Crucifying Bad Theology

 “You can run on for a long time, but sooner or later God’s ‘ill cut you down.” Christ died even for us. Why does good theology matter? Is it because we have books like unChristian giving us statistics of a failing Church? Is it because we have authors like Kenda Dean exploring a moralistic therapeutic deistic culture? Absolutely. We need good theology if young people are abandoning the Church because the very thought of Christians equals bigoted hypocrites. We need good theology if all that matters about God is whether or not we are good people. More than that, we need good theology because it changes lives.

How does good theology change lives? Lutherans have had good theology since Martin Luther decided to deconstruct the core of the Church. If it doesn’t point us to the cross and the work of Christ, it doesn’t matter. Perhaps it is easy to take this for granted or to appeal to experience to “find God,” but good theology is life-changing precisely because it cannot be found and it does not rely on human experience. That’s not to say it doesn’t cause experience. Good theology is life-changing because it finds the lost and leads the blind. Good theology reconstructed in the redemption of the cross of Jesus Christ.

“You can run on for a long time, but sooner or later God’s ‘ill cut you down.” Christ died even for us. What does it mean to have good theology? Our academic and practical theologies have no separation. Good theology is put into praxis. Beyond that Good theology has the crucified God at its crux. Theology is nothing apart from the work of the cross. Our redemption lies within the crucifixion and our reconciliation is rooted in resurrection. The law tells us that God will cut sinners down; conjunctively, the Gospel tells us Christ died even for us.

Good theology matters because the gracious work of Christ is at its core. It is life-altering for people who’ve never known the grace of God or for people who have been blinded by bad theology (which does not point to the work of Christ through the cross). Guilt may be a more powerful motivator than grace, but it doesn’t make it good. Where, then, do we go from here? We go where God is found, where we are led, to the foot of the cross. If you’ve never known the grace of the cross of Jesus Christ or you’ve been trapped by the guilt and shame of piety that puts the role of justification in your hands; by the work of God alone, through the cross of Christ alone, grace is sufficient for you.   

  

What Type of Role Model are You; The False Dichotomy of Role Models

It’s been a quiet month for The Dialect of Praxis, but many thoughts have been brewing, and it’s about to get a little louder. Among the percolating questions, who are role models, why do so many Christians misunderstand mental illness, and Sanctification; what happens after Justification? Today’s post, “What type of role model are you; The False Dichotomy of Role Models” (we’ll get to the other questions another day).

Everybody is a role model. But, not everyone is the same type of role model and maybe some people shouldn’t be afforded the title. Everyone’s a role model, but not everyone wants the job.

“I'm not a role model... Just because I dunk a basketball doesn't mean I should raise your kids” (Charles Barkley).

“I would like to be called an inspiration to people, not a role model - because I make mistakes like everybody else. When I'm offstage, I'm just like everybody else” (Britney Spears).

“I’m not a “Role Model,” I don’t wanna babysit kids…” (Eminem).

The previously quoted celebrities claim they are not role models and I feel sorry for them. Few people choose or feel called to be role models, but it’s not that simple. It used to be, parents, teachers, ministers, and prominent public figures that were bestowed the title of role model. Thanks, in large part, to the internet, no one is exempt from the title. If you come into contact with other human beings, you are a role model, but what type of role model are you?

To be a role model is an arduous task and all have been designated with the job, but not all share the same responsibility. NBA super-stars, like Barkley, may be an example to kids and/or admirers, but their examples may not be what parents want for their kids; that’s why celebrities and public figures are generic-role-models. The difference between celebs, parents, and people like me, job description defines what kind of role model responsibilities come with the position.

Public figures, like celebrities, teachers, and ministers have two things in common: first, they are not primary-role-models; second, if they don’t want to be criticized for their influence they’re in for a bumpy ride. Hence, this is where I let celebrities off the responsibility train. Their example (intended or otherwise) is one of a generic-role-model and their job description is only the technical definition of “role model.”

Teachers and ministers make a decision or fill a calling; as a result, they are secondary-role-models.  A secondary-role-model has more responsibility than celebrities (who are generic-role-models). Teachers and ministers were hired (professionally and voluntarily) to fill an, intentionally, influential position. As secondary-role-models, they will receive more critical reviews. As a Ministry Worker (and a human being) I don’t enjoy heavy criticisms of what I say or do, but it comes with the job description. Thus, the difference for secondary-role-models (like me) and generic-role-models­ (like celebrities and public figures) is we have a greater responsibility to respond to our critics. This reality does not give us primary responsibility.

Parents are the primary-role-models. It is a parent’s job description to raise their children in the ways they think best and they have the most responsibility for the behavior they want their children to emulate. If parents want their kids to be educated, it is on them to foster good work habits and environments, it is up to them to work with teachers, and it is up to them to be the primary example of learning for their children. If a parent wants their child to have lifelong faith discipleship, then a parent has to model the example of faith that they hope their children will live out. As a Youth Minister, I will teach young people the scriptures and foster orthodoxy to the best of my abilities, and encourage orthopraxy, but the job of faith discipleship starts with the parent.

Bottom line, all people are role models, but parents are primary-role-models, educators and ministers are secondary-role-models, and celebrities and public figures are generic-role-models. No one is exempt (thank you Social Media, Internet, and human communication). All aforementioned role models fail and God’s grace is sufficient. Jesus, the Role Model of Role Models, died for all of us role models (called humans) out of grace for our imperfect modeling; may we look to the cross in humility, as none of us has been afforded our positions as role models, without the work of God.

  

On Christian Religion, Jesus, and Scripture: Why Religion Matters

“‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill” (Mt. 5:17, NRSV).

One cannot preach grace with a machinegun for a microphone.

This past week, twelve million Christians debated over a video that says Jesus>Religion. Jefferson, the Spoken Word creator of the video has a lot to say about Jesus and religion. Is this man preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ or condemning people who call themselves Christians? Yes. In addition to what I’ve said elsewhere, does the Bible back up the claims of the popular video? Yes and no.

Definitions are important. First, who is Jesus? Jesus is the Son of God, fully man and fully God, he lived, he died (by crucifixion on the cross), and he resurrected from the dead. The work of the cross was done for the redemption of all people because all suffer from a chronic affliction called sin.

Second, what is religion? It is, “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs” (Dictionary.com).

What does Jesus>Religion claim and is it scriptural? Claim one, “Jesus came to abolish religion.” I could not find this in scripture, but here’s what I did find: “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments” (Mt.19:16-21; Mt. 5:17). Claim two, “Just because you call some people blind, doesn’t automatically give you vision.” True, but that judgment was Jesus’ call (Jn. 9:39-41) and I’d suggest it stay his call. Claim three, “If religion is so great, why does it [insert negative here]?” Religion isn’t the problem; sin is the problem (Ps. 25:6-12).

The claims of Jesus>Religion continue. Claim four, “But, in the Old Testament, God actually calls religious people whores.” This is a bit of a stretch, but the Israelites were called whores because God knew they were inclined to sin and turn from the covenant they had made with the Lord (Deut.31:15-21, ESV). Claim five, “Religion might preach grace, but another thing they practice.”It is true; Christians are guilty of not practicing what they preach. However, grace is from God (Jn. 1:16-18). And, scripture says a lot more on religion and grace (Mt. 5:3-7:27; Acts15:5-11).

Three out of five is pretty good, right? Claim six, “Now I ain’t judging; I’m just saying, quit putting on a fake look because there’s a problem if people only know you’re a Christian by your Facebook.” Unless one is going to take time to disciple “Facebook Christians” this remark is ill-advised (Gal. 6:2-5).

Turning to the opposition of Jesus>Religion; Jesus=Religion. What does the opposition claim? Claim one, “Where do you get off speakin’ up for the man risen from the dead, without botherin’ to quote a single word that he said?” While the point may be valid, it deters from a message of grace and contradicts Jesus’ teaching: “Whoever is not against us is for us” (Mk. 9:38-40).

Since I’m a Lutheran, I share more views with the Jesus=Religion author, but I will compare one point of controversy from each video. “Because, if grace is water, the Church should be an ocean” (Jesus>Religion). “The grace is the water, this baptism now saves you, and the Church is the place where this giving out raises you” (Jesus=Religion). Does scripture support salvation through baptism? Yes and it’s been a heated debate for  easily five-hundred years. We are baptized into Christ’s death and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-7). Thus, baptism brings us into Christ’s resurrection (1Pet. 3:18-22). This is orthodoxy, not heresy, and there are other views if you don’t agree with it.

Finally, Jesus is greater than religion, but religion points believers to the grace of the cross. Both of these rhyming You Tube preachers have solid points and a common problem. As servants of the Lord, Christians are called to humility: “The fear of the Lord is instruction in wisdom, and humility goes before honor” (Pro. 15:33, NRSV). Where the first falsely slanders religion, the other mocks his brother’s folly, and both preach grace with a machinegun.

“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Lk. 23:34, KJV).

Religion and the Internet vs. Systemic Affliction

I abandoned the regular flow of dialect to engage the works of others: Lewis, Dostoyevsky, and DeVries. As a result, I’ve enjoyed the invitation to minister to people in the absence of writing. With my eyes fixed on the cross, this blog seems less essential to my being. But, some thoughts have been stirring that I thought I’d share with you all.

Religion is not the problem, as some might suggest, it is infected by what afflicts the greater systemic issue. Religion is meant to serve as a GPS to the cross (where we find God) and the negative symptoms occur when we abandon our navigational tools. Religion is a stabilizer to our experiential and emotional perceptions; it is a set of beliefs, constructed of theologies and philosophies, which do not waiver when we don’t feel good about God. Sadly, religion tends to get the blame for things it has little or nothing to do with and its definition gets lost.  

The greater affliction I mentioned earlier, infect more than just religion. The internet is a relevant example, a system within systems, which is meant to serve the user. Our systemic affliction takes algorithms meant to customize sites (like Google, Facebook, Netflix, and more) and reveals an ugly symptom of the greater affliction (the symptom being individualism). If “it’s all about me” it’s no wonder we point fingers at systems, like religion and the internet.

Dear friends, life is the system and it is afflicted by a chronic condition, the sin nature. Sin isn’t popular and it may be over emphasized in some denominations, but it is a real affliction. Thankfully, religion tells us that the God of the cross died for us. Christ’s death is the antidote for our chronic affliction and the systemic affliction is given over to the hope of resurrection. This is the work of God, through the gift of grace. And that, my friends, is the definition of religion.  

"Just a Song," Girls, (Father, Son, Holy Ghost; music only)

At the Cross Roads of Orthodoxy and Existentialism

“We must distinguish between what we should believe (orthodoxy) and what we actually believe (existential faith).” – Craig C. Broyles

I found these words in my scholarly reading a couple of years ago and thought they were pretty cool. A few days ago, I saw them in a flashback Facebook status. Since then, I’ve been marinating on the essential quality of this statement.

As a person who generally understands the divine through orthodoxy, theology, and intellectualism, I rarely relate to experiential and existential interpretations of the divine. Ironically, life has its way of screwing with orthodoxy through our experiences. Lately, I’ve asked a lot of “why” questions and said a lot of “I don’t knows.” Orthodoxy doesn’t make me feel better; nothing does. Yet, I’m not one to endorse therapeutic-deism – I don’t think God’s here to make me feel better about life. Therefore, when that viewpoint gets thrown into upheaval by experiences, what is one to do? When the going gets tough, most of us want to get the hell out of dodge. 

Sometimes, we get caught behind “the fan” and existential faith wins. At present moment, what I’m thinking, feeling, experiencing, and believing contradicts my orthodoxy. I wanna feel better about the God who walked away. Translation, I’m feeling like a therapeutic-deist. However, orthodoxy tells me to look to God, who’s found at the cross, and leave my shit there. Orthodoxy also tells me that God has given us the gift of faith. In spite of the fact that my existential faith is stewing in frustration – over the seemingly inactive divine God – it is orthodoxy that allows me to look to the cross and relay on God, the giver of faith, when I feel hopeless.