embracing grace 10: a five-foot gospel

In Scot McKnight's book, Embracing Grace: A Gospel for All of Us, we run into a five-foot gospel by the name of Araminta, who later changed her name to Harriet Tubman. She was what Paul was talking about in the work of Christ breaking down the immoveable, impenetrable walls, put in place by sin. Walls that make it acceptable to downgrade another race to slave status. Walls that not only divide, but enforce and fortify that division.

I found this chapter very inspiring, and very much needed in much of what I see of our evangelical world today. This may seem unfair. But we as a group often seem rather oblivious to the systemic evil all around us and in the world. But this gospel and God's grace in and through it, will not allow us to live there.

What if Harriet Tubman- the "Moses" of "the Underground Railroad had had a gospel like so many of us have? I know this is hard. But I'm making a point. I'm speaking here of an individualistic gospel. That's all about me, my needs. My sin and forgiveness and reconciliation. What if Harriet Tubman believed and knew only that "gospel"?

But the experience of the slaves with Harriet, would not allow them to embrace a gospel that divides people so that some can be beaten and have their children sold as property to others. Harriet learned through her people that such is not the gospel, and she learned to say, "No!", and do something about this systemic evil through her mother's example.

Does our gospel have anything to do with the genocide in Darfur? The grieving Palestinian or Israeli mother? The bereft of Iraq? The poor among us? Or is it just about getting people's "souls" saved? The things in this world mattering not at all!

Well, if the latter is the case, then you don't have the gospel that Jesus brought. The gospel of the Bible. It is a gospel that has good news of a kingdom from God in Jesus, that begins now. And it's a gospel that cannot be silent and inactive when there is systemic evil and injustice in the world and in our neighborhood.

Read Jesus in the gospels. Read Acts and Paul, for example in Colossians. And the entire New Testament. And the rest of the Bible. This gospel is evident, and really "in your face" throughout. And be satisfied with nothing less.

Why is this gospel often missed by us, especially we evangelicals? How does this fit with "the Jesus Creed"?

expectations

We live in life with many expectations. I suppose most of them we take for granted. But when they don't happen, such as our car getting us to work, then we can be quite unhappy. Other expectations are things that we anticipate in life. Such as finding a soul mate and getting married. Or landing the job we've been working towards in our education or training. Or expecting God to do certain things in our lives, based on our theological understanding of his Word, of him and his promises to us.

In Scot McKnight's book, The Real Mary, we find that Mary, as well as many of Jesus' followers during that time, had to work through unrealized expectations. In fact Jesus fulfilling God's promises as given to Mary by the angel Gabriel, as well as from her reading of Scripture as expressed in "the Magnificat", was not at all like Mary had envisioned. She tried to correct her son along the way. But instead had to learn to trust and follow him.

We too, as those in Jesus have "visions" and "dreams" of how things can, should and even will take place, especially when we're younger in our faith. But as we grow older, we begin to see some of these ideals and goals slip away. And what we encounter is not at all like what we had thought God would surely bring to pass.

But if we continue on, steadfast in our faith in God, in spite of, and even because of the unrealizations in life we encounter, we will begin to see God's hand and his grace on us. In ways we would not have predicted before. But we'll find that he and his promises are true. Even though this truth is different than what we had comprehended before, though the words are the same. We then seek and learn to line up our lives according to his working and revelation to us.

Is it good to have strong expectations, especially as one young in the faith (even as Mary did, as expressed in her song)? What is a part of our journey of faith in regard to those expectations? How has that played out in your own life?

ambiguity

12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

1 Corinthians 13 (TNIV)

The mirrors of Paul's time were not the mirrors of today that give us an undistorted image. You caught only a distorted view of the real image, but would have been better off peering in a pond on a placid, sunny day. Paul's point is for us now. We need to learn to accept living with ambiguity.

Somewhere in Scot McKnight's new book, The Real Mary, Scot speaks of the ambiguity Mary had to live with, in her faith. She had received God's words, and accepted them, and taken them to heart. But as the life of her son unfolded, the promises from God were not being fulfilled in the way she supposed they would be. And though she stumbled over what her son was doing, she learned to become a follower of him, as her Lord. In that following, to the very end at the cross, she experienced ambiguity. Yes, she followed on. But, no, she really didn't always understand.

Paul, even post-resurrection and post-Pentecost, says that this side of the kingdom come in Jesus, we too must be willing to live with a true measure of ambiguity. We too must put our faith in God and in his promises. But we too must acknowledge that we really don't "get", oftentimes, what God is doing. We catch only glimpses of it here and there (as Scot points out).

This is surely a part of our walking/living by faith and not by sight. (Paul) This ambiguity helps us to hold on and cling to God as a person. Whom, as Father, Son and Holy Spirit we are getting to know and learning to live in dependence on.

Together we need to accept and own that we don't know it all. That we're always in need of our Lord. And of each other in this life of faith. That we will cling to God and his Word, in faith. And seek understanding from him through the Spirit and as part of our Lord's Bride. We learn, not only from the Lord, but from him through each other. As we remain true to his Word, and seek, in faith, to act on it.

Mary did so. Sometimes mistakenly (as in Mark 3:20-21,31-35). But like her, we need to stake our lives on this faith. Even though we live with uncertainty, not having all the answers about our own lives, much less the bigger picture. But confident that God's will in Jesus will be done in this world. And that we live to be a part of that. In fellowship with our Lord, and with each other.

How do you see ambiguity? How is this a challenge to your faith? In what ways does this experience of ambiguity help us grow in our faith? (a paradoxical question, to be sure)

prayer for veterans

Let us remember our veterans. And pray for them regularly. As we also pray for peace on earth, good will towards all humankind.

memories of a pastor

I know of a pastor who was dearly loved by his congregation. He was limited in theological education, and was not a dynamic speaker. He had sensed the call of God to be a pastor into his adult life, and had followed this inward urging and conviction.

He was known for spending his mornings walking through the church cemetary faithfully praying for the church, and I presume each person in it. The people loved him. He humbly served, and the Spirit was evident on this yielded, humble, faithful servant of God.

Later he sensed the call to go as a missionary to Africa. So he and his wife (I'm not sure if any of his children remained at home, yet) went. I heard his story through a dear lady whose faith was a light for me and others. I did have the privilege of hearing and I presume, meeting this pastor. May God raise up many more like him. And may we all so follow our Lord Jesus Christ.

love as activity

Love, if it is real, must express itself in action. If I really love God, than I will do something about it. If I love another, somehow I will want to express that love. To say I love someone, yet to not help them in their need, the apostle John tells us, is to neither love them, or the God we profess to love.

In the community of Jesus, love must be expressed in a good number of ways. We are already on our way to conformity to the Lord. But we haven't arrived. There will always be the need to forgive each other. And to reach out, in love, in some kind of imaginative way, at times, to break down walls. And to really be in the same room, so to speak, in spite of our remaining differences.

To express our love for each other may often require remaining silent. "There is a time to be still and a time to be speak" (Ecclesiastes). When we do speak, we'll do so in love. Seeking truth. But in a posture of wanting to do so together.

This subject is keen on my mind, because I work at a Christian ministry and on a team in factory work there, among some who have a very strong political opinion that I do not share. We all want God's righteousness to prevail. But our theologies and understanding of Scripture differ. What to do?

Reach out in love. Seek to grow together. Learn to be able to discuss differences. And in doing so, really hear the other person out. Be open to change. In these kind of discussions there should be growth on both sides. Both intellectually, and in regard to wisdom. And especially in the dynamic of our life together in Christ. That we are being lifted up by grace into conformity to him, and in this same process, being brought to increasing fellowship with each other.

One other thing I must add. Love will forgive. Whatever grievances one has towards another in the community of Jesus. We're to forgive, just as God in Christ forgave us. And to put over that, and everything else, this love, we're talking about here. (Paul) This is so necessary. I've found that no matter what I do, there may be that certain someone who doesn't like you, and is more than willing to express that. We have to consider where they're coming from, what they believe, and where they're going. When we see the grace of God in their lives, we know it's just a matter of time before there will be complete reconciliation between us. In the love of God.

What activities do we do at home, at work, as church, in our neighborhoods, and in other places- as acts of love? When we might confront someone, do we do it gently, and out of this love? And are we open to being corrected?

individual versus corporate spirituality

When in seminary, I recall a professor who made the statement that all spirituality in the Bible is corporate in nature, and never individual. In context I may have considered him correct, if I could have heard or read his view explained. And it made a point, in bringing out the needed (maybe especially at that time) Biblical emphasis on community.

However, I must say that Scripture seems to indicate something that needs nuancing here. I would want to say that God created each individual as special. And as a special part of the whole of corporate humanity. And that, in the new creation, God recreates each individual in Christ as a special part of the whole of this new humanity, no longer "in Adam", but now "in Christ".

This means that we can never separate our individuality from the corporate whole God is making. As in a New Age kind of self-help spirituality. But neither can we discount at all, the powerful, and I believe, Biblical message that "Jesus loves me", yes, me. And even in a special way. Just as he loves each human, I believe, in a special way.

So we're left, if what I'm saying is getting at the truth, with the importance of seeing each of us as special. But each as a special part of the whole of humanity, that in Christ God would be bringing into his community of perichoresis, in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In a true sense we should not separate our individuality from the whole of human community. "No one lives unto themselves." (Paul) But at the same time, we must take seriously the special place in this community that each and everyone of us has, potentially- in Christ. So that we need not be ashamed of talking about our own experience, or God's grace in our own life. "...who loved me, and gave himself for me." (Paul)

God's grace

How uplifting is the grace of God. I've seen it time and time again. When I think I'm in some kind of trouble. Or have fallen short. Or am grieved over something of the past. God's grace in Jesus comes in. This grace works in us to free us. To accept God's forgiveness and live in his love. And to do so, much more aware of the depths of who we are. And something more of who he is.

Paul made it clear, "By the grace of God, I am what I am." And also that God's grace was at work in him, and is at work in all believers in Jesus. And with this grace comes God's truth. Which alone, by the Spirit gives us freedom. And this grace is good, even when things seem bad. I might add, especially when things seem, and are bad.

It's a grace that draws us in to "the Jesus Creed": to love God with all our being and doing, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Who can receive it? Anyone. Look at the gospels. To come to the Lord and be at table with him was, and is open to everyone. Grace can begin there. And it needs to begin time and time again even for us who stand in that grace (Romans 5). We need it as much as we did, when we first came to the Lord.

What would you like to share about your experience of God's grace? Does God's grace stop with just one's self, when one is experiencing it?

election day

It's election day again here in the United States. Here in Michigan we've had what's becoming the normal fare of "go after your opponent" politics. It seems like the candidates have a hard time respecting each other in what they say. It's all about showing up their opponent. Instead of thoughtfully being engaged together in a discussion of the issues. And with charity, debating their differences. Not.

I have to say, for myself, that while it's an important day here, I think we as evangelicals are missing the boat in some ways. We have exalted to some kind of canonical status certain positions, that while good in their place can blind us to other issues. And most importantly, what we say, and how we conduct ourselves on the political stage, conveys something to the world that I think, all too often, is less than Christ-like, as in following the Jesus of the gospels. He is, after all, the Jesus we follow.

For myself, personally (to emphasize it!), I am in a kind of funk over my quandary as to how to vote. Voting, as has well been said by an eminent blogger, is a messy thing. More messier than we evangelicals often make it out to be. If I'm to believe my ears, this is all about "black and white". But unfortunately I can't see it that way. I can't say that if I do vote on certain races, I'm going to be happy with my vote. But I vote, and seek to do so in prayer. Praying that God's will will be done as I try to think through issues. And I am sure this can be the case for us, even as we vote for opposite candidates or differently on proposals. This is good to at least get us engaged in prayer, and perhaps at times, in actions in our endeavor to follow Jesus.

My hope and prayer is that we would learn to see the political side as one way in which we express our faith in Jesus. That we would move away from either "the religious right" or "the religious left", into a far more thoughtful and kingdom of God-oriented political view, ethic and practice. And that above all, in all of this, we will be more and more in sync with our status and calling in God as the "holy nation" in Jesus, that resides in every nation throughout the earth. Lord, help us to that end. Amen.

confession of sin

Ted Haggard has confessed his sin publicly, and we need to be in prayer for him and his family. I think Scot McKnight points out a problem that needs addressed among us who are evangelicals. This is the problem of unconfessed sin. And a culture, and perhaps a theology that promotes such a problem.

I would encourage any readers of this blog to go over to this post on Jesus Creed today, and think through this issue and discussion together.

embracing grace 9: the divine comedy gospel

Scot McKnight in this chapter writes of the difference between tragedy and comedy. They are polar opposites. Tragedy ends badly and sadly. As in Ernest Hemingway's great little classic, The Old Man and the Sea. But all too true as to what we often see in real life. Much of what happens here does not end up "happily ever after". Scripture is another story. It is full of comedy. Not comedy as we in our culture understand as in "I Love Lucy" or "Seinfeld". But the classic meaning, comedy as in a good ending, after a conflict has been resolved, as in "happily ever after". This is evident all throughout the Bible. Most climactically in Jesus' death followed by his resurrection, then ascension to be followed by his return to earth. To which the last book of the Bible, Revelation points, in the comedic climax of the Story.

Scot points out that the death of Christ on the cross, alone does not save us. The death and resurrection of Christ, together do. We receive forgiveness and a new life through both. And in real life, too, Christ's death and resurrection means everything for those who have faith. Paul Carlson, an American missionary to the Congo, laid down his life in service to the sick and poor there, as a medical doctor. In spite of danger in a rebel uprising, Paul did not abandon the hospital and those in need. And in doing so, and helping others to escape, he himself was shot. But the end, even there and in the here and now is comedy. An extensive health care system in the Congo rose out of this work. Along with nearly 200,000 Christians in Covenant churches. "All because of resurrection faith."

I am nearly forgetting Pentecost, which Scot adds to this salvation at work in the world now, that is to completely take over the world. The gift of the Spirit keeps the Story very much alive and well, even in this tragic world. And in the end turns tragedy into comedy.

We cracked Eikons are thus restored. And put into community (called "the Jesus community" here) "for the good of the world." Scot suggests that the symbol we need is a cross (in this case, empty- depicting death and resurrection) with a "symbol of fire above it -- telling us that Jesus' death and resurrection, along with the gift of the Spirit, is what creates the cycle of grace."

How do you see life? Do you see it as tragedy, or comedy (in its classical meaning)? And why?

(As in all of these postings on Scot's book, my own thoughts are intermingled.)

the goodness of grief

Jesus tells us, "Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted." What is good about grief?

Lately I've been grieving some deeply inside. Partly for good reason from my view. But partly beyond my reasoning, I think.

Grief is good in its place. Jesus fulfills the prophecy of being "the man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief" (Isaiah). It is part of living fully in a fallen world. Sharing in its suffering. Weeping with those who weep. And burdened by our own falleness in sinning or being sinned against. As well as the curse accompanying this present life.

What I have noticed is that grief can be a good thing, a stage after which God's grace becomes evident to us. "Weeping may last for the night, but joy comes in the morning" (Psalm). Grief involves taking life seriously. Not that we aren't amiss in much of the way we see life. But our grief is still important, and God takes it seriously as well.

It opens us up to heart change. Because it involves the depths of who we are. We can end up, in God's grace, being deepened, so that we are not as shallow as we were before. This opens us up more to others, and especially to our God.

I am one who likes to laugh. We "carry on" quite a bit of our day where I work, in a big, loud factory room/space. I would probably ordinarily be characterized as a dispenser of humor and laughing rather than one who is grieving or depressed (depression, at least as I've experienced it before, rare now). But sorrow has its place. Doing its work in the heart, even when one can still laugh and sing.

What do you see as good about grief?

Blanche B

Yesterday Scot McKnight reminded me of loved ones who have gone before me, and at present are more alive than we are (even in their "intermediate state" awaiting the resurrection). One such saint that I look forward to seeing again, is Blanche B.

She was a single lady all her life. Faithful is one word I think of, when I think of her. And caring is another. She very much cared for us kids. And she manifested her love for the Lord and for people by her faithful ministry in Sunday School at our Mennonite church for many years.

I remember her leading us, probably in singing. And definitely in telling us Bible stories. And I believe she often pressed home to us our need of commiting our lives to Jesus and receiving his salvation for us. We had other good teachers. But she stands out to me. Perhaps because she taught me early on, when I was most influential, and being formed in my understanding of the faith. Even though it wasn't until I was 17, that I committed my life to Christ, yet the seeds she had so faithfully sown over the years surely came to life and fruition during that time.

Blanche, you may not be reading this post, but if you were, I want to say, Thank you. Your heart ran deep for us children. We knew your love, that it came from your heart. Thanks so much for teaching us the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. I look forward to seeing you again, dear sister.

focus

Off and on I struggle with focus to the point that I realize it is an issue I must deal with. I think here of focus as in faith, and what my mind is fixed on. And then from that, my heart, and all I am, as much as possible, by the Spirit and the Word in the Community of Jesus.

I am reminded of what I heard Richard Wurmbrand say years ago. Something like: "You will regret bitterly the weaknesses you have, that you encounter in your ministry." (a paraphrase, keeping the thought I remember). I often am going along fine. But before preaching or when doing a "ministry" activity, I am sorely tempted to focus on something that is a fear to me. That in reality is probably a lie, in and of itself. But in so doing, I find myself losing my focus on the Lord and lose out on the simplicity of the walk with him.

This is like Peter on the water. First he comes (evidently, especially knowing him from the gospels) unhesitatingly at Jesus' bidding, toward Jesus on the water! But then he is tempted to consider "reality". In so doing he loses his focus of faith. No longer is he looking at Jesus, but instead at the waves, whipped up by the wind on the water. Peter is sinking! Of course, in answer to his cry the Lord's hand is there to save him.

I remember in the past going up on a rope's course. It was very high (can't remember just how high, maybe 30 feet), especially for me, as I have a fear of heights. Just to get to the top for me was good. But being there, I was terrified. In fear I couldn't even go through the first rope without falling (of course one is kept safe and simply ends up hanging). And when I got to the other end, all I wanted to do was immediately climb down, which I did.

The next year I determined to do better. I was not going to look down, as I had my first time. I expressed my determination to do well, and not to be afraid this time, at which someone laughed (understandably so, given my other time on it).

I climbed to the top. Never once looked down. Did the entire ropes course. And never once fell! Though some of it was tricky. In all of that, I never lost focus. If I had slipped, that would have been a test of whether or not I would keep focus on what I had to do next. Though certainly exhilerating, and intense, I had avoided the paralyzing fear that comes with the loss of proper focus.

And so it is in our life in God. When danger comes our way, and seems to be in our face, we need to keep the faith. Fixing our eyes, as the writer of Hebrews tells us, on Jesus. Both in the personal-relational way. And in the way of the disciple, learning from our Mentor. From his life as recorded for us in the gospels. And from the Spirit teaching us. And all of this both in our aloneness, and especially in the community of Jesus.

How do we apply this focus? This is where we need to be in Scripture. There are various things we'll have to do. Including, perhaps, like Paul, glorying in our own weakness, because of "the thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan" that may trouble us. Because we know God's strength is made perfect in our weakness. Indeed, a most hard lesson to learn. Simply learning to keep our eyes, in faith on the faithful One: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

How about you? What have you learned about the focus of faith? What keeps you on track? Or helps you get back on track?

the religious roots of American democracy

This weekend on Speaking of Faith Krista Tippett had an interesting interview with Jacob Needleman, philosopher and author of the book, The American Soul: Rediscovering the Wisdom of the Founders, well worth listening to.

Needleman, I think, brings some balance and perspective into the tendency to simply brush off most of the founders of the United States as Deists and men of the Enlightenment, and not Christians. There is much good to be said for them, in spite of the truth in such an assertion.

Needleman himself seems to champion the Enlightenment. He sees it as good, stating that knowledge leads to good actions. Nevertheless his point about how the founders saw democracy compared to how Americans look at democracy today is interesting. In terms of how they saw "happiness", and how rights entailed responsibility for them, contrasted to the "individualism" that can so characterize us today. Also interesting is how Needleman sees the vision of the founding fathers as being appropriate and helpful for the pluralistic society America finds itself in today. A pluralism that is inclusive of all the good in religions, an understanding that many of the founding fathers were more than aware of.

While this does not make some of the leaders in the "religious right" correct about their assertions of the Christianity of the founders, it does provide some balance so that we can see and appreciate their keen insights that in themselves lay the groundwork for a progression towards the realization of the ideals of democracy in the republic, of which they held dear.

please pray again for Bob Robinson

Our blogger friend and servant of Christ is having problems with unstable blood pressure.

embracing grace 8: stories of the gospel story

Scot McKnight points out how the gospel we tell as evangelicals, is not as big as the gospel we find in Scripture. We confine ourselves to individual souls. But this gospel in Jesus is so much larger. It embraces all creation, and the entire story of it.

In fact this gospel is so big, that it takes several stories Christian theologians have come up with, over the centuries, to begin to tell it. The gospel in evangelical circles over the years has been confined to just one story. And it is a grand, glorious story. But to begin to know the depth and riches of it, as given to us from Scripture, requires several tellings of it, from differing perspectives seeing different aspects of it.

First there is Irenaeus, the story of recapitulation. Christ does for the human race what Adam failed to do. He undoes what Adam did. And in the words of this early theologian: "Our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through his transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself." Christ does this by his life, death, resurrection and ascension. We then are by faith part of a new race in Christ, living in this new life he has established for us.

The early theologians tell us the story of ransom. In their version, humankind is captive to Satan. God fools Satan by letting him put to death the Son of God. When Satan grasps the Son, he loses his hold on the human race. Then God mocks him, as the Son of God is raised from the dead. Today's version of this drops this scheme. Sin and systemic evil are dealt a death blow through Christ's death and resurrection. And humans are restored to their Eikonic status.

Anselm tells the story of satisfaction. God had been dishonored by Adam and Eve's sin. The Son of God by his death on the cross restores that honor to God. And along with that, humans are restored and God is honored in it all. Only the Son, finite as a human, but infinite as God, could restore the infinite honor to God along with restoring humans. He becoming like us so we could become like God.

The evangelical reformers tell us the story of penal substitution. God's wrath is factored in for them, against humanity's sin. Christ pays the penalty of God's just wrath by his death for us, as our substitue. Therefore God's wrath, in Christ is deflected from us humans. We must have faith to enter into this blessing, by which we are justified. Though the wrath aspect is controversial with some today, this story does point out that Jesus does something for us, in his death, that we cannot do for ourselves. And takes our judgment for us. Giving us his righteousness.

Abelard tells the story of the example. Christ's life and surrender to the will of God in the death of the cross is an example we're to follow. This is to be our way of life in Christ Jesus. We are to live cruciform, or Cross-formed lives.

The Story for us is a Person. In this Person, Jesus, we are embraced by God, and we embrace God. We have atonement, or at-one-ment in union with God and his will. The creeds of Christianity do not try to explain Christ's atonement, because no one theory of atonement can cover the depth and riches of the Story we find in Scripture. Pondering is good, but as Kevin Vanhoozer points out, partaking of this bread of life, who is the Lord, is better.

How would you define or describe the gospel? What story here matches your understanding best? What value do you see in each or any of the stories, especially those you are not familiar with?

less is more

I believe often that less is more. And because of that, often more is less.

Statements like this tend to be reductionistic and simplistic. For example there is an important place for reading much, and many books (and blogs?), and especially reading much Scripture- even if all of that is wearying to the body (Ecclesiastes). And it is good to be able to see the big picture along with its many parts.

But the point here is, I just don't believe we "multi-task" all that well. The other evening at our home group I was playing my guitar, and leading us in singing. Someone requested a hymn. I was trying to remember the words and hit the right chords at the same time. But dropped the ball on both, the failure to grasp the words breaking my concentration on hitting the right chords. It is something like that in the point here, I'm trying to make.

I'd rather give a one page handout, getting us into Scripture with some questions to facilitate discussion, than give a handout with reams and reams of material, that likely neither they nor I am really going to "get" very well. In this case, less is more, and more is less.

We want depth. We want substance, not only style, and certainly not "fluff". But this all takes time. As we build into our lives, and into the lives of others: line upon line, precept upon precept, working goodness and truth into our lives. Little by little. Until something grows, and continues to grow out of it.

As my blogger friend, Allan Bevere reminded me, the kingdom of God as a mustard seed is important for us, in our outlook of what is truly more and great. We find God at work in the little things of our relationships and of our lives. Taking us along one step- even if small- at a time.

What are your thoughts and experience here? Do you think this is a valid maxim (or generality)? Why or why not?

connecting personally

Last evening we had a home group of our church, in which I think there was a significant connecting to each other personally. And to some degree a connecting together to the Lord.

In much of what we do that is good, we can fail to connect, either with each other, or with God. I often fail to do this in my daily readings of Scripture. I fail to see this as a personal encounter with God. I am working on that.

First we must seek to be walking faithfully with God. As in personal communion with him. This is a walk by faith, not by feeling- though feelings come and go. And from that walk, we encounter others personally. This is a communion that includes God, even if at times we're unaware of that.

Relationship is central in God's eyes. The heart, mind, strength in activities, and life-activity in general are all important, but peripheral to that. Relationship to God, and to each other- in love, is what each of these aspects of life are about, the heart of our living. The Jesus Creed. Loving in response to God's love for us, in Christ.

What keeps us from personally relating to God? To each other? What is the kingdom of God like, as to the place and experience of relationships? What helps relationships become strong and growing, in spite of the difficulties all relationships have? Where is to be our first love? And what does that look like in our lives?

United States: dangerous nation?

Robert Kagan, author of a new book, Dangerous Nation, was interviewed. Worth listening to for me. And the book looks interesting too. An excerpt is shared on the same page.

I think his thoughts help me take a more realistic view towards the United States of America, my country. He helps us avoid an unreal ideal attributed to the founding and earlier years of our nation. This nation is made up of humans who do good and bad things. Motives have not, nor always are completely good. Though the United States has often seen itself as an agent of good will toward humanity, as in what we're doing now, in trying to bring democracy to other peoples, so that they might enjoy ideals that some of us think are intrinsic to human beings.

Of course we get into all kinds of problems philosophically here. And I don't want, neither very well can go into that in this post (or any post). But my point here is that we need to take leaders and their policies for what they are. Maybe poor judgment. Generally well meaning for others, with not a little of our own interests factored in. This is a part of our American heritage, if one is to believe Kagan. I, at least in large part, do.

Does the book live up to its name? Based on the interview alone, I rather doubt it. Though Kagan does have some hard things to say about the United States. And in some ways sees this nation as an empire (benevolent, certainly not in the same category as the Third Reich), but in other ways- not (as compared with the Roman empire). The book, I believe helps us see the fallibility of our leaders from the beginning. But is richly nuanced, if I can judge by the interview itself. So that we're left with some complexity about American ideals and actions. And basically see a nation that wants to do good by its standards, sometimes fails, often succeeds. But with consequences that can be a mixed blessing.

So if you have a little time, and are so inclined, I would encourage you to give this interview a listen. And read the excerpt from Kagan's new book, as well. Then give us your thoughts, if you like, about it.