I’ve been wondering for a long time what could help us to get out of our Christmas rut and into a deeper time of reflection on the significance of the birth of Jesus. A few weeks ago I stumbled upon the video below… it’s given me renewed energy to believe that words and ideas - a vision - can help us to re-frame things that have become stale and impotent…
what if the world’s currency were based on “a loaf of bread”.
There’d be no inflation. A loaf of bread is a loaf bread.
economists and bankers may argue with me with fantastic arguments about how i don’t understand the macro economic dynamics. but all that complicated talk is a well-developed screen to deflect the growing realisation that the current dominant economic system that our world has given itself to is fundamentally flawed. not only is it doomed to collapse (and recollapse) - but it is also a complicated system of ensuring that powerless people stay subservient to the most powerful. it is fundamentally enethical.
I first began to reflect on the nature of the economic system we are all subservient to as the crisis in Zimbabwe deepened. As the economy of Zimbabwe dipped and inflation worsened, the signs were there (according to all the fundamentals of economic speak) that there would be a melt-down and that the economy would bring everything to a halt. But things carry on. The government prints money. not recommended by economists who need the integrity of “currency” to be upheld. But Bob prints money all the time. And things carry on. Inflation has reached the hundreds of millions percentile. It’s beyond sense. everything should be grinding to a halt. But things carry on.
well trained in the religion of market capitalism (as i am) I assumed there must be a point at which all these factors cause everything to come to a halt, and Bob would have to bow to the forces of the market. But he hasn’t. And that’s because Bob knows something that few of us have realised.
That a loaf of bread is still a loaf of bread. The market can use it’s language to “tell” us that the “value” of a loaf of bread has gone “up” (inflation), but in reality we know that the $1 loaf of bread we ate yesterday and the $2 loaf of bread we ate today is exactly the same. it’s real value remains the same.
so i ask, what if the world’s currency were based on “a loaf of bread”?
It’s sad that the dominant economic system is so all-prevailing and has it’s tentacles so deeply in our lives - that we are so deeply invested in this system that any attempt to think sensibly about economics - and the value of things - will be dismissed as the talk of crazy wierdo liberal “communist ” extremisits. “They probably don’t even believe in GOD!!!!” …and side-lined along with talk of aliens and the illuminati.
And so the system carries on… well protected by it’s self-supporting principles of greed, aquisition, money-for-nothing, quick profits and world economic crises leaving the poorest of the poor without a pension…
i can’t win an argument. but i can ask the question. when your “investments” lost a third of their value last month (in the period of about 3 weeks) who said? who says your “investment” is suddenly worth less? and who is benefiting from that “loss”?
economists will blame “the market”. but just press pause on that simplistic answer and interrogate the system for just a moment: if the market crashes and everyone loses, why would everyone support that system with such faithfulness??? think about it…
simple, everyday, ordinary, (often poor) people are being raped by a system that allows 3 single individuals to acquire more wealth than the GDP of 45 (25%) of the world’s poorest countries. 
The chart to the left shows the balance of consumption: that 20% of the worlds people consume more than a quarter (76.6%) ofd the share, leaving just 1.5% for another 20% of the world’s population.
Let’s not buy into simple lies. “The market” is not deciding who gets what and how much. Powerful people are able to use the market to their advantage, leaving other human beings to starve and rot. It’s way past time to take stock and reconsider…
a friend emailed me today asking me about my thoughts on being a person of faith and relating to other religions.
her question went like this…
“…I have always thought that there is a lot of insight and a lot to be learned from people of other religions - and that our practices and ways of worshipping God may well not be the only way. However, if we truly believe that salvation is for everyone and that Jesus will one day return to judge the living and the dead - do we not then have an obligation to try and introduce people of other religions to our Jesus? Or is it really true the idea that there are many angles from which to look at a mountain - but ultimately it is the same mountain?…” (i think the questions is expertly stated - by the way)
i thought i’d post my response to her here: (comments are welcome.) - don’t you think it’s interesting to listen in on a conversation…
Regarding your question about other religions…
you seem to give 2 options: 1. Jesus is the only way. 2. all religions are different ways that lead up the same mountain.
what if there are other options? i.e. other ways of thinking about this difficult debate.
Let me first take note of what (i think) you are saying:
1. you are a kind and generous person who wants to respect other people and their sincere convictions. That is not a bad thing. in fact, i would say it is the sign that you are a true Jesus follower - that even in the face of quite harsh criticism, you want to “come up for” people of other faiths - arguing that they also have goodness in them. and they do!. so that’s important. we need to be asking, is our position true to our christian faith? a faith that encourages acceptance, compassion and a non-judgemental attitude to people - esp those who are different or rejected.
2. You are also saying that if Jesus is “the only way” it would be unkind and wrong to not want to share that knowledge with those people who are not Christians. good. i think that the motivation behind this position is also compassion. you aren’t judging them. just wanting to share something valuable.
the problem is that usually these two things seem to contradict. being accepting, tolerant and evanglising people to follow Jesus are seen as mutually exclusive. like you can’t be true to Jesus AND live in a tolerant way of people who differ.
So, the problem with position 1 (Jesus is the only way) is that on it’s own it quickly becomes a judgmental position that makes people act in ways and say things that don’t actually sound very christian! BUT the problem with option 2 is that it doesn’t really properly honour the vast differences in the different religions.
I don’t think you can say that Islam and Christianity and Buddhism are just different paths up the same mountain… with the same end point. I think that is too simplistic. Buddhism doesn’t believe in a personal deity. islam and Xty do. Xty stresses grace and forgiveness. Islam is very strong on discipline and obedience. These aren’t just minor differences. they are huge differences that mean that if we begin to talk to each other, our concepts of God are not all just going to merge into one view of God. I think there are irreconcilable differences.
BUT there are lots of common points of agreement. There is a lot we CAN talk about. We see that murder is on the rise… and crime. Interesting that Islam, Xty and Buddhism all support a non-violent way of life and believe in the sanctity of life. Thou shalt not kill… So we can get together and work towards a safer society.
Same with violence against women and abuse of children. Religions are together in their rejection of these actions.
SO, to reject another religion based on the idea that “everything that is not Christian is evil” is not helpful. it’s just plain judgemental. and arrogant. There is a lot that we (as human beings, all made “in the image of God”) can do together to honour our creator and work towards a society that in some way reflects the values we believe in.
I propose option 3: which is basically the “respect” option. it basically takes a form as outlined below…
would you serve a God you didn’t like or respect?
* a thought experiment *
ok, so this “God” does things, or runs the universe, according to principles and values which you don’t embrace. I don’t mean selfish differences like you would like fancy stuff and God is teaching you simplicity. I mean, this “God” has set his heart on a special group of people - choosing to bless and affirm them above others. You prefer the value of inclusivity which would involve a “God” who is not swayed by worldly labels and distinctions - a God who sees beyond nationalistic superiority to the bigger picture (rather than actually encouraging it!)
hmmm… so the options are:
1. recognise that God is GOD - and who are you pimply little nobody to question “his” ways????? (well, that certainly settles the matter for me then. I can turn over and go back to sleep…)
2. consider that God is always “God” to us - a humanly constructed concept that doesn’t even begin to fathom the complexities of God’s values and ways… (which unfortunately leads to 2 alternative sub-conclusions…)
3. discover that “God” is (unfortunately) as tribal as he is reflected in (some parts of) the Bible (i remember some pastor oke telling me that (his) God would have no problem wiping out whole nations - no tension there for him at all!!!). Which leads to the interesting position of someone actually consciously choosing “hell” over “heaven” with that “awe-ful” God…
* end of thought experiment *
my point is… heaven is only heaven (with God for eternity) if you LOVE the God OF eternity. Obedience is ok. But obeying a God you don’t Love, and doing things he commands that you don’t believe in, is not recipe for eternal joy.
Yahweh, the God of the Bible, apart from a whole lot of “stuff” which I struggle with, seems to be a God who wants partnership, friendship, relationship. It’s almost as if, he wants us to “Love his Law” - not just obey it.
The Kin’dom Vision of Jesus where
this vision… I love. obedience is a small word to offer in response to it.
this vision inspires passion and participation, it invites me, calls me, reminds me… it’s just not hard to Love a God like this!
are there still people who don’t use soap on their face?
well, i use Lux!
are there still people who get uptight about people spelling Christmas with an X?
well, in Greek, the language that most of the Christian Scriptures was originally written in, the word for Christ begins with an “X” - Xristos… (the “X” resembles a “Ch”)
the more concerning thing for me (more than the irritation value of people sending around emails whining about the deplorable disrespect of the society in whih we live) is the fact that we might actually think our efforts are “for Jesus” - do we really think Jesus is most concerned about his “name” or his reputation… when he arrives in a stable in Bethlehem - that’s like being born in a shack in Germiston!!!
when last did you use the phrase “reading between the lines”. it commonly refers certain unspoken assumptions or special knowledges that are not referred to explicitly in the text. reading between the lines is then the “art” of interpreting a text based not only on what has been said but also on what has not been said.
it seems to me that what has not been said can sometimes prove more significant than what has actually been said. one of the effects of not saying things is that it excludes certain listeners. for instance, if certain specialised knowledges are taken as read by a speaker or writer, then only those who are familiar with those knowledges will easily be able to access the message. this is one of the ways that knowledge and power work together - to the extent that philosopher Michel Foucault chose to refer to them as a single entity, referring to “knowledge/power” in some of his writings.
when “subtext” is used to consciously exclude people i believe that this is unethical use of knowledge/power. but it is probably much more common - in everyday communication - that subtext plays a role without any malicious or prejudicial intent. subtext refers to anything that is not said in a communication, that is still playing a part in that communication. even if that subtext be unconscious or unknown to the speaker or writer!
what will help us to speak (and to write) with greater clarity and simplicity?
but sub-text is not always bad. humour is often very reliant on the subtext of a conversation. the humour is reliant on not everything being said.
the other interesting thought in this regard is the perspective of postmodern philosophers who are inclined to return to the text. for instance, in the area of psychology, postmodern practitioners are critical of a previous tendency to privilege subtext over the actual words and perspective of the client. according to their critique, psychology became overly focused on the privileged and specialised ability to interpret the subtext of a person’s life. some recent writing encourages a return to the surface (as it were) - a renewed focus on the actual words that are spoken (and chosen) by the client in a therapeutic conversation. This perspective discourages delving into reflections on subtext.
interesting alternative views - perhaps we need to acknowledge the subtle role of subtext in communication while at the same time, being careful not to discount the importance of the actual words that people have chosen to use when seeking to communicate something…
(Aiden remarked, when reading another story that he “looked forward to turning the page”… so, with his encouragement, here is page 2…)
did you know that the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures use the phrases “do not fear” and “do not be afraid” 113 times!!! (those same scriptures use the phrase “love God” only 5 times…) So let’s make a humble assumption - spirituality that takes the Bible (meaning the Hebrew and Christian scriptures) seriously will be a spirituality that is Peace-producing. Essentially, I’m assuming that Biblical Spirituality will echo this sentiment - do not fear, do not be afraid, do not worry, etc.
the Christian scriptures tell us that Jesus is the “prince of peace” (i’m assuming that means that if anyone is going to bring peace it will be him..) it also tells us that “perfect love casts out all fear” (1 John 4:18) and goes on to make a clear observation: “for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love.”
the thing that I struggle with is that the “good news” that many Christians offer is highly fearful. The common story goes something like this: God created you. Things were good until you messed up. You sinned and God was angry. You had broken his Law. Justice was required so someone had to die. It would have been you (and it might still be if you don’t…) but Jesus died in your place to “absorb the wrath of God” (John Piper). To return to right relationship with God, you must repent and believe (presumably that Jesus died for you) so that eternal punishment can be avoided. If you do, God’s anger is avoided and heaven awaits. If you don’t, the just punishment for your sins will be your reward - that’s hell. (If “God is Love” he certainly has a big investment in fear and punishment in the universe…)
so here’s a question: what motivates your faith in God? why are you a Christian? is it to avoid the fires of hell - an eternal punishment? as I’ve indicated here i am an unapologetic follower of Jesus. I am willing to associate myself with him in every way. but I am simply not happy to associate myself with this common version of the Christian Story any longer. I think that there is another story which is desperately needing to be told - needing to be heard.
(some quick reasons why the new story needs to be heard:
1. i don’t think that the common version is doing our Great God of Grace justice!
2. many good, thinking, moral, faithful, did i mention good, people are simply not able to fathom a God who is so petty and, instead of looking deeper into the faith tradition, are choosing to live as moral atheists rather than associate with such a paper-thin version of a Creator God.
3. it is Fear Producing - which is exactly the opposite of what Biblical faith is supposed to do. Where is the peace? Where is the confidence?)
Here’s to another story! (I don’t call it a new story because I would like to argue that this other story has been around longer than the common one!!! it’s the old story, needing rediscovery)
my understanding of Jesus was that he chose to live and teach in the tradition of the Hebrew prophetic tradition - most significantly, the prophetic vision of Isaiah. His first public teaching in a synagogue involved a reading from Isaiah 61 (Luke 4:16) - a moving, inspiring vision about the “Year of the Lord’s favour”. (the interesting thing is that the phrase “and a day of vengeance for our God” - Is 61:2 - is omitted in Luke) This prophetic tradition includes moving passages about the coming of the Messiah who will bring peace - when the Lion will lie down with the Lamb (Isaiah 11)… perhaps the most moving passage for me is found in Isaiah chapter 2:
Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob;
that he may teach us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths.’
For out of Zion shall go forth instruction,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He shall judge between the nations,
and shall arbitrate for many peoples;
they shall beat their swords into ploughshares,
and their spears into pruning-hooks;
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more.
These are the passages that I believe inform the ministry of Jesus. When he speaks about the “Kingdom of Heaven”, I believe he is talking about this kind of Kin’dom… where Peace is found to be stronger than force, where love is eternal and cannot die…
In the light of these (biblical) observations, I want to encourage those who are dissatisfied with the common story to begin to consider Alternatives. I believe there are many other stories on offer in the Christian Scriptures. Paul’s writings do contain much that supports the common version, but he also transcends those thoughts in some of his writings, focusing more on the theme of Reconciliation. See 2 Corinthians 5:16-21. (I realise that it is possible to use this passage to underscore the common version of Christianity.) I believe it is possible to interpret this passage in a way that appeals to Loving Relationship as a motivation for Faith… (perhaps the topic of Page 3…) The Gospels are the best place to look though, because the parables and the ministry of Jesus are still being processed by the authors. The Gospel writers certainly include their own interpretations in the re-telling of the stories (which explains some of the differences in the four gospels) but the interpretation can be said to be “in process”. This gives us a glimpse into the early Christian community of people who were not called “Christians” - they were simply people of faith who had decided to follow the teachings of Jesus. They were best described as “those belonging to the Way” (acts 9:2)
What are some of the attributes that I think Another Story might include?
1. i think it must choose to be faithful to the teaching and example of Jesus. this might involve a revisiting of the gospels and a decision to take Jesus at his word. or as Albert Nolan says to “take Jesus seriously”.
2. surely it must work out a new motivation for Faith. If we aren’t following Jesus to “avoid hell and earn our ticket into heaven”, what will be our primary reason for following? it might return to a much more wholistic understanding of the word “believe” which embraces the whole self, heart, will, mind, body, in place of a modern understanding of the word which reduces believing to mental (intellectual?) agreement. To say “I believe in Jesus” would be more akin to saying “I commit my whole self to Jesus”.
3. it must strive to be all-embracing, not sectarian but able to embrace variety so that it can become a story of Peace and Unity. surely if God’s Kin’dom is going to be eternal we’re going to have to live side-by-side then… why not start finding a way to live together now…?
4. it might formulate a different understanding of authority. for instance, it may choose to view the Spirit of scripture as a higher authority than the historical written text. This might include the recognition that not everything that is biblical is consistent with the teaching of Jesus i.e. Christian
5. Another Story might re-emphasize the importance of being good - what Jesus meant when he spoke about the fruit that a tree bears. the Common Story has used the Fear of God (of hell) to motivate people into believing, and has unwittingly encouraged people to “believe” at all costs, but has paid too little attention on the thing that Jesus asked us to do: “go and make disciples” (Matthew 28) disciples are learners, and presumably that means learners of The Way. Evidencing the Fruit of the Spirit - the signs of a transforming life - will become the essence of Another Story.
What do you think might be some of the attributes of Another Story? OR, what would you LIKE to see being addressed by a different kind of Spirituality? (that you feel has been neglected by the Common Version of Christianity in your experience?)
one of the big challenges for people of faith in a postmodern era is responding meaningfully to the relativistic claims that there is no “absolute truth”. my experience is that people of faith become quite defensive about this aspect of postmodern thought.
one thing that I would like to add to this conversation is the following:
i’m not sure that postmoderns are actually claiming that there is not absolute truth.
(I think that this is one of those claims that are made to discredit the “other side” and write them off as uncredible. Rather than write anyone off, let’s trust that anyone who is trying to engage us in a respectful manner actually may have something of worth to listen to and consider!)
I think that postmoderns are drawing attention to the fact that we cannot CLAIM to know any absolute truth. This is a slightly but significantly different claim altogether. There may of course be absolute truth (the favourite retort is to say “the claim that there is no absolute truth is an absolute claim, thus proving that there are absolutes…”) but can we know such absolute truth. All knowledge of the world around us is subject to a number of interpretations which mean that even this paragraph may not be understood quite in the way that I intended it to be understood. That is the risk I take in writing it - the risk of all conversation and realtionship - that intentions are subject to the interpretation of the hearer/reader/observer.
postmoderns are responding to the difficulty that exists (and this is a simple observation) in the world due to significant differences of opinion on issues that affect people’s lives. Wars have been fought between people who believe they are right and are bound to resist the evil efforts of the other side. closer to home, communities bear the pain of conflict and disagreement when people disagree on emotive and controversial issues like religion and homosexuality. The problem is not that either side has given up on “absolute truth”. I would suggest that everyone in the debate believes they are right - else, why would they be arguing? The problem is that try as we might, we just can’t get others to come round to our side and see that WE have the grasp on the absolute truth.
And the problem is not that intelligent and wise people haven’t tried… this is not a new problem in the history of human relationships. Rather than continuing to appeal to some form of Authority and Absolute Truth - which has painfully and repeatedly failed to bring unity and peace in human conflict - let us consider other alternatives for a way forward.
postmoderns are pleading that we consider alternatives for finding a way of being human together in the face of diagreement and conflict. We ahve tried and failed to convince each other that WE are right… What other alternatives are there?
A big part of the idealism that I have had to let go of has been the desire to eliminate tension. Idealism convinced me that life could be easy and trouble free if I just lived according to the “rules” – the right principles. When there was a problem – the thing introducing tension – it could be analysed, diagnosed and attended to… a little like the way a mechanic has a look at your car, works out why it won’t start, then gives you a quote to effect the repair.
Is life as simple as that?
A present example: Having children produces huge tension in my life. I love Ruben. Check out his web-site here: rubenm.iscool.net He has recently turned 2 and I am proud of him. In fact, there are moments when I delight in him in a way that surprises me.
But he also is difficult. He is strong-willed, passionate, incorrigible, and a whole lot of other things that remind me of someone I know. He is able to produce emotions (like anger) in me in ways that scare me. I’m not blaming him for the anger – it obviously arises out of me – but he is certainly the catalyst. He also produces difficulty in my relationship with Elaine, the person I am married to. We love each other and respect each other in so many ways. But Ruben seems to expose all the tender points in our relationship, especially the things that we are not in agreement about. When it was just the two of us, we lived with a high level of tolerance of our different views. I thought we were mature and respectful. But Ruben seems to worm his way behind our respectful and tolerant façade, and gets us engaged with each other over various issues that we probably wouldn’t have brought up otherwise.
I love my child, but he’s a real challenge to my sense of self. In some ways he is a darling and in other ways a selfish little terror who wants nothing except his own way. I love him and I resent him, at the same time. Huge inner tension.
Somehow, I don’t sense the tension is going to suddenly be relieved. Of course, I’d welcome any helpful advice from people who share the struggle of child-rearing… (actually, I might get irritated by anyone offering advice, but try me anyway - I’m desperate) But even great advice is not going to relieve the tension immediately, and probably not even entirely.
Maturity, faith-fulness… these are qualities that for me are forged in the midst of the tension.
