On Monday this week, I read, from cover to cover, Walter Wink's The Powers That Be. I meant to read it for some time now. Since N.T. Wright populates my entire reading list (I have finished five of his books since December), I decided to interrupt my Wright project with a little liberal theology, and I must say, I loved it. For the past few days, I reflected on this work, and these are my first few impressions about it.
This book represents a simple summary of Wink's The Powers Trilogy. Essentially, Wink distilled his scholarly work into an accessible volume for laypeople. He fulfills what my professor Dr. Rob Wall calls his responsibility to scholasticism and to the Church by doing this. I appreciate his efforts.
First and foremost, Walter Wink is an activist. He makes this very clear by telling stories about his days in the Civil Rights Movement in the '60's and his work against South African Apartheid. Like all writers, Wink responds to the problems he sees in current systems. More precisely, he writes to give theological weight to the solutions of these problems. With activism as his platform and theology as his instrument, Wink argues for the Church to commit itself to complete non-violence as a centerpiece of its faith statement. The lines of his argument are as follows:
The main problems Wink encounters derive out of his activist stance. He concerns himself with what stands in the way of the effective liberation of those who suffer. To Wink, the barrier to liberation is, what he calls, The Domination System. The Domination System is nothing new and can be seen all the way down through history whenever one group of people oppresses another for the sake of greed and self-interest. Wink realizes The Domination System is an evil, demonic animal which requires sustenance. The food of this beast grows in the corresponding corollary to The Domination System: The Myth of Redemptive Violence. The Myth of Redemptive Violence provides The Domination System with a narrative that can be reproduced in an infinite number of ways which convinces all involved in The Domination System (oppressor and oppressed alike) that without The Domination System the world would collapse and only the violence perpetrated by it can save us from this fate. The Myth looks roughly like this: a powerful being or system has caused harm or distress to a certain other being or group; from within the oppressed group, a powerful being or system arises to defeat and kill the oppressor, ending the reign of terror; as a result, the victorious protagonist becomes the ruling victor who creates a space in which the liberated can live free and in harmony; but eventually, the once righteous liberator becomes the dominating oppressor, beginning the cycle all over again. This Myth, seen from the Babylonian creation myth to today's children's cartoons, maintains silent ubiquity by coercing its adherents into believing it is normative. This omnipresence, Wink argues, is so pervasive it even infiltrated the way in which ancient Hebrews conceived of G-d; thus, it produced vast amounts of violence in the Hebrew Bible as the will of G-d. Jesus interrupts this Myth, and exposes it for what it really is: legalized immorality. He paints Jesus in an activist light as one who courageously revealed the truth about the one true G-d who has no part in The Domination System. Oppressive structures killed him for his insolence, and the early Church only half-way understood his purpose.
Hope, for Wink, in the face of The Domination System, comes in a two-step process. First, Wink holds the worldview that spirit infuses everything. From the Pentagon to a preschool, spirituality mediates within all structures. Thus, the spirituality of everything can, as all spirits can, be redeemed. Some of these things which can be redeemed, such as the law, need simple or complex recreation; some others, such as Nazism, sexism, or racism, require total abandonment. Our first step in redemption is clothing ourselves in what Wink deems an "Integral Worldview". Once we recognize this worldview to be the case, the second step in the process of redemption occurs through Divine and human collusion manifested as direct non-violent action against The Domination System. This, after all, was what Jesus did and what later Christians would fail to understand as they drifted back into oppressive, demonic structures.
My reaction to Wink's argument is both positive and negative. First, I fully affirm his view of a ubiquitous system of dominance that oppresses others for its own gain and sustains itself through the telling and retelling of an indoctrinating myth that convinces people of its indispensability. Furthermore, I 100% agree with the conclusion concerning non-violence. If we employ the logic of the Myth of Redemptive Violence against oppressors, we simply insert ourselves into the cyclical destruction of The Domination System. Meanwhile, we will fool ourselves into believing we are creating freedom or newness (just as the Myth prophesied we would). Hence, the only conceivable way to escape the Myth's all-encompassing hold is to step outside its operating parameters and do what it least expects: non-violence. Jesus, in my perspective, demonstrated this way of life in the most exemplary way. Wink and I cohere at this point. Finally, I share Wink's Integral Worldview. In general, Wink's largest conclusions are those that I affirm.
My dissension with Wink comes in his nuances. Primarily, we disagree in the extent to which The Domination System must be abandoned. He states clearly Nazism represented a spirit which should not be redeemed but abandoned. Whether or not you agree with his worldview, nearly everyone would agree with him on this point. Nonetheless, the government in the U.S., which has committed genocide against dozens of tribes, afflicted entire people groups under slavery and then Jim Crow, cripples the poor beneath the military-industrial complex, and fights multiple explicit and secret wars around the world, belongs in the category of redeemable which he makes clear by insisting he is a devoted patriot. I cannot agree with Wink here. If the purpose of the nation-state exists to defend its artificial borders from would-be assailants, we can see, by observing the U.S. and its hyper-militarized fetish, where such logic takes us. Nationalism and the good of the state must be abandoned. Subversive love of G-d and neighbor must replace it. Secondarily, Wink's biblical scholarship is inconsistent and jumbled. He writes off the Epistle to the Hebrews as complicit in The Domination System, yet he maintains the authority of some Pauline texts. He exegetes gospel passages, yet he limits their interpretation to his own agenda. As a result, Jesus looks less like G-d's decisive act in history to deal with sin (or The Domination System) in its fullness via non-violent activity and more like a failed social activist like Martin Luther King Jr. or Ghandi who at least understood what the latter two had in mind during their movements. Consequently, he denies the Trinity, and damages his argument in the process. Even though I still agree with his final conclusion, by refuting Jesus' divinity, Wink only allows Jesus to be one who teaches us how G-d is. Instead, by holding Jesus as the second person of the Trinity, we see, in his non-violent, direct action against the powers that be, the very way in which G-d chooses to reveal G-d's self. Not only, then, would this add theological substance to Wink's argument; it would add an ethical mandate for Christians to follow suit.
Finally, Wink believes the future of Christianity does not lie in debates about salvation and justification but in our ability to live out G-d's all-embracing love through peaceable means. I believe this to be half true. All the bickering about who is in and who is out creates a dynamic in which we forget Jesus is Lord, and we recreate him as life-jacket. Jesus is the King, and it is time we started living by his kingdom edicts. However, we must have faith that Jesus is Lord. Faith and obedience are therefore two sides of the same coin which is the Gospel.
How we live this out will eternally be under argument; Wink gives us a useful guide tool. The Church's days of domination are over. Time has come for us to pick up our crosses and follow the Lord. Peace!
-ben adam
Agnus Dei
How G-d rules the world!
26 February 2010
21 February 2010
An Anabaptist Renewal of Lent
Luke 4.1-13 is a difficult passage for me to read. I have a history of being a slacker. Sometimes I take pride in laziness, especially when I am rewarded for it. One of my favorite stories to tell about this is from my Junior year of high school French. The teacher absolutely loved me since I was a personable guy, and I took full advantage of this by indulging in a loophole in his grading system. Anytime someone raised their hand to speak in French, he gave them 1 point of extra credit which was not calculated into the final grade until the end of the semester. Needless to say, I spoke a lot of French that year.
As the semester began to end, I was teetering on the verge of a B with a 91%. I procrastinated to the extreme on two projects that were due just before the end of the semester. I had a workbook which I was supposed to be working all year and a large, fairly simple translation. I stayed up very late the night before they were due, but I did not finish. I handed in my workbook two-thirds complete and my translation three-quarters complete. Combined, they were worth over a third of my final grade. I felt defeated, lousy, and fearful. I was going to get a B (maybe even a C) in one of the easiest classes I had ever taken, and my parents were not going to be happy. A knot was in my stomach as I waited to see my grade the next week. I knew I needed to tell my parents about it before they got the report card so I checked the grade posted outside the French room the day grades were up. Lo and behold, I had not dropped from an A to a B. I jumped from a 91% to a 103%! My teacher factored in all my speaking during class as extra credit, and this propelled me from the grade I actually deserved to an A+.
Sadly, I later learned many of my friends in the class earned lower grades since they were unable to speak during class due to my outspokenness. Also, I did not learn what I needed to learn because I rushed on my projects and left them incomplete. This is what we encounter in Luke 4. The devil is tempting Jesus to speak up in class so he does not have to do his homework.
In Luke chapter 3, Jesus receives baptism from his cousin John (v. 21), and afterward, the Holy Spirit comes upon him (v. 22). Luke 4 picks up at this point after being interrupted by Jesus' genealogy. Luke presents the setting: Jesus is being led around in the wilderness by the Holy Spirit (v. 1). One of the most important parts of Luke is that it possesses the most dense and intricate uses of the LXX by any of the 4 gospels. Immediately, the heritage of Israel should be conjured in our minds. 40 days in the wilderness aligns Jesus with Israel's 40 years in the desert (Deut. 1.34-40), Moses' 40 day fast on Mt. Sinai (Ex. 24.18), and Elijah's 40 day flight to Mt. Horeb (1 Kgs. 19.8). Many want, at this point, to pit the devil against the Holy Spirit here, but nothing in the text suggests this. If anything, the two are in collusion with each other. The word used for tempt in v. 2 means more or less "challenge", and it is always directed at G-d or Jesus in the gospels. It connotes a proving of oneself (if one passes the test).
In v. 2, the 40 days end and Jesus is starving. The devil comes and offers a simple proposition. This portion of the narrative should not be confused with Matthew's version. In Matthew, the devil asks Jesus to turn stones into loaves (4.3). The plurality connotes manna. The devil, in Matthew, tempts Jesus to take on the role of a welfare king feeding all of Israel. In Luke, the temptation is simpler: "If you are the Son of G-d, feed yourself." We hear echoes of this later in the chapter in v. 23 when Jesus says to the people of Nazareth, "Doubtless, you will quote to me this proverb, 'Doctor, cure yourself'," and it comes up again when Jesus is on the cross while priests, soldiers, and the man dying next to him scoff, demanding that he save himself (23.35b, 36-37, 39). Jesus did not come to feed, cure, or save himself. He came to show us the Way into G-d's Kingdom, and stone into bread is insufficient. An act of self-salvation is not a part of this Kingdom. Jesus tells the devil, bread is not enough.
The next temptation is another we must not confuse with Matthew, for in Matthew, this is the 3rd temptation. Looking at Matthew can really help us here. Most people are used to thinking that the devil tells Jesus that the authority and glory of the kingdoms of the world belong to him, the devil. However, only Luke mentions this. Luke must be trying to indicate something by this addition. Most read this with Constantinian eyes, assuming that G-d gave the devil the authority and glory of the nations. This is unmerited. Luke 2.1, which reads, "In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered," says who has authority over "all the kingdoms of the world" (4.5). Caesar does! Who gave the devil this authority? Caesar did. This becomes quite obvious when we read Psalm 2.7-8. G-d says, "You are my son" and "I will give you the nations". Since Jesus is G-d's Son, logically he expects to receive authority over the nations. Bowing to the devil is not how Jesus is to earn this power. Jesus cannot be the king of the world if he bows to the power of Caesar. Thus, he refuses. Instead, he so rattles the cages of the emperor that he is killed, and by the power of G-d, rises again, victorious. This is the lengths to which Jesus' faithfulness takes him.
We saw a temptation to abuse Jesus' status to save himself, we saw a political temptation to expediently achieve the goal of bringing G-d's Kingdom, and finally, we see a religious temptation. The Gospel According to Luke is always pointed toward Jerusalem. It begins and ends there; starting at 9.51 Jesus sets out on a long ten chapter journey toward the Holy City. We find a foreshadow of this journey here as the devil leads Jesus to Jerusalem. Of the three, this is the most somber temptation. Luke's all Christians of all times know that when Jesus gets to Jerusalem at the end of his journey, the highest part of the Temple, the priests, will, in fact, cast him down, but there will be no angels to protect him. What we see clearly here is the devil suggesting that Jesus could avoid the crucifixion if he merely tests G-d's protection. Jesus refuses to do this. Instead, his choice is to trust that his death will result in his resurrection, whereupon G-d's Kingdom will be in its full glory.
Alas, the devil, not "defeated" but "finished", leaves until another opportune time.
What do we take away from this today on the first Sunday of Lent? Though I have not been Anabaptist since birth, I was raised in the broader tradition of the radical reformation. We, the radical reformers, have, for centuries, steered clear of the Church calendar, but gradually, we are making our way back toward it. I believe this is a great thing. It provides us more common ground with our liturgically-minded brothers and sisters. In turn, this allows us to challenge their long outdated views on war, the Church's relationship to government, Baptism, etc. What I think we have is a responsibility to put a prophetic critique on the dominant view surrounding the Lenten season. Lent has become a time in which Christians give up a "vice" which is superfluous or mildly damaging to their well-being. They do so in order to commiserate with Jesus' suffering. If we approach Lent with such an attitude, we commit several major flaws.
First, we fail to recognize that only in a culture of extreme excess is it possible to sacrifice what is superfluous to ourselves. Most people in this world do not have the luxury of indulging in what might be damaging or useless. Second, we approach Lent existentially. We do not give up our vices for the sake of others; we give them up for the sake of ourselves. Finally, we look at Lent as temporal rather than permanent.
Jesus' temptation story addresses these problems head on. First, Jesus' story begins in a place of scarcity and depletion. Lent is therefore not a time of sacrificing a small piece of excess for a moment in time. It is a season in which we thrust ourselves into scarcity so that our faithfulness might be tested. Are we willing to quit earning easy extra credit and start doing our homework.
Second, Jesus is given the opportunity to make himself powerful, but he refuses. The temptations Jesus rejects are rejected not for his sake but for others'. During Lent, we should not rededicate ourselves to the Kingdom of G-d for the sake of our own salvation. We should do it for the sake of others' well-being. What is detracting you from loving your neighbor. Perhaps, it is the temptation to indulge in the power and glory of the kingdoms of the world. Perhaps, you fear the cross of caring for the vulnerable. Refusing the devil's enticing offer is hard. Lent is a time when we work extra hard to do this.
Third, Jesus is tempted 40 days in the wilderness, but it is the final 3 temptations that define his ministry. After refusing them, he does not return to them. That is, he does not worship the devil after rising from the dead. Similarly, what we sacrifice for Lent should not be something we want to return on Easter Sunday. Jesus resurrected; our bad habits should not follow suit.
Finally, Jesus gave up many things that appeared good: bread, authority, and rescue from suffering. In short, he refused to speak in order to avoid his homework. Are we willing to give up that which might be good to us? Can we even identify the parts of life that appear good, but are in fact compromised by the devil's tempting. When we accomplish this task and we rigorously work, by the leading of the Holy Spirit, to rid ourselves of these "good" things, we naturally look not at Lent, but we maintain our attention on the coming day of resurrection, Easter Sunday. When those temptations are refused, we celebrate our own new life as we celebrate our Lord's! No longer afflicted by the scourge of what appears good but is in fact a deceptive shortcut, we live in the glorious light of the resurrection with the hope and assurance that Jesus is King! I pray we do so with courage and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Peace!
-ben adam
As the semester began to end, I was teetering on the verge of a B with a 91%. I procrastinated to the extreme on two projects that were due just before the end of the semester. I had a workbook which I was supposed to be working all year and a large, fairly simple translation. I stayed up very late the night before they were due, but I did not finish. I handed in my workbook two-thirds complete and my translation three-quarters complete. Combined, they were worth over a third of my final grade. I felt defeated, lousy, and fearful. I was going to get a B (maybe even a C) in one of the easiest classes I had ever taken, and my parents were not going to be happy. A knot was in my stomach as I waited to see my grade the next week. I knew I needed to tell my parents about it before they got the report card so I checked the grade posted outside the French room the day grades were up. Lo and behold, I had not dropped from an A to a B. I jumped from a 91% to a 103%! My teacher factored in all my speaking during class as extra credit, and this propelled me from the grade I actually deserved to an A+.
Sadly, I later learned many of my friends in the class earned lower grades since they were unable to speak during class due to my outspokenness. Also, I did not learn what I needed to learn because I rushed on my projects and left them incomplete. This is what we encounter in Luke 4. The devil is tempting Jesus to speak up in class so he does not have to do his homework.
In Luke chapter 3, Jesus receives baptism from his cousin John (v. 21), and afterward, the Holy Spirit comes upon him (v. 22). Luke 4 picks up at this point after being interrupted by Jesus' genealogy. Luke presents the setting: Jesus is being led around in the wilderness by the Holy Spirit (v. 1). One of the most important parts of Luke is that it possesses the most dense and intricate uses of the LXX by any of the 4 gospels. Immediately, the heritage of Israel should be conjured in our minds. 40 days in the wilderness aligns Jesus with Israel's 40 years in the desert (Deut. 1.34-40), Moses' 40 day fast on Mt. Sinai (Ex. 24.18), and Elijah's 40 day flight to Mt. Horeb (1 Kgs. 19.8). Many want, at this point, to pit the devil against the Holy Spirit here, but nothing in the text suggests this. If anything, the two are in collusion with each other. The word used for tempt in v. 2 means more or less "challenge", and it is always directed at G-d or Jesus in the gospels. It connotes a proving of oneself (if one passes the test).
In v. 2, the 40 days end and Jesus is starving. The devil comes and offers a simple proposition. This portion of the narrative should not be confused with Matthew's version. In Matthew, the devil asks Jesus to turn stones into loaves (4.3). The plurality connotes manna. The devil, in Matthew, tempts Jesus to take on the role of a welfare king feeding all of Israel. In Luke, the temptation is simpler: "If you are the Son of G-d, feed yourself." We hear echoes of this later in the chapter in v. 23 when Jesus says to the people of Nazareth, "Doubtless, you will quote to me this proverb, 'Doctor, cure yourself'," and it comes up again when Jesus is on the cross while priests, soldiers, and the man dying next to him scoff, demanding that he save himself (23.35b, 36-37, 39). Jesus did not come to feed, cure, or save himself. He came to show us the Way into G-d's Kingdom, and stone into bread is insufficient. An act of self-salvation is not a part of this Kingdom. Jesus tells the devil, bread is not enough.
The next temptation is another we must not confuse with Matthew, for in Matthew, this is the 3rd temptation. Looking at Matthew can really help us here. Most people are used to thinking that the devil tells Jesus that the authority and glory of the kingdoms of the world belong to him, the devil. However, only Luke mentions this. Luke must be trying to indicate something by this addition. Most read this with Constantinian eyes, assuming that G-d gave the devil the authority and glory of the nations. This is unmerited. Luke 2.1, which reads, "In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered," says who has authority over "all the kingdoms of the world" (4.5). Caesar does! Who gave the devil this authority? Caesar did. This becomes quite obvious when we read Psalm 2.7-8. G-d says, "You are my son" and "I will give you the nations". Since Jesus is G-d's Son, logically he expects to receive authority over the nations. Bowing to the devil is not how Jesus is to earn this power. Jesus cannot be the king of the world if he bows to the power of Caesar. Thus, he refuses. Instead, he so rattles the cages of the emperor that he is killed, and by the power of G-d, rises again, victorious. This is the lengths to which Jesus' faithfulness takes him.
We saw a temptation to abuse Jesus' status to save himself, we saw a political temptation to expediently achieve the goal of bringing G-d's Kingdom, and finally, we see a religious temptation. The Gospel According to Luke is always pointed toward Jerusalem. It begins and ends there; starting at 9.51 Jesus sets out on a long ten chapter journey toward the Holy City. We find a foreshadow of this journey here as the devil leads Jesus to Jerusalem. Of the three, this is the most somber temptation. Luke's all Christians of all times know that when Jesus gets to Jerusalem at the end of his journey, the highest part of the Temple, the priests, will, in fact, cast him down, but there will be no angels to protect him. What we see clearly here is the devil suggesting that Jesus could avoid the crucifixion if he merely tests G-d's protection. Jesus refuses to do this. Instead, his choice is to trust that his death will result in his resurrection, whereupon G-d's Kingdom will be in its full glory.
Alas, the devil, not "defeated" but "finished", leaves until another opportune time.
What do we take away from this today on the first Sunday of Lent? Though I have not been Anabaptist since birth, I was raised in the broader tradition of the radical reformation. We, the radical reformers, have, for centuries, steered clear of the Church calendar, but gradually, we are making our way back toward it. I believe this is a great thing. It provides us more common ground with our liturgically-minded brothers and sisters. In turn, this allows us to challenge their long outdated views on war, the Church's relationship to government, Baptism, etc. What I think we have is a responsibility to put a prophetic critique on the dominant view surrounding the Lenten season. Lent has become a time in which Christians give up a "vice" which is superfluous or mildly damaging to their well-being. They do so in order to commiserate with Jesus' suffering. If we approach Lent with such an attitude, we commit several major flaws.
First, we fail to recognize that only in a culture of extreme excess is it possible to sacrifice what is superfluous to ourselves. Most people in this world do not have the luxury of indulging in what might be damaging or useless. Second, we approach Lent existentially. We do not give up our vices for the sake of others; we give them up for the sake of ourselves. Finally, we look at Lent as temporal rather than permanent.
Jesus' temptation story addresses these problems head on. First, Jesus' story begins in a place of scarcity and depletion. Lent is therefore not a time of sacrificing a small piece of excess for a moment in time. It is a season in which we thrust ourselves into scarcity so that our faithfulness might be tested. Are we willing to quit earning easy extra credit and start doing our homework.
Second, Jesus is given the opportunity to make himself powerful, but he refuses. The temptations Jesus rejects are rejected not for his sake but for others'. During Lent, we should not rededicate ourselves to the Kingdom of G-d for the sake of our own salvation. We should do it for the sake of others' well-being. What is detracting you from loving your neighbor. Perhaps, it is the temptation to indulge in the power and glory of the kingdoms of the world. Perhaps, you fear the cross of caring for the vulnerable. Refusing the devil's enticing offer is hard. Lent is a time when we work extra hard to do this.
Third, Jesus is tempted 40 days in the wilderness, but it is the final 3 temptations that define his ministry. After refusing them, he does not return to them. That is, he does not worship the devil after rising from the dead. Similarly, what we sacrifice for Lent should not be something we want to return on Easter Sunday. Jesus resurrected; our bad habits should not follow suit.
Finally, Jesus gave up many things that appeared good: bread, authority, and rescue from suffering. In short, he refused to speak in order to avoid his homework. Are we willing to give up that which might be good to us? Can we even identify the parts of life that appear good, but are in fact compromised by the devil's tempting. When we accomplish this task and we rigorously work, by the leading of the Holy Spirit, to rid ourselves of these "good" things, we naturally look not at Lent, but we maintain our attention on the coming day of resurrection, Easter Sunday. When those temptations are refused, we celebrate our own new life as we celebrate our Lord's! No longer afflicted by the scourge of what appears good but is in fact a deceptive shortcut, we live in the glorious light of the resurrection with the hope and assurance that Jesus is King! I pray we do so with courage and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Peace!
-ben adam
19 February 2010
The Truth Can Be Funny
The Onion: U.S. Economy Grinds To Halt As Nation Realizes Money Just A Symbolic, Mutually Shared Illusion
Sometimes, the truth is hilarious!
Sometimes, the truth is hilarious!
18 February 2010
Reflections on Lent
Lent began yesterday. I attended my first ever Ash Wednesday service with a real church! I read some “confessions” and had an ashen cross painted on my head. It was very nice. Some twenty people, or maybe less, were there. Two pastors whom I love orchestrated it. The lighting was dark, the colors foreboding, and sufficiently somber tones cast themselves over the short service. Lent is hard for me. Here is why.
Lent came about in the Church’s reflection upon the humanity of Jesus. Particularly, it centered on reflections concerning Jesus’ temptation. For this reason, every first Sunday in Lent the lectionary calls for one of the three stories in the Synoptic Gospels about the devil tempting Jesus out in the desert. The great lesson learned from these stories is that Jesus refused to take advantage of his power in order to hastily accomplish his goals as the Messiah. This can be seen most clearly in Luke’s second temptation, Matthew’s third. The devil offers Jesus authority over all world governments if only Jesus worships the devil. Jesus could easily avoid his own brutal death by this, but he refuses.
Lent, which lasts 40 days in correspondence to Jesus’ 40 days in the wilderness, quite naturally then, is a time in which we are to refuse temptations that seek to bring the Kingdom of G-d in an expedient yet compromised way. However, in a culture satiated to the point of numbness, Lent looks like a sheer mockery of Jesus’ time in the wilderness. Most folks abandon some “vice” for 40 days in order to pick it back up again when the allotted time is up as though Jesus started worshipping the devil upon the resurrection. We should not treat Lent so insignificantly.
-ben adam
17 February 2010
Messes of Ben
Welcome!
I had a blog once. I shared it with two good friends. The friends are still around, but the blog kind of died. Then, I tried to follow another friend's blog on blogger, and for some reason I needed a blog to follow? I think, but anyway, I made one. Actually, I had been planning on making one for some time. Here it is.
The title comes from the first song on mewithoutYou's fantastic third album Brother, Sister. The song is titled "Messes of Men". It is about messes we get into, particularly adultery. I realize each day the mess I am in. My ideological beliefs are fairly radical and difficult to live into. What's more, my beliefs are radically different than the dominant belief structures of our day. I am therefore faced with a predicament. I believe in a difficult moral standard that subverts most worldviews (Christian and secular alike). Consequently, I attempt to employ my mess in a way that subverts the dominating mess we face in society today! What a mess!
My new blog exists to chronicle my experiences of attempting to mess up our tidy evaluations of what Christian living really is (especially since the Christians are so lukewarm and the non-Christians think that's what G-d is like!). I will write my sermons here, summarize books I am reading, narrate my adventures in volunteering with homeless shelters and other groups, and chronicle my own personal struggles to live radically. I hope you will join me. It should be an absolute mess. Peace!
-ben adam
I had a blog once. I shared it with two good friends. The friends are still around, but the blog kind of died. Then, I tried to follow another friend's blog on blogger, and for some reason I needed a blog to follow? I think, but anyway, I made one. Actually, I had been planning on making one for some time. Here it is.
The title comes from the first song on mewithoutYou's fantastic third album Brother, Sister. The song is titled "Messes of Men". It is about messes we get into, particularly adultery. I realize each day the mess I am in. My ideological beliefs are fairly radical and difficult to live into. What's more, my beliefs are radically different than the dominant belief structures of our day. I am therefore faced with a predicament. I believe in a difficult moral standard that subverts most worldviews (Christian and secular alike). Consequently, I attempt to employ my mess in a way that subverts the dominating mess we face in society today! What a mess!
My new blog exists to chronicle my experiences of attempting to mess up our tidy evaluations of what Christian living really is (especially since the Christians are so lukewarm and the non-Christians think that's what G-d is like!). I will write my sermons here, summarize books I am reading, narrate my adventures in volunteering with homeless shelters and other groups, and chronicle my own personal struggles to live radically. I hope you will join me. It should be an absolute mess. Peace!
-ben adam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)