Sharing Jesus: True Hollywood Stories

Well, not "Hollywood" per se, but Kansas City doesn't have any exciting true stories of intrigue and suspense: that is, until now!!

I want to depart from the theoretical rights and wrongs of Christianity and describe some of my experiences in real, true, gritty, raw format. Excited yet? I know I am.

To begin, I confess that I am a horrible, horrible coward when it comes to talking about Jesus with other people. This is partly because I don't want to be made fun of and partly because I don't like revealing my passions to anyone: musical, artistic, design, love, sports teams, or whatever. I like to play everything close to my chest and remain mysteriously (and coolly) aloof from friendship and any level of intimacy.

The result? I have very few friends and a phobia of intimacy on many levels.

Anyhow, I'm sure you're not reading this to hear me complain about my social problems like a tweeny-bopper girl at a giggly slumber party. On to the titular concerns (that is, relating to the title, not what you're thinking!).

As strange as it may sound, there is a lot of difference in trying to explain and persuade to Christianity someone who is a divorced 50-year-old man and a late-twenties philosophy major. The first wants short, simple answers that I have a hard time giving because I tend to get logorrhea ("diarrhea of the mouth") and over explain all the junk behind how people arrive at simple conclusions. This, however, is a great method for the latter guy.

My point is, it is difficult to adapt effective speaking methods to different kinds of people. At times, it frustrates me, because it means that I have to put more time and energy into things.

Or . . . maybe I should just pray about it more and let the Holy Spirit do his job.

Anyway, it's a lot more fun to talk about Jesus and it's pretty wild not having all the answers to the hard questions of life. I've found that if it's too easy, it's probably wrong, but oh well.

Can anyone out there relate to this? Did everybody follow what I just said?

Legos and Leviticus

Well, to be honest, this post does not have much to do with Leviticus, but laws from God in general, and I just liked the alliteration, so I stand by my title.

Going through Matthew in our church, I am struck (probably purposefully by the author) by the competing philosophies of the Pharisees and Jesus. (sarcastically: "NNNOOOOOOOOO, REEEEAAAALLLY?!?!!?!).

This difference is especially noticeable vis a vis Sabbath laws. In historical Judaism (specifically after the exile) there were three main pillars of religious practice that were strictly emphasized in order to maintain distinction between the people of God and the "goyim": the Gentiles. These were Sabbath, diet, and circumcision (all found in Leviticus, and the title is referenced!).

Thus, when Jesus engages the establishment on Sabbath laws, he is treading some mighty rough water (or possibly walking on it, I guess?). But he makes a very striking point in one such meeting: he states that man was not made for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath was made for man.

To me, this line of reasoning sums up all of God's laws, Leviticus and otherwise, in that they are a gift to man for his benefit and not as a punishment. In this way, God's laws are like a parent giving his child a nice lego set.

What was that???

Yup, laws are like legos, though admittedly not as fun. The Pharisees wanted to ensure that the laws were kept to prove how much better they were than everyone else around them. In this way, they built their lego models, and displayed them proudly, yet they put them in fancy acrylic display cases fenced off with velvet ropes and made sure nobody touched them.

All the while, God's intention was for us to play with them, and also to invite others to share the fun with us. Now, to be sure, laws, like legos, are fragile and prone to breaking. But there is a difference between iconoclastic bashing and smashing of God's good gifts and breakage that happens in the course of normal play.

Naturally, God would not want people to smash his gifts to us, but neither would he want us to devote all our energies into keeping something so pristine and untouched that it is completely unenjoyable. Instead, we are called to enjoy God's gifts, to exercise good stewardship of them, and to invite others to enjoy them with us. We are not to use them to abuse and exclude people, and then to judge them for playing with inferior toys.

So what do you think? Is this a good analogy or not? Where does it break down? What scriptures support or deny this analogy? Am I being lazy in forcing readers to do my research for me?

And finally, does Mizzou have a chance in the NCAA Championship coming up?

Defining Church

I was listening to a favorite preacher of mine the other day (hoo-ray for podcasts!) and he was talking about needing to define what a church is before you start one.

Sounds logical.

I decided to try a little bit, so here goes:
"Church" in the Greek is actually best defined as "Assembly." Much like the word "synagogue," it can refer to both the members (primary) and the place of assembly (secondary). Since the Greeks had all kinds of assemblies (political, religious, parties, etc.), the reason for assembling was very important. The reason Christians assemble is to worship Jesus, our great God and Savior.

So, step one, assembly should involve worship.

The New Testament gives some hints at other things that should happen when Christians assemble: prayers, use of spiritual gifts, public reading of scripture, encouragement, giving money, meeting needs, confession of sin, prophecy/teaching, baptism, Eucharist/Agape meal, and several other things. But of course, the focus of all these things is Jesus.

We (scholars and I) are pretty certain that early Christians used and adapted the synagogue sabbath service as a guide for their assemblies, which involved prayers, singing, Scripture reading, and teaching.

I could blog about this all night, but the conviction I come down to is this:

Church--
A group of people who assemble together at regular intervals for the purpose of worshiping Jesus Christ as our God and the only hope of eternal life. In these times, Christians are to obey the highest commands of Jesus to love God and to love each other by means of using their spiritual gifts to build each other up as growing students of Jesus to the glory and praise of God.

Then, I should maybe add something about sacraments and church discipline (accountability) and something about leadership. But I think I've already blogged enough about those things and I'm sure people are already sick of my fantastic armchair quarterback abilities.

Send me some comments if you dare....I might just reply to them....but I probably won't.

Why I Like House Church (50th POST!)

For most of you reading this, you know I really don't have a particular fondness for traditional styles of church. I have been gathering with a home-based church group for several months now and I have just fallen in love with it. I just wanted to take a little time to explain why I love it so much.

1) Eating together every week. While this may sound trivial to some, my primary love language (from Gary Chapman's Five Love Languages) is Quality Time. I rarely got to spend any quality time with people in traditional/contemporary churches. With house church, I get my fix every week, at least.

2) Input in teaching. I'll just say this: in every other single Sunday School class I have been a part of, almost nobody took my inputs/suggestions seriously, except when I was teaching (which was rarely). I'm not sure why. Yet with an open Bible study, everyone has a chance to ask questions, give input, relate to current struggles, apply to life, and so on. My input is valuable, and I get the chance to value input from others.

3) Prayer. This is the crown jewel of the house church movement as far as I'm concerned. In our group, at the end of the Bible time, we all pray for one another every week. When someone prays for you in your presence, it is the most amazing feeling in the world. When a Sunday School teacher prays for you--it feels cold and forced. When a friend prays for you who doesn't have to, it is the most affirming thing ever. I rarely got this at church (for one thing I didn't feel comfortable enough to share requests) and I get it every week at house church. Plus, I think it's in the Bible somewhere.

4) Sleeping in on Sunday. Since our group just has one long meeting per week (and not three short ones) we just have it on Sunday nights, and Sunday mornings are free---and they are AWESOME!! I really don't see why churches try to have Sunday School, AND Service, AND Discipleship Classes, AND Second Service all in one day. Who can keep track of all that? No wonder the best Christians are educated beyond their obedience---they don't have time to obey because they're spending so much time in inneffective Bible studies.
Bottom line: I feel physically refreshed from resting, and spiritually refreshed from the evening's activities with zero compromises. Win-win-win.

I know there are "traditional" churches out there that incorporate these elements into their routine and they are much better off because of it.

For me, going to church is like eating vegetables. It's something that really isn't fun, but you do it anyone because either someone makes you, or think it's good for you. House church is like finding out that there is ice cream and soda that keeps you healthier than vegetables. Only God could do something like that. It's just too bad He doesn't do that with real ice cream and soda.

Mark, Discipleship, and so forth.

I just finished plowing my way through Mark for my "quiet time" ritual, and I thought I'd share some of that, since my last few posts have been just complaints (I'm practicing for Rush Limbaugh's job!).

Clearly, one of Mark's distinctives is his emphasis on the path of discipleship. His gospel takes Jesus from baptism (the beginning of discipleship) through resurrection, and leaves the ending wide open. Another distinctive is that Jesus doesn't do a whole lot of talking, or "teaching." He lets his actions do the talking. In this sense, it's a little difficult to get to know Jesus by reading Mark. And this sense of mystery is definitely present to all the characters in the story, who basically have no idea what is going on--even up to the ladies who discover the empty tomb in 16:8.

I can totally relate to this. For most of my life, I'll admit, this whole Jesus business has been hard to figure out. I'm to the point now where I kind of resent people who appear to have all the answers, especially when they're arrogant about it.

Why is it that I've never been able to "hear" from God during a quiet time? How come my Bible study time never seems to have any relevance to what I'm going through in life? What the heck does Jesus mean in all of his last days teachings? Why is it so difficult to sustain a prayer to God? If the disciples couldn't get Jesus talking to him face to face, what on earth chance do I have when I'm just alone with my thoughts?

And I know I'm not alone in these questions, especially among seminary students.

Maybe the "personal" discipleship and contemporary methods (spiritual disciplines) are what's out of whack. You know, when there is only one verse in the New Testament that remotely supports a daily personal quiet time (or does it?), I kind of wonder if the reason my quiet times don't work is because they're not even God's pattern to begin with?????

More to come......

(spoiler alert: it takes a village to raise a Christian)