Blah Guy

“The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your saints and those who reverence your name, both small and great – and for destroying those who destroy the earth.” Rev. 11:18

It abhors God how bad his people are at taking care of Earth. This little promise should ring in the hearts of all of them. He will destroy those who destroy his Earth.

Wow! Talk about ignorance.

We are so ignorant because we think that Jesus is coming back soon and we can screw the world up as much as we want with wonton abandon.

We are so ignorant because we think that environmentalism was created by activists in the 20th century when in reality God is the original environmentalist.

We are so ignorant to the fact that to most people who are actually trying to save the world, evangelicals and Christians are one of the main enemies.

We are so ignorant of the heart of God.

Why? God really hates it when people mess up the things he makes. Any good father would be the same. You come in and destroy his yard, kill the family dog, and pull down the tree house he made for the son, he will get his shot gun, come out, and take care of business.

Why would God be any different?

“Destroying those who destroy the earth” Christian or not?

There is considerable discussion today as to what “core beliefs” are necessary for being a Christian, a sort of “what makes you in/out” sort of discussion.

Two problems with this discussion are found in our assumptions. First, that our lists actually matter, as if God comes to me wondering, “What does AJ think the list should be today for everyone to be a good little Christian.”. Secondly, every-one’s list is different. I rarely to never find two lists the same, which from my perspective, appears to create somewhat of a theological “pickle” if you will.

At the same time, I think it is a cop-out to simply say “Jesus” like a 5 year old in Sunday School as an answer to that question.

I love the discussion, but it can only be done in the context of the understanding that this discussion will never end. At any point our little “list” is set, I am checking out of the talk. And at the same time, when the “list” never ends, I can never be in with God.

So, keep the discussion rolling.

Dan Kimball has an excellent discussion going on right now and I would highly encourage you to check it out. I love his style. So will you hopefully!

This week I was the guest of a local radio program. It is the most liberal radio station in Eugene. I loved it.

Born and raised a conservative who is learning to rid all labels and political subscriptions from his profile; I found the experience absolutely enlightening. They as well I am sure were expecting something quite different. They knew I am a pastor at a large (mega large) church in town that tends to lean quite right. With their expectations most likely hover somewhere between low to nothing, it was awesome to witness to Jesus without having to fight for a political party.

I am learning this as well. The people I am learning to love who happen to lean left in their own political fetish tend to be very good at listening. While this is of course not the case for every bobble head radio commentator around today, it is for the people I am beginning to know.

Jesus is teaching me to look past labels. It’s my mind that loves to find and obey them.

The great thing about truth is it doesn’t come by association. You don’t have to know the right people to know truth, although it can help. Truth is God’s. He owns it. He also gives it to people who hate him. Satan is smart.

The most dangerous Christian is he who is willing to be obedient to truth wherever they find it, whether at a Christian bookstore or not. I would argue that the Christian tradition has a large corpus of truth, it does not have a monopoly on it.

My point?

I am done seeing truth as something we have. Rather, I see truth as something we all have. I just have to shut up and listen.

I have more than ever taken the theological stance that theology as a whole is a conversation, not a science nor system. In reality, I submit, in some way it must always be to some degree one of the two. For what is science but watching the wonders of the thing you are studying. Jurgen Moltmann writes, with eloquence, about this concept in “The Trinity and the Kingdom”. And to be big headed enough to consider your own voice in the conversation as being the final say, is well, what shall we say, absolutely dumb. When I talk theology, with anyone, I am entering a conversation that has been ongoing for thousands of years. Why is the title of this entry “Reformed”?

My concern lies with the very nature of “Reformed”. Neither did Luther nor Calvin expect us to think that this new “Form” which they “re’d” would be complete. Rather, I would argue they both (Especially Luther who wanted “reformation”, not “separation” from the Catholic church) saw their own contributions to theology as part of a longer conversation, not one that they ended with their own voice.

Here is my point. The reformed faith has one problem, its past tense-ness. It is reform-ed. Past tense. It was reform, not is, not will be. I would like to argue a new name for the reformed brand of theology. Reform(ing).

Why?

Luther sought to create change from the inside, a change which he no doubt saw being a beginning, not an end with himself. And if he were here, I think he would remind us:

“You ain’t done yet bucko”.

His nails weren’t the ones that solved the world’s real problems.

Take some time and read the conversation over on organicjesus.org There are some excellent thoughts on the reformed faith you would do good to read.