|
|
|
MAY
2006
What are God's expectations and/or requirements on church attendance and the importance of membership in religious institutions?
In the Old Testament era—and to this day in Judaism—God's expectation was the sabbath: that Israel would rest on the seventh day, do no work, and instead devote themselves to remembering their God and sharing life within family and community. Protocols for remembering the sabbath developed over time and were influenced by context. Thus, temple worship in Jerusalem had to evolve into synagogue worship in Babylon. The expectation of a sabbath to the Lord remained.
In the Christian community, the sabbath continued to be the norm as long as Christianity remained a sect within Judaism. When it became a separate religion, sabbath shifted to Sunday but the Church's expectation of regular observance remained.
Whether that was God's expectation is unclear. It is unlikely that Jesus intended to found an institution like the Church that developed. His own attitude toward the sabbath was flexible, as he put people ahead of ritual. Jesus was more concerned with what his disciples did in the world as servants than their belonging to a membership society. He certainly had no interest in an exclusionary institution with rigid boundaries. The point, for Jesus seems to have been dedicating one's life to servanthood and self-sacrifice. His hope was for oneness—with God and with each another. That hope could be construed as a call to being together. But it seems a leap to see worship and membership requirements as satisfying Jesus' hope for oneness. God's gift was newness of life, not exchanging one set of membership rituals for another.
That said, I do believe that we derive great and necessary benefit from being together in Christian community. I find it hard to imagine a faith journey that didn't include oneness. That doesn't make regular church attendance a requirement—just a good idea.
(Return to Top)
What is your position on biological evolution? I believe that God "created us from the dust" and that is indeed the simplest and humblest beginning. As for the details of God's creation, I think Darwin got it right.
I think the science of evolution is well established. No serious scientist looks to Biblical creation accounts for scientific explanations of origins. Biblical accounts never purported to be science. They were stories that helped early Hebrews understand their relationship with Yahweh (Genesis 2-3) or El (Genesis 1).
From a theological standpoint, the creation accounts (Genesis 2-3 preceded Genesis 1 by some 400 years) help us to understand humanity's special relationship with God, our human capacity for sin, and the historical drama that began with the Exodus. Biblical literalists reject evolution, not because they have better science to offer, but because they want to preserve Biblical literalism.
How do you know when you are called to be a minister?
This question comes up constantly in the discernment process that most religions require of candidates for ordination. (I assume that, in your question, you are referring to “minister” as ordained clergy, as opposed to the “ministry” of all baptized Christians, both lay and ordained.) The answer usually involves a personal story in which the candidate felt the presence of God in a uniquely powerful way, or felt led by God to undertake a certain ministry (such as leading youth) that pointed to a larger sense of calling, or found a dimension of ordained life that seemed to complete his or her sense of Christian identity. The answers usually are vague, experiential, emotive, intuitive, and not grounded in fact or logic. Along the way, candidates usually have received some affirmation of their call, perhaps from their pastor or church friends.
Some denominations welcome self-presentation, in which a person who feels called presents himself or herself to a church body. More and more congregations and denominations are turning to a process of recruitment, in which a leader approaches a promising candidate and asks him or her to consider ordained ministry.
Most pre-ordination processes also suggest a time of discernment, in which the prospective candidate undertakes at least some of the study and practice of ministry, to see how “the shoe fits,” as it were. This could be field work with an experienced pastor, or an internship with a ministry organization, such as a chaplaincy, or some course of study. The process doesn't usually deepen the original stories, but it does allow the candidate to test the water, to see if the actual work of ordained ministry seems appropriate. Much of the work of ministry, for example, involves motivating other people, conflicts, organizational development, and listening. After getting a taste of those realities, does the candidate still feel called to the ordained role?
I was asked this question on a golf course and did not give a good answer. The question :“Who is GOD anyway?”
I will tell you what I consider to be true. I encourage you to ask others for their responses, as well. For God is a being who needs to be looked at from every possible perspective.
I think of God as loving and merciful creator. I believe God can be known in many ways, some of them beyond human language, but the best way to understand God is through the mystery of love, in which two beings bind themselves to one another. I believe God loves first and leaves it to us whether we respond. We cannot earn or diminish that love. It simply is God's nature to love.
I believe it is also God's nature to have mercy, to forgive, to be kind, as perhaps an ideal parent is kind. While God certainly notices who we are and what we do, God has decided to be patient and kind with us.
God's love and mercy can be confusing to us, especially when we are filled with hatred and self-loathing. We are always tempted to see God as being like us, namely, hating as we hate, perhaps hating the very ones we hate. As I read Scripture, however, hatred and self-loathing aret our problem, not God's nature.
By seeing God as creator, I understand God as the ultimate source of all life. The nature of that creation continues to emerge, as science probes deeper into the mysteries of the universe and thus, in my opinion, discerns more about God. At death, all life returns to God.
I believe God can be known in many ways, even in ways that seem to contradict each other. Thus, as a Christian, I know God through the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. I accept that others can come to know God in other ways. I see no point in Christianity competing with Judaism or Islam. We all see imperfectly. Better, I think, to see God as larger than any single expression of God.
For that reason, I have tried to stop seeing God only in male imagery, as “he” and “Father.” God's nature seems richer than that.
When I was younger, I remember asking my preacher why bad things happen in this world? Why would God let us suffer? The answer I received was that God basically gave us this world to do what we will. After the flood, He said that this world was ours and He would no longer interfere. I was okay with that for a while. Not blaming God when a loved one dies or a tragedy happens. Telling myself that we as humans are responsible for what we do to each other.
But then I started wondering.... if God doesn't interfere, then why do we pray? Why do we praise Jesus or God whenever something GOOD happens but are never supposed to blame God when something bad happens?
Please help me understand this. I don't want to have doubts in my heart about God. I want to believe, but I am just confused about what role God actually does play while we are here on Earth.
You have identified an important and vexing problem. It defies easy answers. If we thank God for good things, why don't we hold God responsible for bad things? Or conversely, if we conclude that bad things happen by random chance, not by the agency of God, then why do we not conclude that good things are random, too?
One part of the answer is that God is good, not evil. God is love, God is mercy, God is forgiveness, God is manna in the desert, God is hope. When we see love or goodness, we are seeing God. It makes sense, therefore, to thank God for goodness. When good things happen, we feel at least a bit of the awe that frightened Hebrews felt when they went out in the morning and found manna on the ground. How wonderful it is to live in a world where goodness exists.
When we pray, we pray for more of that goodness—for healing, for forgiveness, for compassion, for justice. Thus, we pray to God that God be God. That's why the earliest name for God was “Yahweh,” meaning something like “God will be who God will be.”
When bad things happen, we are tempted to blame God or to feel abandoned by God. That misreads what Scripture says about God. Scripture says that God is love, not that God is love and hate. God allows a world in which hatred can exist, but that doesn't make God the source of hatred.
Some “bad things” aren't evil; they're just hurtful or unfortunate for us. A tornado, for example, isn't an evil force, but a natural force that can hurt people. Whatever our view of God as creator, it is clear that God allowed a world in which some storms cause damage, some illnesses get out of control, some trees fall on houses, some children playing in traffic get hurt. In my opinion, such things happen, and God's isn't to blame. Under different circumstances, that storm or falling tree would go unnoticed. Such circumstances tend to be random. That's just the way it is. God will be found in the aftermath, as God works in the hearts of people to provide care to victims. God's goodness inspires human goodness.
As for thanking God when circumstances work in our favor, I don't see that as giving God credit for being in control. I think we are just expressing relief and gratitude.
(Return to Top)
Is
Christianity the highest followed religion in the world?
According
to religioustolerance.org,
the three largest world religions are:
Christianity:
2,039 million (32% of world population)
Islam 1,226 million (19% of world population)
Hinduism 828 million (13% of world population)
I
am beginning to question the teachings of my faith because
of advances in technology. Why are we not allowed to use stem
cells and grow organs to save people? Surely we have been
given this knowledge by God to use wisely. It isn't "playing
God," because we have been doing that for centuries by
creating medicines to heal us.
As
I understand it, those who oppose stem cell research are concerned
with any human effort to interfere with the reproductive process.
Many of them also oppose abortion and birth control.
That
opposition doesn't represent “Christianity's teaching”
on the subject. It is one point of view. Others believe that
science and humanity's God-given gifts of intelligence and
curiosity make it possible for us to enhance human life and
to remove some causes of suffering. As you point out, in the
development of medicine, such enhancements are good and worthy.
I
encourage you to do further study and to arrive at your own
personal views. As you proceed, please realize that there
is no “official” Christian view on these subjects.
Faithful Christians hold many different views.
(Return to Top)
I
have difficulty imaging God as a man. It is tough when God
is referred to as "He." I like the name “Divine
Spirit.” Do you know of any images of God that would
fit the name "Divine Spirit"?
The
Old Testament contains both male and female images for God.
The male (Father, king) are predominant, which isn't surprising
in a patriarchal culture, but the Wisdom literature refers
to God in female imagery. The concept of Spirit is also present,
though more so in the New Testament after the Day of Pentecost.
The feeling of Spirit seems neither male nor female.
Most
intriguing is the odd phrasing of Genesis 1.26: “Then
God said, 'Let us make man in our image, according to our
likeness.'” That usually is taken to be a lingering
remnant of the polytheism that preceded the wilderness wandering
and the commandment from Sinai to worship just “one
God.” The plural in Genesis 1.26 could also be a pre-Biblical
awareness of God as combining male and female, and thus the
creation of “man” in two forms, namely, male and
female. By that awareness, it took both male and female to
express the nature of God.
The point isn't that God is male or female, or that a less
masculine name might be attainable. The point is that God
is personal, having will, feelings, responsiveness and, most
critical for us as Christians, a desire to connect with humanity
in as intimate a way as possible, to the point of taking human
flesh.
(Return to Top)
What
is the Logos/Word that "became flesh and dwelt among
us as Jesus"? The wording in John's gospel suggests that,
while Jesus was [a manifestation of?] the Word, the Word is
not only the human Jesus. Can we see the Word as an aspect
of God? If so, what aspect... wisdom? conscience? love? I
appreciate that there are no right or wrong answers to this
kind of question, but nevertheless I'd very much welcome your
thoughts.
All
four gospels, indeed the entire early Christian community,
wrestled with the question of who Jesus was. Was he fully
human, fully divine, a man chosen by God to be Messiah, a
man chosen before birth, or somehow an eternal being who became
man?
Each
gospel answered the question somewhat differently. Other answers
were contained in writings that were used by the early Church,
such as the Gospel of Thomas, but not passed down to us. By
the 4th Century, the Church felt it necessary to end the debate
in the form of an authoritative creed drafted at the Council
of Nicaea, which we know as the Nicene Creed.
John's
unusual beginning to his gospel—modeled overtly on the
creation story in Genesis 1—seemed intended to make
several points:
-
The
Christ-event was, as John saw it, a new act of creation,
every bit as central as the original.
-
God
was a speaker of word, who could speak creation into being.
The figure Logos (Word) was an essential dimension of God's
being, the very expression of God's will to create.
-
Jesus
was at the beginning with God and therefore was a co-creator
with God.
-
What
became flesh, then, was not an unusually good man, a new
prophet perhaps, but the very essence of God. To look at
Jesus was to see the Father.
-
By
interweaving the Logos theme with words putting John the
Baptist in his place (not the light, but testimony to the
light), the Fourth Evangelist said that Jesus was eternal
and the Baptist was not.
-
When
you take into account the structure of John's Gospel, which
builds to the middle and has an ending that parallels the
beginning, a further meaning emerges, namely, that Jesus
can be known through the further words that would be said
about him. The Gospel (in its original ending) says, “These
[words] are written so that you may come to believe that
Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.” The Word causes
words to be spoken, and those words empower belief. How
this works is shown in the very center of the Gospel, the
9th chapter, where the parents of a man healed by Jesus
says to the man's accusers, “Ask him [their son];
he is of age. He will speak for himself.” Christian
discipleship, therefore, means hearing words about the Word
and then speaking words oneself.
(Return
to Top)
How
much is God willing to forgive? I have made mistake after
mistake. One moment, I am confident about God, the next I
feel he has abandoned me. I am willing to help and have been
helping friends, even at the expense of my time, effort, money
and opportunities. However, when I am alone, I am sad and
lost. No one is there for me. Is God there? Why did God leave
me alone when I needed help? Where is God anyway?
God's
forgiveness has no boundaries. Our mistakes can leave us feeling
alienated from God, but they don't turn God against us. In
the same way, many factors can cause us to feel alone, but
we can be assured that God's desire is for us to be in community
with others. “Let them be one,” said Jesus. And,
“Love one another.”
I
urge you to find a faith community, or to enter more deeply
into the church you have. One reason churches exist is to
provide community and to help members to give and to receive
God's love. That isn't always easy, for we can get in our
own way, and others can let us down. But in the end, a healthy
faith community, led by a wise and healthy pastor, can help
you to step out of your aloneness and into the joy of Christian
fellowship.
Where
is God? “With us,” says Scripture. In the midst
of us.
(Return
to Top)
I
am somewhat confused as to why J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter
books are considered wrong by several churches, yet C.S. Lewis's
Chronicles of Narnia series are reviewed as good
and right. Both deal with the subject of wizards and witches,
the supernatural and magic. True, the Harry Potter
books are a bit darker, but still deal with good overcoming
bad and trying to do the right thing. Have I done something
wrong by allowing these books to be read by my children?
I
suspect that if Lewis's books were published today, they would
fall under the same dim assessment and for the same reasons,
namely, that they offer a fanciful and non-Biblical slant
on life. The larger question, it seems to me, is whether fiction
should be judged negatively because it fails to toe certain
doctrinal lines.
Frankly,
it would be a dull world if everything had to be literal,
non-fanciful and in keeping with the Bible. Even Scripture
has its fancies and allegories. Our minds benefit from many
ways of seeing, from historical figures to wizards, and God
is known in many ways, too.
So,
in my opinion, you have done your children no harm by allowing
them to read Rowling and Lewis. Especially if reading those
books gave them respite from television and its soul-depleting
ads.
(Return
to Top)
Why
do all Christians have to believe in the Trinity? I just can't
understand how Jesus could have been God, especially as Jesus
prayed often for guidance.
Belief
in a Trinitarian conception of God developed over time, as
the early Christians wrestled with some important questions,
such as their relationship to Judaism, the extent to which
Jesus was human (or merely seemed human), to what extent he
suffered (or merely seemed to suffer), and the place of the
Holy Spirit.
You
can imagine the underlying questions... Had he actually suffered
on the cross? Had he actually died? Had he, therefore, actually
risen from the dead? Did the Holy Spirit precede or follow
Jesus? What was the standing of Spirit-related gifts, such
as speaking in tongues?
In
order to answer such questions, the early Church looked at
the monotheism of the Old Covenant and saw God doing something
new in Jesus. Their way of describing that newness was to
say that God (the Father) had created all things and formed
the nation Israel, but now a further expression of God came
into being (God with us, or Jesus the Son), and then after
Jesus' brief ministry, God sent the Spirit to empower the
disciples to proclaim the Gospel.
The
relationship between Jesus and God (the Father) was described
in several ways. The Gospel of John places Jesus (Word) at
the very beginning of creation. Luke and Matthew see God (the
Father) involved in the birth of Jesus. Mark sees Jesus coming
from normal human stock and then discovering his Messianic
identity in the course of his ministry. All four describe
the Son as praying to the Father, which seems like a normal
analogy from human life.
Like
all doctrines, the Trinitarian formula can sound too neat
and rigid. The Trinity attempts to discern the core of a mystery,
namely, how a specific figure in human history is related
to the eternal being of God. Finding the Trinity difficult
to grasp seems normal. I urge you to keep on exploring, so
that you can understand why the Gospels believe we can have
life in the Name of Jesus, and why, as Jesus put it, when
we see him, we see the Father.
(Return
to Top)
|
|
