cairns

Romans 11:36, Marcus Borg, and New Testament “fire” verses have me thinking.  First, I freely admit that my thinking is of the variety most often labeled mystic by those who need labels.  Everything purely factual and logical, scientific and modern falls far too short of the realities of the Divine I have been blessed to experience.  The following thoughts are heresy in the sense that Tolstoy used the word.  They are outside of the declared truth we use to tell others they must come and be just like us in order to be “orthodox.”  They are outside the realm of the arguments we have long used to tell people they must repent of their difference and become like us.  So, they will have to be labeled heresy by any who choose to continue the old game.

Anyway, the idea that everything is from God, through God, and to God contradicts so much theology I have been exposed to along the way.  But, there it is in Romans.  Tempting as it is to pass over it as just another way of saying that God is the Author and Finisher of all things (with many of them being ended eternally in damnation), I believe it says more.  If current existence is all through God, then perhaps any existence in actual defiance and separation from God is earthly illusion.  From God’s side it may look very different in both the present and future tense (both nonsense when speaking of the timeless I Am).  Perhaps no matter how hard man tries to declare himself separate from God, it is impossible because nothing separate from God exists!  I have a mental image of an ant running about in my hand claiming, “I don’t believe in you.  You don’t control me!” And, even that falls short because I did not give the ant life, I am not its purpose for existence, and I will not end its life.

But what of all those “fire” verses and the interpretation of eternal punishment for those not saved by believing our exact doctrine, praying our precise words, or observing the sacraments in our prescribed ways?  They could fit with the thoughts above in terms of those who refuse God’s love experiencing total destruction.  I think eternal fire could easily be interpreted that way because even at the time of the writing of the New Testament, human mythology included the idea of things returning to life after total consumption by a fire of limited duration (think Phoenix).  To state that there would be no possibility of return, it would be logical to poetically make the fire itself eternal.

But there is another possibility.  There are also verses that speak of coming through the fire as pure gold, or with all of one’s bad works burned away and escaping death as by a near miss.  What if exposure to the Divine is the fire?  There are verses to support that view.  Will the God who knew every person before they were formed in the womb truly consume and destroy most of them? Or will the Holy Fire burn away all their impurities causing them to no longer be who they imagined themselves to be?  Perhaps after exposure to the Fire, every head will bow and every knee will bend — not in submission on the way to hell, but in the worship the verse actually seems to indicate.

Taking these things from a more Eastern view, the two possibilities are not opposites.  To become one with the One by choice, or by ceasing to be separate and “evil”, so that all is unity and holiness are essentially the same when viewed through Eastern eyes.  That gives me pause given that the Divine is far beyond all of our reckoning and arguing.

Brief side trip:

Years ago a secular psychiatrist, who was an atheist, told me the reason he did not believe in sin.  He said in all of his years of practice he had yet to meet a human being able to stand up and defy the significant humans in their lives even when they were causing the person great pain.  He definitely did not believe a human being could comprehend that there was indeed an all powerful Creator and then knowingly defy that Creator.  At the time, I found his comment insightful about human capacities but dismissed his anti-theology because I was of course a prize winning memorizer of many literal verses dictated directly by God at least onto the original scrolls if not the paper of my well used King James Bible that proved his ignorance and evil.  Now, I am not so sure.  How does the idea of willfully living in separation actually match up to either the revealed nature of God or the nature we can observe of man?

Back to the original thought: I know this much.  In this life, now here, where I can feel the effects, to be in the presence and will of the Divine is paradise.  To feel unaligned and separate is to experience hell.  Perhaps in eternity there is only one choice which can be stated two ways. We enter the eternal union in bliss, or we have any perception of separation burned away to nonexistence.  The end would be the same — final unity of all things in the One they were Created by and for all along.

If any of my meaning has found its way into these words, it is a blessing.  What I am typing about is beyond the capacity of words and language as the Divine is beyond all things human.  I am glad that eternity is not in my hands or dependent on my understanding.  I will live now in the presence of the Light and celebrate the existence of the Kingdom which has already overtaken us as I would have said in my literalist days, “Just like Jesus said.”  And, I will invite others to join the party because its worth joining, now.

peace

2 Comments »

What if the story recorded in Genesis, and explained to us as “The Fall,” was from some other culture?

Would we interpret the story as centered on the specific event, or the man vs nature conflict it explains?  If it was not part of our traditional explanation of man’s need for a savior, would we not see in it primitives explaining the difficulty of deriving a living from the soil?

What if that culture was newly emerged from the more lush Rift Valley to the south and now trying to live in the harsher portions of the planet to the north?  Would we see it as cosmic cataclysm, or an attempt to explain how their daily lives had changed from one of easy access to food in a tropical climate, to a the labor of survival in a harsher time and place?

Doesn’t the best evidence now indicate the mankind arose in the Rift Valley of Africa and migrated north into the areas of the Middle East?

I wonder how much of the Old Testament would be clearer if we read it with the same literary lenses we apply to a cultures we do not consider to be the beginnings of our religion?  If we were reading the tribal tales of some other culture would we not explain people with a fear vs power world view working to explain the events of their lives and history?  It seems to me that a great deal of the Old Testament reads very much like primitive fear vs power explanations of personal, family, national, and intercultural events.

I also wonder how differently the New Testament interpretations become if we read them as part a culture that has grown from fear vs power to one of shame vs honor.  Much of what we read as matters of eternal guilt, punishment, and pardon become very different when read through a lens of behaving in a manner which brings shame or honor.  If salvation comes to all through the loving pursuit of man by the Creator, then behaving in an ungrateful manner would surely be seen as a manner of great shame.  And, the parables seem to point to a God who deals with even that shame by rushing out to reclaim us once again and invite us into a party as honored guests.

I am contemplating it a lot lately.  I am re-reading familiar passages through these new-to-me lenses.  And so far, the God I am finding seems a lot more like the One who accompanies me day by day than does the Old Son-Sacrificing Judge I was taught about in my youth.

peace

Comments Off

I understand what Bonhoeffer meant, salvation from hell without living out the kingdom is heresy.

But, cheap grace?  We need to return to what grace does to the recipient.

We say it glibly, grace transforms us into the image of Christ.  Easy to say, but the meaning is lost by anyone who believes grace can truly be cheap.

Grace does not transform us into Bill Gates, Oprah, Hughes, Robertson, Dobson, Graham, Hefner, or even the infamous “Joneses.”  It transforms us into the image of a man who owned only the clothes on his back.

Grace does not turn us into the conquering crusader of the west, but the Savior who spent both his lifetime and his death absorbing all the suffering and hatred of humanity into his very being.

Grace does not turn us into attractive charismatic icons, but the man of sorrows — unattractive in appearance, often labeled insane or heretic, harassed, homeless, and finally crucified.

How can a gift of God which turns us into the image of the homeless suffering servant be cheap?  If it is, it simply isn’t grace.

peace,

Greg

4 Comments »

A more disturbing thought is playing across my mind and spirit this evening.  What if the church’s great heresy is that she dares to proclaim that she IS God?

[My own language tells me that I do not buy it, as I use the feminine and historically subordinate female pronoun for the church compared to the masculine pronoun for God.]

But, memories race back of the tithing sermon sequence which so offended me that it was the last I listened to at CCC.  The preacher, who conducts his own actions with much humility, actually claimed that to give one’s tithe anywhere but to the church was anti-scriptural and “should not be considered any more of a personal choice than telling the IRS you gave your tax money to another place.”  At the time I was offended by the implied insult to other ministries and missions, and I was offended that he was telling rich people giving God ten or twelve percent and hording the rest is Bible.  Now, it dawns on me that the gifts are God’s and causes me to question if we have reached a point where the church claims to be God.

I have frequently been told that to separate from the church is to isolate oneself from the care and work of God.

I know the Church has historically claimed to hold the keys to heaven with excommunication representing an eternal death sentence.

I know the place I grew up believed that we alone possessed all truth.

In the non-congregational non-denominational setting where I have been for the last decades, all claim to authority is seated with the pastors and elders.  There is no perceived need to include or allow others into the (self described) prayerful process of important decisions other than to congratulate and praise the work of the leaders.  Have we crossed a line where the leaders of the institution now are actually claiming to be God even while they would recoil at the suggestion?

How many times have we taken credit for the work and wonders of God even while using language that claims we are giving it to Him.

How much of my own desire for a pastoral position is tainted by a desire to be part of that club rather than the pure motives I claim?

I remember growing up singing Larry Norman’s “One Way,” wearing the sweatshirt, and displaying the accompanying hand signs.  While I struggle with the basic theology of it now in its most restrictive forms, I wonder how many times what American Christians really meant wasn’t even Jesus but our chosen expression of the Church…

Maybe I am just to cynical right now to read the self congratulatory things that Christians seem to write on Facebook!  Maybe I just need to listen to the Beatles for awhile instead and “Let It Be.”

peace

4 Comments »

I wonder if the greatest heresy of the church today is not the way the church keeps telling people that God’s greatest promise is anything other than God.

I know it is a heresy when we tell the rich that He promises them greater riches (especially if they keep giving more to the local organization with His name on the door,)  or the poor that they can join us in our mad pursuit of wealth if they just sign up with the church through whatever each group’s magic prayer and rituals are.

I also suspect it is a heresy of stopping short when we promise that He wants to give His healing, protection, comfort, aid, guidance, or any other good thing without including that His greatest gift is to accept us back to Him ( in the Old Testament since to be the “God who dwells among us” or in the New Testament who “stands at the door and knocks,” and then to invite us to join in continuing His work and spend our lives bringing others not to His gifts, but to Him.  As I sit here this morning it seems to me that everything short of that commits the heresy of reducing God to the latest rabbit’s foot, shaman’s pledge, or business plan.  Right now I cannot think of a greater lie to either the rich or poor.

[I know the language I use is still sexist, but my traditional upbringing just stops me short of typing "she" or "her" for God.  I do not believe God is either male or female and was raised in an era when "he" was the neutral pronoun when "it" would be insulting.  Even that includes a sexist assumption of "he" as the superior choice, but I have not yet escaped it.  I think it is because the use of feminine pronouns ("radical language") is even more likely than the masculine to cause people to focus on the language rather than the God behind the musings.]

This is one I would really like to hear other’s opinions on if anyone is actually reading these! lol

peace

Comments Off

If anyone else who reads here is also reading this book, I would love to know what others are thinking.  Every time he almost loses me, he starts describing things I have been trying to communicate to others and myself for years…

peace

Comments Off