(t)reason

26 06 2008

The past couple of books I have read have brought up the same questions. What can we know and how can we know it?  In no way to do I feel qualified or well read enough as to enter into a debate on that subject, but it has me thinking nonetheless. In the fall of 2005 I took a philosophy class at a California community college. I listened for an entire semester as my teacher tried to explain to me why it unreasonable to believe in God. In speaking of the origin of the matter, he argued that it is more likely that matter just appeared, than that a supreme being created it. I remember leaving that semester with two questions. Why do those who claim to not believe in God talk about him so much and what does that say about them/him (I won’t attempt to answer that here)? Also, if indeed our minds can’t grasp the idea of something arriving out of nothing, why is it more logical to believe in the big bang or matter just appearing? Isn’t it pretty apparent that something outside of our understanding must have happened to get us to this point. If that is the case, why is reason even a part of the discussion of God?

In no way am I stating here that I believe I can prove the existence of God. That is not my point. At best, only through an individual’s experience with God or attempting to walk in his ways might one feel compelled to believe for sure that there is a God. I am not here to enter that debate. My point is to ask, is there really a more compelling or reasonable option? One could decide that there is nothing worth believing in. But what good is that?

Lately I’ve been feeling betrayed by reason. I’m not saying that we should become illogical. But reason is a tricky thing. It can protect us from believing wrong or harmful things, but maybe it can also stop us from believing the right things. 

Maybe, in this sense,  reason is for those who are content. Maybe reason is for those who have stopped dreaming. Maybe reason is for those who have lost creativity, imagination and hope. 

In his book “Surprised by Hope”, NT Wright lays out two world views that are prevalent today. The first is what he calls the “Myth of Progress”. Progess says that with advances in science, technology, and education mankind is progressing towards peace and prosperity. This viewpoint popped up around the time of the enlightenment. The problem with progress is that it isn’t happening. The world is still full of evil. Where is the fruit of this “progress”? If studying history has taught us anything it is that mankind fails to learn from its mistakes and is extremely harmful to itself. There is a saying “If you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got.” My pastor Matt says that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting to get a different result. 

The second  prevalent view is a rebirth of Gnosticism. Gnosticism says that the world we live in is evil. Physical matter is evil and our souls are to escape our imperfect bodies, created by an imperfect God. This attitude has crept into the church. Which views the physical world to be temporary and our souls to be eternal. The problem with this view is that it makes people numb to the problems of today. It leads you to believe nothing really matters.

NT Wright says there is yet a third view, however, offered in the New Testament. “The resurrection of Jesus offers itself, to the student of history or science no less than to the Christian or the theologian, not as an odd event within the world as it is, but as the utterly characteristic, prototypical, and foundational event within the world as it has begun to be. It is not an absurd event within the old world but the symbol and starting point of the new world.”

In Wright’s view, the resurrection opened us to new possibilities. Man is not climbing his way into the light (progress, gnosticism), nor is God pulling man’s soul out of the dark into the light (Christian Gnosticism). In his view, God has begun in Jesus coming down into the dark, enabling us now to live the life of the future (resurrection, spirit). The life of the kingdom. Just as it has begun in the resurrection of Christ so to it will continue in the resurrection of the dead. At that point the new Jerusalem will come down, uniting heaven and earth in a “lasting embrace”. 

Now logic would tell us this is just wishful thinking. For certainly no one can be raised from the dead. But maybe more important than what we can know or how we can know it is how do our believes impact us. How do they change they way we live? The choices we make? Maybe it’s better to be a fool who believes there is hope than a genius who wallows in there “reality”. I’m not creating my own reality here, but entering into the reality that God’s claims is possible. 

Maybe reason is swallowed up in love. As God said through prophet Isaiah. “Come now, let us reason together,” says the LORD. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.” This statement would have seemed like complete nonsense. How is possible that our sins are going to “white as snow.” But that is what the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob is like. He intervenes into our reality and changes our paradigms. 

Maybe this is a God worth worshipping. As A.W. Tozer once said of the trinity “Let reason kneel in reverence on the outside”

Maybe this is a God worth believing in. A God who is so completely different than anything else presented to us that he is precisely what we need. 

May we never be confined by the limits of our understanding. May we never let go of hope for the sake of reason. May we become the kind of people who change the world, not describe it. May we anticipate the marriage of heaven and earth, all the while preparing for the ceremony. 





Quote of the Day

25 06 2008

The cross is Gods way of saying “Love Wins”

Rob Bell





Quote of the Day

24 06 2008

If Jesus had never lived, we would never have been able to invent him.

Walter Wink  





Collaborative Eschatology

23 06 2008

I’ve begun reading “Surprised by Hope” by N.T. Wright. I’m sure I’ll have much to say on this book but I would like to share a small section I read where Wright is summarizing a lecture he heard by Dominic Crossan. Here is his summation on Crossan’s idea of “Collobarative Eschatology”. 

“Because the early Christian’s believed that resurrection had begun with Jesus and would be completed in the great final resurrection on the last day, they believed that God had called them to work with him, in the power of the Spirit, to implement the achievement of Jesus and thereby anticapate the final resurrection, in personal and political life, in mission and holiness. It was not merely that God had inaugurated the “end”; if Jesus, the Messiah, was the End in person, God’s-future-arrived-in-the-present, then those who belonged to Jesus and who followed him and were empowered by the Spirit were charged with transforming the present, as far as they were able, in the light of that future.”

Here is Wright’s summation of the book.

“The whole book thus attempts to reflect the Lord’s Prayer itself when it says, “Thy kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven” That remains one of the most powerful and revolutionary sentences we can ever say. As I see it, the prayer was powerfully answered at the first Easter and will finally be answered fully when heaven and earth are joined in the new Jerusalem. Easter was when Hope in person surprised the whole world by coming forward from the future into the present.”





Quote of the Day

23 06 2008

“If I discover within myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.”
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity 





Quote of the Day

22 06 2008

The outpouring of the Spirit meant for Paul that God had fulfilled his promise to dwell once again in and among his people

Gordon Fee

 





Quote of the Day

21 06 2008

Grace makes beauty out of ugly things

Bono





Scripture

19 06 2008

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. - Proverbs 14:31





Irrelevant

17 06 2008

I recently began participating in a discussion group with some of the members of my faith community. We are examining passages of the bible looking for the intent of the text from all angles. We began with John 9 and I would like to share here what I’ve observed. Here is a summation of the story (to find it in its entirety click here).

Jesus and his disciples are walking along on the Sabbath when they run into a man. The story says the man has been blind from birth. The disciples ask Jesus; “Who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?” Jesus tells them neither and then spits in the dirt, makes mud and rubs it on his eyes. He then tells the man to go to a local pool and wash. When he does his sight is healed.

This immediately throws everyone into frenzy. The man’s neighbors recognize him as the one they had seen begging and demand that he tell them what happened. When he tells them they take him to the Pharisees.

Because this healing occurred on the Sabbath, the Pharisees question him. The law required that no work be done on the Sabbath. But after questioning him, they are not convinced he was ever blind, so they take him to his parents to ask them. His parents deflect the question by saying yes, he was blind, but they do not answer how he was healed. They instead tell them to ask their son. They did this because the Pharisees had already decided that anyone who followed Jesus would be kicked out of the synagogue.

The Pharisees ask the man again how he was healed. When he tells them what Jesus did they proclaim, “This man (Jesus) is not from God, he does not keep the Sabbath. He is a sinner.” The healed man responds “Whether this man is a sinner or not I do not know. One thing I do know, I was blind and now I see.” Upon further questioning the man responds to them again by saying that he obviously is from God because he healed him. “We know God doesn’t listen to sinners,” he says. When questioned further, the healed man asks them if they want to become his disciples too, since they keep asking him about it.  At this, they say to him ”How dare you lecture us? You were stepped in sin at birth.” With this they throw the man from the synagogue.

The story says that when Jesus hears that he was kicked from the synagogue he goes and finds him. He then engages him in a conversation asking him if he believes in the Son of Man. Jesus then makes the following statement. ”For judgment the I’ve come into the world so that the blind will see and those who claim to see will become blind.”

Throughout this passage the issue of sin is keeps coming up. The disciples want to know who sinned. The Pharisees say Jesus is a sinner. The healed man says we know God doesn’t listen to sinners. The Pharisees tell him he was steeped in sin at birth. For Jesus, who sinned seems to be irrelevant. He is more interested in the condition of the blind man. We find a similar story in Mark 3, where a man is healed on the Sabbath.

In that story Jesus tells them, “The Sabbath is for man, not man for the Sabbath”. He also says to the Pharisees ““Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill? Here we find some clarity in Jesus statement, “for judgment I’ve come into the world.” Jesus, by his loving action to this man, exposes the heart of those around him.

We are told that this man was seen begging. It’s not hard to imagine why, everyone seems to have believed his afflictions were caused by his or someone else’s sin.  The disciples did, otherwise they wouldn’t have asked Jesus who sinned. The Pharisees did, they told him he was steeped in sin from birth. They obviously perceived this because he was born blind.  He probably even did himself. We are told his parents are there. Why didn’t they help him? Maybe they were to poor to help him. Maybe his affliction caused people to believe they had sinned. What Jesus is exposing is that no one seemed to care that this man was blind. We can infer this because no one seemed to care when he was healed. They were blind to his humanity.

What we find is that Jesus values saving life (giving the man sight) over destroying it (throwing him out of the synagogue). Throwing this man out of the synagogue would have socially ostracized him and removed him from his best source for help. Jesus shows his love for this man both in healing him and in finding him once he was thrown out. There is another element in which I believe Jesus is shining light onto their blindness. The people all seem to accept the fact that “God doesn’t listen to sinners”. Jesus here presents the more radical idea that not only does God listen to sinners, he heals them and pursues them. How often do we look at broken people and decide their decisions put them there. Maybe what is important is not how they got there but how we can get them out.

As to the question of ”why do bad things happen?” Jesus doesn’t really give an answer. He just states ”this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.” We could interpret this statement to mean God purposed this man to be blind for his own glory, though I don’t think that is clear from his response. This might lead some to believe that God is not just. When presented with the question of God being just maybe our best response is like that of the man healed.

“Whether or not this man is a sinner or not, I don’t know, but one thing I do know……

May we become the kind of people who see others humanity. May we see that people’s sin is irrelevant when deciding whether or not to help them. May we be transformed by God’s grace. 

 





Scripture

16 06 2008

Do not withhold good from those who deserve it, when it is in your power to act - Proverbs 3:27