Growing up Baptist means, among other things, that the spirituality I learned contained very little art, poetry, symbolism, beauty, metaphor, or imagery. Spirituality (and Christianity really) was concrete, logical, clear, disciplined, and systematic. This brand of faith is common among evangelicals.
However, in there very little resonance for this kind of Christianity in the history of the church. Even in the scholastic period when theology and biblical studies were at their driest and most obtuse, imagery and metaphor played a major role in the church.
Not only this, but scripture is replete with this sort of thing. Jewish spirituality was almost entirely done in image, metaphor, and symbolic reenactment. Poetry and beauty mark not only the poetic books of the Bible, but find their way onto virtually every page. Imagery and metaphor were the standard tools of not only the prophets, but of Christ himself. Even Paul, the great theologian and logician, provides us with rich imagery and metaphor.
This weekend I attended a conference that developed the image of shepherding, Christ our Good Shepherd, we as under-shepherds ourselves, and we who help develop a future generation of shepherds. This is one of my favorite scriptural word pictures. The richness of it is astounding. Imagery and metaphor can capture our hearts and minds like little else.
How have you experienced (or not experienced) art, imagery, metaphor, symbolic reenactment, and other non-logic-based things in your spirituality? What are your favorite metaphors and images from scripture?
3.22.2010
3.15.2010
You Look Very Christian Today
That would be an odd comment to receive. How would you take that? Compliment or Insult?
I guess the real question is 'Are there Christian and/or un-Christian ways of looking?' Most would probably say 'no' but act as if the answer were 'yes.' As a society, we identify people and categorize them based on the way they look. Everything including their clothes, hair, demeanor, skin (tattoos and piercings), and facial hair help us determine what sort of person we are confronting.
Very few today overtly say, 'A Christian ought to look this or that certain way.' A few will use scripture to argue against tattoos, cross-dressing (women wearing pants in particular), women wearing make-up and jewelry, and hair length (long for men, short for women). Frankly, each argument is pretty flimsy. On a more covert level, however, many believers act as if a Christian ought to be clean, kept, neat, and have no tattoos or piercings (unless they got them before Jesus, Lord forgive them).
So what about it? Are there Christian appearance standards?
Issues to think about: Balancing cultural expectations with Christian freedom, The standard of modesty, matters specific to our culture vs. universal matters.
I guess the real question is 'Are there Christian and/or un-Christian ways of looking?' Most would probably say 'no' but act as if the answer were 'yes.' As a society, we identify people and categorize them based on the way they look. Everything including their clothes, hair, demeanor, skin (tattoos and piercings), and facial hair help us determine what sort of person we are confronting.
Very few today overtly say, 'A Christian ought to look this or that certain way.' A few will use scripture to argue against tattoos, cross-dressing (women wearing pants in particular), women wearing make-up and jewelry, and hair length (long for men, short for women). Frankly, each argument is pretty flimsy. On a more covert level, however, many believers act as if a Christian ought to be clean, kept, neat, and have no tattoos or piercings (unless they got them before Jesus, Lord forgive them).
So what about it? Are there Christian appearance standards?
Issues to think about: Balancing cultural expectations with Christian freedom, The standard of modesty, matters specific to our culture vs. universal matters.
3.07.2010
Of Killer Whales and Goring Oxen
Avoiding a Repeat of the Worst Mistake in Christian History
Here is a link to a story that illustrates for me that some Christians have still not learned one of the biggest lessons of Church history. For those who don't want to read the article, a theologian is suggesting that Tilly the killer whale should die based on the laws of the goring ox found in Exodus 21. This story about someone trying to apply scripture may seem innocuous at worst, and to some even laudable. To me it betrays both a deep ignorance of scripture and a failure to understand our past blunders.
The Scriptural Problem
This person's 'literal' reading of scripture fails to understand one of the most important features of the law. The law was given to a theocratic state where religion and government were essentially the same. Today we would call this the union of church and state. Unless Sea World, or the US is under theocratic rule, this argument holds no water.
The Failure to Understand Church History
Someone might argue that the union of church and state would be a good thing. I would respond that we already tried that in medieval Europe. The union of church and state was one of the the biggest mistakes in the history of the church. It was the root that gave birth to the two worst happenings in the history of the church: 1) the crusades, and 2) the exportation of culture and imperialism under the guise of missions. Both of these happenings were the fully grown fruit of the union of church and state. In both cases, Christians packaged the gospel with their own culture and government.The separation of church and state is a good thing for both the church and the state.
What do you think? Do you think this theologian has a point? Or do you think he is totally off base?
Here is a link to a story that illustrates for me that some Christians have still not learned one of the biggest lessons of Church history. For those who don't want to read the article, a theologian is suggesting that Tilly the killer whale should die based on the laws of the goring ox found in Exodus 21. This story about someone trying to apply scripture may seem innocuous at worst, and to some even laudable. To me it betrays both a deep ignorance of scripture and a failure to understand our past blunders.
The Scriptural Problem
This person's 'literal' reading of scripture fails to understand one of the most important features of the law. The law was given to a theocratic state where religion and government were essentially the same. Today we would call this the union of church and state. Unless Sea World, or the US is under theocratic rule, this argument holds no water.
The Failure to Understand Church History
Someone might argue that the union of church and state would be a good thing. I would respond that we already tried that in medieval Europe. The union of church and state was one of the the biggest mistakes in the history of the church. It was the root that gave birth to the two worst happenings in the history of the church: 1) the crusades, and 2) the exportation of culture and imperialism under the guise of missions. Both of these happenings were the fully grown fruit of the union of church and state. In both cases, Christians packaged the gospel with their own culture and government.The separation of church and state is a good thing for both the church and the state.
What do you think? Do you think this theologian has a point? Or do you think he is totally off base?
3.01.2010
He Said What?!
In my younger years, I had Sunday School teachers who not only taught against cussing, but even taught against using our Christian cussing alternatives. Anyone who grew up in Church knows the Christian cuss words: freakin', frappin', darn, crap, heck, shoot, dad-gum-it (huh?!), and a whole host of other creative terms. These were our acceptable alternatives where a cruder person would insert a cuss word.
In my later years, where I have had a broader exposure to varied types of Christians, I have encountered both those agree with the teaching of my youth, and those who freely insert cuss words where they are appropriate. Experiences in seminary brought this into stark contrast. On the stricter side, I had a fellow student tell me that one of the first things he tried to achieve in discipleship was cleaning up someone's language. This, he said, was one of the easiest and most tangible ways that a person can experience the transformative power of Christ. On the free side of things, I had a professor who, over the course of a semester used the word $#!t no less than 10 times. The first couple of times there was an audible gasp in the room.
Some issues that I think are pertinent here are balancing Christian freedom with Christian witness, the standard of Ephesians 4.29 (does this verse ban cussing as many claim?), and balancing our culture's expectations of Christians (non-drinking, non-cussing, family-values-oriented conservatives) with Christ's expectations of Christians.
So what do you think? Is it wrong for Christians to use words considered crude by our culture, or is it OK to use them when appropriate?
In my later years, where I have had a broader exposure to varied types of Christians, I have encountered both those agree with the teaching of my youth, and those who freely insert cuss words where they are appropriate. Experiences in seminary brought this into stark contrast. On the stricter side, I had a fellow student tell me that one of the first things he tried to achieve in discipleship was cleaning up someone's language. This, he said, was one of the easiest and most tangible ways that a person can experience the transformative power of Christ. On the free side of things, I had a professor who, over the course of a semester used the word $#!t no less than 10 times. The first couple of times there was an audible gasp in the room.
Some issues that I think are pertinent here are balancing Christian freedom with Christian witness, the standard of Ephesians 4.29 (does this verse ban cussing as many claim?), and balancing our culture's expectations of Christians (non-drinking, non-cussing, family-values-oriented conservatives) with Christ's expectations of Christians.
So what do you think? Is it wrong for Christians to use words considered crude by our culture, or is it OK to use them when appropriate?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
