the drum|rob fairbanks

Keller on How to Treat Homosexuals

I thought this was a fair and gracious handling of an increasingly difficult topic. From my perspective, Keller is the epitome of grace and dignity. I am not a huge fan of his Calvinism, but there are few I would vote for to represent Christianity more than Keller.

 

Wealth and the Great Divide between Jesus & America

By Troy

In the Gospels, Jesus is unanimously portrayed as a person of poverty. From his undignified birth in a manger and to his being born the son of a carpenter, Jesus emerged without any of the world’s riches. Even during his earthly ministry, Jesus had no place to call home.

 

America stands in sharp contrast to the simple lifestyle of Jesus. Driven by the allure of consumerism, many of us drive fancy cars, live in fancy houses, play on our fancy technological toys, wear fancy designer clothing, etc. Ingrained in our brains are the ideas of the ‘American dream’ and the ‘pursuit of happiness,’ which keep us chasing after the world. Money might buy happiness, but it does not buy life (and I mean eternal life).

 

Throughout his ministry, Jesus frequently associated with the poor. This is especially remarkable in light of the fact that Jews in Jesus’ day understood wealth as evidence of God’s favor and poverty as a sign of God’s curse. Yet Jesus, “who, being in very nature God…made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7). From the beginning, a major part of Jesus’ mission was to proclaim the Good News to the poor: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.”

 

I think it’s time we take Jesus’ words seriously. Unless we submit our wealth to the Lord, we will be less effective servants of the Kingdom.

 

I am equally as guilty. As I write this post, I’m typing on my Apple Macbook. I’m decked out in Nikes and a Blazers jersey. My Blackberry sits in my Jordan shorts as I watch the Blazers beat the Lakers on a large HDTV.

 

I think many Christians are like the rich young ruler. We go through the motions of Christianity – going to church, living a moral life, maybe even tithing some of our income! – but Jesus says this is not enough: “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have…Then come, follow me.” Go. Sell your stuff. Then follow me.

Capitalism and Christianity in the West

By Peter

In one of our readings about the nature and calling of the Church by Lesslie Newbigin, he writes that “the denomination is precisely that visible form which the Church takes when a secularized society privatizes religion”.  While I understand why differences exist between various denominations, I believe that the separation this has caused is not what the Church of the Kingdom was intended to look like.  This idea of church privatization is an idea that has made me think a lot more about the impact of capitalism on the Western Church. 

In a capitalist market, consumer behavior is said to be directed by an ‘invisible hand’ which is the rise and fall of prices that guides our actions in the market.  The law of demand states that the quantity demanded rises as the price falls and vice-versa. Competition is created as different producers try to make their own product more attractive than their competitors.

The western church seems to be operating under these same principles based on individualism and freedom of choice.  With all the different denominations that exis t today, each one seems to correspond, as Newbigin would say, to the variety of brands available on the shelves of the supermarket.  Everyone is free to make their own choice based on what seems most attractive.  The result is that church ‘growth’ in our country today is primarily just Christians moving between churches rather than new believers joining the Church.  This means that there is little in terms of actual growth as a percentage of the population.  On the other hand, the Church is growing faster than ever in other places of the world, in particular Asia and Latin America.  

I have not done a lot of research yet on this topic but am very interested in the connection that exists between the Church and capitalism and how capitalistic values are shaping the way the Christian faith is ‘marketed’ in our culture.  How does the exponential growth of the Church in Asia and Latin America correlate to the existing social and economic structures and the culture these have created?

Should I Give All my Stuff Away?

By Corey

I have been wrestling with the idea of material possessions for quite a while now. In Mathew 19 Jesus interacts with a young rich man that is looking to find eternal life. Jesus tells the young man that to attain eternal life he needs to “keep the commandments”. The young man then tells Jesus that he already does this but he feels that he is still missing something. As a result Jesus states, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven” (Matthew 19:21 ESV). 

This passage is so challenging to me. I am a college student   without much money or a car, but I have so much stuff. I am a collector and a bit of a pack rat. For example, I have a large collection of shoes, socks, bikes, hats, jeans, and wool ties. And these are just my “collections”, the things that I buy more of simply for the sake of having them.

So what am I supposed to do in light of this passage? I see two options. First, I could adopt the American mentality; I could choose to ignore this pa ssage and believe that it doesn’t apply to me because of America’s obsession with material possessions. This approach is easy, safe, and attempts to justify consumerism. Or secondly, I could look at this passage from a much different point of view, a literal one. Réne Padilla in his book, Mission Between the Times states, “If it is clear that Jesus did at times demand literal poverty as a condition of discipleship, why should we take it for granted that in our case his demand to renounce all possessions should be interpreted figuratively?”

This is the heart of my struggle. Can a compromise be made or is it simply one way or the other? And further, if I am actually bowing my knee to Christ each day, do my material possessions need justification? Thoughts?

"We Lost"

In lieu of Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins" I want to say a few things about what I believe:

First:

I think the Rob Bell book should have been called, “We Lost.”  Honestly, I have been ashamed by Bell, his publisher (not sure where most of the blame should reside) and the crazy people who piled on before even reading the book.  The book is entitled “Love Wins,” but because of the manipulative promotional approach Bell and his publisher utilized I am suggesting that it should have been entitled, “We Lost.”  It has needlessly served to polarize scores of people all to get sales and to make money. This may not have been their base motive, but it certainly came off that way (if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…you know the rest).  This, I would surmise is the most grievous act of the entire fiasco.  So much so, that I am teetering on not reading the book out of sheer principle.  Not just a few of us who are watching and commenting on the state of the western church have cited the voracious consumerism of the west as probably it’s greatest foe.  The approach utilized in marketing this book was a brilliant ploy for marketing and making money (I have heard that it is selling more than the Pope’s book), but in my opinion is reprehensible and really more a sign of our culture than of the gracious Kingdom we are supposed to be pointing and living toward.  I have nothing against Bell, I just think there was a serious mis-fire in his approach in getting the word out.  There!  That is enough about that.  It is off my chest and I can move on. 

Secondly:

While I have heard from numerous reputable folks who have actually read the book that Bell does not actually ascribe to universalism (Universalism is the teaching that all people will be saved), nonetheless, I simply want to say that I believe that the philosophy of universalism is outside of the scope of historical and biblical orthodoxy.  It is a compassionate idea, but finds little actual grounding in the Bible. 

Lastly:

While many, including Bell it seems ascribe to a perspective that does not adhere to a literal view of hell, I simply want to say that I do.  Not because I necessarily want to (it seems like some of the neo-reform folk actually enjoy the idea of hell and wrath and think God does too - a differnent).  While there are several perspectives on hell that could possibly still find a location within historical and biblical orthodoxy, I want to say, for me those positions are unconvincing.  I would concur with my friend and colleague, Brian Newman when he wrote on his BLOG:

• I believe in a true heaven and a hell, and I believe that Scripture teaches that each of these lasts for eternity (outside of time);
• I believe that it is only in and through the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth (Y'shua in Hebrew, 'Isa in Arabic) as the one and only promised Messiah that people "inherit eternal life." Jesus is the Lamb of God (the Christ, Lord) and God by His grace gives people the ability to come to faith in God through Jesus or to not do so. (I find that much of the debate in Calvinism and Arminianism over pre-destination and election is largely a waste of energy.)
• I believe there is much mystery in Scripture about the nature of eternal separation from God. I believe that images of fire, outer darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth are symbols and metaphors for desolation, ultimate isolation and aloneness. I have been greatly helped by C.S. Lewis' understanding of hell in "The Great Divorce" and elsewhere in his writing. I believe that ultimate separation from God is beyond imagination and far more grave than we care to admit.
• I do not know if heaven will be populated with the vast majority of people who have lived through the course of time, nor do I know if hell will be populated with the vast majority of people who have lived through the course of time. The Bible tells us to "enter through the narrow gate" because wide is the way to destruction. It says that a "multitude" from every tribe, nation, and people will be in heaven and that the number is also limited (as represented by the number 144,000). I would argue that the Bible does not treat this as a puzzle to be solved, but rather as a mystery to live within.
• I believe that it is totally and absolutely God's deal to determine people's eternal destiny; God enlists people to be his "evangels" (messengers).
• And finally, I believe that we Evangelicals have gotten terribly distracted by this debate about who is in heaven and who is not. My church here in Denver has split and splintered over this very issue, resulting in unnecessary pain in many people's lives. We Evangelicals have gotten away from our primary calling as "God's sent ones" to announce Jesus' Kingdom by focusing so much energy and attention on what is ultimately a tremendous mystery. It's time to return to being messengers who announce the Kingdom of God.

One last thing - on a positive note, the Bell book has created an opportunity for me/others to articulate a bit more clearly our positions on some important issues.  I think that is a good thing.