Comments for Consuming Jesus

Comment on A “members only” gospel? by Rachel O'Brien

Rachel O'Brien — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 00:30:21 +0000

“to die is gain”. There is a sense that the pain of life makes the joy sweeter. For believer or non this is true. How do we engage… we remember, that’s how. Remember where you have come from, what you have done, who you are, who you are not. Most of what I know of God was learned through being reminded. I look back over my not very long life and see intense pain, wreckage, poetry and beauty, miracles and healing. I can engage others because those things happened to me and I remember them, how it felt, how it still feels. We are not so far off, we are not so perfected that we can’t identify with others. Connecting with the world is identifying with it, knowing that we were once there, still struggle with it and need a savior more today than ever. As a body we take communion to remember, what He has done and our role and place in that act. I take communion every week and every week my pastor says, do this in rememberance of me. I am reminded keenly of who I once was, who I still have to fight to become, I am reminded of who is transforming me, who gave themself to me and for me. We can’t pull away from that moment when we were changed, our whole existence hinges on it. In the remembering we can engage others, we can cross lines, because we know we are broken and restored over and over.

Comment on A “members only” gospel? by Bryan Dormaier

Bryan Dormaier — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 06:39:50 +0000

RE: Ronaldo’s Comment,

I always want to be careful when speaking about the world and how the church relates to the world, as that passage in James is one that I hear tossed around for anybody who wants to isolate from the world.

The same John who writes about Christ’s prayer that His disciples would be kept in the world, though they are not of it, is the John who also wrote that God loved the world to the point that He gave His only begotten Son so that whoever believes in Him might be saved.

It seems that the world we are to not be friends with is not people, but rather the system of the world: the fallen system influenced by the powers and principalities. It is the very system which finds the cross foolishness because Christ chooses to pour out instead of to grasp. It is this system that we are to not be friends with. It is not the people of the world, as this would create a huge problem as Jesus would Himself violate a definition that includes not-yet-Christians.

RE: Kelsi’s Post
As a church planter, I feel a tremendous challenge in terms of working towards a church that is not just a social club or a niche group. It costs me a lot to constantly work against the flow of myself. Just being myself and my leadership style is going to attract a specific type of person. I realize that my leadership style will do so and my speaking style, as well as how the Anchor does worship will always be attractive to a certain type, namely those who have similar tastes as me and others in the Anchor. Working towards a church that really embodies the Gospel is costly, because it means that many times the crowds will not want to come because they aren’t getting exactly what they want. It also means that I have to kill some of my own tendencies and likes for the sake of having a unified church. Outside of being compelled by Christ I really feel like this sort of approach to church is crazy and very costly, so I am not surprised that there are not more people who are trying hard to move towards being a more diverse church. It means putting an end to my comfort and to my laziness, constantly being challenged and constantly feeling a loss. In essence it means to live and do church in light of baptism as a way of life: putting off our old self which is concerned primarily for ourselves, and because we are united with Christ living in light of that, even when it feels costly and like it is slowly killing ourselves.

Comment on A “members only” gospel? by Kelsi Johns

Kelsi Johns — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:23:47 +0000

Thank you, Michael, for sharing your experiences with some of the issues that further separate “us” from “them”. That breaks my heart. It is so painful to see firsthand how people view Christians, and even more painful to realize that they have good reason to see us this way. I find myself so often wanting to use any word but “Christian” to non-believers because if I cringe from what that word conjures, I can only imagine what their experience may be as well (and usually, it is a very painful, negative experience that they have had). The “Christian tipping” example that you gave is quintessential of some of the barriers that we must break down: the disengaged, compartmentalized (they weren’t doing “ministry work”, they were relaxing at a restaurant–no need to bear witness to Christ there!) sort of Christianity. And leaving a tract is quick and easy, and comes at no cost or sacrifice to them. This harmful mindset starts in the “small areas” (eating at a restaurant) but ends in the segregation of communities, churches, cities.

Comment on A “members only” gospel? by Ronaldo A. Sison

Ronaldo A. Sison — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 22:03:49 +0000

There is a huge difference between “separating” from the culture and “isolating” from it. Jesus had a “radical identification” with the societal outcasts of his day (i.e., tax collectors and prostitutes, etc.) but He had a “radical difference”. I would rather be a separatist than an isolationist; i’d rather be “radically identified” though “radically different” from those the elitist Church-ians (an “exclusive group” to which i belong, by the way) consider beggars, parasites and eyesores.
Biblically, we are called to “separate” from the world because “friendship with the world is enmity with God” (James 4:4). But biblically also, Jesus prayed for His followers then and now not that they be taken “out of the world” but that the Father “should keep them from the evil one”, because “they are not of the world” just as Jesus is not of this world.
I am strongly convicted that unless I am always captivated, enamoured and intoxicated by the love of the Triune God who invited me and invites me to His bedroom (as a lover who judges), not into the courtroom (as a judge who loves), in that intimate perichoretic communion, i will always feel and live out the confusion of being separate from being isolated from the world that God so loved (John 3:16) that he gave His only-begotten Son.
Finally, the preceding comment of Michael highlights a very problematic issue amongst Christians: why is it that those who realize and understand that they are simply recepients of grace, are so unwilling to share that grace to the “inarticulate, the downtrodden who are now speaking in their own accents”? Why are we so unwilling to spread the aroma of life to those who are lost and perishing? Unlike the woman who broke the alabaster jar to anoint Jesus in a lavish act of love, we dare not break our own so that the fragrance of a life lived for Christ shall spread throughout our own spaces.
Maybe because we are too preoccupied with the fact that we will be raptured anyway and “too bad” for those who will be “left behind”.
LEX ORANDI LEX CREDENDI!

Comment on A “members only” gospel? by Michael Norman

Michael Norman — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:47:44 +0000

Thank you for the post. Growing up in the South, where fundamentalism reigns supreme, I can definitely attest that the implications of such behavior are devastating and damning. The gospel is viewed merely as the message of salvation and evangelism (also known as “visitation”) is delegated to a select few members who are willing to tract bomb anyone who crosses their path. Rather than taking the time to get to know individuals, we can just hand them a piece of paper as if this will solve all of their problems. Honestly, I think its just a cheap cop out and excuse not to truly engage those who are different. I remember serving on Sundays at a local restaurant during my undergrad and no one ever wanted to work the afternoon shift. Why? Because the “Christians” came in after church and were always the rudest customers and the worst tippers. No worries, they always left a tract to go along with the loose change they threw down on the table to go along with their $50+ dollar checks. There’s something drastically wrong with this picture. No wonder everyone’s concept of Christ is so warped. The very people who have been called to represent him and his kingdom as ambassadors are some of the most ego-centric, arrogant, individuals I’ve ever met. Why is it that Sunday is the most segregated day of the week in several cities throughout this country? This division is not only racial, but a division of class as well. I can’t help but think of church at Philipi as recorded in Acts 16. The difference between the three conversions could not be more different–Lydia, a wealthy Asian business woman; a poor slave girl, probably native Greek; and a working class Roman jailer. There is a clear distinction in class and race in these three conversions, but yet, they all worshiped in the same church. Tim Keller sums it up as follows: “The gospel leads them to embrace one another–they are ‘brethren’ (v.40). The ancient prayer was: “God, I thank you that I am not a woman, a slave, or a Gentile”–but that is the three groups that God shows his grace to!” So, in conclusion, yes there is a huge divide between race and class in our churches, but that is not the picture we see in the Acts. I hope and pray that the true Gospel is embraced as we each seek to flesh out the life of Christ to “everyone” that we are privileged to brush arms with every day, regardless of race, class, or gender.

Comment on God, a friend of ignorance? by Ross Halbach

Ross Halbach — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:58:44 +0000

Chrissi, I appreciate your input. I think you bring a good, balancing point to the discussion. It is easy for us to succumb to the desire to fit in with our questioning culture. This is inherently dangerous because it reveals that we our approval junkies towards humans rather than God.

However, on the other hand, I feel as though many who have come from the standpoint of having the “answer” in Christianity have also tried to redeem themselves to culture by proving there “rightness”, so that they can remain in control. For example, after the monkey scopes trial many Christians were adamant about proving the reasonableness of a Christian defined origin of the universe in a 7 day creation (a faith claim). In many ways, I feel this presentation of “rightness” against culture stems from the same insecurities that makes us susceptible to succumbing to culture. Ultimately, the pendulum can swing either way if we don’t recognize our desperate need of God’s love to secure us in such a way that our approval from God eclipses an approval from our peers. All the same, your point remains: we must not be afraid of having answers that define us as a peculiar people defined by God’s love.

Comment on God, a friend of ignorance? by Ronaldo A. Sison

Ronaldo A. Sison — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:51:37 +0000

In the classic book, The Little Prince, there is a delightful little quote that says:
“It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.”
I think when Jesus looked at the crowds after healing the sick and feeding the hungry and preaching the Good News of the kingdom of God, he saw with his heart that they were harassed and were like sheep without shepherd. He had compassion on them and told His disciples to “pray ye therefore of the Lord of the harvest that he might send laborers because the harvest is plenteous but the workers are few.”
How often have we pray for more laborers including ourselves? How intense is our engagement with God for more laborers in His vineyard? How deep do we long for the profound and effectual reconciliation of the Ivory Tower seminaries and Bible schools with the schools of hard knocks? How obedient do act towards Jesus that we might be those laborers to go into the harvest fields?
One haunting paraphrase of a radical left slogan has embedded its mark on me: “Your orthodoxy calls me totally depraved, a beggar, a parasite and an eyesore but what do you call your orthopraxis that has reduced me to this state?”
May we not, in the matters of orthodoxy and orthopraxis, go silently into the night… may we rage and rage against the dying of the light!

Comment on God, a friend of ignorance? by Kelsi Johns

Kelsi Johns — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:33:26 +0000

I appreciate Ross’s question in terms of how head vs. heart issues and affections vs. affections relate to race and class: I think the bottom line of what we are discussing here is our consumer comfort competing with a heart that is (or is striving to be) consumed by Christ. The latter dives into the trenches and engages in the uncomfortable, the painful, and with the marginalized (i.e., race and class division).
I was just talking with a woman who is hungry to engage with the broken and needy, but she feels frustrated because, despite being actively involved in her church and attending a Bible College, she doesn’t know of any outlets to actually engage with and help others. That breaks my heart that Christian-based institutions can act as an insulator, rather than a conduit, to the needy and broken-hearted. That is, to say the least, unacceptable. We need orthodoxy AND orthopraxis.
Thinking critically, exploring truths and non-truths are all, I think essential to engaging broken systems and broken people.
Also, I agree with Chrissi that asking questions rather than living as if I know “the answer” is much more attractive to this world. I’m supposed to be one of those tortured souls like the rest of em, who broods around and lives as if life is one big question mark. If I don’t, then my mind is frighteningly shallow and narrow. Like Chrissi mentioned, that has much to do with the fact that we live in an age that is “over God”. However, I do believe that, in many ways, we Christians need some serious humility. Just because we know Christ as our savior does not mean we have the world and all its mystery “figured out”. And while it takes prayerful wonder to explore these mysteries, it also takes prayerful humility to accept that there are mysteries we will never figure out in this lifetime.

Comment on God, a friend of ignorance? by chrissi w

chrissi w — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:08:27 +0000

I am afraid that even if Christians do our very best to think, question, study and challenge ourselves we will never measure up the world’s understanding of being “thinkers” and we have to be OK with that. The reality is, once you accept even one truth as truth then you are that much less of a “seeker.” You’ve figured out one part and are therefore no longer trying to find the answer to it. We are in a time when questioning is seen as the coolest and smartest thing to do and answering is only for the small-minded fundamentalist. The reality is, however, that Christianity is an answer, not a question. This is sometimes embarrassing for me as I try to reckon myself a brooding intellectual. And of course, there are a million mysteries in our one answer but that doesn’t change the fact that by its very nature, the Christian faith leads us to stop questioning a couple of things.

The argument of heart vs head is obviously silly because the heart is the head (I mean, we all know that the real heart doesn’t feel, it pumps blood). The problem with learning is that the simple becomes complicated in our minds. Sometimes we add extra complications that aren’t real and the weigh us down. Sometimes we simply acknowledge present complications and are faith is enriched for it.

The pendulum has obviously swung in our post-modern world (I hate to use the term but it works here) and we must be careful to not fall for the latest intellectual trend which so directly equates questioning (some might call it cynicism) with intelligence. I mean, how smart are we if we cut through all the bullcrap of our culture and found Jesus! It’s just a smart that few others will recognize.

Comment on God, a friend of ignorance? by anon, ed ma.

anon, ed ma. — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 08:59:15 +0000

“Society calls me a beggar, a parasite and an eyesore, but what do you call a society that has reduced me to this state?”- a Marxist-Maoist-Leninist’s slogan

“It is only with the heart that one can see rightly. What is essential is invisible to te eye.” Antoine D’ St. Exupery

In the Marxist struggle for a classless society, i used to believe very strongly that we can hasten utopia by overthrowing the bourgeoisie by the proletariat. From the Christian perspective. To do that the intellectual elite has to be eradicated so that the State can educate the people about its own value systems without obstacles or barriers.
a. The Church ignores intellectualism and consign it into the dustbins of evangelicalism because a lot of time this fosters elitism and therefore division anmongst its audience. post-modern man is no longer interested in “faith seeking understanding” but in “finding faith in both reason and experience”.
b. Intellectuals in the church question too much: the whys and wherefores of the passivity of the church and its seeming cosmetic-reforms mindset in addressing race and class issues.
It is an emotional issue that does not require intellectualism.
2. The Bible teaches us that the “heart is deceitful of all things”. Presuppositons, assumptions and stereotyping foster class divisions because there could bethat tendency
Why are there class and race divisions in the Church? Because, among other resons, Christians and believers refuse to put God as pre-eminent over the self.
There are class divisions because hearts of men when prejudiced and when prideful tend to segregate people according to thirand so those who are unable to cope