James--Practical Theologian

I have been meditating and studying James for a couple of weeks in preparation for our upcoming series. Recently, I have begun seeing James' ability to apply theology to his hearers. Practical theology is best not thought of as a list of dos and don'ts, but as theology that aims to be formative; beliefs about and from God that shape our practices--often dos, but sometimes don'ts--in order to shape our character.

Let me give one example of James' practical theology. James is writing to Jewish believers scattered throughout the Roman empire--a phenomenon called the diaspora. As a result of this scattering, some Jews are poor and without land, while some are wealthy, owning land away from Jerusalem. James starts to address this disparity not by telling all his hearers to share and be nice, but by pointing out the benefit of trial. Trials produce perseverance and perseverance leads to maturity and completeness! As a result, James encourages the poor brother to take pride in his high position--a position that enables maturity to be developed.

James continues by charting the course of the rich: the rich should take pride in their low position. They should do this because without a change of attitude, their doom is foretold: they will pass like a plat scorched by the heat. James has taken and applied Jesus' parable of the sower to the wealthy people in this congregation. Just as Jesus said that those seeds which fell in rocky soil were scorched, so James is warning that without a reversal of attitudes, so will the rich of these churches die and be forgotten. The choice is theirs and James makes sure they realize it: "Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you."

Notice that James does not give a road map to solving their problems. Rather, he combines the parable of Jesus ("planted") with the OT law in order to lay out for them their choice. How they live out the word is up to them, but James has made all the connections and challenges. He has redrawn the world appealing to their law--taking care of widows and orphans--and by warning them as Jesus had once warned his listeners.

Clash of the Civilized...

Barack Obama appears to be setting a new course on the war on terror. He is reaching to the Muslim community, affirming that America is not their enemy. This, of course, is a change from Bush's strategy of fight fire with bigger and better fire--and in your neighbourhood. Questions come up: Is Obama naive? Is this new course worth a chance?

My concern is this: If the hand extended is not received--its rejection symbolized by another massive attack?--will the fallout even compare to the Bush doctrine?

Hell hath no fury like hope scorned.

Who's missing the forest for the trees?

It looks like NHL players will not be paid their full salaries this year because the total of their percentage of league earnings is less than their combined salaries. How much they will be short (if any) depends on how well the league does over the next few months.

Recently Gary Bettman has enforced a rule that players selected for the All Star game who do not show up to its festivities must miss either the game before or after the All Star game. If a player is too hurt to show up for the All Star game (not necessarily play), then they are too hurt to play in regular season games surrounding it. (The "If you're too sick to go to school, you're too sick to watch TV" rule.) Some say this is ridiculous because players are preserving themselves for games that really matter. They say that Bettman is missing the forest--what really matters (regular season games), for the trees--the All Star game.

I think Bettman is exactly right. Right now, the marketability of the game is most important. What's meaningless is a regular season game that only a couple of hundred thousand people might care about. What matters is a game that several million people could tune into and see professional athletes in a new light, displaying their amazing talents. And it doesn't matter because hockey should make money, it matters because hockey is a great game and it needs more people playing it. What's for certain is that if hockey becomes expendable among the sports franchises of the USA, the players will really be playing for the love of the game--and nothing else.

Letter from Dunnam to Obama

Maxie Dunnam is the Chancellor of Asbury Seminary and, some would say, the most famous United Methodist in the world.

Congratulations, Mr Obama, and God bless you! You have the potential...the gifts and graces...and the national circumstances are right for you to become one of the three or four greatest presidents in our nation’s history. I'm excited about your leadership.

Your arriving at this place in history is little short of a miracle. I urge you to shepherd this historical opportunity with the kind of thoughtfulness, shared guidance, and deliberate seeking of counsel that you have already demonstrated. While the Office of the President will shape you, don't let it distort who you really are.

You have inspired the nation by bringing together a diverse people. You have done this by not being so rigidly ideological, and by unfolding an expansive umbrellas of acceptance and affirmation. While some would call this "political expediency", it doesn't have to be. Compromise is not a dirty word, but an essential dynamic of leadership. You can't lead without creative compromise. But I urge you,

Don't compromise human rights for short-sighted national security.

Don't compromise a fragile environment for short-term economic gain.

Don't compromise the lives of a million babies each year for a right to privacy notion that is self-serving.

Don't compromise the health and medical care of children for the fear of crossing over some sort of "socialized medicine" line.

Don't compromise the values of a Judeo-Christian culture for a valueless tolerance that will become a religion of secularism, or on an international level suffer from a naive tolerance of radical Islam.

Don't compromise the place of America in the international community by not sharing our God-give resources and human progress with the world, or by failing to champion the principles of democracy that has made us great.

Don't compromise the most positive dynamic of our nation's life by thinking that religion and politics don't go together. There can be no separation of religion and public life, faith and politics. We within the United Methodist Church are committed to contributing a prophetic, healing faith that will not claim God's blessing for all our national policies and practices, as though God is always on "our side". Rather, with one of your favorite presidential mentors, Mr. Lincoln, we worry a lot and pray earnestly as to whether we are on God's side.

Maxie Dunnam

Thoughts on the Lost Premiere

Well, it was entertaining. I started watching the show in the summer as a simple wind-down. I fell asleep during the first episode, but found it pretty engaging after that. As a result, I was looking forward to last night's premiere. After last night's episode, one has to say that the show has lost its coherence. I know it's a TV show and so I'm more than willing to cut it slack, especially when it keeps drawing me back. However, its fans have got to move beyond thinking it is deep and amazed at its ability to confuse and confound us with the hope that it will resolve tightly. Take, for example, the writers finally making explicit last night one of the secrets of the island: it messes with time. When Farraday said that time was like a stream that you can go back and forth in but that you cannot change, but we quickly saw Locke shot by Ethan and Locke kill several Dharma Initiative people in the past thereby undoing Farraday's philosophy of time. Anyway, a fun season premiere and I have my Wednesdays booked for the next few months.

Is Obama the antichrist?

Watching yesterday's extravagant, elegant, exciting, enduring, exhausting--take your pick--inauguration brought to mind a question I'd heard a couple of times through the campaign: Is Obama the anti-Christ? The question is often posed with suspicions of his religious background or just his overwhelming and (in my opinion) puzzling international popularity. I remain quite neutral toward the man, aside from my critiques of his stance on abortion and stem-cell research. But on to the question this post's title poses: Is Obama the anti-Christ?

Wrapped up in this question is a belief that just prior to the return of Jesus a leader will emerge (often from Europe) who will draw many people to himself, accepting forms of worship, and demanding that people receive some sort of mark that reveals their allegiance to him. This person, the anti-Christ, is also called the Beast in Revelation. His overwhelming power and blasphemy will prove bad news for Christians as they refuse to take his mark (sometimes thought of as a computer chip or another form of embedded code). Times will deteriorate for a period of seven years until Christ returns. Some believe Christians will be rescued from this time of horrid persecution (called the "Tribulation") before it starts; others at the mid-point; others right at the very end. Of course, some Christians hold various parts of this narrative without holding the whole thing. The Left Behind series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins has expanded and dramatized this narrative, fleshing it out over a series of popular books and movies.

It may surprise some North American Christians that this narrative of end-times is not universally held either in this time or throughout history. Let's take a quick look at the passages which talk about the anti-Christ. The name itself, of course, simply means against the Christ, against Jesus. The word is only found in the Bible five times, all in the letters of John. Here are the passages:

1 John:
2.18: Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.

2.22: Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.

4.2-3: This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

2 John
Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

What immediately stands out is that John is more concerned the spirit of antichrist and the work of antichrist rather than identifying a specific person. He says that many antichrists have come; he says that any person who denies the presence of Jesus or his kingship is antichrist. He is also concerned with the perseverance of the church to whom he writes. There has been a church split of sorts that forces John to write (2:19, 26-27) and he wants those who have stayed to remain faithful to the kingship of Jesus. We do well to remain faithful in our day, as well, when the world tries to live by any King or politician opposed--in word or deed--to Jesus.

But what about Revelation and the beast John describes? What about the number 666? First we have to remember that John is a symbolic writer. Revelation 13 gives an initial description of the beast, one having elements of a leopard, lion, and bear. John takes this description from Daniel's description of four beasts in Daniel 7, combining all these elements to make this beast the worst of any before. In my opinion the beasts are connected with different political reigns that Daniel has seen and is seeing in the history of Israel. When John picks up these pictures he is describing a political power worse than any of those Daniel saw. Second, we must see that John has included clues to the identity of the beast because, as he tells us, if anyone has insight, he can figure out who he is talking about (Revelation 13:18).

So, what clues has John given? First, John tells us that the beast has seven heads and ten horns (13:2). Rome was known as the city settled on seven hills and John connects these seven heads with the seven hills (17:9). Perhaps John is alluding to Rome. Let's keep reading. Second, John tells us that one of the heads has a fatal wound (13:3), but that it had been healed. If John is talking about Rome, does this make sense? Consider that John also says that the beast itself had a fatal wound (13:12). In some way this head on the beast that suffers a fatal wound is both part of the seven-headed monster and yet captures its essence in itself. Is this a clue from John? Yes. In the first century, the first major persecutor of the church was the Emperor Nero who had Paul and Peter executed. Nero exemplified the concern that power had with the early Christians who often acted in countercultural ways, like treating slaves as brothers and meeting with other people around the worship of another King. Nero also suffered a head wound and died, but there was a belief that he had come back to life--that's how scary the early Christians considered him. But all of this isn't quite yet convincing that the beast of Revelation is Nero, although it's certainly a good fit. Is there another clue? Yes, in fact, the clearest one. John tells us that the beast is a man and that his number is 666 (13:18). It used to be common practice that numbers would be assigned to letters of the alphabet. (For example, A=1, B=2, etc.) This was called "gematria." Nero Caesar written in Hebrew letters come out like transliterated like this: nron qsr. The numerical value assigned to these letters is, respectively, 50, 200, 6, 50, 100, 60, 200. Those added up equals to 666. Of course, this is also a symbolic number of being just prior to the number of perfection(7), tripled, like when God is proclaimed as Holy, Holy, Holy. Not only has John identified this beast of a man, but has used these same numbers to describe his beastly mockery of perfection.

So, is Obama the antichrist? No. I believe the beast of Revelation was a real man, Nero, who exhibited the spirit of antichrist by his persecution of Christians and rebellion against Jesus. Obama, just like any one of us, is confronted with this same spirit of antichrist and we as Christians must pray for him and his leadership and offer, in addition to our words of prayer, our words of thoughtful, constructive criticism when we believe he is going astray. Christians owe this to all leaders whose political reigns mirror, however imperfectly, the Kingdom of our Lord and of His King (Rev. 11:15).

Can humans become perfect?

Jesus said, "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48). The phrase is in connection with loving even your enemies. Jesus said that pagans greet their brothers and so the mark of being different, the mark of God himself, is loving those who do not love you. The only other time the word perfect--complete--comes up in Matthew is in Jesus' words to the rich man who wants to follow him. Jesus says to him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me" (Matt. 19:21).

Interesting that the commands to be perfect as God is perfect is connected with love and kingdom. Perhaps we could boil down Jesus' words in these passage to say that perfection is completion in love and in commitment to the Kingdom. (Interesting, then, to say that if we don't believe humans can become perfect that we are always people who have divided hearts, who display preferential treatment.)

A few things jump out at me from these passages. First, I do not believe that Jesus would give a command he considered unattainable. Second, Jesus' offer to the rich young ruler was to come with Jesus; Jesus would be with him in his journey of kingdom commitment. Third, this call to perfection is really good news. In the first passage, Jesus is expanding the family category, as it is in the context of being sons (and daughters) of God, which means brother- and sisterhood with those who are not blood relatives. We must also note that the Kingdom Jesus preaches is one that is consistently pushing the boundaries of inclusion outward. (It is not one that has no boundaries, as evidenced by the rich man walking away.)

So, how can we answer this question of perfection from Matthew? First, that our ability to become like God in loving all is without limit. Jesus has told us to be perfect in love as God is perfect. Second, our progress in this journey is not one that achieves God's favor, but that is made possible only by God's favor and Jesus' partnership with us. Consider the glorious implications: 1. We can become even more loving towards those we already love. 2. This love we have for our natural relations can be expanded to include all--even those who hate us. 3. We can live by a different set of rules than the world--the rules of God's Kingdom.

Are humans "free"?

This is a tough question because "freedom" has different contexts. Political freedom is often tied to democratic, representative governments, free press, and market capitalism--people are in control of themselves in their nations to a great extent. Personal freedom is tied to independence--perhaps having a car or means of transportation and a sense of autonomy. Religious freedom is connected with an opportunity to discern and pursue different religious avenues. Yet Christians could affirm that one who is lacking political, personal, and religious freedom could still be spiritually free. By this Christians mean that this person is free to respond to their circumstances as Jesus would respond, empowered by his Spirit. This person is free to love, be joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, and in control of their reactions. In short, they are free to choose their response.

But don't we think that everyone is free to choose what they do? Christians traditionally have said No. People are not free to choose what they do--they do not have "free will" because humans have an inward bent--they are "depraved." "Depraved comes from a Latin word that means to bend or make crooked. Humans, each and every one of us, are bent toward ourselves. Christians have not only affirmed this depravity, but a total depravity, meaning that every part of us is bent toward ourselves. John Drury says that total depravity does not mean that "we are as bad as we possibly could be, but rather there's no 'safe' part of us that we can count on as innocent and good over against our fallen parts." This means that humans are not free to choose; we choose what's best for ourselves because we are bent inwards.

This sounds like a bad situation, but by God's grace, it's not. While humans are not free in themselves, because God is at work in the world, we see elements of selfless activity. We see people sacrifice their own time, money, strength, life for others without thought of their own well-being. What does this mean for our discussion of freedom?

John Wesley affirmed that freedom is restored to humanity by the grace of God. Were it not for God's empowering grace, human freedom is completely lost. Yet God's grace enables the "first faint desire" (John Wesley) we have for God--and for others. Any sign of love is a sign of God's grace.

Notice what this means, then. It means that one can only choose to sin when God's Spirit is at work in that person. If God's Spirit is not at work, then one doesn't choose to sin; one acts in their slavery to sin. The only time we choose to sin is by the power of God enabling that choice in the first place. So, why does God graciously enable people in whom his Spirit is at work to sin? Because it's in that graciously restored freedom that God works with us to conform our wills to the good, to God. That's the free response of love that God is wanting and which he makes possible.

Original Sin

Watching TV yesterday morning, I saw a great dialog on popular differences between Catholics and Jews. Its light-hearted approach continued through to the subject of guilt. What do Catholics feel guilty about? What do Jews feel guilty about? The girl they were interviewing--the daughter of a Jewish Rabbi--started talking about guilty pleasures. There is something about doing something wrong, she said, that makes its pleasure all the greater. The fact that it is wrong holds a certain appeal to humans. The reporter then finished with his quip: One thing seems common to all humans: Guilt isn't just an emotion, it's a condition.

Wow! Good theology on TV on a Sunday morning! :)

Beedle the Bard

Just got this book with a gift card from my awesome wife. Read it in an hour or so. It's really short. It's got some neat stories that are meant to be like other fables one would read. If you're a Harry Potter fan, find someone to borrow it from or get it from the library.