Posts
Today, I wanted to share with you a passage from Thomas a Kempis' Imitation of Christ.
Everyone naturally desires knowledge, but of what use is knowledge itself without the fear of God? A humble countryman who serves God is more pleasing to Him than a conceited intellectual who knows the course of the stars, but neglects his own soul. A man who truly knows himself realises his own worthlessness, and takes no pleasure in the praises of men. Did I possess all knowledge in the world, but had no love, how would this help me before God, who will judge me by my deeds?
Restrain an inordinate desire for knowledge, in which is found much anxiety and deception. Learned men always wish to appear so, and desire recognition of their wisdom. But there are many matters, knowledge of which brings little or no advantage to the soul. Indeed, a man is unwise if he occupies himself with anything save those that further his salvation. A spate of words does nothing to satisfy the soul, but a good life refreshes the mind, and a clean conscious brings great confidence in God.
The more complete and excellent your knowledge, the more severe will be God's judgment on you, unless your life be the more holy. Therefore, do not be conceited of any skill or knowledge you may possess, but respect the knowledge that is entrusted to you. If it seems to you that you know a great deal and have wide experience in many fields, yet remember there are many matters of which you are ignorant. So do not be conceited, but confess your ignorance. Why do you wish to esteem yourself above others, when there are many who are wiser and more perfect in the law of God? If you desire to know or learn anything to your advantage, then take delight in being unknown and unregarded.
A true understanding and humble estimate of oneself is the highest and most valuable of all lessons. To take no account of oneself, but always to think well and highly of others is the highest wisdom and perfection. Should you see another person openly doing evil, or carrying out a wicked purpose, do not on that account consider yourself better than him, for you cannot tell how long you will remain in a state of grace. We are all frail; consider none more frail than yourself.
I loved this passage, even though I found it very challenging. I think I often focus more on gaining knowledge about God, than I actually do on knowing God. I place a high value on learning gaining information and reading lots of books and being 'knowledgeable'. And although there's nothing wrong with that, this passage reminds me that it's not really that important. And sometimes it can actually lead us away from what God wants us to do.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Americanisation of Christianity
There’s no doubt about it, the world is becoming more Americanised. American products and entertainments are invading our countries, our towns and our homes. We watch American movies and television products. We eat American food and drink American drinks. Our teenagers dress like Americans and think like Americans. Here in Australia, we almost seem to be more American than Australian at times.
It shouldn’t come as any surprise that this Americanisation of the world is extending into religion. The fastest growing church is the Pentecostal church – which so happens to be the most American. We read American Christian books. We watch American Christian TV programs. Pastors are influenced by American teachings. And much of what Christians say or think or pass on come from American sources.
Now I certainly wouldn’t want to suggest that everything that comes from America is bad. Many of the books I love have been written by American authors. And most, if not all, of the movies I love were produced in Hollywood. My two favourite bands are Bon Jovi and Switchfoot; both of them American. I drink Diet Coke as if I’d die of thirst without it. Let’s face it. One of the reasons why Americanisation is so successful is they know how to produce some good stuff. Or maybe they just produce so much stuff that some of it has to be good.
I like American products. I just don’t like Americanisation. When it comes to Americanisation of religion, I think there are some very real dangers.
Firstly, Americans – by definition – live in America. They are shaped by American culture and they speak to people who are shaped by that same culture. Admittedly, here in Australia, that translates pretty well. Our lifestyle and culture is very similar to America. But even here, there are differences. For instance, when it comes to evangelising, what works in America wouldn’t necessarily work in Australia. We don’t see things in quite the same way.
The second danger is that, when we read the same views in book after book and hear them on TV program after TV program, we may begin to think that there is a strong biblical basis for these views. Whereas, in fact, they are really only products of the American culture. We find the same views because the people are all influenced by the country they live in. American thinking is not necessarily Christian thinking.
Thirdly, when the bulk of our information about the Christian faith comes from the one country, it gives us a very narrow view of Christianity. Because our writers and speakers all live in America – and quite often are themselves influenced by other American theologians – they can have a very similar message. Basically, they say almost the same thing. Now I tend to search out books that have something new and fresh to say. But I remember when I first became a Christian, every single book I picked up seemed to talk about the same things in the same way. For a while I stopped reading Christian books. Why bother? I had heard it all before.
There’s not much we can do about the Americanisation of religion. They produce more books because they can. They have the resources to do more television programs. And even if I could, I’m not sure I would want to stop it. Maybe some of the books that wouldn’t make it to Australia would be those books that I really enjoy.
However, I challenge you to let yourselves be influenced by non-American sources. Read books written by other writers. Research Christians in other countries. Don’t let yourself believe that the American view of Christianity is the gospel truth.
It shouldn’t come as any surprise that this Americanisation of the world is extending into religion. The fastest growing church is the Pentecostal church – which so happens to be the most American. We read American Christian books. We watch American Christian TV programs. Pastors are influenced by American teachings. And much of what Christians say or think or pass on come from American sources.
Now I certainly wouldn’t want to suggest that everything that comes from America is bad. Many of the books I love have been written by American authors. And most, if not all, of the movies I love were produced in Hollywood. My two favourite bands are Bon Jovi and Switchfoot; both of them American. I drink Diet Coke as if I’d die of thirst without it. Let’s face it. One of the reasons why Americanisation is so successful is they know how to produce some good stuff. Or maybe they just produce so much stuff that some of it has to be good.
I like American products. I just don’t like Americanisation. When it comes to Americanisation of religion, I think there are some very real dangers.
Firstly, Americans – by definition – live in America. They are shaped by American culture and they speak to people who are shaped by that same culture. Admittedly, here in Australia, that translates pretty well. Our lifestyle and culture is very similar to America. But even here, there are differences. For instance, when it comes to evangelising, what works in America wouldn’t necessarily work in Australia. We don’t see things in quite the same way.
The second danger is that, when we read the same views in book after book and hear them on TV program after TV program, we may begin to think that there is a strong biblical basis for these views. Whereas, in fact, they are really only products of the American culture. We find the same views because the people are all influenced by the country they live in. American thinking is not necessarily Christian thinking.
Thirdly, when the bulk of our information about the Christian faith comes from the one country, it gives us a very narrow view of Christianity. Because our writers and speakers all live in America – and quite often are themselves influenced by other American theologians – they can have a very similar message. Basically, they say almost the same thing. Now I tend to search out books that have something new and fresh to say. But I remember when I first became a Christian, every single book I picked up seemed to talk about the same things in the same way. For a while I stopped reading Christian books. Why bother? I had heard it all before.
There’s not much we can do about the Americanisation of religion. They produce more books because they can. They have the resources to do more television programs. And even if I could, I’m not sure I would want to stop it. Maybe some of the books that wouldn’t make it to Australia would be those books that I really enjoy.
However, I challenge you to let yourselves be influenced by non-American sources. Read books written by other writers. Research Christians in other countries. Don’t let yourself believe that the American view of Christianity is the gospel truth.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Allowing people to write themselves into the bible was never going to work
Recently, a bible was put on display at Glasgow’s Gallery of Modern Art and people were invited to write themselves back into its pages. However, within a short period of time, there were so many obscene messages, that the artist, Jane Clarke, a Christian minister who has an outreach to gay, lesbian and transgendered people, was forced to place it under a glass case. People were still invited to write comments into it, but they had to do so on loose leaf pages, which were then inserted inside the bible.
At first glance, it sounds like a good idea. The kind of feel-good act, that leaves everybody feeling better. So why did it fail? Perhaps it was because there were too many flaws in the idea from the start.
The major problem in the whole set-up is that it presumed that people would respect the bible. They just want a chance to write themselves back into it. It’s easy for Christians to make assumptions about people’s attitudes towards the bible, that simply aren’t there in the wider community. In a church setting, most people either consider the bible as the sacred word of God or are at least willing to engage it. When we look beyond the church, however, that respect and willing to engage is not always there.
In fact, sometimes people can have very negative attitudes and even hostility towards the bible. I have had someone stand in front of me and swear at God for half an hour. And I don’t think the feelings expressed then were that uncommon.
In all fairness, inviting people to write in the bible may have been a way to address that hostility. If people could simply write what they wanted to in the bible, then they would no longer be angry.
And perhaps it might have worked if the only reason people feel anger or hostility towards God is because they feel excluded. But that’s simply not the case. Yes, there are many Christians who feel rejected by the church. But it should be noted that being rejected by the church is not the same as being excluded from the bible. Also, there are people who are angry with God for what Christians have done, or how they feel God has treated them, or because they think God’s angry with them or doesn’t accept them as they are or is trying to impose a whole lot of rules that they simply cannot keep.
Despite the fact that writing our own messages in the bible does not really address this at any deep level, it’s also not the full story. Some people are angry with God because they want to be. The problem is not so much that the church has rejected them, it’s that they have rejected God. They’re not looking for someone to welcome them back into God’s family. They want no part of it. If Jesus came down from Heaven himself and rolled out the red carpet, they would walk away. For such people, an open bible and a pen is not a chance to re-include themselves, but simply a chance for them to express their anger.
The other problem with the open bible approach is that it’s not really being excluded from the bible that is the problem. Many people feel rejected (or sadly are rejected) by Christians, not because the bible fails to mention them, but because it does. It mentions their sins. Now we are all sinners and there is not a single person alive who does not have at least one of their sins mentioned in the bible. But it’s often the sins that are mentioned in the bible that make people feel excluded. To feel accepted again would not be a matter of writing themselves back in, but of writing their sins out.
And another problem with this whole episode is that it panders to the desire that most (if not all of us) have to simply write our own bibles. I don’t like this, so let’s cross it out. That needs to be changed, let’s edit it. Perhaps we don’t take a pen and physically do this. But whenever we read a bible, we have a tendency to read ourselves into it. We don’t need an invitation. It’s human nature. I heard one (rich) pastor say that Jesus must have been rich, because God would not have wanted his son to be poor. That’s writing himself into the bible. Just add a few words and feel good about all the money you have.
Yes, there are people out there who feel rejected by God and rejected by the church. And I do commend Jane Clarke for trying to do something to make people feel accepted. But the type of exclusion that many people face is not going to be solved by writing a few words next to Leviticus 18:22.
Perhaps instead of writing ourselves into the bible, we should start writing the bible into our hearts.
At first glance, it sounds like a good idea. The kind of feel-good act, that leaves everybody feeling better. So why did it fail? Perhaps it was because there were too many flaws in the idea from the start.
The major problem in the whole set-up is that it presumed that people would respect the bible. They just want a chance to write themselves back into it. It’s easy for Christians to make assumptions about people’s attitudes towards the bible, that simply aren’t there in the wider community. In a church setting, most people either consider the bible as the sacred word of God or are at least willing to engage it. When we look beyond the church, however, that respect and willing to engage is not always there.
In fact, sometimes people can have very negative attitudes and even hostility towards the bible. I have had someone stand in front of me and swear at God for half an hour. And I don’t think the feelings expressed then were that uncommon.
In all fairness, inviting people to write in the bible may have been a way to address that hostility. If people could simply write what they wanted to in the bible, then they would no longer be angry.
And perhaps it might have worked if the only reason people feel anger or hostility towards God is because they feel excluded. But that’s simply not the case. Yes, there are many Christians who feel rejected by the church. But it should be noted that being rejected by the church is not the same as being excluded from the bible. Also, there are people who are angry with God for what Christians have done, or how they feel God has treated them, or because they think God’s angry with them or doesn’t accept them as they are or is trying to impose a whole lot of rules that they simply cannot keep.
Despite the fact that writing our own messages in the bible does not really address this at any deep level, it’s also not the full story. Some people are angry with God because they want to be. The problem is not so much that the church has rejected them, it’s that they have rejected God. They’re not looking for someone to welcome them back into God’s family. They want no part of it. If Jesus came down from Heaven himself and rolled out the red carpet, they would walk away. For such people, an open bible and a pen is not a chance to re-include themselves, but simply a chance for them to express their anger.
The other problem with the open bible approach is that it’s not really being excluded from the bible that is the problem. Many people feel rejected (or sadly are rejected) by Christians, not because the bible fails to mention them, but because it does. It mentions their sins. Now we are all sinners and there is not a single person alive who does not have at least one of their sins mentioned in the bible. But it’s often the sins that are mentioned in the bible that make people feel excluded. To feel accepted again would not be a matter of writing themselves back in, but of writing their sins out.
And another problem with this whole episode is that it panders to the desire that most (if not all of us) have to simply write our own bibles. I don’t like this, so let’s cross it out. That needs to be changed, let’s edit it. Perhaps we don’t take a pen and physically do this. But whenever we read a bible, we have a tendency to read ourselves into it. We don’t need an invitation. It’s human nature. I heard one (rich) pastor say that Jesus must have been rich, because God would not have wanted his son to be poor. That’s writing himself into the bible. Just add a few words and feel good about all the money you have.
Yes, there are people out there who feel rejected by God and rejected by the church. And I do commend Jane Clarke for trying to do something to make people feel accepted. But the type of exclusion that many people face is not going to be solved by writing a few words next to Leviticus 18:22.
Perhaps instead of writing ourselves into the bible, we should start writing the bible into our hearts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
AddThis
