Sin Boldly (But Believe in Christ More Boldly Still): Thoughts on Evangelism

I regret to inform you of an unfortunate truth: Many Christians attempt to use guilt as an evangelical tool. Notably, UGA's "Tate preachers" stand in the courtyard of the student center and announce to the campus God's hatred of drunkenness, sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, and, in some of the more entertaining cases, "weak-kneed pencil-necked men" and educated women.

Many lower-key evangelism styles operate under the same methods. While never explicitly stated, the logical conclusion of this style, even sans-picket-signs, is, "If you have doubt or still sin, then you are obviously not a good enough Christian to earn God's grace."

Which is absolutely ludicrous.

First, we do not "earn God's grace". It is grace because it impossible to earn. Our sins were paid for by the death of the Son of God. You can never earn something bought at so high a cost. Yes, the acceptance of grace costs us our lives, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer reminds us. But even this surrender does not "earn" grace, but instead helps us to fully embrace it. Likewise, Bonhoeffer also reminds us of Luther's famous saying, "Sin, and sin boldly; but more boldly still believe in Christ and rejoice in him." Bonhoeffer cautions us, "[D]on't try to become what you are not." For the very second we try to claim that we can achieve perfection on our own accord, we instead claim a state of arrogance and, in this state of arrogance, reject the very grace that makes us perfect.

For example, if I claim that, after becoming a Christian, I ceased to ever give in to angry thoughts, I would be a liar and a braggart. Granted, acceptance of and discipleship to the Risen Christ will lead to a more peaceful state of mind. Over time, as I begin to walk with the Lord and draw more closely to Him, my mindset is changed. But, to be blatantly (and boldly) honest, I still get angry over small things. At my worst, I am an angry person - at my best, I am a sinner redeemed through the blood shed on the Cross.

And I would go so far as to state that only through openness about our shortcomings that Christians will ever shed the image of hypocrisy that so plagues us today.

Secondly, doubt does not negate faith. Only through doubt is faith truly faith. For the very instant you remove all doubt, faith - the conviction of things not seen (Heb 11:1) – is no longer faith and enters the realm of the empirical. People do not have faith in the existence of coffee cups*; cups are proven daily to exist through direct observation and interaction. God, though, exists beyond our senses and our understanding, known only through faith. To claim a complete understanding and knowledge of God either A) claims the impossible - a finite being understanding an infinite deity, or B) limits God. Christians should do neither. Indeed, doubt strengthens faith. Instead of dismissing doubts as unfounded or false, true faith confronts doubts; it struggles with them and forces the faithful to depend more heavily on God.

In order to encourage and cultivate faith, we must also radically change the field of apologetics, as well as recognize that the sole use of apologetic arguments do not constitute evangelism. As I was once told at an FCA camp, "You cannot argue someone to Christ. If someone is convinced by scientific arguments alone, they can just as easily be convinced by counter-arguments." We can no longer devote ourselves to "proving God". Instead, we should focus on finding Him, walking with Him, and loving Him.

Love - now there's a concept. If instead of making everyone feel guilty about not being perfect, perhaps we could show them God's love. If God is love, then to show love is to show God. If we were to focus on relationships and servanthood, if we were to relate our own stories of God's love...well, wouldn't that be something?

Rock on.

*Even David Hume, the father of modern skepticism, was willing to accept empirical evidence - though he did acknowledge a faith in empiricism. This, though, is better suited for discourse concerning the "New Atheism".

Post Script: I owe a tremendous amount of thanks to my friend Suzanne. Without her editing...well, something about weak verbs, "this" not modifying anything, and comma splices.

Sobald der Gülden im Becken klingt / im huy die Seel im Himmel springt

"Metal bottom makes taking of offering NOISY! Listen to the change rattle in the pot and watch the giving momentum grow!"

I found this in a Christian resource magazine. A modern Christian resource magazine. And I very nearly died laughing.

Of course, this is not a new phenomenon. It's been happening for quite some time. A few examples:

The first is the reason we are all Roman Catholic. During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, a Christian could give money to the Roman church and either earn a few years off of their own stay in Purgatory or free a deceased relative from the same. For those unfamiliar with European High Medieval/Renaissance history, this was the practice of selling Indulgences. It was based off of the theory that "the merits" of Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the saints were stored up and that the papacy had the authority to distribute them. For a generous donation, that is. One German monk, of the Augustinian order, took issue with this unfounded practice. He wrote on it and ended up changing the world. Forever. He challenged the pope, asking, if this unfounded teaching is true, why are the "merits" not given freely to all? His name was Martin Luther, and if you want to more, I would encourage you to watch the movie Luther. It's not the most accurate depiction in the world, but it does a great job of discussing the issue of indulgences.

But don't take my word for it...


Ok. Moving on after a delightful little flashback.

Another prime example comes from the Christ, and you probably already know where I'm going with this. In one of the stories mentioned in all four Gospels, Jesus goes into the Temple and drives out the money changers and those selling animals to be sacrificed - in other words, those trying to make money off of God. And it's not like when he drove out demons, where Christ simply commanded it and it happened. No, it's significantly more dramatic than that. Making a whip out of reeds and turning over tables - this is the stuff Indiana Jones was made for. As Jesus said, the Temple had been made "a den of thieves".

And today we have much the same thing going on. First and foremost, I think of the massive market of Christian books. And here I must be careful, because there are a lot of authors that I respect and admire. But at the same time, there are people selling "special editions" of books and Bibles, trying to come up with any reason for a new volume. The Five Languages of Love...for Young Men Between the Ages of 20 and 30 Who Enjoy Watching Men's Double Tennis During the British Open. Today's New International Version for Housewives Who Just Sent Their Fourth Child to Kindergarten for the First Day - Study Edition. Don't get me wrong. I understand books aimed at special audiences. But when you get tot he point of having five or more editions of the same book, something's gone horribly awry. CS Lewis, arguably one of the best Christian authors of the twentieth century, did not have Mere Christianity - For Singles. And yet Lee Strobel feels that if he doesn't publish seperate copies of The Case for... series for both teens and kids - well, I don't really know what will happen. Will the kids not understand the deep thoughts of the teen version? Will the younger half of a generation not fully love God? Will they be converted to atheism before the age of thirteen, never to go to church again?

And then there are the bullet point books. Joel Osteen guarantees that if you read his book, he can give you seven principles to being blessed by God. I'll hold my criticism of prosperity preachers for another day and focus more on the flawed idea of preaching that bullet points can change your life. First, I'll let Donald Miller explain it.

Second, I'll continue Luther's challenge. If the secret to living a better life is seven simple steps, why are these not given out freely? If everything can be reduced to a point-by-point list, why does it have to be bound and sold for $22 ($15 on Amazon)? Why not publish it on a website? Now, I know that this same argument applies to all books, and CDs, and movies, but how much more, then, does it apply to lists?

Yes, yes, I know it all comes down to money. I know that money drives people, even Christians.

But I also know one thing: God is not for sale.

We cannot sale religion. We cannot sale salvation. We cannot sale a better relationship with God.

And Christianity is not the only religion with this problem.

I'm currently in "Introduction to Religion in Native American Cultures". And the first thing we talked about in this class was the New Age attempt to mix Eastern and Native American religious traditions and sell them. Which is why you have wealthy fifty year old white men smoking "peace pipes" and going on "vision quests" and teaching that we are all one with Mother Earth and the Great Spirit*. This abduction of culture has driven some Native Americans to "declare war" on the perpetrators, boycotting bookstores and New Age shops.

Which makes me wonder.

If native people are offended by cultural/religious theft and are willing to protest the offenders, why are Christians so willing to let our faith be packaged and sold for twenty dollars per mountaintop experience? Why do we stand by as "Christian" toys (BibleMan would pwn Psalty in a cage match), "Christian" financial guides, and, among the more troubling, "Christian" patriotic clothing, continue to commercialize Christianity?

And even more important, once we've had enough, what do we do about it?

Rock on.

*The "peace pipe" comes from various traditions of the Sacred Pipe. Vision quests are not practiced by all cultures. Mother Earth is a Greek concept. And the Great Spirit is a translation of an Oglala Lakota (think Black Elk) belief used to make monotheistic Westerners more comfortable with polytheistic native beliefs.

Post Script: The title is Johann Tetzel's famous rhyme. Translated , it means "As soon as the gold in the pan rings, the soul in [to] Heaven jumps," or more commonly translated, "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul to Heaven springs." Or, depending on the source, it could be "Die Seel aus dem Fegefeuer springt", which is, "the soul from Purgatory springs." There are a few other variations, but I won't go into them.

Updated: 28 June 2008

"I am Yours. Save me."

One of the most powerful scenes in the movie Luther is a dialogue between Martin Luther and his superior. Luther is shown awake late at night, talking to himself and arguing with the Devil. Luther tells Father von Staupitz that he is too full of sin to be a priest and that he fears damnation. Staupitz consoles Luther, telling him to put his faith in Christ, not in his works, saying, "Look to the Cross. Say to God, 'I am Yours. Save me.'"

The modern (or postmodern) Church does a good job of encouraging its followers to do good works. Claiborne's The Irresistible Revolution is almost entirely about working for social justice. This movement has been needed for a long time. Christianity has become to focused on approaching God in a bubble, stressing personal relationships and personal salvation. The communal aspect has been lost and the Emergent movement has done a great job of restoring it.

But sometimes I think that we've gone too far to the communal side. We stress doing good works. Great. Faith without deeds is dead. But maybe we emphasize works too much (I've got to hand it to Don Miller - he does the best job of expressing this). Why am I saying this? Well, another great part of the Emergent movement is the honesty that it has brought. Over the past few weeks and months, I've started to fall into the same place Luther found himself. Too full of sin to be loved by God. Too selfish to embrace Love. It's an incredibly frightening place in which to find one's self. Fear of damnation brings about fear of Death, the very Death which we proclaim Christ to have defeated. So in questioning my salvation, I, by default, question the power of God himself.

So where's the balance? If we emphasize works too much, we fall back into the spiritual trap that was the Middle Ages and start teaching that salvation is to be earned and bought. But if we don't emphasize works, we end up where we were in the the modernist period - Christianity becomes a political tool and Christians don't live their faith.

As I read the works of Thomas Merton (I'm working on New Seeds of Contemplation) I'm starting to see the proper balance. Merton was a monk, but lived in a hermitage. He lived in solitude, but in community. He saw himself living in solitude, but connected to other people living in solitude. Always alone. Always with others. I've been trying to figure out where the balance is, and I think Thomas Merton had it right. A personal relationship with God, trusting in the salvation of Christ, but pushing towards community. Relationships not because we fear damnation, but because we Love. Doing good not because we must earn our salvation, but because we Love.

Rock on.

Maybe Islam Has Found It's Emergent Movement

Alright, it's a far cry from the Shane Claiborne of the Arab world, but it's a start. Oddly enough, it is with Osama bin Laden's son, Omar.

Read the article here.

Shalom,
Drew

Emergent Qaeda; or Why the Christian Right Is al Qaeda's Ally and Enemy

According to Frank Pastore, al Qaeda supports the Emergent Church - I read it on the internet, so it must be true!

I love sarcasm, so when I came upon Jordan Green's response, I giggled like a schoolgirl for nearly ten minutes. Especially this little tidbit on fundamentalist Christianity and Islam: "They both think Jesus was alright, but he didn’t kick enough ass."

For those with neither the time nor attention span to read either of the articles, I will attempt to summarize: Frank Pastore claims that radical Islam is bent on converting the world (caution: those who are allergic to BS may want to stop reading here) and that only America can stop it. And out of the Americans, only the conservatives, and more specifically, the Conservative Christians, are capable of stopping this threat (I get the feeling that radical Muslims believe they are the only ones who can save the world from conservative Christians). Pastore goes on to claim that Christianity is the driving force of the world, from Constantine to Bush, and that all art and philosophy owe Christianity (which, in turn, owes the ancient Greeks, especially the Athenians, namely Plato; this is, of course, excepting Aquinas, who owes Muslims, who in turn owe Aristotle, who owes Plato - longer train, same destination). Of course, what Pastore is really saying is that the gun is the only way to solve anything, and conservative Christians are the only people with the balls to pull the trigger. Accordingly, he claims that the Emergent, post-modern Christians would rather sit around and talk over coffee, and is therefore willing to let al Qaeda take over the world.

He's right. I would much rather sit around over coffee and talk rather than fight, though I would not nod "in agreement that America probably deserved to die". And while I disagree with some of the more liberal leaders of post-modern Christianity over just war theory, even I would rather feed the hungry than kill the warlord who's starving them. But I doubt that this is what al Qaeda wants, for a group of the supposed enemy to do good deeds. To build up an army of angry youth, you need one thing - angry youth. And it's hard to be pissed at the person who just taught you better farming techniques, dug a well in your town, and is now treating you to coffee (an amazing similarity between the Middle East and the US).

Pastore claims that post-modern Christianity dislikes truth, knowledge, science, authority, doctrine, institutions, and religion. That's an out-right lie. Anybody who's ever spoken with a post-modern Christian will know that they are searching for truth and knowledge, depend on science, respect the authority of God, and even hold their own doctrines (though they don't force them on others as a means of salvation). Granted, I don't much care for institutionalized religion, but neither did Jesus.

In the essay, the Emergent Church is summarized this way: "Bottom line, it's feelings over thoughts, the heart over the head, experience over truth, deeds over creeds, narratives over propositions, the corporate over the individualistic, being inclusive rather than exclusive, with none of that offensive 'in versus out' language, such as those who are “saved” and those who are 'not saved,' or even the most divisive of all referents–'Christian' and 'non-Christian.'" I'm still waiting for the bad part.

No, post-modern Christianity is probably actually a pretty big threat to Wahabi Islam. Instead, the abuses of the Christian Right provide al Qaeda with all of the pissed-off youth the could ever need. It's easy to be mad at the person who calls for war instead of peace, the person who doesn't respect your point of view and brands your faith as evil, the person who, even accidentally, bombs your village. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we should just throw down our weapons and leave Iraq and Afghanistan. But I do think if we focus more on humanitarian missions instead of detaining prisoners, we would notice a lot less angry teens. As both fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity compete for the control of governments and corporations, it will become a war of attrition - and the Islamic side has a lot more kids to anger.

Rock on.

Blue Like Miller

My Intro to Religious Thought teacher is, in essence, the embodiment of post-modern philosophy. Raised as a conservative Methodist, he majored in Religion as an undergrad, and, as all Religion majors, realized that Christianity is not as simple as it seems. And, as all young adults coming to that this realization, faced the accompanying crisis of faith. After all, if you can accept that most of Genesis is exaggeration (at best, and this is not to mention all of the other things you learn about the Bible in school) and not notice an impact in your faith, something is probably very wrong with you. Studying those like Nietzsche and coming to the realization that you cannot prove what you believe tends to do that to you. Post-modernism is, really, the philosophy of rejection. All our lives are stories, and nobody's story can be correct.

It is into this time that we see (and need) a post-modern response to a post-modern philosophy. Whether or not they claim to be a part of the Emergent movement or not, authors like Brian McLaren, Shane Claiborne, and Rob Bell provide this response. And most popular among them (at least among the youth group masses) is Donald Miller. I'll admit, his books are probably among my favorite. You laugh, wonder, think, grow angry, and hopefully, learn. Christianity Today's review of Miller (not his books, but the man himself) says Miller is "often described as 'irreverent' or 'bohemian'". Which means one thing: he fits in with the rest of the world born after 1970.

Though the article focuses, in the beginning, on Miller's current aging-yet-relevant style of being (the author mentions that he is starting to have those mid-age moments, meeting a friend and asking, "Hey, how's your wife feeling these days?"), it later goes on to discuss this new trend of the Christian experience as a whole. Quoting one fan, we read, "I love Blue Like Jazz because it's, like, a Christian book, but it doesn't make you feel bad about yourself." Which means one thing (well, several, but I'll focus on this one): Nietzsche was wrong when he said that guilt is inherent in Christianity. Instead, Miller would probably argue, and I will agree, that Christianity is a post-modern religion. It's about our stories. God's story about how much he loves humanity, humanity's story about how we are trying to get back to God, and our own stories about how we relate to God and humanity. Miller is quoted as saying, "The chief role of a Christian is to tell a better story."

And, as the article points out, this is how Miller writes. Blue Like Jazz is the story of Miller going through life and learning. Searching for God Knows What is a collection of essays drawing from stories - his story of developing his own sense of evangelism, realizing that the world is fallen and needs God's help, and thinking about the role of the Church. In fact, Miller has one book that is really just one long story punctuated with moments of philosophical clarity; Through Painted Deserts is about how Miller discovered Portland.

As the masses start to wake up and smell the stories, they will need leaders, or at the very least, influences. Whether or not he wants to be, Don Miller has taken that position.

So, what's your story?

Rock on.