Decisions, decisions

I have been rolling the theological issue of evangelism in my thinking. What this has come down to is the issue of a "personal decision" and hence a "personal" Lord. I think that this theological issue needs to be re-thought (which some are doing). We are in a post-Christiandom, post-Constantinian age (for those who do not know what those mean, simply think postmodern. if that still is drawing blanks, read some political philosophy or something current concerning religion) which means that we Christians can no longer think that we can pack out stadiums and send an evangelist in front of them to preach the Good News in order to get them "saved." It does not work like that anymore, that day is dead.

What that evangelism has generally done to the Christians is pretty much nothing. It "saved" them and then told them to go find a church and read the Bible. So a bunch of newly "saved" people who had little idea of the "liturgy" of the church and were interpreting the Bible on their individually own, entered into churches with no clue. And if these churches were somewhat normal, it seems to take some time for the congregation to warm up to those who are more introverted, which means even more isolation of the individual who thinks that he or she goes to church in order to receive that "nugget" of truth or that spiritual food, which they do but it is not in the form of an objective proposition that a person can take home like some commodified good, (and do whatever they want with "it"); it comes through the re-membering of the Body of Christ through the Liturgical re-telling of "calling out"; confession of sin; communal prayer; hearing the Word; participating in the Eucharist/Lord's Supper/Communion; and the "sending out" which re-narrates us into the narrative of the Lord Jesus Christ.

What we need to do as churches is come together and becom a prime community in our lives as Christians and not just simply something we do on Sunday morning (though the Sunday worship is absolutely vital being the eighth day of the week; The Lord's DAy. It just does not stop there). We need to find creative ways to be able to learn how to depend on each other as opposed to being completely self-sufficient. We need to learn how to help each other out of the hard times so when the real hard times come, we will know how to "be." Within this context we can start inviting our friends to participate with us (that is to say that we need to build the friendship first and when they notice that we are on a different mission that liberal, consumer-capitalist mission then we can invite them into the mission of Christ). Therefore, we are after baptisms that bring people into the story that will convert and transform them into new creatures as opposed to a "personal" decision to have a "personal" lord.

Concerning this "personal" lord idea, Christ is titled as the King of kings and the Lord of lords. He is the King of the cosmos and his mission is redeeming the creation back unto himself. This is far greater and far larger than simple some God "vacuum" with each one of us. To come together in his Body is to come together and become a part of each other lives and to confess our sins one to another and bear each other's burdens. This is the farthest thing from some simple religious "opinion." This means that the Christians in my community will have a say in my life and I in theirs, likewise Christians everywhere have the right to dialogue to me about my life and thoughts, my interpretations and actions. This is not personal as made known by our society.

Our surrounding society wants us to think that the Way is simply personal, beliefs and convictions that have no more substance than ignorant opinions. They want the Way to be opinion and it will be ok for us to have those "opinions" as long as these opinions do not leave our own personal lives. You see, as an American, my neighbor has really no right to become involved in my life if I choose to keep him out. I have even heard those stories of people sueing those who have saved others from some life-threatening tragedy! We do not even have the right to help the afflicted, for that is why society has instititued the "specialists" in those "helping areas" like the police officer and the medical technician. This society has no place for the Way, for the King of kings to really be a King of the cosmos, but it needs a cultured, impotent faith that is about a "personal" king of each "personal" individual - the "personal" being are his borders.

Therefore, we need to have a way of life in a King that crosses these false borders!

Power in the word

I have heard that there is power in words. I can agree with this statement for i believe that there is power in words but I will only go so far with this. This idea has been in the back of my mind for sometime now and has been revived by recent conversations I have had.
I believe there is a certain power in what I speak, for instance, I can come home everyday and speak to my wife in a derogatory way and call her by bad names and the results of this abuse will be bad. She will leave me or her self view or esteem will be eventually destroyed. The same can go for my children, I can give them love with my words or give them death and destruction with my words. I believe this.
But now, I have heard about some idea of "speaking it into existence." My basic understanding of this is, for example, I have the power to speak things into existence. This idea also involves my beliefs about the things, whatever the the things are. Therefore, if I am poor, it is because I believe and talk like I am poor and I have the power to lift myself out of this situation through proper belief that I am not poor and speak my new found debt-free life into existence by talking like I am not poor. I do not think that this power necessarily exists. If I try to speak my un-poorness into existence, that does not make me un-poor. Nor does this constitute faith in God about him lifting me out of my poorness. This is like thinking that I could pray about my poorness and then speak as if He already worked and that it then happens that way.
A different angle, I think that the little girl who is being molested by her father cannot lift herself out of that situation or exhibit faith in God by speaking like it is not happening, or however she should speak that liberation/justice into existence. This makes the words have some sort of magical property.
Then, let me say for the sake of argument, is it only the spoken word or do the written words have magic too? I have read many works about non-violence and ending the war, but the war is still in existence and there is still violence. Maybe these authors should stop writting and start speaking.
Therefore, I do not think that this notion of "speaking it into existence" actually happens the way it has been introduced to me, even when it concerns faith in God. Otherwise, my faith is found wanting. I guess I should talk as if i can afford to pay my child support and give her the extra money she needs while still being able to afford to travel there and magically the funds will appear, or else God will finally see that i have the proper faith in his power and will grant me my wish.
Or else, maybe I can keep praying that I have needs and keep trying to get a real job, understanding that simply speaking it into existence does not work but patience, faith, and perseverence will help me grow and last through this situation.
The way i see it, Jesus Christ did not come and work his life and make disciples in the world to bring justice into the world by individuals "speaking it into existence." I think that there is a reason that he established a community of believers or in other words, the Church which is the body of Christ. The body of Christ is where justice is brought to the world, by all the things that the New Testament talks about. The church becomes a "community of Character" as Stanely Hauerwas wrote about.
I will post about this justice next time because, "speaking it into existence" i believe, is basically about justice but on an individualistic level.

a purpose?

I am going to lay out an opinion, and it is an opinion because i have not much real knowledge of the issues but i readily feel the effects of the issues everyday. The Church in america is in a particular situation!



What i see is that the television is a major part of life here in america. I have seen numerous news broadcasts that would be talking about lifestyles and during the show, the broadcaster, or whoever, could use a phrase to illustrate a "poor" or "bad" lifestyle by stating that they, he, or she could not even have or watch a TV. TV is stated like it is a necessity. I mean, for the love of Pete, the TV has made it, generally, into every household in america. (Yet, oddly enough i have been in many places that have had no TV)



I bring this up because it is very influential. I go to work and the daily talk is about what was on last night on the various television shows. Various sports can be watched in the comfort of one's home due to the TV. Ambitious politicians have virtual access to more homes and families then most governments have ever dreamed of. The media also has a unique way of presenting the news because the video camera has it's own interpretation as opposed to a text in a newspaper. In small words, it is very influential.



I, then, think that a large portion of the influence towards people of the idea of what Christianity is about comes from the TV. This comes from the stations such as TBN or some of the interviews on CNN or news channels/shows or whatever else of that nature. What then happens is that there becomes a silent consensus that relates better to, or is aligned with what this idea that is presented on TV. Therefore, there becomes churches that become better aligned with or related to the idea presented on the TV.



I protest the idea of Christianity that is largely presented on TV. I really think that the ideas that are more generally presented across the air waves is not Christianity. When people can say that a Joel Olsteen represents Christianity, we should know that we are not doing well. I cannot quote but i did hear Olsteen say on CNN that he was not preaching but motivating or uplifting or something of that nature, yet he has a pulpit and a large stage and a larger church. Likewise, what about the preachers on TBN? If i listened to the preachers on that channel, then i would become broke and poor simply by giving to those who seemingly do not need the money. It seems like every one of those preachers is asking for a "gift or seed."

Yet, i think that they are missing some key issues on being church. That is . . . being the body of Christ and doing justice. It is hard to be a body of Christ when the majority of the congregation does not know each other (especially when it is due to the majority that is watching the program on tv in the comfort of their private homes). I think that the unity, commitment and relationships are vital to everything that it means to be Christian. This is also where justice comes to play, because it is hard to be just or to help those who you do not know. I mean, why should i give my money to mike murdock when i have people close to me that are starving?



I will admit that i feel like i am not well off monetarily. I could use help every now and again, but at least i have a roof (someone's floor) over my head for now. How much better could i be? I try. I have thought about what i could do if the pastor/board members lessened the symphony at the "Crystal Cathedral" to help out my family and our bills, or sold that gold cross for that matter.



I am just venting.

church worship

I have been rolling around my head for the last week about Church. Why to some is it called a "service?" Are we providing a service like my auto mechanic or our banker or our mail persons? IF we are then what is the service?

And on top of this, what are church models? I have heard that there are some church models like the traditional model that so-called "fundamentalists" would like, a seeker, program loaded model after some felt needs or a missional model that is for urban settings or a godcentered model that might resemble the first christians, among others I imagine.

I do not understand this. Why is there a model or why is the model about a service? I say that we should start to understand this differently or think about this differently. I have been a part of many congregations of brothers and sisters of Christ that have been concerned with things other than the kingdom of God. I want people to come to church, sure, but for what? For spirtual food? what is that? For a good worship and fellowship? Do they have to be a part of the in-crowd then? To hear a good sermon? I have never heard a perfect sermon, yet.

I do not know, i am confused about this. I have seen and read about the certain aspects of order and criteria so to speak, given in the pastoral letters of the new testament but i do not understand that necessarily to be about church models. Maybe the models are a good way and reason for not accepting a certain church or people, or their message. You know, something like, "oh you only live in simplicity because you participate in a missional congregation. We have programs that reach thousands." or "our church is here to focus on providing for the missionaries that we sent to afganistan. We also have great fellowship on sundays."