with one of our curious and horrendous human tendencies: Our ability to completely turn our back on those who care for us the most when they don't meet our expectations. Did you notice what happened in the readings today? In the span of one week the crowd in Jerusalem went from welcoming Jesus as a King to spitting on Him as a criminal. The whole crowd. In one week the disciples went from being willing to die for Jesus to being unwilling to admit they even knew Him.

I want you to notice that [PAUSE].

They expected Jesus to be one thing, and He turned out to be another. They expected Jesus to be the Warrior Messiah who was going to destroy the Roman Army, kill all the infidels, and set up God's Kingdom on Earth, where all nations would grovel before the Jews and pay tribute money. What they got was a Jesus who came to usher in a Kingdom of Love, where ALL people- Jew AND Gentile- would Love God above all and Love each other as themselves.

The crowd expected power, and they got peace. They expected victory, and they got humility. The expected hate, and they got Love [PAUSE]. So, they turned on him and got rid of him.

And, like pretty much every story in the Bible, the important thing is not just that it happened then. But it happens now too. Because that crowd was not just them, then. It is us now. The only major difference in how we turn our backs on Jesus is that while their rejection was hot-blooded and violent, our rejection is often cold and bland. We simply don't care: about Jesus then, or about God now. We have better things to do. And we only think about God when it suits us… When we NEED something!

One Crappy Sermon

Philippians 3:4-14 If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. Yet whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ.

More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead.

Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but this one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus.

___________________________________
Do you remember the first time you used profanity? Do you recall the first time a really juicy, filthy word flowed forth from your mouth? Do you remember the feeling that went with it? Was it shame, or power, or the feeling of getting away with something? Were you angry? Were you hurt? Were you frustrated? Were you trying to be cute or mischevious?

Can someone give me ONE LOGICAL REASON to believe in God?

Someone asked the question "Can someone give me ONE LOGICAL REASON to believe in God?" on a facebook bulletin board. I got tired of scrolling through the very poorly thought out replies to such a question, so on spot 1333 I replied with this:

The End of Postmodernism?

I think I have stopped believing in the promise of postmodernism. It is a dead end, a self-defeating denial that only exists as a protest movement against the naïve humanism of post-enlightenment modernity.

Postmodernism, at its worst and most hypocritical, is:

Should Christians use images?

Today one of my college students sent me this question:

_________________________________
Hey... got a question for ya, I'll try to keep this short:

I attached a picture of the triquetra, one of my favorite trinity symbols. I was recently looking at the symbol on google, trying to find one that I think would look good on a t-shirt or something.

However, in what could only be God trying to compel me to delve further into religion, I discovered that in Acts 17:29, it says, "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man's design and skill." Am I analyzing this way too much, or am I looking at a verse that basically says that I shouldn't, for example, wear a ring with the triquetra symbol on it? If you could maybe clear this up for me, that'd be yet another awesome point for ya. Thanks!
_________________________________

To which I answered...

"Evangelical" has apparently been left behind to follow "Antichrist"

2018 Note: After re-reading this post, I agree with the substance of it for the most part. But I do come off here as a bit of a condescending twit. So, read at your own risk. I leave it up as a monument to personal growth.

On July 05 2006 I posted a critique of the anti-Christian video game (made by Evangelical Christians) called "Left Behind" (in honor of the novel series of the same name). Today, I received a comment from a blogger named "SJR" who claims to work for Left Behind video games. I want to post his comment, my response to his comment, and my original article:

--------------------------------------
SJR's complete comment (with the points I want to comment on numbered in brackets []):

This statement is posted from an employee of Left Behind Games on behalf of Troy Lyndon, our Chief Executive Officer.

There has been in incredible amount of MISINFORMATION published in the media and in online blogs here and elsewhere.

Pacifist Christians and other groups are taking the game material out of context to support their own causes [1]. There is NO “killing in the name of God” and NO “convert or die” [2]. There are NO “negative portrayals of Muslims” and there are NO “points for killing” [3].

Please play the game demo for yourself (to at least level 5 of 40) to get an accurate perspective [4], or listen to what CREDIBLE unbiased experts are saying [5] after reviewing the game at www.leftbehindgames.com/pages/controversy.htm

Then, we’d love to hear your feedback as an informed player. The reality is that we’re receiving reports everyday of how this game is positively affecting lives by all who play it [6].

Thank you for taking the time to be a responsible blogger [7].
--------------------------------------

My response to SJR:

WWGD: What Would Gramsci Do?

I read an article the other day written decrying how atheist secularism has invaded our University systems and turned them into Godless cesspools of rotting postmodernity. It ponted out how many Universities (even Religious ones!) have a systematic method of "catechesis" designed to make the student body seriously question, if not deny, the traditional values espoused by most traditional religions. And, judging from my experience at six Universities, they were largely right about the method, even if they were wrong about the extent (there are still lots of faithful academics out there who have not bowed their knees to the Baals of secular culture). And what is supposed to be the reaction of "good Christian" parents and children? Hide! Vacate secular universities for home schools and "safe" Bible colleges. But is that the right response for people who believe that Jesus came to redeem and reconcile ALL creation to the Father?