Sunday, December 09, 2007
The Collection, Tithing Controversy, and Christmas Commercialism
The collection is one of Paul's most intriguing projects. Paul walks on eggshells through II Corinthians 8 and 9 as he seeks to inspire the church in Corinth to part with their material goods in order to send them to a group of people in a far off country, who they probably would never meet, and who likely would not have entered their church much less sat down to eat with them. Despite other considerable obstacles including traveling with large sums of money, risking the appearance of mismanaging funds, and the very real possibility that the Christian church in Jerusalem would refuse the tainted though badly needed money, Paul pressed forward with the collection. His reasons for proceeding with this risky and thorny project have implications for our own practice of tithing and our celebration of Christmas
There is an ongoing debate in Christianity over tithe. The Biblical precedent for tithing is circumstantial and nearly exclusively based on the Old Testament. Within Adventism, the debate is not generally over whether or not to tithe, but how and where our tithe money should be used. Those of us who have a more congregational bent would like to see the majority of our tithe kept in our own church for local mission. On the other hand, combining our collective 10 percent with the money from other churches in our area provides financial support for smaller churches, schools, camps, and other ministries, thus effectively expanding our local mission to a larger area. In addition, some of the money then goes up to higher levels of the organization, eventually supporting the international church. Although Paul's collection does not exactly correspond to our practice of tithing, the principle of giving to expand our limited world view and to unite a growing, diverse, global community applies well in both cases.
Always a hot topic around the holidays, Christmas commercialism is gaining in both attention and condemnation this year. Many of the comments in a recent article in the religion section of The Birmingham News suggest the answer is to simply stop giving gifts at Christmas. This may work well for some families. However, there are many who find meaning in the giving of gifts and to deny them this pleasure would only serve to diminish their holiday cheer. For Paul, the collection was never about the money. Instead, it was about the motives inspiring the gift and the relationships revealed and formed in the giving and receiving. If this perspective is carried into our Christmas giving this year, perhaps we can continue our holiday traditions with our humanity intact.
In II Corinthians 10:5, Paul writes that every thought should be taken captive in Christ. Rather than reading this as just another example of Christian elitism, expecting everyone to become like us and accept our point of view, could we live this text out in our experience of the Holiday Season and with intentional thought and Christlike humility seek to bless our family, friends, and the rest of the least of these? The God who became man and moved into the neighborhood has shown us how to be a good giver. This Christmas will you consider with me the way our giving expands our world view, enhances relationships, and helps us become a part of the Kingdom of God?
Here are a few links to websites that may stimulate ideas to enhance our giving this year. If you've got some other ideas, post them below in a comment. Thanks!
Fair trade?
http://tradeasone.com/
Tree hugger?
http://www.treehugger.com/giftguide/
Want a guide for what's good?
http://www.unclemark.org/unclemark2008.pdf
Pass on the gift?
http://www.heifer.org/
Really useful gift?
http://www.adra.org/site/PageServer?pagename=cat07_Ecommerce_home
There is an ongoing debate in Christianity over tithe. The Biblical precedent for tithing is circumstantial and nearly exclusively based on the Old Testament. Within Adventism, the debate is not generally over whether or not to tithe, but how and where our tithe money should be used. Those of us who have a more congregational bent would like to see the majority of our tithe kept in our own church for local mission. On the other hand, combining our collective 10 percent with the money from other churches in our area provides financial support for smaller churches, schools, camps, and other ministries, thus effectively expanding our local mission to a larger area. In addition, some of the money then goes up to higher levels of the organization, eventually supporting the international church. Although Paul's collection does not exactly correspond to our practice of tithing, the principle of giving to expand our limited world view and to unite a growing, diverse, global community applies well in both cases.
Always a hot topic around the holidays, Christmas commercialism is gaining in both attention and condemnation this year. Many of the comments in a recent article in the religion section of The Birmingham News suggest the answer is to simply stop giving gifts at Christmas. This may work well for some families. However, there are many who find meaning in the giving of gifts and to deny them this pleasure would only serve to diminish their holiday cheer. For Paul, the collection was never about the money. Instead, it was about the motives inspiring the gift and the relationships revealed and formed in the giving and receiving. If this perspective is carried into our Christmas giving this year, perhaps we can continue our holiday traditions with our humanity intact.
In II Corinthians 10:5, Paul writes that every thought should be taken captive in Christ. Rather than reading this as just another example of Christian elitism, expecting everyone to become like us and accept our point of view, could we live this text out in our experience of the Holiday Season and with intentional thought and Christlike humility seek to bless our family, friends, and the rest of the least of these? The God who became man and moved into the neighborhood has shown us how to be a good giver. This Christmas will you consider with me the way our giving expands our world view, enhances relationships, and helps us become a part of the Kingdom of God?
Here are a few links to websites that may stimulate ideas to enhance our giving this year. If you've got some other ideas, post them below in a comment. Thanks!
Fair trade?
http://tradeasone.com/
Tree hugger?
http://www.treehugger.com/giftguide/
Want a guide for what's good?
http://www.unclemark.org/unclemark2008.pdf
Pass on the gift?
http://www.heifer.org/
Really useful gift?
http://www.adra.org/site/PageServer?pagename=cat07_Ecommerce_home
Labels: Adventist, Christmas, Corinthians, giving, Jesus, religion, tithe
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Self Promotion, New Covenant, and War
Accusations of self promotion seem to be one of the stimulating factors that lead Paul to write another letter to the community in Corinth. His response is to discuss the new covenant in what we know as II Corinthians, chapter 3. What is the connection? Is Paul blowing a smoke screen, bringing up a deep theological discussion to distract us from the sensitive issue of his self congratulatory comments? Just what is the significance of the new covenant?
That is the question. I have friends who have left Adventism over the new covenant and the perception that we Adventists have totally missed the mark. The perception is that since under the new covenant we are saved by Jesus Christ and His grace, Adventist's continued overemphasis on archaic, legalistic laws like the sabbath constitutes an effort to earn salvation. Unfortunately, there are enough legalists in every religion, Adventism included, that this view finds plenty of evidence for corroboration. However, it seems to me that this evangelical perspective grounded in the Biblical (though limited) substitutionary model of atonement and focused on personal salvation also misses the point of the new covenant.
Some background may be helpful. The old covenant has been described as a marriage document(1)between God and the Israelites consisting of some core commandments written by God on tablets of stone and numerous other laws written down separately. Jack Rogers gives this covenant context in his book, Jesus, The Bible, and Homosexuality.
He writes, "The Israelites had been slaves in Egypt; they had wandered in the desert, subject to attacks from other tribes, starvation, and infectious diseases. The needed cohesiveness, cleanliness, and order in every aspect of their lives. They wanted to keep pure their manner of worshiping God, who had brought them to this land. They were struggling for their own identity. Failure to form a tight knit community could threaten their long-term survival. They needed a code for living.
In response, they developed a Holiness Code to define their religious, civic, and cultural identity. The Holiness Code’s function was to achieve the “holy purity” they sought. Its underlying theme was that they must be separate, different from the Egyptians from whom they had escaped and unmixed with the Canaanite into whose land they had now come. How were they to achieve holy purity?" 2
This raison d'etre resonates with my own appreciation of the 10 commandments as primarily designed to maintain a community in relationship with God and one another. The old covenant then was an agreement between God and Israel dealing with community and relationships.
Then, moving us into the present, God incarnate lives, teaches, dies, and lives again and this changes everything, or does it? Jesus inaugurates the new covenant and sends the Holy Spirit. The results are seen in the gospels, especially Luke, and become increasingly evident in Acts. The narrowly defined holy community of Jews has the doors blown off and the line of demarcation between those in and those out keeps expanding until nobody is excluded.
The new covenant is not so much a change in substance as it is a change in dimension. The law previously written on tablets of stone for the Jews is now written on human hearts for the world. This good news prompts Peter Storey to write, "When Christ was nailed to the cross, he nailed us to our neighbors, breaking down the divisions between us. All Christians, whether pacifists or proponents of the "just war" theory, are bound to acknowledge that for those who follow Jesus, all wars are civil wars. All wars, everywhere, are a form of fratricide."
Every war whether fought for freedom, over borders, across pews, or from competing ideologies is a sibling rivalry. Those who we like to consider "other" (elderly, muslim, female, homosexual, black, etc.) could better be described as "brother" and "sister," possibly estranged but related non-the-less. This is the good news and the big change in the new covenant.
When there is genuine unity amidst diversity in a community, this is evidence of God's life-changing grace. Paul recognizes that and responds to accusations of self endorsement by pointing to the community in Corinth struggling with sin and fighting over theology yet growing in love and he says, "You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all; and you show that you are a letter of Christ, prepared by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts." (3)
1. Rob Bell, Sex God
2. I found this insightful quote in a discussion on the Spectrum Blog about a new documentary, "For the Bible Tells me So." Thanks Stephen!
3. II Corinthians 3:2-3 (NRSV)
That is the question. I have friends who have left Adventism over the new covenant and the perception that we Adventists have totally missed the mark. The perception is that since under the new covenant we are saved by Jesus Christ and His grace, Adventist's continued overemphasis on archaic, legalistic laws like the sabbath constitutes an effort to earn salvation. Unfortunately, there are enough legalists in every religion, Adventism included, that this view finds plenty of evidence for corroboration. However, it seems to me that this evangelical perspective grounded in the Biblical (though limited) substitutionary model of atonement and focused on personal salvation also misses the point of the new covenant.
Some background may be helpful. The old covenant has been described as a marriage document(1)between God and the Israelites consisting of some core commandments written by God on tablets of stone and numerous other laws written down separately. Jack Rogers gives this covenant context in his book, Jesus, The Bible, and Homosexuality.
He writes, "The Israelites had been slaves in Egypt; they had wandered in the desert, subject to attacks from other tribes, starvation, and infectious diseases. The needed cohesiveness, cleanliness, and order in every aspect of their lives. They wanted to keep pure their manner of worshiping God, who had brought them to this land. They were struggling for their own identity. Failure to form a tight knit community could threaten their long-term survival. They needed a code for living.
In response, they developed a Holiness Code to define their religious, civic, and cultural identity. The Holiness Code’s function was to achieve the “holy purity” they sought. Its underlying theme was that they must be separate, different from the Egyptians from whom they had escaped and unmixed with the Canaanite into whose land they had now come. How were they to achieve holy purity?" 2
This raison d'etre resonates with my own appreciation of the 10 commandments as primarily designed to maintain a community in relationship with God and one another. The old covenant then was an agreement between God and Israel dealing with community and relationships.
Then, moving us into the present, God incarnate lives, teaches, dies, and lives again and this changes everything, or does it? Jesus inaugurates the new covenant and sends the Holy Spirit. The results are seen in the gospels, especially Luke, and become increasingly evident in Acts. The narrowly defined holy community of Jews has the doors blown off and the line of demarcation between those in and those out keeps expanding until nobody is excluded.
The new covenant is not so much a change in substance as it is a change in dimension. The law previously written on tablets of stone for the Jews is now written on human hearts for the world. This good news prompts Peter Storey to write, "When Christ was nailed to the cross, he nailed us to our neighbors, breaking down the divisions between us. All Christians, whether pacifists or proponents of the "just war" theory, are bound to acknowledge that for those who follow Jesus, all wars are civil wars. All wars, everywhere, are a form of fratricide."
Every war whether fought for freedom, over borders, across pews, or from competing ideologies is a sibling rivalry. Those who we like to consider "other" (elderly, muslim, female, homosexual, black, etc.) could better be described as "brother" and "sister," possibly estranged but related non-the-less. This is the good news and the big change in the new covenant.
When there is genuine unity amidst diversity in a community, this is evidence of God's life-changing grace. Paul recognizes that and responds to accusations of self endorsement by pointing to the community in Corinth struggling with sin and fighting over theology yet growing in love and he says, "You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all; and you show that you are a letter of Christ, prepared by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts." (3)
1. Rob Bell, Sex God
2. I found this insightful quote in a discussion on the Spectrum Blog about a new documentary, "For the Bible Tells me So." Thanks Stephen!
3. II Corinthians 3:2-3 (NRSV)
Labels: Acts, Adventist, community, Corinthians, Epicenter, Jesus, law, religion, unity
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Children of Men, End of Time, and Speaking in Tongues
The overt religious presence in the recent movie Children of Men is small and disappointing. There is a passing comment about a woman who became a penitent, flogging herself for the sins of mankind. Then, a visual image is presented of placard-bearing repent-proclaiming isolationists. Additionally, there is a demonstration by immigrants that conjures images of recent fundamentalist Islamic uprisings. 18 years of worldwide sterility has broken down the rest of society as well with rampant terrorism, distrust of foreigners, and imprisonment or worse for anyone unlucky enough to look, act, or speak differently. As the movie progresses, even those who claim to fight injustice utilize the same fear mongering, manipulation, and coercion they despise in the ruthless British government.
In contrast, the presence of God is revealed in Clive Owen's reluctant former activist appropriately named Theo and Pam Ferris' spiritualist out-of-work midwife evocatively called Miriam. These two individuals empty themselves of everything in order to bring the hope of a child into a world of chaos. Even while running from violence, they demonstrate true courage in standing up for good in the face of overwhelming evil. This selfless love leads to a sublime moment where the Angel's song, "Peace on earth, good will toward men," is given flesh by a crying child who hushes a brutal gun battle to a reverent though momentary standstill.
The blatant religious zealots are irrelevant or worse while the presence of God is demonstrated in those who care for the 'least of these'. This contrast is reminiscent of our proposed response to the breakdown of society predicted in Adventist eschatology. When all hell breaks loose will we perpetrate injustice, preach doom, decry evil, shrink back and isolate, or seek to do good? Chris Blake offers a vision of how we might react in his book, Swimming Against the Current. He writes, "In the midst of imminent collapse, Adventist homes open to the dispossessed and fearful. Adventist churches and schools become cities of refuge and outposts of mercy. Sanctuaries house the homeless. Playing fields plow up into gardens. As a world self-destructs, chapter 2 of Acts emerges before our wondering eyes."
A community of selfless love is infinitely more compelling than a group of individuals seeking self preservation. In I Corinthians, Paul sandwiches his eloquent description of selfless love between chapters discussing Spiritual gifts and speaking in tongues in particular. The significance of this placement points the selfishly arrogant Corinthians beyond charismatic religious demonstrations and into a more excellent way of loving one another. In the end, glossolalia is nice but agape is essential.
In Children of Men, an unexpected child provides hope for a lost world. As Christians we claim to follow One who did this very same thing. Will we join the injustice as society deteriorates? Will we become irrelevant, speaking in language nobody comprehends? Or, will we enter the Kingdom of God strengthening, encouraging, and comforting our neighbors?
In contrast, the presence of God is revealed in Clive Owen's reluctant former activist appropriately named Theo and Pam Ferris' spiritualist out-of-work midwife evocatively called Miriam. These two individuals empty themselves of everything in order to bring the hope of a child into a world of chaos. Even while running from violence, they demonstrate true courage in standing up for good in the face of overwhelming evil. This selfless love leads to a sublime moment where the Angel's song, "Peace on earth, good will toward men," is given flesh by a crying child who hushes a brutal gun battle to a reverent though momentary standstill.
The blatant religious zealots are irrelevant or worse while the presence of God is demonstrated in those who care for the 'least of these'. This contrast is reminiscent of our proposed response to the breakdown of society predicted in Adventist eschatology. When all hell breaks loose will we perpetrate injustice, preach doom, decry evil, shrink back and isolate, or seek to do good? Chris Blake offers a vision of how we might react in his book, Swimming Against the Current. He writes, "In the midst of imminent collapse, Adventist homes open to the dispossessed and fearful. Adventist churches and schools become cities of refuge and outposts of mercy. Sanctuaries house the homeless. Playing fields plow up into gardens. As a world self-destructs, chapter 2 of Acts emerges before our wondering eyes."
A community of selfless love is infinitely more compelling than a group of individuals seeking self preservation. In I Corinthians, Paul sandwiches his eloquent description of selfless love between chapters discussing Spiritual gifts and speaking in tongues in particular. The significance of this placement points the selfishly arrogant Corinthians beyond charismatic religious demonstrations and into a more excellent way of loving one another. In the end, glossolalia is nice but agape is essential.
In Children of Men, an unexpected child provides hope for a lost world. As Christians we claim to follow One who did this very same thing. Will we join the injustice as society deteriorates? Will we become irrelevant, speaking in language nobody comprehends? Or, will we enter the Kingdom of God strengthening, encouraging, and comforting our neighbors?
Labels: Adventist, community, Corinthians, diversity, Epicenter, Jesus, religion, unity
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Will the Real Adventist Please Stand Up?
With boards looming large next month I have not been updating the blog as regularly as I would like. In our Epicenter class we are currently discussing I Corinthians. Here are some ideas to consider for next week when we look at I Corinthians 11-13.
Will the real Adventist please stand up?
I have engaged this fruitless question more often than I would like to admit. Mostly these thoughts rattle around inside my head, only rarely making a synapse with cranial nerves to give them voice.
A real Adventist is (make your choices), in agreement with all 28 fundamental beliefs, ready to seek present truth, conservative, liberal, legalistic, grace-centered, rich, poor, smart, ignorant, short, tall, black, white, tan, etc...all of which insinuate that a true Adventist can be broken down into a single ideal prototype. No.
A real Adventist is an individual who chooses to join themselves to an Adventist community. Period.
It is imperative that we define ourselves through belonging rather than by behaving or believing. (1) I have heard influential Adventist leaders state bluntly that those who hold errant beliefs and eschew other vital beliefs should leave. I have read about Adventist churches that resisted outreach because it might bring imperfect sinners who would disrupt the otherwise sterile purity of their desolate church. I long for an Adventist church which recognizes that the strength of unity in diversity is more than just skin deep. (2)
But, you say with furrowed brow, Jesus prayed that we would be one. (3) Yes, he prayed for unity but not manipulative coercion to conform to some prototypical, imaginary, ideal human. Never unity by force.
The issue is illustrated in the stories of Babel and Pentecost. The tower of Babel was built through unified human effort that had no room for diversity. Minority voices were oppressed as humans struggled to save themselves. As soon as diversity was introduced, the whole project failed. Pentecost, some say, was a reversal of the loss of unity at Babel. (4) Miroslav Volf contends that this interpretation does justice to neither story. (5) Pentecost occurred in a humble prayer meeting as humans struggled to understand God. The result was not a conformed community that spoke with one homogeneous voice, but a reformed community who spoke and related to every tongue, tribe, and nation, causing diverse passersby to exclaim, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own native language?" (6)
John records Jesus' prayer that we would be unified in the same way He was unified with His Father. Unified in love. (7)
Love is not license. There may be times when we should do as Paul says and expel the immoral member. (8) When the actions of one are to disrupt the community, their choice is clear. The cancer of arrogance whether in flaunting errant ideas, unrepentant debauchery, icy legalism, or dangerously narrow theological understanding should be carefully excised. Occasionally this may even involve removing a member of the community. In that case, we love that individual we have lost. We work and pray for healing and reunion in the same way that you would carefully pack up a severed member from your own body and rapidly present it to a surgeon for reattachment.
The body of Christ functions best as Paul described it. Christ is the head and we are a diverse group of individual parts performing our unique functions in a coordinated, communicating miracle of life. (9)
Will the real Adventist please sit back down and join the community?
1. Richard Rice's book Believing, Behaving, Belonging is a brilliant and persuasive call for the primacy of belonging.
2. I am in no way attempting to minimize the need for unity among racial diversity. Living in Birmingham, Alabama, I realize we have a great deal of growth ahead of us in this area as well. What I am attempting to highlight is the fact that issues of diversity run much deeper than the amount of melanin in our skin. Think of the rich diversity along the spectrum of traditional to progressive Adventists. Assuming we have achieved unity in diversity because we have bridged the racial divide ignores the rich depths of experience awaiting us as we dialogue with many different cultures, traditions, backgrounds, and ideas.
3. John 17:20-22
4. Genesis 11:1-9
5. Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace
6. Acts 2:1-9 (NRSV)
7. John 17:23
8. I Corinthians 5
9. I Corinthians 12...
Labels: Adventist, community, Corinthians, Epicenter, religion
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]