seethrough

some people like to remember Jesus like this…

He died on the cross to make it possible for us to go to heaven.  We (humans) have all sinned and angered a righteous God.  God is (presumably) not able to forgive us in the way he forgives numerous people throughout the previous ages - by just saying “you’re forgiven”.  A payment must be made.  A suitable sacrifice must be offered to placate all this pent up anger (that would send us all to a deserved place in eternal punishment).  So Jesus dies, takes our sin upon himself, and in so doing, frees us from guilt and shame thus enabling intimate relationship with God again.  Most importantly, with such forgiveness secured, our eternal place in heaven is assured.  Good news!

Usually people who present this summary have a fairly strong committment to the authority of scripture, which they usually regard as THE vital and inerrant revelation of God’s message to people on this earth.  So as I read said scriptures it seems to me that this sumamry is not properly in line with all that is said about Jesus in the Bible.  It’s not that forgiveness of sins and reconciliation with God is not mentioned.  Of course it is.  The difficulty I have is that forgiveness of sins doesn’t seem to be top of Jesus’ agenda.  In fact, he is so busy dishing out assurance of forgiveness (Mt 9:2-5, Mk 2:5, Lk 5:20, 7:48) that he seriously ruffles the feathers of the religious types of his time, who spent their energy (surprise!) carefully clarifying what EXACTLY was required to please God and earn sufficient atonement.  They are so offended by this generous display of absolution that they accuse him of the highest offence in Jewish Law (breaking the first commandment) - blasphemy.  see Mark 2:7 and John 10:33.  I would argue that it is on these very grounds - with this kind of self-righteous motivation - that the religious leaders of Jerusalem did whatever was required to have Jesus “eliminated” (to use a euphamism more common in political circles…)

Jesus’ great preoccupation was with trying to proclaim that Kingdom of God (Heaven) was already here/near/amongst you (some translations even render “within you”).  “To proclaim release for the captives, sight to the blind, good news to the poor…”

The greater evil in our world is not people who have not repented and confessed their sin.  (Many of them have, they simply don’t want to have anything to do with religion - an interesting distinction that religious groupings will need to consider carefully…)  The real evil is people who claim to have repented - who are openly religious - and yet continue to live without grace, perpetrating some of the greatest acts of injustice, hatred, oppression, cruelty and blindness.

Christianity (and I think Islam as well) must answer for how it has failed to honour the teaching of it’s own scriptures… “do not judge”, do not condemn”, “do not resist an evil doer”, “love your enemies”, “pray for those who persecute you”…

Religious people (so easily, and regularly, it seems) feel the need to delimit the boundaries of God’s forgiveness, allowing the “story” to beomce about who’s IN and who’s not.  Re-member-ing the story of Jesus, and the glorious good news that the Bible offers to a hurting and broken world, requires a re-reading of scripture, seeking to open ourselves to all that Jesus is about.  Jesus’ agenda is contained in John 10:10, life (in all it’s fulness).  Heaven is not so much the goal as it is the measure.  the measure of how well we are grasping and living the life that God has intended.  Eternal life is not worth considering draggin ourselves through until we’ve allowed God’s Spirit to bring us to life - to know what it means to really live!  Then eternal life will be something to look forward to…

if only we could forget all the limiting stuff we’ve heard about Jesus and be able to read the Bible again, as if for the first time…

if only we could forgive people as willingly, and quickly as our heavenly Father seems to…

if only we could catch a glimpse of the earth/world/universe transforming vision that motivated and guided all that Jesus said and did…

what made the NP (apartheid) government overthrow PW Botha (at the historic cabinet meeting in George)?

My first take on that (from my tender teen-age perspective) was that FW de Klerk was an intelligent and reasonable man who, along with others, saw the errors of the apartheid ways and moved for change.

Of course, later I needed to reconsider this naive view.  FW was no angel.  He sat in on cabinet meetings where conversations about “eliminating” people happened.  The TRC (and most powerfully for me, Country of my Skull by Antjie Krog) brought my attention to the levels of violence that characterised our country, especially in the last few decades of apartheid.  This raised the question: was it the armed struggle, the work of Umkhonto we Sizwe and the spiralling violence and unrest that finally brought the NP government to the negotiating table?

Even more recently I was invited to consider another alternative.  Non-violent resistance to the apartheid government included rallies, stay-aways and boycotts.  Under the UDF this pressure intensified.  International resistance to the South African regime was also intensifying with increased political pressure and economic sanctions.  To what extent did non-violent resistance contribute to a negotiated settlement and democratic elections in 1994?

It seems FW would like history to remember him as a humanitarian.  People who suffered and lost friends and family in the armed struggle and violent resistance would (understandably) want the comfort of knowing that their effort was not in vain.  And those who continue to keep hope that non-violent resistance is not only an ethical but also effective way of dealing with violence and oppression, would obviously prefer to emphasise the value and significance of non-violent contributions to change in South Africa…

so what’s the truth?

the literal meaning of the word muslim is “one who submits to God”.  if that be the case, i am (proudly) a muslim.

the history of the relationship between christians and muslims has been one of opposition and conflict.  having grown up in the “christian west” i have experienced the way that history is retold.  For me, this always included a certain way of speaking about Islam that portrayed that religion in terms of threat.

Even today, with conflict in the middle east, people in (relatively) unaffected southern africa have strong opinions and characteristic ways of speaking about Muslims.

I think christians (and especially the zealous kind) have a lot in common with many muslims.  We are keen to share our convictions with others.  We believe we have found the “truth” and that we are (more) right than anyone else.  We are sincerely convinced that we know the way to please God.  We appeal to our scriptures as a primary (and final) authority.

In fact, christians who view the Bible as a product of divine inspiration with no real human involvement in it’s authorship reflect a strong resembalnce to to the most common Islamic view of the Q’uran.  For most Muslims the Q’uran is believed to be an accurate word-for-word transcription of the “original” text given to the prophet Mohammed to record.  These are the exact words of Allah given to people to aid their submission to the Almighty.

Not all Christians understand the Bible in this way.  In fact, I would argue that in the Christian tradition, this view of scripture is not the way of the faithful through the ages.  Faithful Christ-following has been a product of careful interpretation of scripture.  The perception of the Bible as a book that dropped out of heaven can be seen as a relatively recent historical occurence which reflects a deviation from the traditional interpretive understanding.

Last year I attended a Muslim Propogation Soceity rally.  I felt safe and respected.  The speakers were sincere.  They communicated a respect for other views.  They reminded us that people can be sincerely wrong or simply ignorant.  They sought to help us understand the limits of our knowledge and understanding by showing the relative value of adopting the Islamic view of various things.  I think they were sincerely moticated by loving conern.  If they are right, and if we are misguided, shouldn’t they seek to share their insight with us - for our benefit?  (a familiar argument?)  Mostly they compared the Bible with the Q’uran showing how (if we accept the assumption that Holy Scriptures drop out of the sky from God to humans) the Q’uran is a far more reliable source than the Bible. (which from a scrictly textual critical perspective it is!)

They also encouraged us to acknowledge (properly) the belief in ONE God - identifying the dangers of Trinitarian thinking - and taking Christians to their own Bible, showed them that in the original Hebrew texts, the name for God is recorded as “Allah”.

At question time I  stood up and  conceded that if to be a Muslim one needed to “submit to the will of [the one] GOd”, then I was a Muslim!  The room cheered and I was rewarded with a complimentary copy of the Q’uran.  I then asked a curious question about interpretations of the Q’uran (recognising from my own experience of the Bible that the greatest problems are not about agreeing on the sources of the text, but rather on how those texts should be understood…)

The speaker was not willing to concede that there are significant differences in interpretations of the Q’uran, by different “schools” or “teachers”…  Perhaps in a more frank and open conversation - without the need to convince a crowd - a Muslim may acknowledge some difficulties with the interpretation and application of the text to current and contextual challenges.  Somehow I find it hard to believe that there are not varying opinions within Islam on how the “law” is to be interpretted.

If only we could see beyond the competition.

I am not suggesting that Islam and Christianity are “different paths up the mountain”.  I think they are distinct and unique and different in many significant ways.  And I am even clearer now (having visited a Muslim rally) that I am a Jesus-follower.  What I am suggesting is that we have more in common than we would like to admit.  And that if we could re-member our “history” and reconsider some of our opposition stories there might be space for us to tell stories of humanity and relationship… stories of living as neighbours and stories of respect and mutual understanding.

At the very least, i think we could stop killing each other!

there are some threads running through my last few reflections on this blog…

yes.  it always matters who is saying it, but sometimes it’s irritating who it comes from!

the thing we seem not to learn from painful experience is that we often don’t learn from it.

part of that is because there is no one story - there is no single history.  just as there is no one “truth”.  there is a quest for truth, no doubt.  and there is our truth.  that is, the way we tell the story.

these are all the “threads of truth”.

this is why memory is so interesting.  history will tell the story in a very limited way.  historians do their best work when they get beyond simple re-telling and ask: why have we come to tell story in this particular way?  (and the follow-on questions, who benefits from this way of telling?  who is remembered?  who is forgotten?)

remembering is not a science.  memory is the work of those seek meaning.  re-member-ing is the work of those who intentionally and actively look beyond the most common ways of telling “the” story… and piece together the threads.  they choose to value all the “members” of the story, both the members of the story who are honoured by the retelling AND those members of the story who have been side-lined or simply forgotten.  memory is the work of honouring the untold stories - the untold “truths”.

re-member-ing is the work of open-minded and open-hearted people.  curious people.  people who seek to put their dominant opinions on hold just long enough to consider another perspective on events.  and then drawing together the threads to allow the lost members to find their place in the story again.  it is a work of tracing lost threads and weaving them back into the fabric of the story.

the work of confession and repentance is always about re-member-ing.  gracious YHWH helps us to re-tell the story before him, drawing together lost threads of truth that, being neglected, have caused us to live (and tell the story of) a half-life.  memory will help us to tell a more complete (and complex) story of our own lives.  we’ll tell it with compassion.  and our compassion for others will grow.

there’s no need for violence or “justice” in God’s work of reconciliation.  (justice has always been our concern)

for a case study of history being told from one limited perspective try reading this article in the M&G: Why women should rule

i went out for a paddle today in fairly rough waters.  A few very large waves came through and I was washed out the boat.  That in itself isn’t a big problem.  I let the boat get washed to the shore.  Then I thought I’d  swim in with my paddle.

Strong current made that hard.  Along with some very big waves which meant I was regularly being dumped and having to swim hard to keep my had above water.

Fortunately there were two surfers nearby and I quickly called to one to help me.  He came over quickly and I was able to hold onto his board.  He and I struggled to make any headway but he kept calm and seemed confident we were ok.  We allowed the current to wash us in, recovering after each big wave by hanging onto the board.

Finally we made it in.

I misjudged the waves.  Should have been wearing a life-jacket.  Gave the family (all watching from the beach) a huge fright.

I’m just hugely grateful to Quintin for the help!

does it matter who’s saying it?

I suggest you link to the John Pilger article on the M&G website. He describes how this Paul Weinberg photo has given him strength over the years - to continue to stand up to the powers of force and violence and control.

He quotes Milan Kundera, who writes: “The struggle of people against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”

That is the work of faithful spirituality. This is what Jesus does with the disciples who are so quick to forget. In the face of horrific violence they forget his life and teaching, his principles and his foot-washing example… They forget in the face of fear.

Fear has a way of doing that - making us forget what got us started on this path in the first place.

Jesus encourages the two disciples on the road to Emmaus to remember the long story of God’s faithfulness - as a way of helping them to overcome the fear of their immediate circumstances. “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!” (Luke 24:25)

We were once moved by a vision of the Kingdom - a kingdom of peace and justice. A place of respect and dignity. Jesus painted the picture, in the long tradition of the prophets, of a time when the lion would lie down with the lamb. And he encouraged his disciples to pray “your will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. It was powerful and moving vision of a transformed world where power was used to free and build, not constrain and punish.

But power has a way of wanting more power. And control doesn’t let go of control easily. It fights and beats and maims and kills. It lies and exagerates and holds on to the bitter end. Why not? It’s got everything to lose! If control loses control then it’s lost everything!

So it beats us into submission and helps us to forget.

We forget the vision of Jesus - the kingdom of God.

We forget that God has called us to be partners in freeing people to live abundant lives.

We forget that the church and the bible and everthing religious will return to dust in the face of the Reign of God. They are not ends in themselves but simply means to an end - the purpose and will of God.

But, frustratingly, God will not move to control things toward the Kingdom. (of course God could take charge on this earth and establish the Kingdom in an instant.) To take control would be to adopt the way of control - which always leads to the protection of that control. If God were to take charge - he would have to continue to take charge. Rather he resists taking charge. He resists resorting to the way of violence. In stead God surrenders to the punishment violent and controlling people deserve - he recieves the punishment controlling people will always enforce and impose on those who refuse to submit to their control - their “word”. He does not so much speak a “word” - his non-violent resistance IS the Word - the Word of God for us: the eternal encouragement of God to trust the way of invitation andself-giving love, over powerful attempts to control and force history into submission and obedience.

When will we get it?

God does not force us to obey? He will not and will never. The Cross is the most powerful symbol of surrender to the violence of other that we will ever be given.

God is waiting.

for us!

(repentance means - stop fighting, stop controlling, stop insisting, stop condemning, stop condemning, stop condemning, stop. and start loving, praying, waiting, listening, watching, praying, praying, praying…)

…to be continued…

does Jesus point us to God’s Word in the Bible?

or does the Bible point us to Jesus, the Word?

Luke 24:17
Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.

how can you see what you’re not seeing?

how can you hear what you’re not hearing?

we know that we naturally resist change.  we also know that we see (and hear) the world through the”glasses” that are our assumptions.  what this means in practice is that we will find it very difficult to “hear” something new.  To even give it a chance.

an example.  the Pope - with access to some of the most knowledgeable scholars in the world at that time - told Galileo with absolute certainty that his observations about the earth being round were not only against scripture but also scientifically and logically ridiculous.

Of course we can laugh at the Pope and his advisers.  How stupid they were.  But how do we know that we aren’t doing the very same thing in our own little cosmos.  Someone’s asking us to look at God’s world with new eyes.  Someone’s speaking with a new voice that we’re not familiar with.  How will we respond?

Will we also condemn everything that is not within our current boundary of understanding?

And if so…  how will we learn anything?  Learning (discipleship) requires a certain kind of humility.  It’s called uncertainty.  Certainty likes to dominate and convince.  but it also has a track record of ignoring and condemning helpful and (in retrospect) quite plainly truthful new discoveries…

There are those who value certainty so highly that they have closed themselves up in a cocoon.  It might feel warm and safe in the little cocoon, but the staying in the cocoon represents a desire to ignore and deny that God is real and alive in all of creation.  New ideas are not really new ideas.  They are discoveries.  Why are we so slow to learn from the painful lessons of the disciples who walked before us?

as Steve Turner puts it:

The only thing we learn from history
is that we don’t
learn from history…