Salt and Cotton

I just finished reading How (Not) to Speak of God by Peter Rollins (on the second try!).  It is not an easy read - I think a lot of it went right over my head, but the parts I did understand were very interesting.

It seems to be mostly rejecting the binary thinking of modernism.  In Chapter 2, he talks about how God is both transcendent and immanent. Instead of treating them as opposites, he compares transcendence to the sun. You can't really look at the sun without being overwhelmed by its light. In the same way, God is so present that we are overwhelmed by his presence.  Okay, so I didn't explain that very well - this is the part I am having trouble understanding!

In Chapter 3, he discusses apologetics.  He says there are two main types of apologetics.  Both try to compel people to believe "regardless of their motives or the nature of their desire." (p. 36)  Rather than trying to have all the answers, he says the job of the Church is to help people ask the questions that will lead them to seek God, and have faith that those who seek will find. 

Throughout the book, he talks about interpreting the Bible.  We are naturally interpretive. When I look at something, I don't see it just as shapes and colors, but my brain tells me what it is. It interprets the data provided by my eyes and other senses. In the same way, we cannot read the Bible in a neutral, bias-free way.  We always bring our background, experiences, church traditions, etc.  But if that's true, does that mean that there are infinite ways to interpret the Bible?  He says no and explains it with math. :)  Infinity describes the endless set of numbers.  Transfinite is the infinite set of numbers between two numbers (like between 1 and 2, there is 1.2, 1.3. 1.31, etc.)  So while there are many ways we can understand something in the Bible, there are limits on it.  While people may disagree on exactly what "God is love" means, it can't mean to hate others.

In the last chapter, Rollins uses an illustration to explain how different denominations can both be "correct."  Two camels are both traveling to market.  One is carrying salt and the other is carrying cotton.  On the way, they have to cross a river. On reaching the opposite bank, the camel carrying the salt finds new strength and increases its pace (since the river dissolved part of the salt). The camel carrying the cotton, on the other hand, quickly collapses under its burden of soaking wet cotton. He compares different churches and denominations to the river.  It affected the camels differently because of what they were carrying. Churches can be the same.  A church may help one person grow while burdening or oppressing someone else. This is something I really need to remember - just because a church isn't a good place for me doesn't mean it isn't a good place for anybody.

This book has certainly given me a lot to think about.  Some things in the book seem to be things I was already thinking about.  Some are completely new and I'm not even sure I understand them yet.

Sabbath

Last week, I listened to a sermon by Ruth Haley Barton called "Longing for Rest." It has really given me a lot to think about this week. She talks about how God made us to need a Sabbath, but in today's world, we don't often slow down even for one evening, let alone a whole day. It runs seriously counter to our culture to take a day where I can say "I didn't do anything today," and not feel guilty about that.

She gave some guidelines for keeping the Sabbath. She said the day is for rest, worship, and delight. I found that interesting. She basically said that defining "work" is really up to each individual or family. The example she gave is yard work. Some people find that to be work and shouldn't do it on the Sabbath. Other people find that digging in the dirt and working with plants feeds their soul and so it is a form of rest and connecting with God's creation.

I have spent the week thinking about what that means for me. I'm still not sure. I think starting to keep the Sabbath will be a very hard thing to do. For me, I like to spend Saturday resting since I am so tired from teaching all week. However, I have found that when I have papers to grade over the weekend, it kind of feels like they are hanging over my head all weekend, and I really can't stop thinking about them. Perhaps a better plan would be to spend Friday night finishing up my work from the week, Saturday doing the "work" that is different from my weekday work, and then have Sunday to devote to rest, worship, and delight. 

Evangelism

Okay, so I was listening to another Mars Hill sermon yesterday (The Importance of Beginning at the Beginning) and it got me thinking about evangelism. I always approach evangelism with all the enthusiasm that I give to cleaning the toilet.  "Aw, man, I REALLY don't want to do this, but I guess it needs to be done."  Actually, it might even be less enthusiasm because at least when I clean the toilet I get the feeling that I accomplished something.  So, I started wondering why I've felt this way.  In the sermon, Rob Bell says that where you begin a story affects what the story even is.  The story I had always heard in the church basically started in Genesis 3 with the fall.  We all have fallen short of the glory of God and need to be "saved."  That's true, but it seems to me that the story is bigger than that.  Is that all Jesus can do?  Get rid of sin? If you start the story of God in Genesis 1, it becomes the story of how God created the world and it was good.  And he wants it to still be good, so he is in the process of renewing it, restoring it.  That includes me and you. It includes getting rid of sin, but it's so much bigger than that.  It's God restoring the whole world back to the way he wants it to be.  Now, that seems like a story worth telling!!!

Eating and Drinking

Over the past year or so, I have been listening to the sermons from Mars Hill Bible Church, Rob Bell's church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I am amazed week after week at what the speakers have to say (Rob Bell, Ed Dobson, Kent Dobson, and many guest speakers). Every time, they seem to bring up things in a way I have never thought of before!  Today, I listened to a sermon by Ed Dobson from August (I'm a few months behind!) called The Sacred Obligation of Eating. It was the sermon for their communion Sunday. He raised some interesting ideas, although I'm not sure I understand what the main point was. In Genesis, he pointed out that sin came into the world through eating. Then he showed in Matthew how Jesus asked his disciples to remember him through eating. And the Tree of Life from Genesis shows up again in Revelation. I thought that was very interesting. He said in Genesis we have "paradise lost" and in Revelation "paradise regained."  And in the middle is Jesus and what he did to restore the world. And we are supposed to remember what he did by eating and drinking.  Here is something I have been wondering about since I started looking into first century Jewish culture: They all ate bread and drank wine. That was a normal meal. So when Jesus asked his disciples to "do this in remembrance of me," did he mean a special meal like the Passover, or did he mean every time they ate?

Another topic in the sermon is giving thanks for our food. He points out that from a Jewish point of view, asking God to bless the food is absurd, since God has already blessed the food when he sent the rain and caused it to grow. Instead, they bless the God who has already provided the blessing of food. It reminds me of The Fiddler on the Roof when they ask the rabbi if there is a blessing for a sewing machine and he answers that there is a blessing for everything! If we remember the source of all good things, of course, there is a blessing for everything!

Blessed is he who gave humans the intelligence to invent computers and the internet.