Darwin's Birthday...and I'm Late to the Party

I read a fascinating piece the other day while researching ahead of a trip to see Brian McLaren speak out in Louisville on Sunday.


Sure, this is a late response to that particular blog post, but I'm sharing nonetheless.

I'm certainly in agreement that religion has treated science with disdain when the two are not inherently competitive. I'm also in agreement that society has, in large part, sacrificed objective truth on the altar of subjective morality (although I don't think Charles Darwin is solely to blame for this shift in cultural attitudes...post-modern thought didn't arise from one man's scientific theory).

I disagree with Ken that "do unto others as you would have them do until you" is the core of Christ's message. It is undoubtedly an essential part of the Christian theology that Jesus established. It is not The Gospel. To think otherwise is to place man's actions ahead of God's salvation. Indeed, that line of reasoning has it backwards; the reverse, in fact, is true: salvation first, works that result from that salvation is second.

The Gospel is this: in an outpouring of love, God created the universe, and with it, mankind. The first man chose sin instead of a personal relationship with God, and, thus, sin entered the world, separating imperfect humans from a perfect and divine God. Yet God, in his great mercy and love, ever-seeking to restore man's relationship to Him, provided Himself as a sacrifice by coming to earth as a man, Jesus, who lived a perfect and sinless life prior to giving Himself to death.

In that act of sacrifice--and in His glorious, bodily resurrection from the dead three days later--Jesus now stands at man's side as an advoate, saying to God on behalf of those Christ has saved: "This is my child. He/she has asked forgiveness for the sinful acts of their lives that have separated them from you. Yes, this one is imperfect. But I was willing to live the life he/she could not have lived by dying the death he/she should have died. I took this one's place, Father. My perfection provides Grace to them in your eyes, regardless of their worthiness."

That's The Gospel. Sure, gratitude from Christ's sacrifice pours itself out from Believers in acts of sacrificial love; these are reflections of Christ's love for man, stirred in us by Christ living within us through the Holy Spirit. This manifests itself as Christ commanded, through "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you." But that oft-quoted verse is not The Gospel. A component, yes.

I'm not as intelligent as Charles Darwin. I think he came up with a fascinating theory. The minutae of how God, in His omniscence and omnipotence, established Creation, is beyond the limits of my human intelligence. Don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting that it is somehow wrong to attempt, with vigorous scientific observation and inquiry, to discern these and other matters. What I am suggesting is that mankind is guilty of a collective arrogance in regards to its attempts at comprehending God. That, among other reasons, is why I can't understand the reasons behind some evangelicals' celebration of an agnostic scientist, despite his obvious genius.

So, what do you think? Agree with me? Disagree with me? That's cool...but share your thoughts. Back 'em up.

Take care...

Friday Link Day

No Communion for Obama Supporters?
Wait, let me see if I understand this. If you support abortion rights, Jesus did not die for you? I'm confused. (That's not the Gospel as I understand it. Whatever happened to Romans 8:1?)

How Do Different Religions Define Death?
I'm not sure this is a point of contention in the Evangelical community. Or am I wrong? Anyone wanna weigh in?

Group Sues Over 'Day of Prayer'
Oh, come on. Get over yourselves. So don't pray. Or, better yet, celebrate the 364 days of the year when most people ignore God.

Text Messaging for Jesus
Give them credit. Christians will make a ministry out of just about anything.

Defender of the Faith: Tim Keller

Evangelizing to a post-modern culture requires Believers to speak to the head as well as the heart. Our culture is smarter, more savvy and more gluttonous on information than any of its previous generational incarnations. Simply saying "You've got to have faith" isn't going to fly. At least not as a singular strategy.

Meet Tim Keller (if you haven't already). This guy slays the stereotype of Christian as dunce. His body of work is not only wide-ranging and Biblically sound, it challenges us on an intellectual level and turns our model of evangelical ministry on its head.

That's especially true of his latest book The Reason for God. (at least that's the kind of reviews he's getting; I haven't yet read it myself). Keller is now out on a nationwide tour promoting not only his book but his brand of reaching both Believers and unBelievers.

For a little sneak peak, read his interview with Christianity Today. Don't have time right now? You'd be well-served in bookmarking and coming back to it. In the meantime, here are some highlights:

On how some Christians are at a loss to effectively witness
"I do think a lot of Christians — because they don't understand the grace narrative — get out into the world and find it very tough to navigate. I think it's because they don't understand the gospel, not because they can't answer all the theological questions."

On the difference between marketing Christianity and spreading the Gospel
"Marketing is showing how Christianity meets the need, and I think the gospel is showing how Christianity is the truth...C. S. Lewis says somewhere not to believe in Christianity because it's relevant or exciting or personally satisfying. Believe it because it's true. And if it's true, it eventually will be relevant, exciting, and personally satisfying."

On one pastor's response to a controversial issue
"He went through all the various theories that evangelical Christians with a high view of Scripture have come to. He showed the strengths and weaknesses of every one. Nobody does that anymore. Nobody says different Christians might come down in different places here and still have a high view of Scripture. Instead, they identify their take as the wise one, and say everyone else is selling out or something."

On dealing with Jesus first and other issues after that
"I point out that it's a red herring to go after (intelligent design versus evolution) before you decide whether Jesus died and rose again. Two people said [last night at a Veritas forum]: 'I can't believe in Christianity, because look at the fossils.' And I was trying to say, 'Because you believe in evolution does this mean that Jesus Christ couldn't be raised from the dead?' One said, 'No, that has nothing to do with it.' If he was raised from the dead, then you have to take seriously the Scripture and you have to work on all this. If he wasn't raised from the dead, who cares about Genesis 1–11?"

So, if you were going to design a new way of "doing" evangelism, what would it look like? How much can intellectual arguments really sway unBelievers toward a relationship with Jesus? Where do appeals to one's intellect stop and a simple act of faith start?

For more about Tim Keller, visit the Web site of Redeemer Church in New York, where Keller is pastor.

I welcome all comments. Feel free to comment on-page, or e-mail feedback to CandidChristian@gmail.com.

A New Stereotype of West Virginia Christians

His face is red and bloated. Spittle is on the corner of his mouth. His eyes rage like the anger in his heart. He rails against sin, homosexuals, minorities--really, aren't they all the same?--and, later, handles a snake.

Who is he? A West Virginia Christian, of course.

Yeah, but there's a problem here. I don't know the guy. Oh, he exists. Somewhere. Too many places, in fact. But the Christians I know are something quite different. They call out of the blue to tell me they love me. Pray for me when I'm sick. Counsel me when I'm down. Worship with me when I'm happy.

Today, a statewide network of bloggers here in West Virginia are joining a conversation started a week ago about how we can redefine the stereotypes surrounding West Virginians. You've no doubt read about us. We're illiterate, bigoted, incestual, barefoot and pregnant. That's the common perception, isn't it? Vice President Dick Cheney thinks so. Get in line, buddy.

All of the West Virginia bloggers working on the ABetterWestVirginia project--timed to coincide with West Virginia Day (that's today, June 20; we broke away from Virginia on this day in 1863)--have their own niche. Some will talk politics. Others, art. For me, it's an opportunity to confront the same stereotypes that hound what you might call an "evangelical Christian."

But, again, those stereotypes--like those of West Virginians in general--are simply wrong. That's not to say Christians haven't made their mistakes. We've emphasized God's justice at the expense of His mercy. We are paying a steep price for that overemphasis of one aspect of God's nature at the expense of another. The Barna Group is an evangelical polling organization that analyzes demographic information about spirituality, religion and Christianity in American cultural life. As research for the book UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity, Barna found that of 24 million non-Christians aged 16-29, fewer than half view "evangelical" Christians "in a positive light."

Something is desperately wrong here. The story of Jesus is one of love, sacrifice and redemption. Yet somehow we've failed to communicate that message properly, and the result is that emerging generations are either walking away from the faith--or eschewing it from the very beginning.

It's especially true here in West Virginia. Socio-cultural trends are admittedly slow to take root here. A groundswell of modern Christian congregations that are embracing the need for greater dialogue and cultural relevance is taking place across the country, but that conversation is largely silent here. This must change. The Church in West Virginia must adapt and find better ways of communicating Christ's message to a new generation that, as UnChristian says "esteem(s) fair-mindedness and diversity, they are irreverent and blunt. Finding ways to express themselves and their rage is an endless pursuit. Being skeptical of leaders, products and institutions is part of their generational coding...They do not trust things that seem too perfect, accepting that life comes with its share of messiness and off-the-wall experiences and people."

Let me be clear on something here: I'm not advocating a softening of The Gospel, nor any stance that would capitulate on core doctrine. Far from it. I think society is desperate for a people with the courage to live their convictions. As a Christian, I firmly believe that Jesus is the answer to this messy thing we call life. I stand on that conviction. I trust in it. I weep because of its beauty. I am honored to stand in defense of it.

Yet the question remains: if we are to counter culture's opinions--and expectations--of Christians and re-define stereotypes not just in West Virginia but worldwide, we must find a way to communicate the Truth with courage...and just a little bit of humilty.

I welcome all comments. Feel free to comment on-page, or e-mail feedback to CandidChristian@gmail.com.

Brian McLaren Speaks...Again

Here's the thing: I don't want to come off as being reactionary when it comes to Emergent types in general and Brian McLaren specifically. I really don't. I also don't want to be what Emergents roll their eyes at--an evangelical, Reformed Christian who only points out bad theology or worldview instead of engaging in dialogue.

But if I am what I hate, then I have something in common with the Apostle Paul, and that puts me in good company. Am I rationalizing? Sure.

That said, here's some thoughts on McLaren's interview with the Associated Press. His quotes are first, in italics.

Q: How is what you recommend different than the humanitarian work churches do already?
A: It's not working within the paradigm that a lot of Christians work — which is all that God is ultimately interested in is extracting souls for heaven. And we might do some good works here on earth, but we don't really expect any of it to work, because the world is sort of, the toilet has been flushed and it's going down.

Ummm...OK. So far, so good. No complaints here. This is one of the central points of why I walked away from my faith in my late teens/early 20s (real original, huh?) and why society has de-valued Christian thought in recent decades.

Q: What do you mean by systemic change?
A: You can make incremental changes within a subsystem but in order to actually change a whole system you have to get a lot of the parts changing all at once. ... You can pour money into building a school, but then if there's a war, the war wipes out all the benefit you got from the school and the school shuts down. You can improve agriculture, but if HIV runs through, then there's so much upheaval, then you can't maintain the advances in agriculture.

And now we're 2-for-2. Of course, I would argue that the "whole system" of Christian theology hardly needs changing. Again, and this is the central point of my beef with Emergent types, if we start talking about systemic change, then we get down a path that questions Christ's divinity the inerrancy of Scripture, etc.

Q: But there's an impression churches are already so active on these issues. Why does anyone need to urge churches to do this?
A: One of the really important concepts is the difference between mercy and justice. There's that famous passage from Micah 6, "Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with God." One way to describe it is unjust systems throw people into misery and mercy brings us to relieve some of their misery, but until we confront the unjust systems by doing justice we're never going to make a change. ... I think what churches in America, especially evangelical churches, are just waking up to is the way they have to deal with systemic injustice, not just charitable giving to people in misery.

Bravo, Mr. McLaren. Bravo.

I think the naivete of some of those critics is that they're starting with a pure pristine understanding of the Gospel. It seems to me we're all in danger of screwing up.

OK, now we're starting to have trouble. A pristine understanding of the Gospel? How about "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life...no one comes to the Father but through Me." How are we in danger of screwing up if we start with that as cornerstone No. 1? Is that not a pristine understanding of the Gospel? Look, I know "no one comes to the Father but through Me" is divisive. But Jesus said it. Sorry. End of story.

Ten years ago, the question was, why are Gen-Xers dropping out of church? .. So we've been grappling with these very deep theological questions over the last five or seven years.

Fantastic. That's the question I've been seeking an answer to as well. I know my own story, and I would suspect it is similar to others'.

Q: What are the weaknesses of the movement?
A: Nobody had a master strategy for this. That creates weaknesses as well as strengths. It means you don't have anybody calling the shots and it means that things happen in a somewhat haphazard way. And I think there's a huge range of responses. ... Among evangelicals you have people who are not doing any theological rethinking at all. The theology that they inherited, they're staying with 100 percent. They're trying to do sort of methodological innovation (in styles of worship). And my personal feeling is that's great. Those'll be steps in a good direction... I'm not a purist about anything. I think it's all good. We're all trying to stumble along and take some steps in the right direction. Others of us are asking theological questions and that's always messy.

I am a purist...about Jesus, what He said, what He did. I'm not apologizing for it. It seems like too many people are. Again, the big question: What if Jesus meant everything He said? And, again, what does "theological rethinking" mean, anyway? Does it mean we are rethinking core aspects of the faith, the Truth of Christ? The inerrancy of the Word of God? Because these are areas where there can be no compromise. Again, that's divisive. But Jesus was divisive to a lot of people. That's one of the reasons they wanted to kill Him. (But they failed...they didn't kill Jesus. Jesus laid down His life.)

...if liberal means that government can solve all of our problems and that secularism is better than faith, and that it doesn't matter what you do in your personal life and that morality is up for grabs, then I'm not a liberal.

Nor am I.

I welcome all comments. Feel free to comment on-page, or e-mail feedback to CandidChristian@gmail.com.

The Passion of the Christ: A Running Diary

First, read the set up here.

Now, onto the running diary...

0:0:22
Well, it's Isaiah 53:5 to be specific...aw, heck, let's look at the whole context. And, as the movie is pointing out, let's remember this was written 700 years before the birth of Christ.

0:0:35
Great mood music, ethnic, chilling.

0:0:55
First chill bumps...Jesus calling His Father/Lord's name in Hebrew: "Adonai! Adonai!"

0:02:40
"Are you in danger? Should we flee, Master?" Remember, he had fled traps before...the religious leaders were after Him for some time. This time, though, it was different. Think the disciples knew?

0:05:00
Poor disciples...how would they have known what to think, to see their Master, their Rabbi, their Messiah, afraid and "sorrowful even to death."

0:06:25
Think Satan confronted Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane?

0:06:48
Notice that? He referred to His Father as "Abba," which is more informal, more akin to saying "Daddy." Whew...chilling. The portrait of conflict between Son of God and Son of Man, of divinity vs. humanity. He had been saying "Adonai," or "Lord." Now he's pleading to His "daddy," literally asking, "Is there some other way?" Surely He knew the answer was no...and that was the crux of His mental anguish. Still, "Not my will, but yours be done."

0:08:00
Even more interesting now, at least in terms of how the movie is portraying it. Again, it's not scripture. But you can hear Jesus praying, and now He's using every word for God He can think of: "Elohim"...."Abba"...."Adonai." Literally anything to get God's attention and, perhaps, save Himself from the anguish that is to come.

0:09:08
Love that...stomping on the snake. More creative liberty, of course, but nice.

0:10:20
Man, I bet Peter wanted to smack the taste out of Judas' mouth.

0:10:45
Even being betrayed, look at the sympathy on Jesus' face. Only He could realize the depths of the betrayal, and what it would set in motion.

0:11:30
Would I have run? Fearing arrest, would I have left my Messiah there? Would I, like Peter, have fought?

0:21:50
Interesting thing going on. I would imagine Jesus would have been torn in a way I hadn't considered. He would be sad at His having to leave His earthly mother and nostalgic at His memories here, but surely He was, on some level, pleased to be able to leave the confines of a broken world to be back with His father in Heaven.

0:27:44
And there's the kicker. A kangaroo court, convened illegally, witness testimonies contradicting each other...yet Jesus effectively seals His own fate. "I AM!"

0:29:43
Peter, Peter, Peter...how tragic to bail on your best friend, your Messiah, your God, just to save your own skin. Of course, they all bailed on Him and, heck, we're still doing it today.

0:42:07
"My kingdom is not of this world." The key distinction no one understood. Once those waving palm branches just a week eariler understood He had no intention of overthrowing Roman rule, they were finished with Him.

0:56:30
Not sure I can watch the cat-o-nine-tails flogging. I remember seeing it in the theater and turning away, and God immediately bringing to mind the scripture in Isaiah: "....and we hid, as it were, our faces from Him...." When I looked away, and remembered that scripture, I wept bitterly.

0:57:55
Not in scripture, but Mary's thoughts here are striking and must have been on her and the disciples' minds: "How will you choose to be delivered of this?" When did they realize He had no intention of being delivered, but instead would follow it all the way to death at Calvary?

1:02:12
Tears flowing now. This is the part of the movie that always gets me...the cut from the Roman soldiers' bloody feet to a flashback to Jesus washing His disciples' feet. Christ as servant, first in a symbolic act of washing feet, then the real deal: His sacrificial death as the ultimate act of service.

1:06:33
Flashback scene to the woman caught in adultery. Ever wonder what Jesus wrote in the sand? I heard someone once say He was writing the sins of each of those who had brought the woman to Him for judgment. If that's true...wow.

1:07:40
"Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more."

1:10:05
How many chances did Jesus have go get Himself off the hook? That was the last one. Pilate: "Don't you know I can set you free?" Jesus: "You really think that? You have diddly-squat. Any power you have has been given by God...and it looks like He's already made up His mind." I should go back through the Gospels and count how many chances Jesus had to get Himself out of trouble--and I'm talking legit chances, not just the causing-angels-to-appear-and-wipe-everyone-out kind. Tangible, earthly chances where He could have just walked away. This was the last one.

1:13:00
Look at how He embraces the cross, as if it were a friend. If only we had that attitude..."If any man be my disciple, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me." So, if you do that, where is Jesus going...to where are you following Him? To the cross. To Calvary.

1:18:30
The scene between Jesus and His mother...no words. As a parent, I can't imagine. Now consider our Heavenly Father's response, and what love it required to allow such a thing to happen in the name of an unworthy people's salvation.

1:22:20
Perfect illustration of substitutionary atonement. Simon saying "I'm innocent, and He is condemned." It was our guilt that caused it in the first place. "He became sin who knew no sin so that we might be called the children of righteousness."

1:31:05
Here's the crux of the whole thing..."No one takes my life from me. But I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down and power to take it up again."

1:32:08
Wow. Never noticed that before. After Simon helps lay the cross down, the soldiers tell him "You're free to go." Exactly. Who really belonged on that cross, on that hill, who really deserved that death? You. Me. Everyone.
As Mark Driscoll says, "He lived the life we could not live. He died the death we should have died."

1:34:30
Another great cinematic juxtaposition. Christ, in the upper room, pulling the cloth off the bread for that first communion, then cutting to Christ's body being exposed as the soldiers rip the clothes from Him, the Bread of Life.

1:39:45
Great camera shot. Jesus' blood dripping as, in the background, Mary Magdalene lies seemingly beneath it.

1:58:45
Ahhhh...the Resurrection. He is risen indeed. "You come looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified? He is not here. He is risen. Come see the place where He lay!"

Grace and peace...you must accept the first before you can have the second.

Grace. And Peace.

Comments? E-mail to CandidChristian@gmail.com, or use social media sites below...