Which Reality is Truer?

The World As It Is

In the days following the bombing of the Boston marathon,  the majority of the nation has expressed outrage and sorrow over the bombing. There has been grieving regarding the loss of three innocent lives and the permanent injury of many others. The thoughts and prayers of the nation are poised towards Boston.

An event like this seems to put different versions of reality in conflict. We have different groups dictating that we should view this tragic event in different lights. I would maintain that each of the views put forth reveal truth about our world, just on different levels. They are truths within truths--concentric circles of reality, if you will. Allow me to explain.

Circle One

The innermost circle is the circle where most Americans live. In this reality, we have the claim that the kind of event that we had in Boston does not happen in the United States. This is a true statement; in the US, we are not plagued with IEDs and roadside bombs. Violent deaths are not the norm within our country. And, it is because of this that we find ourselves outraged and horrified when violence occurs against our citizens. Americans are much more inclined to react with disbelief when we encounter true violence and evil acts.

In America, you expect that the police and the military will keep you safe. When these systems are found wanting, our world is rocked. We expect that everyone should live to reach a ripe old age. And, we are shocked if this does not come true.

Circle Two

The greater reality here is that violence and death reign throughout the world. Americans may react with shock and disbelief when these things happen in our lands but the fact of the matter is that these kinds of things happen consistently across the world. There are countries where violent deaths are just a fact of life. The people in these lands see grizzly sights on a daily basis. For them, the concept of safety is illusory. Bombs explode frequently. Friends and family die. They find that there is no guarantee of living to a ripe old age.

We find here that the American view, while true to an extent, is limited. This reality, the bigger picture reality, is a reality filled with pain. It can be found everywhere. Grief is woven throughout this reality. And, often, the grieving process is not just for distant strangers that were struck down before their time--it is for friends and neighbors. This is a reality full of torment, both of mind and body.

The Greater Reality

Yet, there is a greater reality even still. The fact remains that God reigns over the earth. His is a reign of justice and peace. His reign is spread through His ambassadors, the Church.

The gospel is adequately called the gospel of peace. His is a reign that is properly spread without violence or threat of the sword. His rightful ambassadors do not use bodily harm and announce the fact that He brings peace to the soul.

The King of this Kingdom was coronated with suffering. This Suffering King is in tune with the suffering of this world. He knows the pain of separation and loss. And, as King, He has the power to heal the hurt of the world. He does not turn a blind eye to the world but seeks to restore it.

This reality, this Kingdom, is a reality that is both now and not yet. As we go about our work as ambassadors, we make the greater reality of the Kingdom part of our current reality. Yes, there is pain and loss in our world. But, that is not the way things are supposed to be. And, there will come a day where these current pains and injustices shall no longer be.

What we find, then, is that it is our job as Christ's ambassadors to squeeze the greater reality onto our current reality. We seek to do God's work upon the earth that His reign may be known. We do this so that the world may know that God is King and that pain and death are powerless as a result.

Evildoers of Infinite Worth

When Bad Things Happen

Today, the United States was rocked with the news that two bombs exploded at the Boston Marathon, killing at least three and injuring over a hundred more. News like this can shake you to your core. Your most basic traits come forward with your first reaction. I found this to be true of myself today.

Reacting to Tragedy

When I first saw that the Boston Marathon had been bombed, the first words out of my mouth were words I regretted. I was talking to the secretary in my department and I said, "The Boston Marathon, the pinnacle of a runner's experience, has been marred with this." I realized as soon as I said it how calloused it must have sounded. It came off like I only cared about the race's reputation. Deep down, I had not intended it to sound like that. What I was hinting at was the fact nothing is sacred anymore--you are no longer safe in school, at the movies, or even at a road race. To me, the Boston Marathon was something pure; it was something that those watching and participating in could simply enjoy without the complications of life. But, with what happened today, this is no longer the case. A day that was supposed to be a day of joy became a day of sorrow. Today is now a day of bad memories.

This simple fact grieves me. We are no longer allowed to simply enjoy things. There is potential for the loss of life at every turn.

Considering the Perpetrators

After my initial reaction to the news, I began to research the story further. After seeing images from the explosion, I realized that prayer was a necessity in this situation. I began to pray for the victims, that God would bring them healing and comfort. Then, I started to think about the evil itself. It was then that I realized how the Cross has shifted my perspective.

When I considered the perpetrators (as of 11pm CST on 4/15, there is still no word as to who did this deplorable act), I felt compelled to pray for them. My prayer was not that justice and the sword would find them. Instead, it was that remorse, repentance, and grace would find them. My prayer was (and still is) that the God of peace, who is comforting those who mourn as a result of this act, would restore the hearts of the ones who did this.

The typical response to a situation like this is something akin to "I'd love to have 5 minutes alone in a locked room with whoever did this" or "There's a special place in hell for people like that." This reaction is typical because it demands justice in the here and now. It values justice more than mercy. It demands that our enemy pay for their wrongdoings. But, Jesus told us to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us (Matt. 5:43-48). And, you have to admit that Jesus did not place a limit on how far the term enemy goes. Speaking to first century Jews, Jesus' crowd would have heard, "Love those who kill you and your friends for no reason. The ones who destroy your home and possessions and throw you in jail just because--pray for them."

When Christians join in on the talk of taking part in old fashioned justice, they abandon the thought of the perpetrators possibly being redeemed. It seems as if Christians subconsciously think, "My sins may be bad but I never KILLED anybody. That's the point of no return." If Christians want to abandon the hope of redemption for killers, they might as well throw out over half of the New Testament. When we read the writings of the apostle Paul, we should realize that no one is beyond redemption.

In truth, Christianity should be the religion of compassion. And, when you consider the kind of person that would commit an act like we saw today, you realize that they need compassion just as much as anyone else. Yes, they committed an act that caused much pain. But, we have to imagine the depth of the pain that would fester into the kind hatred that could make these acts possible. If only they knew they love that heals all wounds and makes enemy love possible. If only they knew the power of the persecuted and risen Christ!

When an evil act like this occurs, we can stand and condemn the perpetrator all day long. But, seeking to solve violence with violence, threats of violence, or condemning threats of "cosmic justice" will solve nothing. It is the self-sacrificial love of Jesus that will restore our world. It is our responsibility to treat everyone like Jesus would--as people of infinite worth, evildoers and all.

Who Are You?, Part 2

This is the fifth installment of the ongoing "Personal Theology Outline" series. The fourth installment can be found here. 

The Chief Characteristic

In the last post, we concluded with the thought that God is indeed relational and that idea implies that He can be known. When we talk about a God that we can know, we are talking about a God whose character is on display. If God is as relational as the biblical data suggests then we should be able to infer traits about Him from His interaction with humanity. Reading through the Bible, you might conclude, as the psalmist did, that the Lord is good (Psalm 100:5). You might read through and decide that, above all, God is holy. You might read the Gospels and make the conjecture that, ultimately, God is compassionate.

When examining the nature of God, the question of whether or not God's character can be reduced to a single attribute arises. I would maintain that it can and that the Bible (my chief reference) reduces God's character down to one word: love (1 John 4:8). This assumption changes the scope of a person's theology. So, it is fundamental that we are sure of this assumption before we proceed to describing God any further.

Love at the Core

Can God's character, His nature, His being be boiled down to love? I would assert that, of God's traits, love is indeed paramount. It comes to this: the loving aspect of God seems to be the only quality that He can possess intrinsically (the only quality that is inseparable from His nature). Imagine, if you will, what God was like before the creation of the cosmos, before He created the world or even the angels. Imagine God by Himself without anything outside Himself. According to the Trinitarian view, even before everything, God could relate with Himself. He existed as Father, Son, and Spirit--all participating together in the "divine dance." Even in isolation, God would not have experienced "aloneness" as we would count it (you would have to look to the Cross for that).

Thus, when we evaluate the intrinsic traits of God, we should think about traits with this perspective of God (God by Himself) in mind. When you consider this, we cannot consider things like wrath to be innate to God's character because wrath requires broken relationship. In Himself, God cannot experience broken relationship. It also means that God cannot be grace because it too requires broken relationship. Compassion cannot be a fundamental aspect of God's character because compassion implies that someone has been broken or subjugated to some torment. And, God's holiness only exists as a result of that which is outside Himself, what is distinct from Him.

Yet, when it comes to love, we find that it can be a fundamental element of God's character, part of Him from before the creation of everything. If the Father, the Son, and the Spirit all exist in perfect harmony, we assume the exist in perfect love. If they are co-equally God then there is no subversion or inappropriate love between them. Perfect love can be a natural characteristic of God.

If love is at the core of God's nature, every view we hold of Him has to be filtered through His love. Every outpouring of emotion from God is backed and tempered by His love. The anger of God is the frustration of someone watching the self-destructive behavior of a cherished loved one. The jealousy of God is a jealousy of One who loves perfectly and who despises that which ultimately hurts us. God's actions towards us are motivated by His love.

A New Filter

This realization changes the scope of everything. If any aspect of our theology comes into conflict with this fundamental aspect of God's character, it has to be reconsidered. Love is at God's core. It is who He is. And, it makes the pursuit of Him worth it.

The Dangers of Overambitious Orthodoxy

The Two Edged Sword

Orthodoxy is important within Christianity. There are a number of dogmas in Christianity to which we should adhere lest we find ourselves outside the fold. But, trouble arises when we push the need for orthodoxy too far. When we begin to make doctrinal statements conditions for right Christian standing, we turn orthodoxy into a two edged sword of separation. And, this creates a dire situation for all those who decide to bear this dangerous sword of orthodoxy.

Cutting Others Out

The first dangerous situation that arises from treating doctrinal issues as criteria for orthodoxy is the division it causes between believers. Christianity is supposed to be big enough to handle minor variations in doctrine. When we elevate doctrine to the level of dogma, we start pushing others away as heretics. We divide into camps, saying things like, "The people in Group X are not Christians because they do not hold to Doctrine Y."

Yet, the fact of the matter is that Jesus is what defines a Christian. As long as we hold to Him, we are in the fold. Doctrines pertaining to hell, providence, election, baptism, eschatology, and tongues should not divide the church like they do. Differences of opinion should not create classes within Christianity. Yet, that is exactly what happens when we exalt doctrine to the level of dogma, when we make the conditions for orthodoxy anything beyond that of the old creeds.

I once had a friend that tried to belittle me because we disagreed on the topic of eschatology and because he found out that I had a Charismatic background. It seemed like he saw our differences of opinion as trumping Jesus' command to "love one another" (John 13:34). It felt like he saw our doctrinal divergence as grounds to  demean me. Instead of rejoicing in the fact that we both embraced Christ, he sought to have a petty argument with me over matters of opinion. In doing so, he began to build a wall of separation between us.

Building Walls

The second dangerous result of exalting doctrinal issues to the level of orthodoxy is the fact that doing so builds walls. But, the chief danger here is not the fact that these walls keep others out as much as it is the fact that they keep us in, that they isolate us from others. It has been my experience that, you devote more time to the study of theology, there is greater potential for diverse opinions to be raised. And, what you find after some time is that the group of people that agree with you perfectly begins to shrink. Eventually, the walls we build to keep the "heretics" out become a jail cell that keeps us trapped. We find ourselves unable to fellowship with anyone because they all possess some minor doctrine with which we do not agree.

I know this from firsthand experience. Recently, I have undergone the task of searching for a new church. The problem is that, over the years, I have become so opinionated that I have difficulty really joining in with any body of believers lest we disagree. I have found that my opinions seem to isolate me. Beyond just making me think that no one else has thought through my pet issues like me, they instill in me a fear that no group could accept me as one of their own if they knew my stance on different doctrines. After all, who in the Bible-Belt could accept a open theist/partial-preterist/annihilationist? Thus, I reside in my little jail cell of doctrine, afraid that I can neither accept anyone else's doctrine nor be accepted by anyone else.

But, the fact of the matter is that there is an error in my ways. Doctrines are not meant to divide. They are merely meant to explain things in a coherent way. The fact that I have allowed issues of doctrine to potentially cut me off from others implies an error on my part. I have exalted my pet doctrines too high. I should be rejoicing in the fact that I embrace the same Christ that other believers embrace. I am not alone. I am part of a larger body.

In the end, as long as we can echo the motto of the Moravian Church ("In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity"), we will be fine. But, when we make the non-essentials too important, we risk damage to ourselves and others. Such is not the plan of Christ.

Some Kind of Zombie

Warning: Slight spoilers for the movie Warm Bodies ahead. Furthermore, towards the end of the post, I unapologetically draw some slightly cheesy parallels between zombie-ism and life.

Living in the Land of the Dead

Let it be known that I am a fan of zombie movies and television shows. Everyone has a dirty little secret and this is one of mine: despite all of the blood and gore, the zombie genre never fails to fascinate me. It does not matter if the approach to zombies is serious or comedic. I am equally enthralled by 28 Days Later and Zombieland, "The Walking Dead" and Shaun of the Dead. Maybe it stems from this idea that a world of zombies would be simpler, that life would suddenly be free of the rat race. You get the idea that, in the post-apocalyptic wasteland, you either live together or die alone. Never mind the fact that debating the best zombie contingency plan provides hours of fun discussion of young men in their twenties.

So, obviously, when I heard that Hollywood was producing a zombie romantic comedy, it was love at first bite for me (sorry but I am obligated to make puns when available). I recent watched this movie (Warm Bodies) and, while it was not a perfect movie, it did make me think. Now, the zombie world Warm Bodies that is more Dawn of the Dead/Shaun of the Dead than 28 Days Later. This means that the main character, a zombie by the name of R, can moan a word or two. In the film, R comes across a girl named Julie and his world begins to change. As odd as it may seem, I found myself identifying with R. Sadly, R and I possess a similar vocabulary when it comes to dealing with the opposite sex. But, the ways in which I identify with R do not stop there.

Bring Me to Life

Once R encounters Julie, he slowly starts to come back to life. His heart starts to beat again. He begins to dream again. His body begins to warm from the chill of death. He regains his ability to speak. He starts to become truly human once again. In this film, the budding love between Julie and R is enough to resurrect not only R but all of zombie-kind.

I watched this process on the silver screen and thought to myself, "I see the Christian life in this." I thought of the divine love story in which humanity is involved. I thought back to my own portion of this story. I thought of how I first came to Christ and how that was like the first beat of my spiritual heart. God gives us His vision and causes us to dream dreams truer than reality. Our hearts are warmed with the compassion that Jesus had for the lost, broken, trampled, and abused. We find our voice as we go to share the Truth that we have encountered. In time, we become truly alive. And, one day, we will possess in fullness the same resurrection life that Christ has.

The most beautiful parallel here is that the transformation for R is not instantaneous. And, it is the same with us. This process is a long one--one that takes each of us the remainder of our lives to undergo. In the movie, R still blundered and fumbled things even after he began his process of being exhumed. Yet, life was still coming to his corpse. So it is with us--we are in the process of being revived but we still fumble with the dead parts of us from time to time. We are being sanctified through it all. We just have to remember that, in the end, we will possess the very Life that God had planned for us all along.

Embrace the Change

There is a second metaphor for us to gleam from this film (though we will have to consider it to be a different analogy from the first, lest we push the first metaphor to the point where it becomes dis-analogous with the truth). As in all zombie scenarios, there is a small band of survivors who are holed up and holding on to the precious life within them. The harshness of the world outside their walls has pushed them to the point where they are more inclined to shoot than to listen to reason (there is one scene in Warm Bodies that I am thinking of specifically that demonstrates this). But, in the end, it is not until they embrace the potential for life within the zombies outside their walls that this life can come to these corpses.

I find this to be a sad analogy for parts of the church today. There are some out there that view the world outside the church with such distrust that they forget the potential for life that these people have. We treat the outside world like bonafide zombies--we dehumanize them. We treat them like the shell of a person we used to know. When we paint someone as a zombie within our minds, we give ourselves permission to deal with them as a subhuman--as someone without feelings and as someone deserving of violence (be it verbal or emotional).

Yet, the lesson of Warm Bodies is that the corpses came to life once they were embraced by the humans. So it is with the Church. When we extend the love of Jesus out beyond the four walls of our churches, the lost are found, the blind see, and the dead live. If we leave them alone, they will remain zombies. We have to step out, take the risk, and embrace them. 

Life among the zombies can be dangerous. There is potential for us to be hurt. Someone might bite your head off. Someone might rip into you. You might find yourself broken down and wounded. But, the reward of the dead come back to true life is worth the risk.

Who Are You?, Part 1

This is the fourth installment of the ongoing "Personal Theology Outline" series. The third installment can be found here. The fifth can be found here.

Taking Things Personally

While undertaking this journey of describing my views, it is likely best for me to start with what is one of the biggest questions out there: Who is God? And, really, this question is more prevalent in my mind at this moment because of a few things I see in pop culture. Allow me to explain.

The Unknown

I have a slight addiction to the show "How I Met Your Mother." As of right now, I have watched every episode available on Netflix about three times as of now (the only other show that I have done that with is "Doctor Who"). Admittedly, I may have an unhealthy fascination with the show. But, all in all, I feel that it does a good job of highlighting things that go unnoticed in our culture--both intentionally and unintentionally. Because I have watched the show as much as I have, I have discovered some background themes that speak to the sad state of our current culture.

You see, when it comes to metaphysical matters, this show opts to deem "The Universe" to be the bringer of good, the executor of justice, and the mysterious planner of lives. Meanwhile, the show deems "God" to be a petty smiter and the one who snatches away loved ones. Now, the show does not go as far as to state these things outright but the dialogue does seem to point towards these presuppositions.

Watching the show, I can see what the appeal would be to view "The Universe" in such a way. In this context, "The Universe" is this unknown and unknowable entity that only asks you to do good things and rewards you when you do. And, when you get down to it, the definition of "doing good" when it comes to "The Universe" is not really defined objectively--it is just whatever you and your friends deem to be good. Its role as a mysterious planner provides the security blanket of a "grand plan" without any sense of responsibility attached to it. So, as long as you do what you think is good, "The Universe" will reward you with things that you want. Sounds great, does it not?

When I consider such perspective, there are a few things that bother me. First, how are you supposed to know the Universe's plans? Where do they originate? How do you discern them? How does the Universe communicate with you? Honestly, I cannot answer any of these questions without changing this view to something that detracts from its appeal. You see, as far as I can tell, this view is appealing because the Universe gets to remain abstract, distant, and unintrusive entity. When you get to the core of the matter, you cannot really know anything about the Universe and that is appealing because it lets us off the hook from needing to get to know it. But, is an entity that you can know nothing about really any better than a nonentity?

This view really does not do much better than to declare that there is justice in the cosmos and that "what goes around comes around." But, you get to sound spiritual and mysterious when you attribute these things to "The Universe."

The One to be Known

As I outlined in an earlier post, I have come to a place where I am convinced that reality must coincide with the truths outlined in the Bible. And, what we find there is a God that desperately wants to be known. He is relational. We do not find a distant God who sets the world in motion and then disappears from the scene. He is involved with His creation. He sought relationship with Adam in the Garden. Then, when Adam and Eve turned away from Him, He initiated the plan to restore His creation. In this view, there is no room for practical deism where God is to be considered far off and unavailable.

Jesus reveals the Father to us (John 14:9). So, when we look at Jesus, we see what God is like. And, there is beauty in that image. In Jesus, we see a God who reaches down into creation and deals with His creation in a one-on-one fashion. God does not remain far off and unknowable. He puts on meat (John 1:14) and makes Himself available. He relates to us.

Furthermore, we see the relationality of God built into His being in the Christian view of God. God is a triune entity which implies that He has a relationship with Himself on a level that is foreign to us. In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis describes the Trinity as a sort of "divine dance."

In the end, what we find in Christianity is a God that is not an isolated being. He meets people. He has plans that are not hidden. We find here a god that knows us and wants to be known by us. And, that makes this discussion of who He is worthwhile.