too often we see the walk with Jesus like the poem footprints.
but is that how our life really feels most of the time?
many of us struggle and fall and get hurt and cry out and feel like walking with god is nothing like walking on a beach. more like climbing a mountain...in the rain...at night...with donkey kong throwing those barrels at us!
so, in the spirit of recognizing the walk for what it often feels like. please watch this video, sent by rose, and hopefully we can see that the walk can feel dangerous at times...but, when you follow god, you are always in the right hands!
walking with god through hell is better than walking alone in a meadow.
it is important for our humanity to remember our part in divinity.
we must claim and live a life based on the knowledge that who we are is a result of by Whom we are loved.
we gathered on wed evening to sing, pray and realize that we are not what is in our wallets, we are not our cars, we are not our khakis....
we are not who people say we are..whether good or bad. we are who god says we are...and god says we are beloved.
that is how we are to live when they look at us and cry 'hosanna'
that is how we are to live when they look at us and cry 'crucify'
for that is how the One lived while he walked the dust of this world.
one of our family members sent this clip. we watched it and were deeply blessed by it. thank you dan. here is the clip for the rest to enjoy...take 17 mins out of your day and watch this. if you do not have time right now then skip the video but do yourself a solid and come back to it:
last night was another in our series 'false idol: a look at the 7 deadly sins for the 21st century' and last night's does not have a catchy title like the others.
last night we talked about the drive within each of us to answer 'who am i?' with stuff, accomplishments, reputation..etc.
we needed to be reminded that the only thing that truly defines us is 'beloved'
we are beloved of god...that is who we are. now we must live as such.
we will pause in our series on the 12th to honour those who have fallen in, what i think is the ultimate evidence of the fallen nature of humanity: war. that is worth breaking up a series.
when we return we will look at failure. we will celebrate failure. we will embrace all that we do wrong. for in that we are given the chance to see that we are beloved.
when we are weak...then we are strong.
when we fail...then we can succeed.
when we see that we are beloved...then we see ourselves.
watch this clip and ask yourself the same question: is it wrong to pray for rain?
is it wrong to pray for a candidate?
is it wrong to pray against a candidate?
after all, don't we believe that god works in and through prayer?
if we think someone is truly opposed to god's will should we not pray against their success...not their destruction but just their success?
should we not champion christian issues and demand that our leaders do the same?
paul, in romans 13, tells us to pray for the leaders and to be good citizens and pay our taxes (even jesus does that...'render unto ceasar' and all that).
so, we gathered and we voted. we voted and talked about whether or not it is right for a christian, a follower of jesus, to vote their faith.
then we discovered something kind of funny. in the book of revelation (note not revelationsthere is no 's' although most think there is) john calls rome the 'whore of babylon' who is 'drunk on the blood of the martyrs'
yikes!!
turns out that not even the bible has a consistent view of the christian church's responsibility to the state.
it was then, as we talked, that one of our people raised her hand and asked the question:
'i mean, we have seen time and again that all the people in this group have different ideas so how can we possibly define what a christian issue even is?'
bingo.
what IS a christian issue? abortion? same sex marriage? education? health care? national security? international aid? welfare? the environment? you can make an argument for each one of these.
and we did.
the group voted on a series of 14 issues compiled from various polls that showed what the 'hot button' issues for christians are (or, more accurately, the ones most christians are told to think are the important ones) and we voted.
here is our top 4 (not ranked): environment, health, education, international aid.
interesting. the top two issues for christians in the u.s. & canada combined were: abortion, same sex marriage and immigration.
are we less christian? or more canadian?
interesting.
someone pointed out that welfare did not even crack our top ten.
interesting.
someone else pointed out that while neither got a lot of votes pro-life beat out pro-choice in our group.
interesting.
even though the market had crashed the economy was only number 6 on our scale.
interesting.
the point is this: the notion of a christian issue is largley problematic to solve in the political ring because, and let's be honest here, christianity is not about making other people believe what we do.
sure, we can try to convince others about what we believe (hopefully more with actions than with words!) but we must realize that we have a pluralistic nation and we must allow all people, no matter how they worship (or whom) the freedom to do just that. it is not long after that that you begin to see that we have all been sold a line about christian issues and that we are being taken for a ride by people who want to win elections.
life should be protected. that is clear in the faith. but not just at the moment of birth but through the entire time a person live on this earth. how can someone be pro-life and pro-capital punishment? it is possible but that stance deserves to be scrutinized heavily.
that was what, hopefully, we came away with. voting is a privilege but there is no such thing as a christian party (and even if there was and even if they came to power that would just mean that people would start saying they were christian so that they could be in power too...so don't get all misty-eyed about the idea of christian's in control. we tend to hoop it as bad as anyone!) but there is such a thing as a christian voter.
so, as we head to the polls in a little less than a week let us remember that we are people of faith. however that influences your voting, vote who you think is best but before you do that, pray. ask god for help.
and may god bless our nation and the people in it...and the people in america...and in mexico.....and afghanistan...and england...and iraq....and australia....and sudan.....and peru.....and...........
immersion is proud to present the premiere of the documentary
GO: HOW FAR WOULD YOU GO FOR CHANGE?
on wed. sept 17th in the hall.
we hope you can join us for this powerful video and invite you to watch some of the clips from YouTube.
the members of invisible children will be joining us to answer questions and engage us in dialogue about helping children in uganda.
the more the merrier, so please invite as many people as you want to this event. if you would like some posters or know of some people who might be interested in promoting this event please contact jamie at jamieatwalton@yahoo.ca
just a note to say that our first official service back will be wed (of course) sept 17th
we are lining up some great stuff for september but after that it is up to the community to decide where we go!!
spoiler alert: we have already been asked to screen a new documentary on the civil war in uganda from an american film company...so we are going to be hosting these travelling radicals and showcasing their film...watch for that in the coming weeks
and we are also getting ready to launch the new interactive online community website for immersion. this one will allow each member to contribute to the site just like we do on wed nights. we are hoping all the bugs and kinks will be worked out by the 17th so stay tuned for that!
as someone great once said: T-T-T-T-That's all folks!! (well, for now anyway)
well, the first year of immersion is over already!
we can hardly believe where the time is gone.
so many new friendships have been formed..so many new topics addressed.
it has been great and we look forward to exploring all sorts of new craziness in the fall.
stay tuned to this blog for more updates and [hopefully] the brand new interactive website will be ready to go in september...it will be awesome and has us to spread our community out through cyberspace.
Last night I fearlessly led the discussion at iMMERSION - our alternative service on Wednesday nights.
The discussion for this week and the next are on Sin, and it was up to me to present the sides of the debate, open up the table to some dialogue, and hopefully get them thinking in ways they may not have imagined.And I think I did it.
For Original Sin, I wanted to start at the beginning and discuss what exactly happened in Eden. It was the beginning of things, wasn't it? So we started off with the Genesis 3 passages, followed by (thank you, YouTube!) a Born Again instructional video, whose bible verse reader sounded like Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons actually.
I could tell that their first impressions to the video were similar to my own - heads were shaking at the arrogant parts, corners of lips were twitching at the overly dramatic music. So I let them get their thoughts off their chest, then plunged straight into An Athiest's View On Original Sin - another YouTube find.
Only I read it out loud instead of playing the video (which was really just a voice and floating pictures). I saw more heads shaking and lips being nibbled in thought with this one. It asked a lot of tough questions that made you think for a second.
With the readings over with, we headed right into discussion. Thank you to all the contributors over on the Original Sin Questions topic - I got a fantastic response to all of them! I recommend popping over and reading all the suggestions, but in the end I chose these six:
1. How much of Christianity rests on the concept of Sin?
2. What is Original Sin? What was the original sin?
3. Does sin pass down through generations?
4. Is it our (humankind's) fault, God's fault, or no one's fault?
5. Does "Original Sin" mean we are inherently bad, or are we just inherently lacking something? What do these possibilities say about God?
6. Is it healthy for humans to hold the view that all people are born as sinners? How does this worldview affect our lives?
Our dialogue was great - we actually went naturally from some questions into others, and the ideas kept flowing. We wondered if God had designed us to be rebellious, or if Sin was just a human concept, or if Jesus died to remind us that we should not fear God... not to instruct what was Good or Evil.Finally, I read the story of the Garden of Eden from one of my favourite books: "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn. It was an incredible feeling, as I read nearly four full pages from the book, of everyone's eyes captivated on me. Well, not on me, but on the words. I could see the ideas unfolding new ideas in their minds as I spoke. I had feared that it might be boring, to sit and listen to me read page after page, but that fear vanished quickly as I read on. A bit of stunned silence hung in the air when I had finished. But it quickly turned back into refreshed discussion, and I actually ended up lending the book out after everything wrapped up.
All in all, a surprisingly successful night. We'll see what happens next week, when we start discussing the kind of Sin we see everyday, and whether or not God keeps track of points.
there is no 'right' answer but there is a wrong idea behind the current state of north-american christianity.
consumerism is our idol and the true cost is being felt more by the developing world than our own pockets.
and if you know anything about god you know that god is always with the poor. so, if our products are causing some harm to the poor what do you think that makes god feel?
so, i am not saying that jesus would never shop at wal-mart [but i never will] but i am saying that jesus would never just settle for blaming some big corporation and then moving on...jesus was nothing if not passionate about personal change.
with that in mind we would like to introduce you to 'trade as one'
t.a.o. is about bringing people with money together with tradespeople/artisans in developing nations. thus, we can purchase stuff like food, cards, purses and toys from people who are not part of some large [and lead filled] corporation. instead, our money is going to an individual trying to use their skills to support their family.
this is not the solution, but it does get us thinking about ways in which we can change lives with the stuff we buy.
that might be more in keeping with how jesus would shop.
check our their site...it's on the side of this page as well as linked in this article
last night we walked from musical genre to musical genre as we explored the psalms. [some of the songs played are listed on the video bar]
we had 'audio stations' in the hopes that people would become inspired by something they heard.
at each station a bible was open to a different psalm. our community was invited to read the psalm, listen to the music, watch a video solely about the face of jesus, or stare out the window and look at the waves crash on the beach, and then grab paper and pen and write some thoughts down.
the psalms capture the raw emotions of the human experience. anger, sadness, lonliness, despair, jubilation, remorse, feelings of abandonment, excitment, praise, ponderings...etc. you name it, it is in there.
so, last night we attempted to tap into that primal, creative part that links us with god and each other...and then spew that out onto paper.
for some this was not a pleasant idea...some simply sat quietly and enjoyed the music or art...some chatted and caught up with friends...others watched a jesus film...still others wrote poetry or drew pictures.
that's the great thing about experimenting in worship...you never know where you'll go.
at the end we gathered together to talk about the night and heather shared a poem that she wrote during this time. we decided to end the night with this poem as it was such a powerful example of artistic, verbal worship that we needed nothing further.
so...here it is...enjoy:
I loved her.
That was why I found sand scorching my feet, and air burning out my mouth, and a torrential shower of heat beating down from the arrogant sun.
I loved her.
I stopped eating; not because I wasn't hungry, but because I feared my appetite.
That was why I had left. I felt that appetite inside me, ready to devour all that was good and innocent about her.
She had already been through Hell.
I loved her.
I didn't want to lose her.Could the heat get worse? This -was- Hell, ready to gobble up anything cold or moist.
And then I saw her. She stood there, radiant in the glare.
In her outstretched hands was her heart.
It looked delicious and cool, and I knew that a single bite of it would fill my stomach and give me strength.But then I looked at her face. She was crying, her cheeks salty and red... and I realized that it was not her heart, but mine. "Take it," I whispered through parched lips. "You have been hungry for love longer than I have." As if she had been a cloud across the sun, she vanished and the heat returned with a vengeance.
I continued to walk.
I loved her, and though I refused her food, that gnawing appetite still remained.
I felt the sand slide through my toes as the land began to rise. Up and up I climbed, until I came to the dune's crest.
The sun glared and stole my sight in a blinding flash. I saw her again as I cowered away from the furious sky.
There she knelt at my feet, her head down, her dark hair like a shining river flowing across the sand. I loved her. She drew her hand across my sandal and tried to undo it."Show me that you love me," she breathed. I could feel the promise of cool water and fragrant oil smoothed over my hard, calloused feet. But I loved her. So instead, I knelt in front of her."Love is not a show."Again, she vanished.
I started descending the dune, stumbling through the amber grit.
The world disappeared around me in a haze of heat, and I could feel nothing but my stomach, still empty and demanding.
I loved her, and it hurt.
I wondered why I was still walking. She was a mirage - she did not exist.
She was dead. Why was I still walking?
I loved her.
But did she love me?
Would she ever love me?
Had it been yet another mirage?
I stumbled, and at that moment an overwhelming desire to stop - to lie down, to stop walking towards that hope in front of me - flooded through my body."I love... her..." I stuttered aloud. My dry tongue betrayed me - I had meant to say 'loved'. But it was right, it was true, and the words had an incredible effect on me.
I stood upright, walked straight, and raised my face defiantly towards the sun.
I love her.
She is not an appetite, she is not a craving.
I accepted the ache in my stomach as still being present,
and I continued walking. It could not tempt me, because I love her.
And she had become my need, my ache.
And all the pain, the heat and the weariness only made my love clearer and stronger.
So I walked until I came home, knowing that I love her.
And I will love her beyond giving up,
beyond despair,
beyond temptation and appetite.
No matter if she loves me or not,
I love her.
selah.
worship is not something we do...it is something we live.
become immersed in worship and nothing in life will ever be trivial again.
not music. not film. not art. not taking out the garbage. not shopping. not family. not friends. nothing..not even you.
for if we lose our life for christ...it is then that we find it.
this will be a short post about the movie keeping mum
you really must watch this film and no one enjoys spoilers so why don't we just concentrate on the comments made by those in the community who watched the film, okay?
the story of the goodfellow clan charmed us all and we had many comments about the lighting in the film, the beauty of the shots, the excellent acting, and the moving recitation of the song of solomon
[spoiler: rev. goodfellow says about the song of solomon: 'o, that is a book about a man's devotion to his Lord.'
grace retorts: 'no, it's about sex.']
at the end we spoke about the existence of grace in the lives of the characters in the story [in which case grace quite literally lived them as that was the name of their new nanny] and then how grace lives with us in our own lives.
the grace in the film comes in to dispatch [hint, hint] of the problems in this seemingly perfect, though deeply wounded family [the husband/reverend is oblivious to his wife and children; the wife is having an affair with her golf instructor, the daughter is fully steeped in her raging libido and the son is being bullied at school]. slowly, the family is transformed into a more visibly flawed, but much more real and happy group.
the transformation does not happen over night but it does happen. is that not like grace in our own lives?
although this is a satirical look at life the message is that grace, once it is invited in to our lives, can do no other thing than transform us.
the message of christ was not 'you are okay just the way you are.' but was, 'you are deeply wounded, so much so that you don't even see it anymore. allow me to come in, believe that i will, and i will change you profoundly from the inside.'
we are all wounded and although many of us have perfect masks to get us through each day that is not the abundant life christ calls us to.
although it is not necessarily noticeable at first it does come, and the problems of this world grow strangely dim. it may even bring resentment from those around us who have become comfortable with the status quo and look on any kind of change as alien and threatening...even if that change promises to make their lives better too.
in the end...the movie got us to look at the fact that grace needs to be a very real presence in each one of our homes and while the methods grace employs aren't always what we would choose we must, like rev. goodfellow states in his sermon, realize that god is mysterious folks, deal with it!
it was quite the journey through fire [both real and metaphorical] and darkness [also, both real and metahporical] and have emerged, somewhat unscathed on the other side.
all euphimisms aside, it was an engaging series full of new discoveries and fascinating discussions.
last night we concluded the series talking about the conditional view of salvation. are all humans destined for immortality or is eternal life conditional on acceptance of christ and following in the footsteps of god?
this view is also known as annihilationism because those who refuse to spend eternity with god are, literally, annihilated and cease to exist.
the reasoning is that god honours all decisions of the human species, even those who do not choose him. clark pinnock words it like this:
"He will not save [people] if they do not want to be saved. God wills the salvation of all people (2 Peter 3:9) but will fail to save some of them on account of their human freedom...Sinners do not have to be saved and will not be forced to go to heaven. They have a moral 'right' to hell...In the end he will allow us to become what we have chosen."
god has no obligation to keep everyone alive. only god is truly immortal and bestows immortality upon those who are the children of god.
is not everyone the child of god?
no. according to christ in john 8:38-40 some of the people were the children of the devil!
the idea that everyone is a full-blooded child of god is not biblical and that must be taken seriously.
we must also take the teachings of the bible seriously on the matter of hell. it is an uncomfortable topic but that is precisely why we chose it as a topic. every sensitive christian should, at least once, question how we can reconcile a loving god [as we see in jesus] with a god who allows people to burn for eternity for sins they committed while trapped in time. that is a legitimate grievance. we can dislike the idea of hell all we want [and many people at the immersion services throughout the weeks have expressed that] but this is not about what we like or dislike. it is about trying to understand and be faithful to One who we are called to serve...not the other way around.
back to the topic at hand.
pinnock argues that the bible never teaches the immortality of the soul but that this idea has crept in from greek philosophy. in fact, the bible teaches that those whom god declares as wicked are not kept alive forever to suffer inexpressible torments but are actually destined for destruction.
'hell' is not eternal suffering but is, in fact, the great nothing of nonexistence. a complete negation of the gift of life offered by god. a dark place, the outer ring where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. the wicked are burned up, consumed and exist no more. in the end days all that will exist will be the kingdom of god [as it says, god will be 'all in all' 1 corinthians 15:28] and those who have chosen not to exist there will not be in some dark corner of heaven just hanging out and burning. no, life will no longer be theirs to possess and so they will no longer be alive. they will be swallowed up by the second death that is described in rev. 20:5. thus, hell is still an inexpressibly horrible fate, but is not the inexplicably cruel fate described by those who support the traditional hypothesis. thus, we retain the fear of hell as jesus described it because that is a terrible fate. but we do not have the moral gymnastics to do in order to explain how a loving god can see the justice of building an eternal 'auschwitz' that does not even offer people the reprise of death.
however, is this scriptural?
pinnock [and myself] would argue that it is. here are some verses that clearly speak of the impending destruction [and not eternal torment] of the wicked:
2 peter 2:6 the evil will be like sodom and gomorrah which were utterly destroyed by god
jude 7 cites sodom as the city that underwent 'the punishment of eternal fire'
it seems pretty clear that death and destruction is all that await the rebellious ones. while those who are humble and serve can expect eternal life in the kingdom of god as their reward.
even the verses that speak of 'everlasting destruction' can be countered by other verses using the same language but referring to places that are not still burning to this day but were utterly destroyed [like sodom].
even jesus' use of the word gehenna can combat the idea of eternal suffering. the idea of the worm that does not die does not mean that people are eaten by worms forever but is a reference to isaiah 66:24 when there were so many dead that the worms were able to feast on. the smoke that rises is not to indicate eternal, conscious torment but imagery to indicate total destruction and consumption.
listen, this is not designed to give anyone warm fuzzies but that is because the topic of hell must be seen as a very real threat written about numerous times throughout the scriptures. we cannot and should not ever become comfortable with hell as a destiny for anyone we know. jesus was not comfortable with this prospect and went to the cross to make sure that it would not be the fate of humanity.
however, god's love for humanity is so deep and profound that a place like hell must exist because our Lord does not force his love onto anyone who does not want it.
the world is full of clues about god and god's love but, as cam pointed out last night, he seems to purposefully withdraw his full glory so that we are forced to rely on faith.
seeing god in all the splendour of the Creator would eliminate the need for faith. but it might also eliminate real love. and that is one thing that god is all about: love.
so, in conclusion, whether or not you like the traditional, metaphorical, purgatorial, or conditional view of hell is not the point. we should not 'like' any of it. we should dig through scripture in prayer to find an answer to this question that can be supported.
but, as we talk with our friends over a coffee or pint or whatever we should ask them what they think about hell and offer our guidance. we can talk about the use of symbolism and metaphor and feel utterly confident to agree that the idea of eternal suffering does not coinside with the loving picture we get of god in the new testament [and in the old testament as well].
we must remember, first and foremost, that the god we serve is the god of john 3:16; is the god of the oppressed and downtrodden; is the god of mercy, love and compassion. we must look at the doctrine of hell in the same way we are called to look at everything: through the lens of christ.
what does christ teach us?
what was he like?
was he tolerant of sin? no. but neither was he vicious and sadistic to sinners.
if we can begin our discussions about hell [and discussions is what they should always be since none of us know exactly what hell looks like we should all be willing to entertain suggestions and not assert our conjectures dogmatically. remember the suggestions tell us more about the person saying them than about actual hell and if we are trying to understand someone listening to what they think about something is the easiest way to see them a little clearer.] with christ in mind then our opinions will be tempered with love and compassion and, who knows, we might actually help some people learn more about god because we talked to them about hell!
thanks to rose, one of our members, for this fantastic clip of the harrowing walk of el camino del rey.
we often talk about walking in faith and many of us picture a pleasant stroll through a sunlit field of fresh flowers with a bubbling stream. thus, we do not understand when things feel 'off' and we begin to think that we have been abandoned by god or that god was never with us to begin with.
however, if we start to think of our walk with god more like this we can see the inexplicable beauty of the journey but also the times when security and peace seem far and even times when life seems legitimately dangerous!
the walk of faith is more akin to el camino than it is to a pleasant sunday stroll! enjoy the view and remember that the destination at the end of the walk is worth it all!
now, most of us at immersion have grown up in the protestant tradition of the christian faith.
therefore perhaps many of our knee jerk reactions were [are] to dismiss purgatory outright. not even consider it a viable option. of all the topics covered while we have been in hell this one is, perhaps, the most foreign. then again next week's topic [see sidebar] might be pretty new to people too.
father hayes in his article "the purgatorial view" makes an excellent point that most christians [be they prot, cath or ortho] believe in some kind of interim period between when a person dies but before they reach their final, eternal destiny. what happened to the people who died before jesus came?
even the new testament writers seemed to communicate the idea that after we shuffle off this mortal coil we enter into a state of not-quite-thereness. paul calls it 'sleep' and mentions that those who are 'sleeping in the lord' will be the first to rise to meet christ in the sky and then the living faithful will join them afterwards.
sidenote: there are many people out there who think that this whole notion of flying corpses sounds more like clive barker than god. however, in the proper context, this idea of people meeting jesus in the sky makes perfect sense. in the ancient world when a king or diplomat for a king was approaching a city the people of that city would send out an envoy to meet them. it was a sign of honour and showed that they recognized the dignity of this person. so, when jesus-the King of kings-comes to earth would it not make sense in that culture that the people would come out to meet him? and he is not going to be riding on earth but coming from heaven so the natural conclusion is that we will meet him in the sky. now, minds today may scoff at this as ridiculous but let us be careful of being time-ists or too chronocentric and thinking that our point in time is superior to another point in time. they are communicating in ways that make sense and we reveal only our own ignorance and lack of understanding when we mock them. it is not paul or other people of that period that come off looking foolish, it is us.
once again, back to the topic at hand: purgatory.
so, many believe in an interim state between this time and the day of judgement. in fact, there is strong scriptural support for that position.
what about purgatory? well, that is different than the interim.
the idea of purgatory comes from wondering if god can still work on and with people during that interim state. thus, if you die short of attaining perfection in grace [which i think is a fate that we are all going to share in!] god keeps working on you in the interim until the day of judgement.
c.s. lewis explains it that if you show up at the gates of heaven and you are still covered in the filth of this world, wouldn't you want god to clean you up before you went into heaven...even if it hurt a little?
so, purgatory can be understood [somewhat tongue and cheek] as god turning the hose on you to wash all the guck of this world off before you enter his beautiful and pristine home.
make sense?
as father hayes puts it, his support of purgatory comes from a place of love for the many lost people in this world and for the massive amount of people who will die with unfinished business and for all of us who will die before fully realizing our christian identities.
he writes:
"As long as there was only heaven and hell, it was not suprising that hell would be heavily populated. But when the possibility of purification after death entered the scene, with it came the tendency to depopulate hell by placing many people in a sort of outer court of heaven until they were more fully prepared for entrance into the presence of God."
however, to caution against people using purgatory as an excuse for loose morality and thinking they can get away with anything in this life by simply making up for it in the next one, father hayes quotes augustine:
"[Augustine] argues that it is better to be cleansed in this life than the next, for the cleansing process in the next life will be far more severe than anything experienced in this life."
it is a tempting idea that there are more chances than just this life. clark pinnock writes that father hayes is the kind of priest protestants could learn from. his heart is good and his desire is for the lost and to see god as always capable of working with people. it is a wonderful idea and many at immersion last night were able to nod along to some of the different facets that purgatory teaches. even death cannot stop god's work in us.
the problem?
there is no scriptural support for the idea of purgatory. although a few places are quoted [notably: matthew 12:31-32 because it talks of the 'age to come'; and 1 corinthians 3:11-15 because paul talks about being purified in fire] but these are flimsy at best and open to many other interpretations.
also, what can god's 'hose' clean off that the death of christ could not? does god not see christ when he looks at us? are we not supposed to claim our eternal home in heaven as granted to us by christ and his death on the cross? many of us struggle with what that means but the simple fact seems to be that christ accomplished something so deep and profound on golgotha that there are no additions to be required. sadly, purgatory smacks of the ideology that paul dedicated so much of his life fighting against. we cannot add to jesus' sacrifice, we cannot do anything to bring about our own salvation. and to attempt that is to walk away from the grace of god and enter, once again, into the world of law and death.
it is tempting to think that there are chances for us [or, as we discovered last night, one of the driving principles behind our concern is for loved ones who do not know the lord] beyond this world. while there is no proof of purgatory and not even any good arguments for its existence it does teach us one very valuable thing: god works through us and with us to bring about our redemption.
god is always at work in us. that is clear. god is a god of grace and mercy. one of the threats about these kind of topics is that we can get bogged down in semantics which help no one [see the discussion between doug pagitt and todd friel on the video wall and you will see a philosophical discussion that did nothing to help our community understand the nature of hell better. it just made us all sad because neither man came off sounding good or willing to listen. however, it does sound like pagitt was blindsided] and communicate nothing of the grace that our lord put at the heart of his message.
true, jesus does talk about hell as a terrible place to avoid with every fiber of our being. but he showed people how beautiful the kingdom was with his healings and teachings on mercy and grace and even his parables were not designed to confuse but to invite people into the story of the kingdom. no, jesus was never about condemning the world but was all about saving the world. if we can remember that then we are better prepared to see hell for what it really is: a terrible place that is not part of the plan of god.
so...what is hell? we're still not sure. but the video at the end of this story shows us a pretty clear view of what hell on this earth looks like. but, more importantly, it also shows us the love of god on this planet as well.
"if your right eye causes you to sin, poke it out and throw it away. it is better to lose one part of your body, than for your whole body to end up in hell." [matthew 5:29]
"see that hot girl/guy over there?" "yeah." "you just committed lust!" "oh no! what can i do to stop this infernal [pun intended] lusting?" "gouge out your eye." "really?" "sure, jesus told us to." "and that will make me stop lusting." "according to the bible." "okay, well then i guess that is what i have to do....wait." "what?" "what about my imagination?"
does anyone really think that blind people don't lust?
does anyone really think that deaf people don't curse?
does anyone really think that cutting off a hand makes a thief less of a thief?
no, it just makes them a blind pervert, a deaf person with anger issues and a thief with a bit of a tougher time ahead.
because he is not smart? because the bible is outdated? because he was having a bad day? because the faith called christianity is full of crap?
or...and let's just really put our thinking caps on for this one...
could jesus have actually been using metaphor or hyperbole to explain something?
gasp!!
he would not!
the bible is literal and inerrant and to ascribe to jesus the linguistic art of metaphor would be akin to crucifying him a second time!
if you think that then you probably stopped reading this blog a long time ago.
last night we sat together, sang beautiful one, unfailing love, faithful one & imagine, watched some videos [we highly recommend rowan atkinson's 'a warm welcome'], and talked about hell as a metaphor.
following the persuasive essay by william crockett we explored the numerous ways in which word-pictures have been used throughout scripture [including by jesus himself!]
in these words we learned that people apparently walked around with large pieces of timber jutting from their faces [jesus told them to remove them, but not for medical reasons but so they could perform complex optical surgery on their friends...not such a great physician after all!], and anyone who believes in god can make any mountain range they choose do calisthenics [this one is exciting for me since i come from the rocky mountains...there is going to be some shocked people on my next trip home!], and had to be murderously enraged with their own family members before they could even begin to consider themselves worthy of being jesus' followers [that's not too good for business, eh dr. dobson?]
apologies for the sarcasm but not accepting the metaphorical usage in scripture makes the story of christ move from amazing into the absurd and irrelevant faster than anything else. it is necessary to see that seeing jesus as capable of using rabbinic hyperbole does nothing to negate the influence and truth of the scriptures.
so...can this be applied to the doctrine of hell?
dr. crockett thinks so:
"There is nothing wrong with using images to teach truth. After all, Jesus used the images of fire and darkness to warn the wicked of the consequences of sin. Difficulties arise only when we insist that the images reflect concrete reality."
"Unfortunately, some people confuse a high view of Scripture with taking every word of the Bible literally."
we can see the images jesus use to paint the picture of the afterlife [both heaven: a room with many mansions and hell: like the burning garbage dump outside a city] as earthly representations of spiritual truths. after all, jesus is using words and phrases that make sense to people trapped in time and on this planet during a certain stage of history. he must establish a frame of reference or else the words mean nothing to any of us. we are dealing with symbols to describe realities of which our minds and experiences cannot begin to grasp. to take these symbols literally is to miss the point entirely.
"[jesus' metaphors are] not to give the reader a literal picture of torment, but a symbolic one."
"fire in Jewish and early Christian writings is regularly used to create a mood of seriousness or reverence...When the writers use fire to describe judgment or hell, they use a convenient image that will demonstrate the burning wrath of God."
feel better? the next time we dine with our friends and they challenge us on the idea that a loving god could not send someone to burn for eternity we can counter with the argument that fire throughout the bible is often a metaphor and jesus frequently used earthly matters to explain deeper ideas. like when we say we've seen something 'a million times' or 'that apple didn't fall far from the tree' we all acknowledge that they can have literal meanings but most understand that they are being used metaphorically.
then your friend will become instantly relieved [maybe even offering to buy you lunch] and become a professed follower on the spot! and as soon as the excitement dies down they will ask
"so, if hell isn't all full of fire, what is it like then?" [pause] "i'll pay for lunch."
we are right back where we started! the only thing that changed was the mode in which the torture takes place...but the fact remains that this argument still sees god torturing those who turned from his offer of grace for eternity. the only difference is that the fire is simply a picture of something so far beyond our experience that we can't grasp it. great! so, in essence, we are talking about something so awful that the closest thing on earth we have to understand it is the image of being burned alive for eternity!
it might, very well, be worse.
anything to say on the topic dr. crockett?
"When it comes to the afterlife, only the dead know for sure."
great. thanks.
so, here is where we stand:
there are strong arguments to support the traditional view of hell as something constructed from images in our world to help us understand better and not literal teachings about the nature and appearance of hell
it is entirely possible that the world they are describing is vastly worse than anything we can imagine
god is sadistic and will torture people forever in some mysterious way that is worse than any conceivable system existant on earth today
i have not been this sad and confused since the end of the empire strikes back
han is frozen
luke is vader's son [and down one hand]
lando is a traitor
the rebellion's hope is fading fast
it is not fair to be left in the lurch like this
so, perhaps, we need to spend some time trying to define hell a little closer in ways that are both biblical and honest. not an easy task, to say the least. so let us roll up our sleeves and get down to business...
good thing we still have a couple more weeks in hell!
this is a quote from one of our members. really good stuff from one of our deep thinkers:
A couple things.
First... do you think Americans use the "double hockey sticks" expression?
Second, what I really got out of Wednesday night is the idea of eternal damnation. It's true that many people eagerly accept the idea of a timeless paradise, reaching on across the span of eternity in a rosy, glowing hue. Eternal damnation however, doesn't get the same treatment.What is it about 'eternity' that we don't accept? As humans, I think we have a hard enough time looking forward a generation - not to mention FOREVER.
I think most people think in terms of their lifespan: 'til death do us part, or 'until my last breath'. When we think of being happy for eternity, we assume that time passes in a way that we cannot grasp. Eternity is simply a moment that goes on forever. When you think in those terms, it's easier to understand the idea of eternal damnation. Stuck in the moment of rejection of God... forever. It's the fact that it's our choice that seems to scare people. Go towards the light, right? Does suspicion of God's omnipotence translate into rejection? Will we screw it up?
More next time, when I've warmed up with popcorn and Rowan Atkinson.
so, the first week in hell is over! not too bad eh?
last night a large group of us gathered to begin our new series: 4 weeks in hell.
the topic was whether or not we believe in a hell that is a pit of fire where sinners and the lost spend eternity slow roasting for all their sins.
if you have spent any time at all talking to thoughtful people concerned with matters of the faith the topic of hell will most likely come to the surface at some point. the questions usually go something like this:
how can a loving god send people to burn for eternity?
isn't it arrogant to think that only christians are the only ones who won't burn?
i am a good person, why should i spend all eternity burning? i never hurt anyone, i'm no murderer! i love my family and friends...that hardly sounds fair!
most of the people at immersion last night admitted that those are fairly compelling reasons to avoid the whole topic all together.
however, we cannot truly avoid it because it is in the bible. and let us not forget that jesus does spend quite a bit of time talking about it.
so, what is the thoughtful and compassionate believer to do?
well, come to immersion for starters!! [we kid...is funny, no?]
we read and talk about it in a community interested in discovering the truth.
so, last night we read john f. walvoord's defense of the literal interpretation of hell as a place of fire & the eternality of the suffering of the dammed.
here are some segments from his article:
"If one accepts the authority of Scripture as being inerrant and accurate, it is clear that Christ taught the doctrine of everlasting punishment."
"While on the one hand [God] bestows infinite grace on those who trust him, he must, on the other hand, inflict eternal punishment on those who spurn his grace."
"Eternal punishment is an unrelenting doctrine that faces every human being as the alternative to grace and salvation in Jesus Christ. As such, it is a spur to preaching the gospel, to witnessing for Christ, to praying for the unsaved, and to showing compassion on those who need to be snatched as brands from the burning."
while these are only segments they do communicate the basic thrust of dr. walvoord's argument.
this, needless to say, made many people in the community uncomfortable and somewhat upset. but who are we to judge the ways of god? if god deems eternal punishment necessary can we, as mere mortals, really object?
after all walvoord puts scripture after scripture in his essay to compliment and support his argument. some examples from last night [click on the verses to read them]:
well, as we looked further into the various texts we began to notice that while some verses talked about hell being full of fire others talked about it being a place of darkness. some mentioned there were worms there that would never stop eating people yet those people were being burned too. how are these opposite images to be reconciled?
we talked about gehenna and jesus' use of that word in the new testament. gehenna was a place where garbage was burned on the outside of the city and jesus uses this place to help explain the netherworld to his disciples.
we began to see that although there are numerous pictures in the bible about hell being a place of fire the traditional view may not be as clear cut as we first thought.
clark pinnock wrote a rebuttal to walvoord [the two are friends, well, until walvoord passed away] and he wrote the following:
"[Walvoord] actually asks us to believe that the God who wills the salvation of the world plans to torture people endlessly in physical fire if they decline his offer of salvation...Who would want to accept salvation from a God like that? Has Walvoord visited the burn unit in his local hospital recently? Is he not conscious of the sadism he is attributing to God's actions? [this view of God] makes him out to be morally worse than Hitler."
although this excerpt is more personal than theological [although theologians who use personal experience in their work do tend to be more convincing] the arguments pinnock puts forth are convincing.
the scriptures quoted by walvoord often appear to uphold his argument on the surface. but only a slightly deeper look begins to show cracks in the armour. many of the passages quoted are metaphorical [and some even poetic] in nature are do not appear to have been designed to be interepreted literally. others are stories.
an example is the use of jesus' parable of the rich man and lazarus in luke 16 when the rich man goes to hell and asks laarus-who is in heaven-for some water to cool him in the flames. walvoord uses this as proof of hell's fiery reality. however, hell is not what this tale is about. it looks to have been a popular morality lesson circulating in the day when jesus walked the earth. jesus uses the story to illustrate his point, which is summed up at the end of the lesson:
He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.' "Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.' " 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.' "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "
the point of this story is not that hell is full of fire but that the law and the prophets all point to the divinity of jesus. that those who refuse to believe will never believe...even if a man should come back from the dead! this story was told to the readers so that they would understand better how so many could reject christ! to use this tale to defend the traditional view of hell misses the point entirely [after all, why does lazarus go to heaven? there is no mention that he was a believer or any mention about his piety or faithfulness at all...because this is not about the afterlife but is a clever story about the actions of people in this life!]
this is only part 1 so we will leave it at this: the idea of hell as a pit of fire burning forever is not as easy to prove as some would lead us to believe. the words sheol, gehenna, tartaros, hades which are all, at one point or another, translated as hell in the english bible have varied [and sometime contradictory] meanings. it appears that the traditional pit of fire depictions of hell are not necessarily the most biblical...even though the proponents for this position argue that they are! therefore, we are forced to resign ourselves to the fact that we do not have an answer yet, but we seem to be getting closer.
did the christian church sell out judas and give him the undeserved reputation of a monster?
did jesus go to the cross because judas betrayed him or because jesus told him to betray him?
what does the gospel of judas have to say about this?
dr. gordon heath lead a packed immersion through such questions. we talked about the conflict within the scholarly world about whether or not the gospel of judas even portrays judas in the positive light that the national geographic special claims it does. we talked about the difference between gnosticism and christianity and how some claim that christianity simply was the 'lucky winner' of the debate and that is why it is more popular than gnosticism.
dr heath talked about the beliefs held by some of this ancient sect and how it would impact our learning of god. we learned that were we to accept the teachings of the ancient gnostics we would throw out the idea of the trinity, the old testament, jesus' death on the cross, the resurrection and, effectively, everything we attach to the work of salvation accomplished by jesus. we could no longer see yahweh [ our god] as powerful and the 'real' god would never interact with us because matter [what we see, touch, smell etc.] is evil and too far removed from the spirit of god. our incarnate god would never contaminate himself by engaging with sinful humanity. god would be untouchable.
it was a powerful night full of discussion, debate and learning. next week gord concludes his two-week stay with us and we are going to dedicate more time to discussion because people did not want to leave but wanted to keep on talking [or listening]. hey, immersion is nothing if not community run so we look forward to even more engagement in the upcoming service.
among them are genetic intervention, drug abuse, and environmental concerns.
this is an interesting development within Catholic theology and begs the question about whether or not 'sin' changes from age to age.
a while ago the vatican came up with a kind-of 10 commandments for driving [opposing drunk, driving, road rage and even inconsiderate driving] and this is in keeping with this move within the Catholic hierarchy to maintain christian teaching in the post modern world [some of the vatican is even going to solar power!]
the church is continuing to cry against the mistreatment of the poor by societal systems which keep the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
all in all an interesting article worth the read and a potential future iMMERSION topic.
the cross is always seen as the central message of the christian faith
in fact, the cross is one of the most recognized symbols in the world [the golden arches of mcdonalds are more recognizable]
but did the notion of jesus dying on a cross come out of nowhere? was this a last minute audible called by god the quarterback? or, was the cross the culmination of the story of salvation that god had been calling since the beginning?
at this time of year the stations of the cross are quite popular with our catholic brothers and sisters and we want to partake in this worship service but add another element to it as well. we are going to, quite literally, spend some time walking through some of the old testament to see god's plan of salvation for the world in action even before the time of jesus.
there will be music, movie clips, discussion and time to explore the past in a new light.
your comments will be appreciated both on the evening and afterwards for posting.
let us take time to truly reflect and celebrate this special time of year as we see that god's plans have existed for centuries and continue to live on in this day and age.
so, how do we fix that? aaaaa, therein lies the rub.
andrea speers led us in a dialogue to help us sort out these situations in our own lives. here are some of the points that came from the talk:
in this day and age where roles are up for grabs, daytimers and pda's are the norm and the family dinner is a relic from days of yore the question still remains how we stay a family and not just a group of roommates who barely see each other.
obviously, there is no easy answer to this but one of the keys appears to be open and honest communication. gathering together, if not for dinner every night, at least once a week for a family meeting. the topics don't have to be heavy. one meeting can be spent planning a fun family event that everyone can be involved in...both the actual event and the planning of it.
the idea of a nuclear family with the dad, mom and their 2.1 kids is a fairy tale for most these days. single parents, same-sex parents, re-marriages all bring their own sense of identity and their own set of problems that need to be sorted through.
a large part of the problem in this part of the world is that we are very 'achievement focused' and the art of relaxation has been lost. being exhausted is a badge of honour instead of a warning sign! there needs to be respect for taking some time off, or taking some down time, or just taking time to be alone and to be together.
families can be busy places and many people just run from one place to another. whether it is soccer...ballet...music lessons...homework...school play....more homework...quick meal in the car...tutoring...whatever. it can feel like too much a lot of the time.
there is no one answer, but the dialogue and the awareness of this issue is a promising step in the right direction. andrea gave us some helpful hints and her website [under our family counsellor on the side or here] has even more, but the key is that we need to realize that doing everything and always being busy for the sake of our families will mean very little if we never see our families!
remember, god exists as a trinity and that three-in-one kind of thing is more than just some weird way christians try to understand god; it gives us some insight into the topic at hand.
after all, god IS a family. god is in relation. jesus said he did nothing except follow the father. the holy spirit does nothing but point people to god. they/he/she/god communicates and shows us that if we are created in the image of god then part of that means that we are created to be in community...to be in family.
i wonder what god talks about at god's family meetings?
NOTE: big stuff is coming to iMMERSION!
dr. gordon heath will be with us on mar 19 and 26 to talk about the gospel of judas. dr. heath has written a book [avail. at chapters] on this topic and will be sharing with us some wonderful insights and answering questions about this controversial topic. mark the dates in your calendars and join us for an informative and powerful evening.
underneath a lunar exclipse we gathered to watch some of the al gore-ical film an inconvenient truth and talk about whether or not the concern for the environment has usurped the nature of the christian message.
the arguments made included:
if we don't have an earth, where are we going to spread our message?
perhaps god put us in the garden of eden to take care of the land
can taking care of the land be part of our destiny?
all good points but is not the deeper issue where are we supposed to put our focus while we are on this planet? after all, if we spend time talking about the planet and resources and recycling are we neglecting the true purpose to teach the message of christ?
some in the church believe that we are called to focus our time and talents purely on spreading the gospel and that all other things act as merely distractions. now, the intent of this way of thinking is not purely off although, it can be argued, it is somewhat extreme.
christians are called to act as god's ambassadors on earth [see II corinthians 5] but the idea of what constitutes the message of christ tends to be somewhat narrow in those with the aforementioned opinion.
after all, did christ not talk about a new heaven AND a new earth?
did christ not honour this world simply by existing in it?
does the book of genesis not record that god saw creation and, more importantly, that it was good?
true, many pseudo-gospels threaten to usurp the salvation offered by the sacrifice of christ on the cross but the care of this world does not have to be one of them. the lord is all about recreation not destruction and calls all His children to respect the art that He has created. just as we are called not to destroy our fellow humans it can be argued that the gospel message includes not destroying the planet god gave us not because we are trying to be hip or cool, but because all things that bear the fingerprint of the One we are following.
listen, the message of christ is life-transforming and, if allowed, will bleed into all aspects of a person's life. we begin to see salvation as more than just a message about who goes to heaven and see that it is about bringing heaven to earth. it is not an either-or situation. we are not called to choose between spreading the gospel or taking care of the planet. however, as we follow god we begin to see that they are both part of the same mission: recreation.
one of the main characteristics of immersion is something we call edenism. edenism is about seeing the planet as something other than our own personal playground. hedonism has brought us to this place but edenism seeks to view the restoration and maintenance of the planet in a spiritual light. we are called to work the land just as much now as adam and eve first were in the garden of eden...it is part of our mandate as followers of god.
hopefully, we will take the call of environmentalism seriously not beacuse it is the trendy thing to do right now [although it can be argued that it is not trendy but necessary!] but because it has always been part of the christian's role on earth. we love this planet because god made it and god's artwork is always something to be cared for and held in reverence.
next time we are tempted to throw a can on the street or leave our cars running or any of the other assorted things we now know harm our planet let us remember that god may have created this world for us but that does not mean it was created for us to abuse.
there will be some posts tomorrow once this week's immersion has happened but we wanted to get the word out that family counsellor and all-around parenting expert [she hates it when we say stuff like this] andrea speers will be leading next week's immersion service.
she has fantastic ideas and you can read the praises in the 'next week' column but we wanted to make a special mention of the fact and remind all you people out there to clear up some time in your schedule and invite some other people to an immersion...this will be a very useful one!
last night we gathered to see whether or not god has a sense of humour.
we looked at some [actual] products found on line. the picture is of He'Brews Jewish Beer. don't believe it is real? check out their website
we also looked at a frying pan which burns the face of jesus into your pancakes or grilled cheese sandwich, pet baptism kits, hot air balloon jesus and a lanyard for your iPod shuffle that is in the shape of a cross. we discussed whether or not these items were funny or offensive. all of them fell into the funny category.
however, the websites that dealt with the rapture [actually, the site was about investing in stocks during the 7 years when the anti-christ is on earth to make the most money...there is waaaaaay too much there to explain right now but we all agreed a study about the end of the world would make an interesting future immersion service] or sending messages to dead relatives through people in paliative care or the other more intolerant sites were put into the offensive/blasphemous category. these sites were seen as destructive and communicative of an unhealthy and violent ideology. the basic consensus was that there is nothing funny about taking advantage of people who are grieving the loss of a loved one or manipulating a certain idea about the end times to make financial gain.
but it was the video that inspired the most passionate discussion [see video bar for the video]. this youtube vid was full of images and we watched and then wrote which ones we reacted the strongest towards.
please watch the video and do the same.
many people were deeply offended about the woman in the stain-glassed window, or the cross with the word 'ikea' written on it, or the ones mocking pope john paul II's declining health in his final days, or the pictures depicting jesus as a drug user.
we asked why these things were offensive and the main idea was that there is no longer anything sacred anymore. there seems to be a noticable disrespect for religion and a desire to profane what used to be considered holy. conversation turned to stores and bars being open on sundays and how the church is a target for hateful remarks.
but we also talked about this type of thing being a vehicle for honest dialogue. if we can get past the feelings of repulsion or anger we may be able to find someone who is lashing out because of an incident in their past when they were let down, or hurt, by the church. and that is the kind of person we want to show understanding and compassion towards. people expect a negative reaction from 'church types' when they post such images. what a wonderful opportunity to pleasantly surprise them!
what about those who post images and mock the church just because, and are just being malicious for, no good reason or because it is the popular thing to do? well, it is probably best just to avoid the situation and hope that they mature enough down the road and will become willing to engage in an intelligent discussion on the subject. or, at the very least, realize that mocking another person's beliefs-no matter how silly they may seem-is never a good course of action.
but the point that must be concluded on is this: god does have a sense of humour. it is important to see that god delights in people. it is important to see the distinction between failing at an honest attempt to please god and just mocking god. as thomas merton says: "i believe even the desire to please god pleases god."
god is a god who laughs as well as cries. god is not vengeful and waiting to smite us because we tell jokes about the faith. it is important for christians-and people of faith-to look at themselves and laugh at what is funny...we do a lot of ridiculous things in this pursurit of the Divine and it can only help to be able to honestly laugh at ourselves! plus, it probably will help us rid ourselves of the whole vengeful and grumpy god image that can haunt us and our spiritual walk.
after all, if god doesn't have a sense of humour we are all pretty much up the mighty brown creek sans paddle!
and seriously, if god doesn't have a sens of humour who can explain the platypus and teenagers?
ps: for a great website that has some hilarious church culture items check out www.shipoffools.com
a group of people exploring what life lived through a spiritual lens actually looks like. we ask what it means to our world if church is not some place we go but some thing we are. we want to know what it feels like to be immersed in the presence of God...not for the people who have all the answers, more for the people asking the questions
