4 Ways Christmas is Unchristian (and Ideas for Rebuilding It)

I hate Christmas.

There, I said it.

Now that that's out of the way, let me explain: at no other time during the year are people so consumed with materialism, so ill-content, and so intense about making sure everything is perfect. I would contend that at no other time during the year are people so far away from the way of living Jesus talked about (namely in loving God and people). The Christmas season, at least as it is practiced in the U.S., is radically unchristian, especially when compared to other holidays in the American social calendar.

Christmas has so much potential. People do seem to be more jolly at times during the Christmas season; it's just that our practice is so lame. I don't want my kids to grow up with a yearly practice of greed, materialism, and discontent. So this year, we're reworking how our family is practicing Christmas. I'd like Christmas to not undo what we're teaching our boys about following Jesus. I'd like to rebuild our Christmas. If we'd like to actually have a Christmas season that reflects, I don't know, the values and teachings of Jesus, we need to do a bit of borrowing from a few other holidays:

Christmas Needs to Be as Content as Thanksgiving
Thanksgiving is the best American holiday for practicing contentment. There is no other holiday where, if all goes well, the agenda consists of 1) eating a great meal and 2) being together. There is no worry about the future, no thought of work troubles or gifts. All there is to do is think about how lucky we are to be alive, to have the people in our lives that we do, and to be thankful. Many people actually say what they're thankful for out loud; others simply reflect internally; everyone I've talked to practices being grateful and content. If we're to redeem Christmas, we could handle a gallon of contentment with what we have and seconds and thirds of thankfulness.

How to Contentify Christmas: Throw out the Christmas tree concept and replace it with a Thankful-For tree. Decorate the tree with items or pictures of things and people we're thankful for.

Christmas Needs to Give Like Halloween
Halloween is my favorite holiday in that it most reflects the generosity teachings of Jesus. Think about it: neighbors freely give gifts of candy or various other goodies to perfect strangers, expecting nothing in return. My kids got equally excited about giving out candy to the kids that came to the door as they did about receiving candy, and for me that's a really big deal. It would be amazing if, at Christmas, my kids were as excited about giving away gifts as they were about receiving them. If we're going line up Christmas with the life and teachings of Jesus, we need to refocus it from getting everything we want to giving away things. Haven't we yet learned that it's better to give that to receive?
How to Givificate Christmas: Instead of loading up the tree with coveted toys, put gifts to give away under the Thankful-For tree. Put some thought into it. Give generously and without shame.

Christmas Needs to Hope Like New Year's Day
I'm definitely not one to make a New Year's resolution, namely because if I'm going to make a life change, I don't need a calendar date to tell me now's the time. However, there is something about the New Year celebration that gives a sense of hope, of new beginning. People really feel like they can change their lives. We can take the good stuff from the last year and leave behind the bad. We have a fresh start; even the calendar says so. I can't help but think about forgiveness on New Year's, about how mistakes of the past can be overcome, about how former enemies can now become friends. There is endless hope in starting over. Can we start over a bit more during the Christmas season?
How to Hope-infuse Christmas: You remember those gifts to give away under the Thankful-For tree? How about picking some enemies to give to? How about apologizing for your wrongdoings toward them, telling them you're starting over, and inviting them to do the same? Have you ever unenemied someone? It's life-changing.

Christmas Needs to Obsess on Love Like Valentines Day
Nothing so captures the teachings of Jesus like loving God and people. And while good ol' V-Day is generally about romantic love, there's not much else to this holiday, except maybe some chocolates (the Hallmark cards can go, in my opinion). Valentine's Day's got something right: thinking about others and figuring out how you can express love to them.
How to Loveinticate Christmas: The easiest fix for this one is to start and not stop. I'm not sure living a life of love can ever be a seasonal thing; it's either your practice or it isn't. As followers of Jesus, if we're going to infuse the Christmas season with love, it's going to need to be our daily practice. Talk about loving God by loving neighbors and enemies. Then do it. Everyday. Not because we're so great, but because we've been shown great love. It's really easy to share when you've been given a lot.

So that's the plan. This year we're rebuilding Christmas because we want the holiday season to be something we can believe in and really get into and practice. Just this morning my younger son informed me "we are re-doing the tree to be about what we are thankful for." It wasn't a question. I didn't even know he knew we were rethinking our practice.

As I said before, Christmas in the U.S. has a lot of potential, and it's not all bad. But the way we practice it as a society has almost nothing to do with the person for which it is named. Perhaps that goes for the general practice of the faith as well. Why stop with rebuilding Christmas? Why not practice gratitude, generosity, hope, and love all year? Can you imagine the effect on Christianity?

*******

What ideas do you have for rebuilding Christmas? How does your family practice Christmas?

Does the current practice of Christmas need to be rebuilt? Does the current practice of Christianity?

What teachings of Jesus need to be incorporated into Christmas? How can we practice those teachings during the Christmas season?

Have I lost my mind? Is the current practice of Christmas a good reflection of Jesus? How does the Christmas season help you follow the way of Jesus?

Hopelessly Devoted to (Fill in the Blank)

In a recent article (a really, really recent article), James K. A. Smith challenges the notion that vast numbers of people are leaving "religion" (meaning a set of doctrinal beliefs) because they are getting smart enough that they simply get over the need for religion. This refuted idea comes from the book Faith No More by Phil Zuckerman.

Instead, Smith suggests a different definition for "religion"; namely, that instead of belief, "religion" implies worship, or the practice of giving devotion to something or someone. By this definition, I know very few non-religious people.

This definition reminds me of the difference between the English word "belief" and the Greek word for "faith." "Belief" simply means thinking something exists (like aliens). "I think aliens exist. I think they are hostile, and can read my thoughts." "Faith," though, means putting beliefs into action, as in wearing a tin-foil hat on your head because you think aliens exists, are hostile, and can read your thoughts. "Faith" is belief in action. Smith's article seems to push the word "religion" toward the "faith" definition rather than the "belief" one. Belief in action is a good definition for religion as well.

I work in a restaurant with other servers, managers, cooks, and cleaners, and I can tell you most assuredly that these are some of the most devoted and worshipful people I have ever met. Most of them are religiously devoted to money. They want a lot of it. They weep when they don't make enough of it. They celebrate together when they make a lot of it. They are always thinking about it, counting it, or trying to figure out how they can get the one extra dollar or two in tips.

Many of the same people are also devoted to sex. They evaluate particularly attractive people that come in. They report conquests to each other, relishing details. They think having it (or more of it) will make their lives fulfilled. They think about it a lot, and plan much of their lives around getting more of it or avoiding losing it.

Everyone I work with (and everyone I know, for that matter), is religiously devoted to something. Some are devoted to a particular style of eating; others are devoted to exercise; others are devoted to a political party or political activity; others are devoted to their job(s). It seems that Americans are some of the most religious people around.

What definition do you like best for religion: belief, worship/devotion, faith/belief in action? Which definition do you use in conversation?

What objects, activities, or ideas are people devoted to? Would it be fair to say they are religiously devoted to them? Would it be fair to say that it is their religion?

Are people's primary devotions easy to see? How are our devotions most evident?

When is a Christian Not a Christian?

I came across an article written by a fellow blogger that asked the question, "What Does a Christian Have to Believe to be a Christian?" I was intrigued by the topic, so I clicked on the article. I began reading it, and then something came up, and I closed the article, never to find it again. Tear. (Always bookmark good articles.)

However, this topic is one I think about a lot, especially recently. What is the dividing line where, if you stop believing [INSERT DOCTRINE OF CHOICE], you cease to be a Christian and become something else (an Atheist, an Agnostic, a Philosopher, a Fill-in-the-Blankist)?

What is the marker of a Christian?

I have this question, not just because I like to think about theoretical (im)possibilities, but because I have a number of friends who identify as Christian, but who hold a number of differing doctrinal stances. I have friends who adhere to infant baptism by sprinkling, and friends who hold to adult(ish) baptism by immersion; friends who are Calvinist, and others who are Armenian; friends who believe in a fallen-angel devil, and others who do not; friends who believe the Bible is inspired, others who believe it is inerrant, and others who believe it is neither; friends who do not believe Jesus was God in flesh, and others who do; friends who do not believe in the triune nature of God, and others who do; friends who know evolution is a scientific fact, and others who know God created the world in six days by speaking; friends who think Paul was a bit crazy, and others who believe his words are as important as Jesus'; friends who believe in universal reconciliation, and others who believe in eternal damnation for most of humanity; friends who meet in designated buildings, others who meet in venues, others who meet in homes, and still others who have no formal meetings; friends who believe all homosexuality is sin and despised by God, and others who believe differently. And all of these friends identify as Christians. So, if there's a line, where is it? Which of these friends is really a Christian, and which is not?

This raises the question: are doctrines anything more than human attempts at creating "in" and "out" categories?

You already know of my preference to identify myself as a follower of Jesus rather than a Christian (for a number of reasons). This preference also eliminates the issue of doctrinal correctness, of having a dividing line between who's in and who's out. But maybe that's not quite right; maybe it just makes the dividing line so apparent that there's no longer an argument. A person is either a follower of Jesus or they aren't.

So what is a follower of Jesus?

People who follow the teachings of the Buddha often don't call themselves Buddhists; rather, they say they follow the Buddha, or follow the teachings of the Buddha. Such a person learns what the Buddha taught, and then models their life and philosophy after those teachings - they seek to live them out. So, a follower of Jesus learns what Jesus taught, and then models their life and philosophy after those teachings - they seek to live them out.

Which raises the questions: is following Jesus a philosophy? Is Christianity a philosophy? If the answer is different for the two, what is the difference between following Jesus and being a Christian?

Jesus had a number of teachings on a variety of subjects. Learning them and living them can take a bit of time. Perhaps Jesus' most important teachings, though, are to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself. He says the sum of the law of God is to love.

Love, then, seems to be the marker of a follower of Jesus.

Which brings me back to my first question: what is the marker of a Christian?

What do you think?

1) What is the marker of a Christian?

2) What is the point of doctrines?

3) What is a follower of Jesus?

4) Is following Jesus a philosophy? Is Christianity a philosophy? If one and not the other, what is the difference?

5) Is love the defining marker of a follower of Jesus? If not, what is?

Check out Creating a New Corporate Practice Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 6.

The Bible Really IS Hard to Read

Jaime the Very Worst Missionary addresses the topic of Bible reading in a recent blog post. She even goes so far as to say the Bible is weird. I'd say that's an understatement.

Does anybody still think that the Bible is easy to read? Jamie's advice in the article points to exactly how difficult the process of Bible reading can be. She advises a beginner to the Bible to 1) don't start at the beginning, 2) read it with other people, and 3) give it time. These three tips illuminate a view of the Bible that Jamie has and that I share:

1) Don't Start at the Beginning
This advice points out that the Bible is not like other books (did that even need to be said?). With most books, starting at the beginning is often the only way it will make sense. It is the primary scripture of two of the world's great faith traditions (well, parts of it anyway). It is written about and during vastly different periods of human history, in different cultures, and in different languages (many people still don't know that the texts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, and translated into your language of choice). Said book is actually a collection of different books across culture, time, and space, with differing genres and messages in their books. So, in these ways, the Bible is not like other books, and starting at the beginning might very well get you as lost as Jaime was when she started. All of these little bits of information coalesce into a screaming declaration that the Bible is not written to you, 21st Century Human. We may (eventually) learn and glean from it, but it isn't a book God wrote to you to answer all of your questions. Often, it raises many more questions than it answers.

2) Read It with Other People
This bit of advice struck me as telling for a number of reasons. First, it illuminates the idea that, if you read the Bible alone, you could end up with any number of ideas about God. These ideas may conflict with each other, and you can bet a quarter they will often conflict with the ideas purported by INSERT NAME OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HERE. From the Bible, we can walk away with the ideas that God wants us to murder our enemies (men, women, children, donkeys, cattle...and don't forget to burn all of their stuff) and also that we should, when slapped, turn the other cheek; we can get the idea that the Way of Jesus is to love and forgive our enemies (I'm pretty sure he said that somewhere in there), but also that God will NOT love and forgive his enemies, preferring to torture them for all eternity in fire and darkness (must be some strange fire). Apparently, God hasn't heard of Jesus, or maybe Jesus was wrong - these are ideas a person can get just from reading this one not-so-little book-of-books.

Back to the "Read It with Other People" advice. This, I suppose, is to help keep a person from getting the crazy ideas I spouted above; you know, to keep them "on the right track." However, this "right track" of communal reading is also used to indoctrinate participants in a denomination's doctrinal stance. And if we just tell people to read the Bible on their own, they may punch holes in our ideas/beliefs. And we can't have that.

3) Give It Time
This last bit of advice also clearly illustrates the difficult task of reading the Bible. With advice like, "marinade in it" and "give it time," you can be sure that a clear meaning and application to the 21st century life is not apparent on the surface level of most of the Biblical text. It reminds me of the Zen story of Gutei's Finger.

So what is the point of all of this? The Bible is difficult to read and understand. Jamie's right; this advice can help make sense of the Biblical text. But then that raises the question: if we need others to help us understand the text, is the text really our authority? Can a book so far removed from us in culture, time, language, and space really be said to be our authority when, to understand it, we rely on the words of others?

What advice would you give to someone starting to read the Bible for the first time?

What benefit does communal reading of the Bible hold? What dangers does it present?

Is the Bible really the source of authority for the Christian who can't really understand it without other outside authority?

Interview with Frank Viola

When I first felt undeniably compelled to leave paid professional ministry and congregational Christianity as I knew it, I thought I was the only one. After the transition, I discovered that there are a growing number of people leaving the prevailing model of Christian religion. Some of these had even done so decades ago, and so have much more experience and helpful advice for those just joining the conversation.

One such major voice is author and speaker Frank Viola. Frank is the author of a number of books, including the explosive Pagan Christianity, the constructive Reimagining Church, his self-described most important work The Jesus Manifesto, and most recently Epic Jesus. His work regarding non-traditional Christian congregations and communities is broad and helpful for those with questions from inside institutional Christian congregations as well as for those emerging from such congregations and reevaluating their faith and practice as followers of Jesus.

I had the pleasure of interviewing Frank about some topics that will benefit those practicing congregational Christianity and those looking to follow Jesus outside congregational forms:

Steve: People often define the word "religion" in a number of ways. How do you define religion?

Frank: Like “missional” and “organic church,” the word “religion” is a clay word, being molded and shaped to mean dramatically different things.

In the 17^th and 18^th centuries, “religion” in the Christian context meant living by the Holy Spirit and being Christlike. (You can find this usage in the King James Version of the Bible, for instance. And in the writings of frontier revivalists like Charles Finney.)

Today, “religion” commonly has a very different meaning. One that is contra biblical Christianity.

I like Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s definition in his book Ethics. Bonhoeffer didn’t define religion as belief in God or one’s practices of prayer or worship. To Bonhoeffer, religion is a phenomenon that is characterized by three things:

1. Thinking in terms of two spheres. Religion accepts the division of life into a spiritual sphere and a secular sphere.
2. Metaphysics. Religion offers God as a hypothesis that is necessary if one is to explain the world. (Religion = a worldview.)
3. Inwardness. Religion provides a set of sentiments necessary for the living of a meaningful life.

Someone once said that religion is humanity's attempt to reach God; Christianity is God's attempt to reach humans.

In Jesus Manifesto, Leonard Sweet and I delineate what we see as the major differences between religion and Jesus Christ, between eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (religion) and the Tree of Life (Christ).

Steve: Imagine a person who has no knowledge or understanding of non-traditional Christian congregations. What explanation would you give this person as to the reason people are moving from traditional congregations to non-traditional forms? Why are so many making this transition?

Frank: My ReChurch Series is dedicated to such people, as well as to Christians who are disenchanted with the traditional form of church.

As I survey the Christian landscape today, there are three key reasons for the present revolution whereby countless Christians are transitioning from institutional forms of church to more Christ-centered, organic forms.

1. Many Christians want a deeper, more “real” relationship to Jesus Christ, and they want more authentic relationships with other believers. Their spiritual instincts are craving for face-to-face community centered on knowing, loving, following, and expressing Christ. In their experience (by their own admission), the institutional forms of church that they know aren’t meeting this spiritual craving.
2. Many Christians have become bored with church services. To their minds, the typical church service relegates them as spectators who watch a performance. They can’t function or participate (except in the singing and throwing money in an offering plate). There are tired of being religious consumers who pay religious specialists to do the ministry. Deep within their hearts, they know that there must be more to Jesus Christ and His church. 
3. Many Christians are reexamining the Scriptures in their historical, chronological context. As such, they are rediscovering what Jesus and the apostles taught about the church, and they are realizing the sharp distinctions between what the New Testament teaches versus what’s been motivated and fueled by human traditions that “violate the Word of God” (to quote Jesus).

Of course, other Christians are quite content with the traditional form of church. Yet millions are not. And for that reason, one million adult Christians leave the institutional church every year. And 1,700 pastors leave the clergy system each month in the USA.

Not long ago, Reggie McNeal said that “a growing number of people are leaving the institutional church for a new reason. They are not leaving because they have lost faith. They are leaving to preserve their faith.” This reflects the sentiments of many followers of Jesus today.

Steve: Jesus said he would build his Church. How do we know the current prevailing institutional model is not what he had in mind?

Frank: I think it could be safe to say that what Jesus had in mind would not violate His teachings nor the teachings of the apostles whom He trained and sent out to carry His message.

We must realize that God often permits and uses that which isn’t according to His perfect will. Thus His use of a thing doesn’t equate His approval. What God permits and what He longs to see on this earth are often two very different things. The history of Israel is a testament to this fact.

I’ve addressed your question in more detail in a blog post entitled Why I Love the Church. The metaphor used in that piece unpacks what I’ve stated above.

Incidentally, the main thrust of my ministry is not about church structure or practice. (I’ve only written a few books on that theme.)

My main ministry is on what A.W. Tozer called “the deeper Christian life” . . . which emphasizes God’s grand mission, the epic greatness of Jesus Christ, and how to live by the indwelling life of Christ. These themes have been sorely neglected today. My books Epic Jesus (just released), From Eternity to Here, Revise Us Again, and Jesus Manifesto go into these themes in detail.

Steve: Lots of people leaving institutional congregations are hungry for community, but often find find themselves alone, since they "are being pulled loose from a 'works' mentality, liberated from a guilt complex, and set free from a sense of religious duty." What advice would you have for those longing for community, but not having it?

Frank: Because this is such a needed issue, I’ve written a book that gives on-the-ground, practical advice to such people. It’s called Finding Organic Church. It took me 20 years to write.

The book not only explores how such communities can be effectively started and maintained, but also how people can go about finding and/or starting them.

Three practical things that people can implement right away:

·         Check out those websites that are designed for connecting people. Two are www.housechurchresource.org – www.organicchurchtoday.com – the audience for the latter is diverse, but you might find some people with like vision and mind.

·         Start an in-person book discussion group and advertise on Meet Up, the local newspaper, the Internet, and meet weekly to discuss a book that explores Christian community. There are many such books on my 100 Best Christian Books Ever Written list to choose form that I’d recommend. See the “Church Life” section.

·         Attend an organic missional church conference and meet others who are looking for Christian community that’s Christ-centered. I’ve personally seen many new groups get started this way and wonderful relationships fostered. Here’s an e-list you can get on to be notified about such events.

Finding Organic Church has much more along this line.

Steve: What is the message of Jesus? What is the good news of the Kingdom?

Frank: In my newest book, Epic Jesus, I explore the three main views of the kingdom in contrast to what I believe Jesus meant by the term. The kingdom is the same as what Paul calls the eternal purpose in Ephesians and Romans. And it is the grand narrative of the entire Bible.

From the beginning, even before humans fell, God the Father has wanted a Bride for His Son, a House for Himself, a Body for His Son, and a Family for Himself. The Spirit is the One who makes them all a practical reality. These four aspects of the eternal purpose can be traced from Genesis to Revelation consistently. (I trace them all in From Eternity to Here.)

The kingdom of God is bound up with all of these elements. Jesus Christ is the King. He is Life—Divine, Eternal, Uncreated Life. The kingdom of God is the new creation that has its source in the Life of Christ. (One overlooked fact is that Jesus spoke about Life as much as He did about the kingdom.)

The kingdom is the society that lives by Divine Life . . . that lives by Christ . . . that becomes a counterpart, a family, a visible expression, and a habitation for God, and it is inseparable from Jesus Himself. Epic Jesus unfolds these thoughts in more detail.

--

FRANK VIOLA is the author of numerous Christian books, including the newly released REVISE US AGAIN, the bestselling FROM ETERNITY TO HERE, and PAGAN CHRISTIANITY, JESUS MANIFESTO, REIMAGINING CHURCH. His website contains a vast array of free articles, podcasts, interviews, and discussion guides: www.ptmin.org, and his blog, BEYOND EVANGELICAL, is one of the most popular in Christian circles today: www.frankviola.org

How My View on Homosexual Rights Changed

Having left paid, professional Christian ministry, I have been afforded the opportunity to reexamine my beliefs without fear of losing my job or becoming a social outcast among my peers (I've already accomplished both). In light of such freedom, one of the issues that I reevaluated was homosexuality, especially as it pertains to following Jesus. My examination of the issue resulted in three big steps that ultimately made up my mind regarding the political issue of marriage rights and equality. Here they are for your perusal:

1) Exploring the Topic Biblically

My first step was to examine what the Bible has to say regarding homosexuality. I was pretty well-versed on the conservative Evangelical stance, so I decided to see if the "other" side had anything worthwhile or convincing to say. My search lead me to this website, which gives a thorough, detailed comparison of the conservative view and the liberal view of homosexuality in the Bible. Of particular interest where the hot passages in Genesis 19 (Sodom and Gomorrah), Leviticus 18:22, and Romans 1:26-27. I found that the liberal view had some convincing arguments, but I wasn't convinced they where completely right. Thinking judiciously, I decided that there was "reasonable doubt" as to what exactly the Bible means when it discusses homosexuality. This was a huge step for me, and it lead to a religiously neutral stance regarding homosexuality.

2) Determining to Follow Jesus

Leaving paid ministry and organized Christianity gave me the opportunity to take a serious look at the person I was claiming to follow. Seeing the Bible as neutral regarding homosexuality, I hoped the records of Jesus in the gospels might shed some light on the issue. They did, not because he says anything about homosexuality, but because he doesn't. That might not sound important to you, but it says volumes to me. Instead, Jesus talked about loving your neighbor, and loving your enemy, and people knowing we're really his followers by our love for one another. Jesus' radical inclusion and call to love has shaped my view of many topics and people, homosexuals included.

3) The Philosophy of Personhood, or How Science Fiction Helped Me Think Rationally
I'm a nerd; I admit it freely. I love watching Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, and District 9, and playing video games like Mass Effect. Full of humans, aliens, humans-becoming-aliens, androids, Cylons, and even complex computer programs, many of the nerdy episodes I reveled in also discuss the rights of non-human, sentient beings. So you can imagine my glee when I found this article, which takes those same thoughts from those science fiction shows and games and applies them to the issue of marital equality. Likewise, a friend posted this slightly more sarcastic and biting article that also uses personhood as the basis of its argument. Applying my rationale about personhood to the political realm has helped once before, and applying it to this debate brings even more clarity.

The lack of clarity on the meaning of key Biblical texts, the example of Jesus and his message, and understanding and applying the concept of personhood led to a reversal of my previous, more conservative stance. For me, this is a moral issue, but in a different way than it used to be - we must advocate the equal rights of all people. We will be more like Jesus when we do, not less.

Have you explored the meaning of the passages in the Bible regarding homosexuality? What is your conclusion?

What would Jesus say or do regarding the current political debate about marriage rights?

Does personhood illuminate this issue? Why or why not? What knowledge or information shapes the debate most for you?

What is the "Good News"?

In a previous post, we examined the attributes of the kingdom of God as recorded in the gospel accounts. What we didn't discern, however, is exactly what the good news of the kingdom of God is. The confusing part is, exactly what the "good news" of the kingdom of God is is never recorded.  Maybe that goes along with Jesus' desire that the message of the kingdom of God be "a mystery," something "revealed in parables."

Can we take the attributes, though, and see what fits? What would be such good news that religious leaders would hate it and outcasts would love it? This has always been a fascination of mine - what made Jesus so compelling to prostitutes and "sinners" and so despised by religious leaders? I knew that if religious leaders and "sinners" came to my congregation, the religious leaders would feel right at home and the "sinners" would not. What, then, did Jesus do or say to hack off the one and endear the other? Frankly, we don't know for sure, but  I think we can get a pretty clear idea from Jesus' recorded descriptions of the kingdom of God.

The kingdom of God is described thusly:
Associated with Faith
Associated with Poor/Not Associated with Wealth
Associated with Persecuted
Associated with Two Greatest Commandments
Belongs to Children/Child-Like
Close
Contains Prophets
Doing Rather than Saying
Expected
Has Ranks
Hidden/Found
Highly Valued
A Mystery/Revealed in Parables
Open to All
Parallel with Non-Kingdom
People Can Hinder Others Entering
Preached Since John/Surrounded by Violence
Present Now/Banishing Evil
Radical Forgiveness/Generosity
Requires Preparation
Requires Rebirth to See
Reversal of Order
Sacrifice
Something Spoken of
Somewhere/when Else
Spans Physical and Spiritual Realities
Starts Small and Gets Big

From these descriptions, I can definitely throw out the "Jesus died for your sins" idea that gets purported to be the good news. Which descriptions seem to eliminate this option for you, if any? If the theory of substitutionary atonement is not the good news Jesus spoke of, what are we left with? What is the good news? What let outcasts in and pissed insiders off?

I have a theory; let me know what you think. I think, from these attributes listed above and from the records of reactions of the people Jesus encountered (disciples, outsiders, religious elite), that Jesus' message, the good news, is a simple concept that can be spoken many ways:

God loves you.

You can approach God directly.

The only thing keeping you from God is you.

The gods aren't angry.

You are free from religious obligation.

There is nothing you need to do to be right with God.

You are good.

This is radical. This is cause for celebration. This is a reason for "sinners" to flock and religious people to freak.

Does this concept fit with the descriptions listed above? Where might it not?

Why might Jesus not have said this this plainly?

If a person believed this (or began to believe it), what would it change? How would their view of the world be shaped?

How would such a person interact with others? How would they not act?

Check out Creating a New Corporate Practice Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 5, and Part 6.

Top 10 Attributes of the Kingdom of God (According to the Gospel Accounts)

It seems to me that, more than anything else, Jesus' message was "the kingdom of God." What, exactly, this kingdom is, though, he never clearly explained. Instead, Jesus' message of the kingdom is revealed in parables (Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11, Luke 8:10). So, if we are really going to be followers of Jesus, we must understand his primary message, the kingdom of God.

In an effort to wrap my mind around Jesus' message of the kingdom, I've looked at all of the mentions in the four gospel accounts. While some references are repeated in other gospels and some talk about more than one attribute of the kingdom, I have left no references out in an attempt to get a clear, complete picture of the message of the kingdom of God.

So, without further ado, here are the Top 10 attributes of the kingdom of God:

#10 - It's About Doing Rather than Saying (Matthew 7:21, Matthew 21:31, Matthew 21:43)
It seems that merely claiming to follow God is not enough; you actually must follow God to be a part of the kingdom.

#9 - It is a Mystery/Revealed in Parables (Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11, Mark 4:26, Luke 8:10)
Confused about the kingdom of God? Jesus planned it that way, then told stories to reveal it.

#8 - It is Highly Valued (Matthew 13:44, Matthew 13:45, Matthew 13:52, Mark 9:47)
The kingdom of God is worth more than body parts, in case you were wondering.

#7 - It Has Ranks (Matthew 5:19, Matthew 11:11, Matthew 18:1, Luke 7:28)
You can be low-ranking or high-ranking based on your actions and child-likeness, but either way you're greater than John.

#6 - It Starts Small and Gets Big (Matthew 13:31, Matthew 13:33, Mark 4:30, Luke 13:18, Luke 13:20)
It's like a mustard see that grows, or yeast that rises; it gets bigger and spreads out.

#5 - It Belongs to Children/Child-Like (Matthew 18:1, Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, Mark 10:15, Luke 18:16)
Children seem to be in by default, and those that accept the kingdom "like a child" are in, too.

#4 - It is Something Spoken of (Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Luke 4:43, Luke 8:1, Luke 9:2, Luke 9:11, Luke 9:60)
You actually can talk about it. That's good to know, since that's what we're doing.

#3 - It is Associated with Poor/Not Associated with Wealth (Matthew 5:3, Matthew 19:23, Matthew 22:2, Mark 10:23-25, Luke 6:20, Luke 14:15, Luke 18:24)
Now we're getting serious. It seems wealth and the kingdom are at odds.

#2 - It is a Reversal of Order (Matthew 18:1, Matthew 18:23, Matthew 20:1, Matthew 21:31, Matthew 22:2, Mark 10:15, Luke 14:15, Luke 18:17)
Those who seem to be in may not be, and those irritating outsiders? They're most likely in.

And finally, the most frequent description of the kingdom of God according to Jesus as recorded in the gospels of the canon:

#1 - It is Close (Matthew 3:2, Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Mark 1:15, Mark 9:1, Mark 12:34, Luke 9:27, Luke 10:9, Luke 21:31)

So, to recap, the kingdom of God is close. It is for the small, the poor, the outsider. It is of great value, and if you're interested in it, you better be willing to look for it, to decode a mystery.

There are also some interesting seeming-paradoxes. For instance, the kingdom is Close (Matthew 3:2, Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Mark 1:15, Mark 9:1, Mark 12:34, Luke 9:27, Luke 10:9, Luke 21:31), Somewhere/when Else (Mark 14:25, Luke 22:16), and also Present Now (Matthew 12:28, Luke 11:20, Luke 17:20) and still being Expected (Mark 15:43, Luke 19:11, Luke 23:51); it is Open to All (Matthew 22:2, Matthew 23:13), but People Can Hinder Others Entering (Matthew 23:13), and Requires Preparation (Matthew 22:2, Matthew 25:1), Rebirth (John 3:3), and maybe Sacrifice (Matthew 19:12, Luke 18:29).

So what do you think the kingdom of God is?

Where do our ideas about Jesus' central message come from?

How can we live out such a foreign kingdom?

Check out Creating a New Corporate Practice Part 1, Part 2, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6.

*******

For those of you that care, here are the attributes of the kingdom of God as recorded in the synoptic gospels and John (by the way, John says almost nothing about the kingdom):
Associated with Faith (1)
Matthew 8:11
Associated with Poor/Not Associated with Wealth (7)
Matthew 5:3, Matthew 19:23, Matthew 22:2, Mark 10:23-25, Luke 6:20, Luke 14:15, Luke 18:24
Associated with Persecuted (1)
Matthew 5:10
Associated with Two Greatest Commandments (1)
Mark 12:34
Belongs to Children/Child-Like (5)
Matthew 18:1, Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, Mark 10:15, Luke 18:16
Close (9)
Matthew 3:2, Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Mark 1:15, Mark 9:1, Mark 12:34, Luke 9:27, Luke 10:9, Luke 21:31
Contains Prophets (1)
Luke 13:28
Doing Rather than Saying (3)
Matthew 7:21, Matthew 21:31, Matthew 21:43
Expected (3)
Mark 15:43, Luke 19:11, Luke 23:51
Has Ranks (4)
Matthew 5:19, Matthew 11:11, Matthew 18:1, Luke 7:28
Hidden/Found (3)
Matthew 13:33, Matthew 13:44, Matthew 13:45
Highly Valued (4)
Matthew 13:44, Matthew 13:45, Matthew 13:52, Mark 9:47
A Mystery/Revealed in Parables (4)
Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11, Mark 4:26, Luke 8:10
Open to All (2)
Matthew 22:2, Matthew 23:13
Parallel with Non-Kingdom (2)
Matthew 13:24, Matthew 13:47
People Can Hinder Others Entering (1)
Matthew 23:13
Preached Since John/Surrounded by Violence (1)
Luke 16:16
Present Now/Banishing Evil (3)
Matthew 12:28, Luke 11:20, Luke 17:20
Radical Forgiveness/Generosity (2)
Matthew 18:23, Matthew 20:1
Requires Preparation (2)
Matthew 22:2, Matthew 25:1
Requires Rebirth to See (1)
John 3:3
Reversal of Order (8)
Matthew 18:1, Matthew 18:23, Matthew 20:1, Matthew 21:31, Matthew 22:2, Mark 10:15, Luke 14:15, Luke 18:17
Sacrifice (2)
Matthew 19:12, Luke 18:29
Something Spoken of (7)
Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Luke 4:43, Luke 8:1, Luke 9:2, Luke 9:11, Luke 9:60
Somewhere/when Else (2)
Mark 14:25, Luke 22:16
Spans Physical and Spiritual Realities (1)
Matthew 16:19
Starts Small and Gets Big (5)
Matthew 13:31, Matthew 13:33, Mark 4:30, Luke 13:18, Luke 13:20

Marriage Rights and Christianity

The issue of marriage rights for all humans is an often talked about, rarely agreed upon debate among Christians. This article strongly states Christians should give up the legal battle. I am for marriage rights and equality for all people for the following reasons:

1) All People Are Equal Before the Law in Other Ways
Gay people and straight people are both allowed to own property, create wills, drive cars, and sign legally binding documents. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with legal rights and responsibilities except regarding legal marriage. Why is this the case?

2) There Are Two "Marriages" in the United States: Legal and Religious
In order for people to marry legally, a representative of the state or of a religious institution who is registered with the state must fill out the appropriate legal document. This document is then filed with the state, and the state then recognizes the legal marriage of the two individuals (in some states, the married couple need not even sign the legal document, just their witnesses). In order for people to marry religiously, a religious official conducts a ceremony in keeping with his or her tradition. People can be legally married but not religiously married (as in signing at the courthouse), religiously married but not legally married (having a religious ceremony/covenant without filing with the state), or religiously and legally married (I've performed several of these, fulfilling the legal and religious role). Why allow one right and not the other? On what basis is one denied and not the other?

3) The Separation Between Church and State is Valuable
You may even say this wouldn't be America without it. Americans typically value the ability to hold to their own religious beliefs. This is what enables freedom of worship, religious diversity, and public discussions such as this one. Why then, on this lone issue, do many Americans abandon their typical value and want the state to force their particular religious beliefs on a group that does not embrace them? If Baptists lobbied and demanded Catholics cease baptizing infants, there may be a bit of an uproar, and rightly so. Why then are some insisting a legal right be denied on religious grounds?

4) The "Homosexual Agenda" is Equality.
Of the homosexuals that I know, they all are seeking the same thing: legal equality. They are people who, in many ways, are just like me, with religious and spiritual beliefs, love of certain foods, preferences of music and comedy and toothpaste. They're people, and what they seek is to be treated as people.

It is for these reasons I advocate equal rights for all humans in the United States (and everywhere else, for that matter).

What do you think? Are all people equal? Are there really two marriages? Should we separate legal action from religious belief? What do you think, if anything, is the homosexual agenda?