The Questions Are...

Movies, music, TV, books, are all meant for our entertainment. Or are they? I would argue that while they may be entertaining, their primary purpose is to communicate. These are all means by which we as people communicate the stories of our lives. When you sit down to read a book, listen to an album, watch a TV show, or watch a movie you are peering into the heart and soul of another person. You are hearing from them what they most deeply believe about life and truth. We as followers of Jesus must engage with this cultural activity critically. We are a free people. We are also a called out and holy people. Jesus sent us into the world to be as innocent as doves and as wise as serpents (Matthew 10:16). Sadly most followers of Jesus pick one or the other. We need to be both. To be both means that we must learn to think and engage the world critically. Many Jesus followers also miss the "sent" aspect of the statement. This necessarily means that we must engage the world. Here are four questions that if we would apply them to the film, music, and books then we will be able to think critically:

What does this communicate about God?
What does this communicate about man?
What does this communicate about man's greatest problem?
What is the proposed solution for man's greatest problem?

These questions can be applied to religion, politics, and the arts. These are worldview questions. The answers give us insight into the worldview of the communicator. From there we begin to ask another set of questions:

How is this view similar to and contrast with the Biblical view of God?
How is this view similar to and contrast with the Biblical view of man?
How is this view similar to and contrast with the Biblical view of man's greatest problem?
How is this view similar to and contrast with the Biblical view of the solution to man's greatest problem?

As we take these handful of questions we can begin to understand the good and the bad of various cultural pieces of the pie. There is nothing that should be taken in without thinking critically. Just because song is called "Christian" does not make it so. Over the next few posts we will seek to apply these eight questions to a few songs, "Christian" and "Secular" and see how they stack up. We may also take a look at some G-rated films and compare them to R-rated films to see which are more detrimental from the Biblical worldview. Let the discernment begin!

Give Me a New Law!

Derek Webb sings,

don’t teach me about politics and government just tell me who to vote for don’t teach me about truth and beauty just label my music don’t teach me how to live like a free man just give me a new law (from "A New Law")

This tends to be how the average Christian implicitly lives. Not many of us would say it aloud but we live this way. If it's a "Christian" band then it's good. If it's rated "G" then it's good. If it's rated "R" then it's bad. If it's "secular" then it's bad. We have created a new law to replace the one that Jesus freed us from. We have done so because we don't want to learn "how to live like a free man". To be sure this is not a recent development. Paul was dealing with it in the first generation of Christians. In Galatians 5 he writes,

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1 ESV)

Paul then goes on to exonerate the Galatians for accepting circumcision and submitting to a yoke of legalism. We do the same. Only we are most often guilty of doing so in the realm of pop culture and personal agendas. There is a balance, however, so Paul gives the following warning,

For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another. (Galatians 5:13-15 ESV)

Paul then discusses the role of the Spirit in our sanctification and restoration. We must not miss what Paul is talking about here. What he is saying is that we must learn through the tutoring of the Holy Spirit what it means to live free. He is calling the people of God to learn character and virtue. He desires them to come to adulthood and maturity in the faith. Consider how we raise our children. When they are babies and young children we give them direct orders. We tell them what to do and we expect them to do it. As they get older we begin to give them reasons and try to help them learn why we desire them to do these things. Why do we do this? Because we want them to become adults who can reason and discern the world around them. Unless it comes to music. Unless it comes to film. Unless it comes to politics. Then we teach them to read the label and the follow the "law". I have heard it said, "not every Christian is 'called' to engage culture." Really? Here is the definition of culture, "An integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning." If we live around other human beings then we must engage culture, it is that simple. Jesus sent his disciples into the world. His desire was that they would be holy (check out this post about holiness). This holiness was not a self-righteous piety but being set apart for the mission of God. To be on God's mission necessarily means that we must engage culture. We must do so critically. We must do so with eyes wide open. We must do with discernment and wisdom. So, how do we that? That's the subject we'll tackle next... Here is Derek Webb's video for "A New Law" for your enjoyment:

It's MY RIGHT!

"Just because something is technically legal doesn't mean that it's spiritually appropriate. If I went around doing whatever I thought I could get by with, I'd be a slave to my whims." - Eugene Peterson The refrain, "It's my right!" rings our everywhere today in our culture. Whether it's in demand of entitlements or freedom from regulation. Regardless, our "rights" are something that we constantly demand. The quote from Peterson is actually 1 Corinthians 6:12 from the Message. This verse will be the final one that we look in our conversation about freedom and the law. It is used almost always to support the freedom of a person and their use of freedom. Based on Peterson's rendering we are left scratching our heads as to "why?" Well, consider the traditional translation from the ESV, ""All things are lawful for me," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything." So, when we read this often we think, "Yes, I can do anything!" This leads us to a place of license. However, Peterson's rendering provides us with the correct sense. There are things that we should not do because they harm us spiritually. 1 Corinthians 6-9 is a fascinating section of Scripture where Paul lays out many issues regarding freedom. To work through all of it would be too lengthy. So here are a couple of bullet points:

Paul wants the Corinthians to realize that there is more to life than what they see. Their bodies are going to be resurrected and bought with a price. Freedom is limited by the statement, "So glorify God in you body. (6:20)"
Freedom is determined by knowledge of God (8:1-2).
Freedom is limited by concern for the brother's conscience (8:12)
The freedom which Paul is directly dealing with is in regards to food laws (6-8)
Freedom in relation to personal association is doggedly protected (9:19-23)
Freedom is determined by ones own understanding of the gospel (9:19)

In short, we have no "rights". We cannot do anything we want because we are constrained by love for our brothers. We cannot do anything we want because we are constrained by love for our Savior. We cannot do anything we want because we are constrained by our desire to glorify God. However, we are also free to love well. To enjoy the creation. To engage the culture in all its fullness. We are free to "become all things to all people" without fear of condemnation. We are free to speak the language of the common man and to enter into his world. I think that as we close this conversation about freedom and law we must realize that in Christ we are free. The measure that we use this freedom is direct correlation to our understanding of grace. If we are free, really free, then we can also choose to protect the weaker brother. We are also to help one another grow in knowledge and experience of the gospel.

Strong, weak, what!?

Our journey through freedom and the law is coming to a close, for now. I think this is the second to last post on the issue before we turn our attention to Baptism and Communion. The passage that I am interested in today is Romans 14. This is where we find the famous, "Therefore, let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. (Romans 14:13). This is a section that I think has been done great harm and violence in Christian circles because it is so often read through a grid of legalism. Where do we begin? First, the core issues that Paul raises here are those of food laws. It seems that what we had in Rome was a church comprised of a variety of different people as one would expect in a cosmopolitan city. This caused great tension within the community as they bumped into one another's understandings of how they were to interact with God and what it meant to live all of life in a way that brings honor to God.

Paul finds that there were two camps, the weak and the strong. The weak only ate vegetables (as these were safe from being offered to idols) and the strong ate anything. Paul in verse 3 argues that neither are despise the other. Pauls says in verse 5 that "Each one should be fully convinced his own mind." He drives the point home in verse 12, "So then each of us will give an account of himself to God." It is with this context that we arrive at verse 13.

Many of the commentators argue that 13b (decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother) is pointed at the "strong". The reasoning comes from the fact that verse 15:1 says, "We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak." I think that this is accurate. The question then becomes what is the scope of the passage? Is Christian freedom to be held to the lowest common denominator across the board? No. First, Paul argues on behalf of the strong. He desires for all to become strong and leave weakness behind. The reason for this is that these issues are faith issues. Paul's desire is for the people of God to fully engage in all that God has made clean in faith. He says, "Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he [God] approves (22)." Second, Paul changes the issue. He says, "For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men (17-18)." Paul is telling them that their focus is off base. These issues of food and festivals are silly compared to the work of the kingdom. Finally, Paul calls for the strong to "bear" the "failings" of the weak. This is language that drives one to realize that Paul's desire is for change. The term "bear" is βαστάζω and is understood as "be able to bear up under especially trying or oppressive circumstances (BDAG)." This is insightful. Consider what Paul is saying. The weak are "especially trying" in their "failings". Paul gets that those who would rob the strong of their freedom are "trying" and even "oppressive". His desire is for them not to stay that way. He wants them to become strong. But, until that time the strong are love well and not judge. What is the take home then? It means that those who see Christians exerting their freedom ought not pass judgment (14:3) and realize that they are weak (14:2) and ask the strong for help that they might not stay in that state. It also means that the strong must hang in there in the midst of the frustrations that come from the weak and love well. They must not flaunt their freedom or force the weak into living freely until they can do so in faith. Paul says it well, "Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God. (Romans 15:7)"

By no means!

I think that some of my favorite moments in the Bible are when the apostle Paul gets worked up. As you read you can almost feel the juices flowing inside Paul. I imagine his forehead sweating and his face turning red. I can see him pacing and flailing his arms as if he would be mute without them. Then the climactic moment comes and his hands go to the forehead, veins popping, eyes clenched, and BOOM, a statement and a torrent of questions exploding! This is the image I get as I read Romans 5 and 6. What concerns us today is Romans 6:15-23 (The Message):

^15-18So, since we're out from under the old tyranny, does that mean we can live any old way we want? Since we're free in the freedom of God, can we do anything that comes to mind? Hardly. You know well enough from your own experience that there are some acts of so-called freedom that destroy freedom. Offer yourselves to sin, for instance, and it's your last free act. But offer yourselves to the ways of God and the freedom never quits. All your lives you've let sin tell you what to do. But thank God you've started listening to a new master, one whose commands set you free to live openly in his freedom!¹⁹I'm using this freedom language because it's easy to picture. You can readily recall, can't you, how at one time the more you did just what you felt like doing—not caring about others, not caring about God—the worse your life became and the less freedom you had? And how much different is it now as you live in God's freedom, your lives healed and expansive in holiness? ^20-21As long as you did what you felt like doing, ignoring God, you didn't have to bother with right thinking or right living, or right anything for that matter. But do you call that a free life? What did you get out of it? Nothing you're proud of now. Where did it get you? A dead end. ^22-23But now that you've found you don't have to listen to sin tell you what to do, and have discovered the delight of listening to God telling you, what a surprise! A whole, healed, put-together life right now, with more and more of life on the way! Work hard for sin your whole life and your pension is death. But God's gift is real life, eternal life, delivered by Jesus, our Master.

I like the way that Peterson's translation renders this passage because I think that it gets down to the heart of the matter. Verse 15 is rendered like this in the ESV, "What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no mans!" Paul is anticipating his detractors. He is assuming what they are going to say before they say it. Remember, Paul did not physically write this letter, he dictated it to Tertius. I imagine that Tertius played the proverbial devil's advocate for Paul so that there could be a give and take. This was meant to be a conversation not a treatise. Consider here what Pauls is doing. He is preempting the person who would say that the radical grace that he is describing thus far is will lead to license. Paul argues quite the opposite. He argues that as a result of the freeing from the curse of the law there will be new found freedom to truly live the way that a person was made to live. I love how Peterson puts this, "But now that you've found you don't have to listen to sin tell you what to do, and have discovered the delight of listening to God telling you, what a surprise! A whole, healed, put-together life right now, with more and more of life on the way! Work hard for sin your whole life and your pension is death. But God's gift is real life, eternal life, delivered by Jesus, our Master." There is delight and joy in living the life of hearing from God. I hate money. It's annoying and it preoccupies too much of my time and other people's time. I remember when I first heard about budgets and I thought, "Ugh, that seems restrictive and annoying." But, then my bride and I created a budget. You know what we discovered? It gave us freedom. Prior to a budget we did not believe that we could go on dates because we did not have money. Once we created a budget we found the freedom to date again.

I think this is how grace works. When we are living lives separated from God we look at the "good two shoe" Christians and think "Ugh, that seems restrictive and annoying." But, then our hearts are captured by the radical grace of God and we find that we have freedom to live life to its full. We find that we can do all things to the glory of God and in so doing experience great freedom. Yet, this freedom is contained within the confines of grace and glory. This weekend Tiger Woods returned to the links. He played well, no, he played really well. Consider though the pain and agony that he suffered and his family suffered while he "did whatever he wanted" and as some sports hosts put it, "lived every man's fantasy." I guarantee you that Woods would trade every one of his sexual escapades for the freedom of a happy monogamous marriage with Elin. Freedom comes from living out the reality that we were made for good and for God. This is the beauty of grace and living in light of righteousness.

Are you gonna eat that?

We had been walking for a week straight. The pace was incredible. We did not even feel like they had homes any more because we were always on the move. This is the way it always was. There was a constant pressure to move on to the next town and to continue proclaiming the "good news". Saturday was always the hardest day. Usually there was no way to prepare and have extra food on hand so Saturday was a hungry day. Today, was especially tough though. Our travels took us through a grain field! It was excruciating. But, to our astonishment the Teacher grabbed the head of a grain rubbed it in his hands and ate the kernel. We looked at one another, confused, it was the Sabbath wasn't it? But, the Teacher picked and ate. We did too. Then "they" showed up. The religious, the high and mighty Pharisees. They were always around. They said, "Your disciples are breaking the Sabbath rules!" The Teacher's response was amazing, "Really? Didn't you ever read what David and his companions did when they were hungry, how they entered the sanctuary and ate fresh bread off the altar, bread that no one but priests were allowed to eat? And didn't you ever read in God's Law that priests carrying out their Temple duties break Sabbath rules all the time and it's not held against them? There is far more at stake here than religion. If you had any idea what this Scripture meant—'I prefer a flexible heart to an inflexible ritual'—you wouldn't be nitpicking like this. The Son of Man is no lackey to the Sabbath; he's in charge." Then we went into the Synagogue for worship. When we got there "they" thought they had the Teacher trapped because there was a crippled man there. "They" asked, "Is it legal to heal on the Sabbath?" The Teacher got them again, "Is there a person here who, finding one of your lambs fallen into a ravine, wouldn't, even though it was a Sabbath, pull it out? Surely kindness to people is as legal as kindness to animals!" Then he said to the man, "Hold out your hand." He held it out and it was healed. "They" walked out furious, sputtering about how they were going to ruin Jesus. (Based on Matthew 12:1-14, with a little help from the Message) -- This is an amazing story. It's really a central text for our question about freedom and law. The law said, "Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Work six days and do everything you need to do. But the seventh day is a Sabbath to God, your God. Don't do any work—not you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your servant, nor your maid, nor your animals, not even the foreign guest visiting in your town. For in six days Godmade Heaven, Earth, and sea, and everything in them; he rested on the seventh day. Therefore God blessed the Sabbath day; he set it apart as a holy day." The Pharisees were somewhat right in their questioning of Jesus and the disciples. In their minds they really were breaking the sabbath commandment. But Jesus response flips their understanding of the commandment on its head, "the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath". Brilliant! He even says that the disciples in this case are guiltless! He goes so far as to point out that they missed the point of the command when he quotes Hosea 6:6. In Hosea God has his people in the dock and calling them to account. The Pharisees would have felt the sting. Jesus was calling them out as heartless and completely disconnected from God himself. In their quest to be faithful to God the Pharisees had missed God's heart and his desire for them to worship. I think we are guilty of this. What are the rules that you have put in place to be faithful to God? Maybe some of these ring true:

No R rated movies.
No secular music.
No smoking.
No drinking.
No dating.
No being a Democrat.
No being a Republican.
No being Pro-Choice.
No being Pro-Life.
No watching MSNBC.
No rooting for Ohio State University (OK, this is mine, I admit it. I think God's OK with it.)

Freedom is about worship. Freedom is about coming to the God of the universe and being with him and with his people. There are no longer divisions. The boundary markers of in and out are changed they are now spiritual and communal. They are no longer based on law. What's your list? How does it need to change? Are you building barriers on behalf of God? Are you OK with God's dismantling of barriers through the crucifixion of Jesus?

You Can't DO THAT! YES I CAN! NO YOU CAN'T!!!

Yesterday we began exploring Galatians 5:1, "For freedom Christ has set us free, stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery." We explored the historical and literary context a bit. Today, I want to draw some conclusions regarding freedom. The key word in the verse is "freedom". It is ἐλευθερίᾳ in the Greek text in the dative. ἐλευθερία is a word that that at its heart means liberty in the context of becoming free from slavery. Why is it in the dative? What is the purpose of this case here? This is the dative of interest which is a subset of the indirect object (Wallace, 143). This means that Christ set the Galatians free "for the benefit" of freedom. Think about this for a moment. Christ set them free. Why? He set them free so that they would experience freedom. This means that they were, at some point, not free. What were they not free from? To what were they enslaved? Remember Paul is discussing in Galatians what it means to be "in Christ". How can someone know they are in the community as opposed to be outside of the community. The Galatian converts were confused and needed direction. They turned to the other community of "the Book" and were informed that they needed to follow certain rituals. These rituals concerned table fellowship, festivals, and circumcision. These boundary markers, that have been thoroughly discussed by Wright, Dunn, Schreiner, and others, are the very things that are causing Paul such consternation. The Galatians were becoming enslaved to boundaries of in/out that were obliterated in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. In chapters three and four Paul laid out the differentiation between the law and the promise. Now he brings them to the point of action where they must realize that these laws are not necessary for them to interact with God. They do not need to become Jewish to be in Christ. Christ has set loose the boundaries of who is in and who is out. There is now freedom to live as they are in Christ. Freedom here, therefore, is a liberation from a law which mandated one identify oneself by doing certain activities. The community of the people is open and free, the boundary markers have been shifted (baptism and communion, another series of posts coming soon). The outworking of being "justified" is inclusion or exclusion from the community of God. One cannot be "in the camp" if they are not justified. Justification prior to Christ came through the law, the following of mandated requirements to show that one was in the community of faith. Christ's coming freed humanity from this stricture because he himself fulfilled these requirements and provides a means by his crucifixion and resurrection to enter into the community by faith alone, trusting in his finished work. Paul anticipates the critics, "Freedom leads to license!" Not so, says Paul. This freeing from the old boundaries frees us "through love to serve one another. (5:13b)" Why? The freedom from boundary markers that separate one people from another allows us to love all those that come across our paths. We no longer have to concern ourselves with the issues that drove Jesus's parable of the good Samaritan. Summary idea: Freedom in Galatians 5:1 is the freedom for anyone to be in God's community and for us to relate to God as who we are and to serve anyone regardless of who they are.

Frrrrreeeedom!!! (Yes, read this with a Scottish brogue) Pt. 1

Whenever I think about freedom, I think about William Wallace. Is it because I have Scottish blood running through my veins? Maybe. Is it because of Braveheart (one of the greatest 'guy' movies ever)? Maybe. I like to think it is because the story of Scottish liberation from the tyranny of the English is powerful, beautiful, and thrilling. I like to think it is because the imagery of a small revolutionary movement, spear-headed by a single passionate leader is what I long to see happen in the church. I hope it's also because freedom is something that is full of beauty, hope, and trust. Galatians 5:1 says, "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery." This little sentence has been the cause of a great many problems even though it was meant to be the solution of a great many problems. You know the old saying, "Give them and inch and they take a mile"? This is how many feel about Galatians 5:1. Why did Paul give them an inch? Why did he not call the Galatians to follow the ten commandments? I think that this is a wonderful starting point in our journey about law and grace. The problem with beginning at Galatians 5:1 is that it is near the end of the letter to the Galatians. To get a good sense of what is happening we must understand the context from which this verse comes, both historically and literarily. Where do we begin? Let's begin with the situation to which Paul was writing. There was a significant Jewish minority in the region of Galatia, stemming from the fact that approximately 2,000 Jewish families were forced to relocate to the region in the second century BC. As the Galatian converts, whether Jew or Gentile, were coming into contact with the large Jewish minority they were facing questions that needed answers. The key question being in reference to what it meant for a person to be included in the community of faith. This historical setting is critical to coming to an understanding of what is happening in Galatians 5:1. The community of faith wanted answers. These answers were not coming from the reality of the crucified messiah but from a Jewish tradition that did not always line up with grace. The general answer that this little group of Galatian converts were receiving was that to be in the community of faith you are to do certain things and not do certains things. This was a law that brought guilt, shame, and dishonor to most that sought to uphold it. The literary context of 5:1 is also important. In Galatians 4 Paul has illustrated the difference of being under the law and under grace by comparing Hagar and Sarah. Following his brief discussion on freedom he moves on to look at the practical outworking of being a Christ follower in the second half of chapter 5 and chapter 6. This issue of freedom is important because Paul is juxtaposing it against living under the law and equates is to living under grace. Therefore, we must grapple with what Paul is saying in 5:1 and come to some conclusions. We will pick this up tomorrow, so that the posts don't get too long.

James S. Jeffers, The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament Era, (InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL, 1999), 213.

Paul Barnett, Behind the Scenes of the New Testament, (InterVarsity Press: DownersGrove, IL, 1990), 175-177.

danielmrose.com

thoughts on spirituality, church, culture, and life.

Archives

Filed under freedom