index

Burning the Koran

Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:31:07 +0100

Forgive the tired saying, but responding to the Quran burning event in Florida is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel. I often use mild sarcasm in this blog to make my point and I could so easily spread it as thick as butter on toast in addressing this issue. But as many are now warning, this is a serious issue and will almost undoubtedly draw violent reprisals in many parts of the world.

You’re probably aware of the story of a Florida pastor, Dr Terry Jones, who is planning to burn a number of Qurans in the yard of his church property in the town of Gainsville, Florida, to commemorate the 9/11 atrocity. His church, the Dove World Outreach Centre, is a congregation of 50 strong according to the BBC website and is rooted in the Pentecostal tradition. On the church’s own website Dr Jones is featured on a 10 minute YouTube video explaining the vision he has for his ministry – to call the church to stand against the evils of this world. This is partly to be done through protest and there are photographs and reports from previous protest marches that his church has been a part of. It would appear that the Quran burning episode is the latest action to be taken.

There is much to commend in the wider vision that Terry Jones has for his congregation. They believe that their role is to grow men and women of faith who will themselves be witnesses to the love of God in the world. They set out to release Christians into their gifts and callings. They abhor the evil that is spreading in society and want to do something about it. Whatever we feel about some of the language and actions, we cannot be critical of many of their values.

Dr Jones offers 15 reasons why it is right that they burn Islam’s holy book – the main one being that he believes the book to be representing false religion. He has authored a book entitled Islam is of the Devil, which has its own website, www.islamisofthedevil.com (both the church and book websites were down when posting this - so no links). He firmly – and no doubt sincerely – believes that Islam in all its forms is a force for evil in the world today and that it needs exposing. By burning the Quran he acknowledges that he is seeking publicity for his cause.

And Terry Jones is not alone in his campaign. The Facegroup page for the burning event has attracted over eleven thousand followers – though not all of them may be supportive. We also know of many others – on both sides of the Atlantic – who share these feelings and that while Jones’ book burning may be on the extreme wing of this movement there is do doubt that they represent a significant voice in the Western church today.

And they have a point. Secularism is advancing at a pace; the church is loosing influence; and the more radical elements of political Islam should be of concern to all of us. Western society – the world we know – is changing and not always for the better. These seem to be indisputable facts to me. The question arises, however, as to how we should respond to such changes. In yesterday’s post I quoted the German theologian Jurgen Moltmann and his view that those Christians who react to a changing world without seeing the opportunity for reform in church life, speak out of fear. And as I studied the Dove World Outreach Centre’s website along with the site accompanying Jones’ volume on Islam and the Facebook page, what came over very clearly was this same fear in the face of change.

It is ironic, maybe, that it is not only Christian fundamentalism that has grown out of fear of the modern world, but fundamentalist Islam also. Both movements, even though they are directly and dangerously opposed to one another, stem from the same reactionary root. In the face of the unstoppable march of modernity from the late nineteenth century onwards some have sought refuge and security in hard-line conservatism. But such an entrenchment has not stopped them from feeling the fear as modernity and now post-modernity have continued apace and the reactions are getting increasingly extreme.

One point to end this post: if fear is the driver behind this extremism then could the reaction be a negation of the very gospel they purport to defend? Jesus came to set us free from fear. He died and rose again so that we did not have to live under the fear of the consequences of sin. He promised to be with us through all adversities. He sent his Spirit to fill us and give us the power to defeat all evil. He came to love us just as we are. And perfect love is supposed to cast out all fear. Rather than attack that which causes fear, therefore, maybe the first response to a changing world is to look inside ourselves and see what needs to change.

If you enjoyed this post why not share it with others by clicking the bar below. Thanks.

Moltmann and the church -1

Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:35:55 +0100

Men and fires are a combination made in heaven. So when Helen said yesterday that she had four bin bags of Post Office rubbish to destroy I could not resist putting down Moltmann and going with her to make a fire. I had only just begun reading The Church in the Power of the Spirit (London, English translation 1977) when she called. But I still have a couple of quotes for you today!

In referring to the crisis that was (and still is) facing the church in Western Europe due the advancement of secularism, the German theologian says the church must see the opportunity this brings to think again about what the church is for. He says:

Anyone who only talks about ‘crisis’ without recognising this opportunity is talking because he is afraid and without hope (page xiii).

He was writing in the mid 1970s but could easily have been writing about our own period today. Many people in the church in the UK are feeling this fear as they see the church loose its influence and privilege in our country. Their response, however, is not to ask the bigger theological questions but to complain and protest, insisting that the church does not need to change in the face of its current challenges. Regular readers of this blog will know that I am with Moltmann on this one and that I believe that it is incumbent upon us as Christians to rise to the challenge of re-defining our role as missionary church in the present context of being church on the margins. We must put this fear aside and engage with society rather than rail against it.

It is on this issue of mission that I take my second quote from the book. It

is not that the church has a ‘mission’, but the very reverse: that the mission of Christ creates its own church (10).

The mission is God’s and its end goal is the restoration of the whole of creation and it is our privilege to be called to partner with God in this endeavour. As Christendom disintegrates all around us it is essential that we understand not whether but how we involve ourselves in this mission of God’s.

More from Jürgen Moltmann some other day. Now go and enjoy this one and ask how God would like you to partner with him today.

If you enjoyed this post why not shre it with others by clicking the button below. Thanks.

The apostolic - 5: Luke's account

Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:56:07 +0100

Luke opens his account of the acts of the apostles by referring back to his first book, his gospel. There, he says, he recorded all that Jesus had ‘begun to do’. What an amazing thought! That all we have in the gospels is the beginning of what Jesus wants to do in this world. He hadn’t finished his work – it had merely begun. And Luke closes the gospel by referring to Jesus’ ascension which brings his earthly ministry to an end. The work he began, however, has not been completed and it is to this continuation that Luke now turns in Acts – for Jesus ‘by the Holy Spirit [had] given orders to the apostles whom he had chosen’. It seems that Luke quite clearly saw their work as the extension of the work begun by Jesus.

Luke then goes on to explain that in the forty day period in between Jesus’ resurrection and ascension the apostles were given more teaching about ‘the kingdom of God’ (v.3). It was this theme that Jesus taught on so much in the short ministry he undertook before being crucified. It was the central subject of his work. Indeed this was the reason why he had come – to usher in the rule of God here on earth.

Now we are given no detail as to what exactly he taught in this forty day period but we can assume, maybe, that it was similar in substance to all he said previously. Central to all of that was the emphasis on the supernatural – the healing of the sick and the casting out of the demonic – and the radical value system of the kingdom. Having the rule of God restored would see a very different world. For our understanding of the apostolic to be biblical maybe we should also emphasise what Jesus did not teach on, namely church – how to plant one and/or how to build one up. This was not his emphasis and did not form a part of his teaching to the apostles.

With this opening paragraph, Luke lays introduces the subject of his second book – the continuation of the work of Jesus through the apostles. To do this work they would need the same power that Jesus himself had – which is the subject I shall turn to next in the series.

Nominal Christianity and culture

Mon, 06 Sep 2010 10:28:06 +0100

There are only around 600,000 of us. We’re squeezed into a small strip of land on the fringes of Western Europe. In the 1960s we faced a real struggle for survival though there has been a modest improvement since then. We generally lack self confidence and often feel we have to prove ourselves better than our nearest neighbour. But the amount of talent we have seems to be astounding. I’m talking about Welsh speakers and in a concert held last night to raise funds for the Pakistan flood appeal I was reminded how much talent there really is here.

Most of those taking part lived within 30 minutes of the venue and yet among them were young people who will shortly leave to study music at university level and fully expect to become professional performers in the future. They have already sustained a competitive lifestyle in their fields over the past ten years as they have engaged with the eisteddfod culture here in Wales and this dedication has fine tuned their talents to an astonishing standard.

An important aspect of this culture is nominal Christianity. Many of the songs sung last night had religious themes or were actual hymns and one young lad recited the story of Zacchaeus from Luke’s gospel. The concert venue was a fine example of a Victorian chapel and to end the evening we all sang a verse from a well known Welsh hymn. The level of Christian references may have diminished over the years but it is still there – even among the younger generation. And this makes being church here doubly hard, for the stronger the hold of nominal faith the harder it is to see a spiritual breakthrough.

Part of the problem lies in the fact that the language and customs of nominal Christianity immunise people from real faith. They would claim to be Christian even though following Jesus’ radical lifestyle does not feature on their radar. As they sing the hymns and spiritual songs in the cultural events they come to know the language of faith without that faith ever making an impact upon their lives.

The answers to this problem are multiple but a part of the solution may lie in allowing the secularising process that many Christians complain of in the UK to enter into this cultural life. Many will raise their hands in horror at this thought especially as the deep connection between faith and culture in Wales has helped sustain the language in its darkest days. However, if nominal Christianity is upheld by this cultural connection then breaking it could, in the long term, be helpful to the church as it offers the radical alternative that Jesus represents to a generation unaffected by this inoculation.

If you enjoyed this post then why not share it with others by clicking the link below. Thanks.

Affirming this life in the resurrection

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 09:12:36 +0100

A few thoughts on resurrection today as I have a funeral to take tomorrow and I’ve been asked to preach. One of the readings chosen is the final section of the 15^th chapter in 1 Corinthians – it’s the chapter on resurrection and includes these powerful words, ‘O death, where is your victory’. I once challenged an atheist to say what hope he could provide a family in bereavement apart from the fact that the deceased had lived a good life. The answer, of course, was ‘none’. Without resurrection there is no hope which is why the resurrection of Jesus is such a central aspect of the Christian faith.

Here are three things I’d like to share on this subject.

The resurrection of Jesus speaks of the fullness of hope we have in the gospel. Many Christians cling onto the very unbiblical idea that salvation is merely the disembodied soul flying off to heaven for eternity. But that has more to do with Greek philosophy than it does with Christian theology. Physical resurrection lies at the heart of God’s promises and it includes more than just spiritual salvation for humanity but also restoration for the whole creation. The resurrection of Jesus is the first step in God’s Kingdom being restored to a new heaven and a new earth.
There is real hope in the face of death. Hope is a vital element of life. Without it there is only despair. And in life we manage to hold onto hope in many different ways. Even in the face of death, people manage to cling onto something, even if it is only the fact that their life has been full. But in the resurrection we have the promise that death does not have the final word and cannot be victorious. It looses its grip and power over us as we realise that an eternal, transformed life is ours in Jesus.
The resurrection gives worth to this life. While the Greek philosophy referred to does give hope of a spiritual eternity in heaven, it also devalues physical life on earth. The material world is something that is to be escaped for it is corrupt and decaying. And of course there is truth in that view for our world is corrupt and is decaying, but in the resurrection we see God, rather than abandoning this world, actually transforming it into something new and beautiful. However bad things get, therefore, we see in the resurrection of Jesus an affirmation of the world by God. It is good and it is worth renewing.

Paul’s last words in chapter 15 are therefore very relevant – ‘your toil is not in vain in the Lord’. So often in the past we have interpreted our ‘toil in the Lord’ as some spiritual tasks we have done in church. But if the whole of created life is good and is affirmed in the life and resurrection of Jesus, then we must define our work in God in much broader terms. The old sacred/secular divide has to go. Everything we do that adds to the life of others, that adds to the beauty of this earth, that adds to justice and fairness – all this and more is our work in God. And because of the resurrection – because of a new heaven and a new earth – the work we do in God is not in vain, not because it means we have lived a full life, but because it lasts with us to eternity.

Resurrection is not just an affirmation of the life of Jesus, therefore, but an affirmation of all our lives in him.

If you enjoyed this post why not share it with others by clicking the bar below. Thanks.

Kevin Prosch and congregational worship

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:47:52 +0100

During the Reformation in the 16^th century an emphasis was put on the whole of the church congregation being involved in worship. Psalms were put to music and hymns were written in order to help with this process and so worship became associated with community hymn singing. At the time this was a novelty as the Catholic Church had reduced worship to be almost exclusively the action of the priests alone.

Over the weekend I attended two worship events lead by Kevin Prosch, a leading singer-song writer and worship leader from the US. His songs include Show your power and Love is all you need. It was great to be at events that had a big congregation and where the level of musical ability was so high. Kevin Prosch used a number of different musical styles, expressing his belief that in heaven we will be using far more styles than our national favourite! But rather than lead us as a congregation to sing songs whose words were up on a screen, he and his band worshipped in the front and let the rest of us participate in any way we deemed appropriate. Some danced, some sang their own made-up songs, some sang in tongues – and many either stood or sat and did very little. It wasn’t an easy experience to enter into and in truth, while there were many people worshipping, it wasn’t the congregation doing so as one body. (This was less true on the Sunday morning where we were part of a church service that Prosch was helping to lead.)

This is an extension of where charismatic worship has been going for a while. We sing many songs where the emphasis is on my connection with God. The songs are often about the individual – I, me, my – rather than the congregation – us, we, our. This then makes the congregation merely a collection of individuals and this new style of having no set songs to sing at all takes us even farther to that way of being. I think something is lost in this. We are, after all, the body of Jesus and though our individual interaction with God is so necessary, there is an emphasis in Scripture on the corporate.

There is an important plus to mention, however, in that this style does break the strongly believed equation: songs with set words + charismatic worship leader with guitar/keyboard + congregation all singing together = worship. While this can be worship, it is only a part of what worship is. The freer style used by Prosch forced us to consider how we enter into worship and how much we depend on the ‘worship leader’. Just as we don’t need the pastor to pray for us, or the priest to give us communion, neither do we need a worship leader to take us into God’s presence in worship.

The Reformers liked to emphasise the priesthood of all believers and their participation in the worship service. But for many this emphasis in practice – if not in theory – has been eroded – and we depend a great deal on the various types of leaders we have in our churches. Though I struggle with the lack of corporate emphasis that Prosch in part had, I think that, on balance, his approach is to be welcomed as it takes us back to common priesthood ideals.

If you enjoyed this post why not share it with others by clicking the bar below. Thanks.

Being a critic of Israel

Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:36:32 +0100

If I were to suggest to my fellow Welshmen and women that the resentment some of them have in their hearts towards the English is not a helpful thing but that it is actually a sin, what would that make me? Would it make me an enemy of my nation? If I were to point out that actually, far from helping our cause, such resentment detracts from it, would that make me anti-Welsh?

Or let me give you another scenario – one that is just plain silly. We’re intending to do some bed and breakfast next summer as a way of earning a little extra income. In that situation, if Helen, my wife, were to continually burn the toast for the guests’ breakfast (guaranteed not to happen, by the way!) and if I were to suggest to her that it was not the best way to ensure that any guest would want to return for a second time to us, would that make me an anti-Helenist? If the guests were to complain about their burnt toast and I were to agree with them and suggest to Helen she might want to compensate them in some way, would it be fair to accuse me of anti-Helenism?

No, of course not. In both scenarios the suggestions and criticisms made by me would be fair and maybe even wise. Holding onto resentment isn’t a good and godly thing and burning the paying guests’ toast is not a good way to run a business (though you may want to tell me to make the toast myself!). So why is it then that if someone criticises the state of Israel for taking land that belongs to private Palestinian citizens and takes houses away from wholly innocent people, they are immediately accused of being anti-Semitic?

In a post-Holocaust world to charge anyone of anti-Semitism is one the gravest accusations you can make. You are aligning them with one of the most odious political regimes this world has ever seen, a regime that murdered over six million Jews. It is not an assertion that should be made lightly about anyone for in doing so you are either painting the accused as complete monsters or you are devaluing the term ‘anti-Semitic’.

And yet in north Wales today this is the accusation that has publicly been made against some people by a prominent political figure. The details so far are a little sketchy, which is why I have not named anyone. But potentially it is an issue that is too important to be silent about.

An angry god - part 2

Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:08:54 +0100

A little more on the angry god today.

One of my favourite biblical passages is Romans 5:6-11. Here Paul tells us how Jesus died for us while we were still in our sin and thereby proving his love for us. Clearly God’s love for us was the motivation for the cross and not the other way around. The death of Jesus did not open the way for him to love us, he already did so.

But it is verse 10 that is possibly the most amazing of this passage – ‘For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son …’ In our sin we are the ones who are the enemies of God and it is we who need reconciling to him – and not the other way around. Even in our sin he was not our enemy; even in our sin he had no need to be reconciled to us. We were the ones who had turned away from him and created the enmity that existed. God was still for us, still our friend, still nearby waiting for us to turn. Paul expresses much the same truth in his second letter to the Corinthians when he says to them, ‘Be reconciled to God’ (5:20).

This is not an angry God. He is a God of love. And he has always loved us no matter how far away from him we have run.

If you enjoyed this post and think others would too then why not shre it by clicking the bar below. Thanks.

How angry is your god today?

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 10:42:41 +0100

On a scale of 1 to 10 (where 10 is very angry), how angry is God with you today? In answering this question don’t respond in the way you think you should, rather try giving it your gut reaction. Your answer will reflect a number of things – not least your own upbringing at home, where your understanding of God’s fatherhood will have been heavily influenced by your parents. But the answer will also be influenced by your spiritual upbringing and the religious tradition you have been a part of.

Your understanding of the word itself is also an important aspect of this. Language is a funny thing – words and phrases mean different things to different people. In our house when we ask, ‘Is the internet on?’ what we mean is whether the wifi router is switched on. When I say I’m ‘keeping the shopping’ what I mean is that I’m ‘putting it away’. But we both understand – it is our language. And the word ‘anger’ will mean something different to you compared to me and more importantly it will create a different emotional response in us that may make us respond to the word in different ways. What the word normally means matters not; what matters is what it means to me.

By challenging the notion that God is angry with us, some say – even accuse – that we’re diluting the gospel. The popular American preacher, Rob Bell, has especially had to face this accusation in recent months and while I understand what his detractors mean when they argue against his teaching, I am minded to stand with him rather than against him. His critics are correct in saying that there is an emphasis on a wrathful God in the Bible and that he takes a very dim view of sin. Key verses can be quoted to back up that assertion and are a handy little tool when it comes to constructing the arguments. But do these verses and the way they are interpreted reflect God’s character and his attitude towards us and the world? My conclusion is that they do not. As we come to study those verses I think the following need to be taken into account:

God’s essential, core characteristic is love;
The cross of Jesus has dealt with the sin;
For those who believe that only the sin of the ‘elect’ is covered on the cross it is still true that Jesus died not so that God could love us, but because he loved us. That means that God loved the sinner before the cross and that we are loved even if we haven’t opted into being ‘in Christ’;
The general thrust of God’s actions is to restore creation – not to punish it. This means that the emphasis should be not that we are saved from something (a wrathful, vengeful God) but for something (a restored life in a restored creation);
The resurrection of Jesus means that this restorative action is already at work in the world.

The above are the theological prerequisites that I believe we should bring with us to the Bible. The following are historical/psychological issues that also need to be taken to account.

How do we understand the word anger? What picture does it create in our minds? If we see someone with a red face, a frown, and lots of shouting – it may not be the best understanding to bring with us when we come to read verses that include the word! Our upbringing may well be the cause for the picture we have. We need an understanding of how that has affected us to know that we truly understand the Bible.
How much of our church context is affecting our biblical understanding? This context will give me a theology that I then take with me to the Bible and I will read into the scriptures what I already believe. In some churches this theology has remained pretty much unchanged and unchallenged for considerable period of time and yet in the light of recent learning may be deeply flawed.
The culture of the world that surrounds me will affect how I read the Bible. For example, how differently was the Bible read in the more permissive age of the 1960s compared to the stricter age of the immediate post-war period?

Someone who lives nearby told us that once a week he goes into the local town and will often buy a second-hand lawn mower. (I think he may fix them up and then sell them on.) And then he said, ‘I don’t drink so I think it’s ok.’ That is, he was justifying his actions. He does not attend a place of worship and has no faith as far as I’m aware but he does know that we are Christians and church leaders and he obviously felt that he needed to justify what is a wholly innocent pastime. Deep within him there seems to be this feeling that God is an angry being always on the look-out for people to punish, hence his comment that his ‘vice’ is not as bad as others’. A sad story, no doubt you will agree. Even sadder is that many Christians still live in this place where they believe God is angry with them. That the church needs to revisit this subject is clear.

That God wants the best for us and from us is beyond doubt. But post-crucifixion and resurrection he’s far too busy bringing that into being to be spitting feathers every time you and I mess up. Instead of living under the shadow of some perceived threat we should lift up our heads and see that the Son is shining and bidding us to come follow him into a better life.

If you found this post useful why not share it with others by clicking the bar below. Thanks.

Back to Church Sunday

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:03:17 +0100

It’s ‘Back to Church Sunday’ on 26 September – an initiative that aims to get those of us who are regulars in Sunday services to invite a friend who has not been to ‘church’ for a while to return to the fold. On the face of it, it’s an excellent idea.

I was present at a congregation yesterday where one of the resources prepared for the initiative was handed out to the regulars and there is no doubting the genuine heart behind the scheme. I was also impressed by the particular resource that was distributed. It’s a small, well designed card, folded in two: one section has a prayer for the church regular to pray for their invitee and the second is the invitation itself. The prayer centres on God’s desire to invite all to come to him and to be accepted by him. That the whole thing is available in the Welsh language is also brilliant as this is essential to the many hundreds of small Welsh-speaking congregations up and down the country. So in many different ways this is an excellent plan.

I’m guessing you can hear the ‘but’ coming, though! Because I do have a couple of concerns about it, both of which if we truly tackled we may have less need for such an initiative in the first place.

The first is this idea – deeply entrenched in our Western European religious conscious – that we ‘go to church’ in contrast to the biblical view of us ‘being church’. We are the body of Jesus here on earth every single day of our life. Everything we do, we do as the body of Jesus. It is correct that a part of that being does involve us meeting other followers, more often than not on a Sunday morning, to worship, fellowship, and be taught – but that congregational aspect is still us being church rather than going there. This idea is one that desperately needs challenging and the BTCS initiative seems to do the opposite.

The second concern I have I am best able to express by asking a question. Why do we think that our non ‘church’ friends would be drawn to our services by reading a printed invitation card when they haven’t shown much interest after reading our Christ centred character? It may be an unpalatable truth, but truth it still is that in our lives we present all we meet with an invite card to consider Jesus and the Christian faith.

Such initiatives are not bad in themselves; indeed they can produce much good fruit. But we do need to be careful that they are not a poor substitute to living the life that Jesus calls us to live.

If you found this post useful then why not share it with others by clicking the bar below. Thanks.