Same Sex Marriage in New York State August 2011
Q. Pastor, how do you feel about NYS’s new law allowing same sex marriages?
A, I am 100% in favor of this law. Marriage is a civil right granted by the government for the ordering of society regarding taxes, inheritances, legal heirs etc. The meaning of a marriage is for the couple to decide; it can be a practical arrangement, a romantic or sentimental one and or it can have spiritual meaning...
The church’s participation in marriage through its clergy is as an agent of the state. The clergy perform this ceremony in the name of the state and secondly in the name of the church or God...
Couples wanting to marry in the church with clergy officiating are usually seeking the blessing of the church and God to enrich their lives with God’s love even as we pledge to love our spouse.
For Protestant Christians marriage is not a sacrament. It is considered a rite. For Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians marriage is a sacrament and a priest must be present to celebrate the liturgy for the sacrament to be effective. Civil ceremonies are not marriages in the eyes of the Roman Catholic or Orthodox churches. Since both Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches consider gay relations beyond God’s approval they can not officiate or even bless such unions.
Can Protestant clergy bless same sex unions? Why not? There is nothing in the Bible that forbids such unions. In the middle ages the church blessed same sex unions between monks. In the libraries of Europe there are liturgies from the middle ages for such union ceremonies. DR John Boswell of Yale University wrote “Same Sex Unions in Premodern Europe”, Villard Press, New York 1994. Some editions of this book actually contain photographs of these ancient liturgies of same sex marriages.
Also there are two canonized Saints in the Roman Catholic Church who were a gay couple, St Serge and St Bacchus from the 4th century AD. See John Boswell book,” Same Sex Unions” to discover more about these saints. Boswells other relevant book on this topic is titled “Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality” in 14th and 15th century Spain.
Almost all the Old testament passages about homosexuality are about violence, rape , and temple prostitution and such behavior is also forbidden in heterosexual relations too but this does not mean that healthy, loving sexual relationship are forbidden to people just because some corrupt them. There is also the Levitical text dealing with purity issues which are mixed in with many antiquated laws which we no longer consider binding.
There is one same sex love story in I Samuel 18 between Jonathan, the prince, and David the up and coming young man at court. Then in II Samuel 1 after Jonathan is killed we read of David’s reflections about their love.
In the New Testament neither Jesus nor any of the original apostles mention the issue of homosexuality even though it was a common practice among Roman and Greek society. Only the apostle Paul mentions the subject in 3 texts .These text need to be understood in terms of how the original Greek words were meant to be interpreted. The English translations that have been used were prejudicial making gay people the object of God’s rejection. The church has aided in developing homophobia in society by using these anti gay texts as a weapons. The Rev DR Peter Gomes former chaplain of Harvard University wrote an excellent book called “The Good Book” which helps us understand the Bible verses in their context and in the original language which was Greek.
The church’s reaction to this subject is way out of proportion to what the Bible says. There are two verses in the Old Testament written in the 12th century BC and then the next mention of the subject is 1200 years later by St Paul in New Testament times.
How important is this subject? Why has the church made it the sin of sins? Why has it become the litmus test about whether one is a true believer?
Marriage is the action between two people who want to declare their love for one another and want to live as a couple, Who has the right to say their love is not legitimate or not real? Who has the right to say they can not be a couple or a family? Shouldn’t the church bless any couple who wants to live in a loving relationship as a married couple.
Today the State of NewYork recognizes same sex marriages as do 5 other states and at least a dozen countries in the world . The US military now allows gay people to openly serve as a homosexual person. Society has gay people in every walk of life serving with excellence. When will the church recognize that gay people are also children of God and welcomed by God for the blessings he wants to bestow including the blessing of marriage? Pastor Carl Rosenblum
Same Sex Marriage in New York State August 2011
Q. Pastor, how do you feel about NYS’s new law allowing same sex marriages?
A, I am 100% in favor of this law. Marriage is a civil right granted by the government for the ordering of society regarding taxes, inheritances, legal heirs etc. The meaning of a marriage is for the couple to decide; it can be a practical arrangement, a romantic or sentimental one and or it can have spiritual meaning...
The church’s participation in marriage through its clergy is as an agent of the state. The clergy perform this ceremony in the name of the state and secondly in the name of the church or God...
Couples wanting to marry in the church with clergy officiating are usually seeking the blessing of the church and God to enrich their lives with God’s love even as we pledge to love our spouse.
For Protestant Christians marriage is not a sacrament. It is considered a rite. For Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians marriage is a sacrament and a priest must be present to celebrate the liturgy for the sacrament to be effective. Civil ceremonies are not marriages in the eyes of the Roman Catholic or Orthodox churches. Since both Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches consider gay relations beyond God’s approval they can not officiate or even bless such unions.
Can Protestant clergy bless same sex unions? Why not? There is nothing in the Bible that forbids such unions. In the middle ages the church blessed same sex unions between monks. In the libraries of Europe there are liturgies from the middle ages for such union ceremonies. DR John Boswell of Yale University wrote “Same Sex Unions in Premodern Europe”, Villard Press, New York 1994. Some editions of this book actually contain photographs of these ancient liturgies of same sex marriages.
Also there are two canonized Saints in the Roman Catholic Church who were a gay couple, St Serge and St Bacchus from the 4th century AD. See John Boswell book,” Same Sex Unions” to discover more about these saints. Boswells other relevant book on this topic is titled “Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality” in 14th and 15th century Spain.
Almost all the Old testament passages about homosexuality are about violence, rape , and temple prostitution and such behavior is also forbidden in heterosexual relations too but this does not mean that healthy, loving sexual relationship are forbidden to people just because some corrupt them. There is also the Levitical text dealing with purity issues which are mixed in with many antiquated laws which we no longer consider binding.
There is one same sex love story in I Samuel 18 between Jonathan, the prince, and David the up and coming young man at court. Then in II Samuel 1 after Jonathan is killed we read of David’s reflections about their love.
In the New Testament neither Jesus nor any of the original apostles mention the issue of homosexuality even though it was a common practice among Roman and Greek society. Only the apostle Paul mentions the subject in 3 texts .These text need to be understood in terms of how the original Greek words were meant to be interpreted. The English translations that have been used were prejudicial making gay people the object of God’s rejection. The church has aided in developing homophobia in society by using these anti gay texts as a weapons. The Rev DR Peter Gomes former chaplain of Harvard University wrote an excellent book called “The Good Book” which helps us understand the Bible verses in their context and in the original language which was Greek.
The church’s reaction to this subject is way out of proportion to what the Bible says. There are two verses in the Old Testament written in the 12th century BC and then the next mention of the subject is 1200 years later by St Paul in New Testament times.
How important is this subject? Why has the church made it the sin of sins? Why has it become the litmus test about whether one is a true believer?
Marriage is the action between two people who want to declare their love for one another and want to live as a couple, Who has the right to say their love is not legitimate or not real? Who has the right to say they can not be a couple or a family? Shouldn’t the church bless any couple who wants to live in a loving relationship as a married couple.
Today the State of NewYork recognizes same sex marriages as do 5 other states and at least a dozen countries in the world . The US military now allows gay people to openly serve as a homosexual person. Society has gay people in every walk of life serving with excellence. When will the church recognize that gay people are also children of God and welcomed by God for the blessings he wants to bestow including the blessing of marriage? Pastor Carl Rosenblum
Same Sex Marriage in New York State August 2011
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Islamophobia
June ,2011
Q_ What is the church doing to combat Islamophobia?
A-_There is no single or simple response to the question because the Christian Church is not a monolithic organization. Each branch of the church has a response to the question but these are not coordinated in a single view. The main branches of Christianity fall under either Roman Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant which has many different smaller churches under it. Each denomination may put out an official position which represents its church but individual members need not conform to the church’s official view. Freedom of conscience is permitted. The responses would be as broad as the political spectrum of society.
I am Presbyterian so I can speak a little about some of my church’s response to Islamophobia. Again there is no central office that speaks for all Presbyterians but the denomination will put out opinions that were voted on by elected members at official meetings. The church functions as a representative democracy. But these opinions or views are not binding on individuals; freedom of conscience is always a higher value..
The Presbyterian Church has had a long standing relationship with Muslim Countries and Islam from North Africa to the Middle East to Asia. In he 19th century the church sent missionaries to these countries to tell the Christian message about Jesus but they also engaged in helping people in what ever way was needed; education, orphanages, medical needs with doctors and hospitals, drilling wells for water, …
Since World War 2 the church has become less patronizing and more willing to offer help where the people feel they need it. Bridges to Islam have resulted in mutual understanding and appreciation in many places. Since we, Muslims and Christians, are both people of the Book along with the Jews have a common background from which to build mutual understanding. We are all children of Abraham.
In today’s world Islamophobia is a key issue which Presbyterians are addressing at all levels of the church’s life. On the Internet you can find video dialogues between Muslim leaders and Presbyterian scholars and clergy as well as ideas about how to promote mutual understanding at the congregational level. Most Presbyterians hear a message of God’s inclusive love for all people. Since God cares for all people we are to care for all as well. Social justice and tolerance are high values in our denomination. We are to protect the rights of minorities so they can live freely among us. So although we are taught tolerance and justice other influences can override our faith principles.
Today’s Islamophobia in the USA has mainly been a reaction to the 9/11 experience being attacked by terrorist who claim to be speaking for Islam. Osama ben Laden, the leader, and Alkaieda his organization. are the ones who ignited this struggle.. This attack shocked Americans resulting in anger, hurt, a desire for revenge as well as a challenge. Americans wanted to hurt back and regain our dignity. The frustration of the American people was felt by the Muslim community living in the in the USA in the form of Islamophobia. There are now about 8-10 million Muslims living in the US.
Some churches to counteract the Islamophobia that has been developing, have encouraged their members to check with there Muslim neighbors to make sure they are safe and that they are not experiencing overt attacks or rejection.
The Church as well as Americans are beginning to learn that Islam is not a monolithic institution. Although Muslims I know want to present themselves as a unified community, it’s really as diverse as any world wide organization or as the church. Islam has major internal divisions such as Sunni, Shiite and Sufis. Muslims live in a variety of political structures, not a caliphate; autocratic states, theocratic states, democracies, monarchies, republics, and tribal systems. They come from a wide varieties of countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia speaking many languages. Muslims are divided about living with shiria law, there is a variety of opinion about the role of the clergy and their place in the community. Yes. there are ideas and concepts that unite Muslims; the Mosque, the Hajj, Eid, Quran as well as words that might generate negative feelings such as jihad or fatwa.
It is good for Americans and Christians to realize these differences and to recognize that each Muslim is an individual person whose views are their own. They are not always tied into a collective or monolithic world view, especially the world view of Osama ben Laden. In America the rights of the individual must be respected and protected.
Americans and definitely Christians have no justification for reacting to the present situation with Islamophobia. Individuals can not be blamed or attacked for the actions of a few because they share one thing in common and.in this case a religious belief.
Americans and Christians can be challenged from their own fundamental tenets of life and faith not to engage in Islamophobia
I think there is one thing that I feel the Muslim community and leaders can do to encourage reconciliation between Muslims and other Americans of all religions. After Osama’s ben Laden’s death was announced some young Americans celebrated which seemed very crass. But I noticed no Muslim leaders among the clergy or the political community spoke about how glad they were that Osama was gone. I listened and although I know of individuals who were glad he was gone there was, as far as I know, no public statement by a leader. Did I miss something?
This left me with one of two conclusions ; either the leadership in Islam is afraid to speak this way because Osama’s followers might take revenge and attack them or deep in their hearts they believe there was something right about what Osama did, attacking the USA. Because the USA was too arrogant or did not respect the Muslim world the attack helped Osama regained some dignity for the Muslims world.
If the first option is true, Americans need to know how difficult it is for the Muslim community to escape Osama’s influence. We need to know so we can side with you and support you. What Americans want to know is that we are all on the same side. Not that USA is right. Americans need to be more humble in the world. But if Osama is a secret saint or idol to Muslims then we have very different world views and will not function well together,
Osama was a very self righteous man who played at being god. He decided what was right and wrong and who lived or died. He was not kind or charitable. He was selfish and egotistical. He destroyed many lives. He killed more Muslims that any individual over the past decade. He stole children from their homes and turned them into suicide bombers, he created a false hope with his Jihad. He lived in relative comfort in hiding while his followers sacrificed everything. . The terror he caused ruined lives for generations to come with the bombings. He had no regard for human suffering. He was heartless and a total shame to Islam.
So where does the Islamic community and leadership stand on Osama ben Laden? I can not imagine anyone trying to convince me Adolf Hitler did some good and I think this applies to ben Laden too.
A clear statement on ben Laden would help unite us , Muslims and Christians against tyrants, religious or political. .
Carl Rosenblum
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Feelings about Osama's death
Are there right feelings? May 2011
Q- I felt conflicted when I saw Americans celebrating when the news came that Osama Bin Laden had been killed. Some on TV were acting like it’s party time, mostly the youth. I was glad he was dead but I could not turn it into a party. For me it was a sobering moment. Should Christians or believers in God celebrate Osama being killed?
A-People have their own personal reaction to such news. For some it is relief and the need to let loose, others feel justice has been served and now they can relax about the moral outrage they have been holding; the world has been righted. We can not tell people how to feel, our feelings are a reaction to a situation. It is what we do with our feelings that we have some control over and we should want our actions to reflect our values.
I was very impressed with the people who had lost loved ones in 9/11 and the present wars. They were glad Osama was dead but the issues of their hearts are not solved by his death; their loved one is dead and never coming back. Maybe a chapter in this saga has closed by Osama’s death for them but life without their loved one is forever.
Many who started to party could have been just following the crowd. We have all lived with pent up emotions about Osama and terrorism and news of his death released some of these feelings. Our desire for revenge might have been satisfied or American dignity was redeemed and pride could return. Many of the youth were singing patriotic songs. But when we can put our desires for revenge behind us and work for the common good we will find some real healing.
As for the believer’s responses, we too are just human but our actions should take into account the teachings of our faith. In the Old Testament, the Jewish Scriptures, we can see mixed responses. When David (I Samuel 18) kills the giant Goliath with his sling shot and he then goes and cuts Goliath’s head off with Goliath’s own sword, he brings the head to King Saul. The women came out singing and dancing. The giant who had plagued Israel for years was now dead. They no longer had to live with this dreaded fear.
But in Ezekiel (33:11) the prophet writes “God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God rather the wicked repent and live” God would show mercy to the wicked if they were willing to receive it by turning from their wicked ways. Even Jesus gave us an example when he said about those crucifying him, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” In Paul’s letter to the Romans he quotes Deut.32:35 “Vengeance is mine , saith the Lord, I will repay” and Proverbs 25:21&22 “If your enemy is hungry feed him if he is thirsty give him drink. In so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.” Do not be over come by evil, but over come evil with good.
As believers we must learn how to live with our ideals in the face of the world’s evils.
When Adolf Hitler who caused much grief in the world was declared dead the then Senator Howard Taft of Ohio was asked to speak at his local Universalist Church, a denomination that doesn’t not believe in Hell or judgment. Taft stood up before the people and said “I am pleased to announce to you that Adolf Hitler is in that place that you and I don’t believe in”.
The feelings of relief and need for justice and even vengeance was partial satisfied when Taft consigned Hitler to Hell.
For me when of I heard of Osama’s death, a somber mood came over me. I was glad he was gone and no longer instigating evil deeds. I had a mild sense that justice had been served and good can win out and the hope that now maybe the whole world will see Osama for what he really was, a man an obsessed by his own self-righteousness. He made himself a god judging who should live and who should die. Osama represented the worse of what an individual human being can do, the worst of what we can become by taking others down to hell with us.
Our national response to Osama was the Iraq and the Afghan wars. This became a part of the evil inflicted on the world. Osama killed his thousands but we the USA ended up killing our tens of thousands in these wars. Osama and his followers created a false dream causing young people to sacrifice their lives as suicide bombers, as an insurgency army, as the army to bring about a Caliphate, as martyrs who would inherit heaven because they have pleased God by killing thousands of people including other Muslims. The worst evil ends up calling evil good and convinces other to believe thereby destroying everything. We saw this with Hitler and the Nazi movement, Pol Pot and the Kamerouge, Mao in China killing millions of his own people in the name of the highest good, a communist state. In Rwanda one tribe slaughtered 800,000 of another tribe in the name of an ideal, racial purity. When evil is called good, no one is safe.
Osama has now passed even as all the other sources of evil in the last century and we are glad. There is relief but it is not a party time. It is time to reflect in order not to let the problems and process repeat itself.
Our response which caused much suffering reflected our ignorance of other cultures, of Islam, of political and economics realities in these regions and ignorance especially of how America effects this area of the world by our power, money and culture. Not that we could have fixed it all but at least we could have been more understanding over the many years that it happened. The greed in our own culture was allowed to run wild and roughshod over other peoples and culture. Does this excuse the actions of an Osama and Alkaida.? No, but our understanding could mitigate the clashes of culture and values.
Our economic policies in the USA did as much to hurt our own people allowing two wars to be put on the tab so to speak while lowering taxes for the wealthy class. Allowing unrestricted greed in the economic community caused the collapse of the economy and then the tax payer was asked to foot the bill creating even more deficits and then turning around and blaming the average middle and working class people after wiping out their savings, their retirement plans and even taking their homes. And in the recovery who got their money and life stabilized first, the rich; the bankers and the Wall Street community while everyone else has to slog through the mess hoping to come out with something for a future. Now our demographics are going to create even an worse struggle due to the number of retirees, our health care system or lack thereof ( much of it is a greed problem) and the educational system which has failed many. We have bred our own underclass by refusing to share the wealth in a constructive way so everyone can live a better more productive life.This is seen in the facts that CEOs now make 400 to 1 more income than the average worker. It use to be 40 to 1 more.
Our policies are part of the reason the world hates us.
If class warfareever comes to the USA it is not because the lower classes started it. It is because the wealthy have arranged to keep most of the goodies for themselves. The class warfare in Russia was cause by those who ignored the poverty of the people so the ruling class got what it deserved, a revolution.
This is the spirit in the world that is reacting to the USA. Our seeming arrogance and indifference to other people's concerns are inciting people to action against us.
All people are God’s children and God wishes all to come to repentance and knowledge of the truth. The USA is not the most favored nation of God. As believers how are we showing love for all people. Power and greed are big turn offs for people so do we teach our families about a proper perspective about our place and our responsibility in the world and for the world. As Christians we look to Jesus for direction about how to live in the world. He was always seeking the welfare of others with no thought to class or power. We are called as much as possible to live in peace with all people and we are to care for the least among us. Our caring is to be a reflection of God’s caring for the world. We need to be willing to be a voice crying in the wilderness ,a voice against the powers of the day, so that God’s concerns are incorporated into our way of life. We need to challenge the wealthy and the powerful especially if they are bent on aggressive action and to intercede on behalf of the powerless.
The life and death matters that are always before us must be held up as issue that God cares about. We are invited to be ambassadors for God presenting his concerns for all people and invite the rich and powerful to share in this work as God’s agents. Our religion teaches us to be loving and generous to others. Do our feelings match our what God asks of us?
Are there right feelings? May 2011
Q- I felt conflicted when I saw Americans celebrating when the news came that Osama Bin Laden had been killed. Some on TV were acting like it’s party time, mostly the youth. I was glad he was dead but I could not turn it into a party. For me it was a sobering moment. Should Christians or believers in God celebrate Osama being killed?
A-People have their own personal reaction to such news. For some it is relief and the need to let loose, others feel justice has been served and now they can relax about the moral outrage they have been holding; the world has been righted. We can not tell people how to feel, our feelings are a reaction to a situation. It is what we do with our feelings that we have some control over and we should want our actions to reflect our values.
I was very impressed with the people who had lost loved ones in 9/11 and the present wars. They were glad Osama was dead but the issues of their hearts are not solved by his death; their loved one is dead and never coming back. Maybe a chapter in this saga has closed by Osama’s death for them but life without their loved one is forever.
Many who started to party could have been just following the crowd. We have all lived with pent up emotions about Osama and terrorism and news of his death released some of these feelings. Our desire for revenge might have been satisfied or American dignity was redeemed and pride could return. Many of the youth were singing patriotic songs. But when we can put our desires for revenge behind us and work for the common good we will find some real healing.
As for the believer’s responses, we too are just human but our actions should take into account the teachings of our faith. In the Old Testament, the Jewish Scriptures, we can see mixed responses. When David (I Samuel 18) kills the giant Goliath with his sling shot and he then goes and cuts Goliath’s head off with Goliath’s own sword, he brings the head to King Saul. The women came out singing and dancing. The giant who had plagued Israel for years was now dead. They no longer had to live with this dreaded fear.
But in Ezekiel (33:11) the prophet writes “God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God rather the wicked repent and live” God would show mercy to the wicked if they were willing to receive it by turning from their wicked ways. Even Jesus gave us an example when he said about those crucifying him, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” In Paul’s letter to the Romans he quotes Deut.32:35 “Vengence is mine , saith the Lord, I will repay” and Proverbs 25:21&22 “If your enemy is hungry feed him if he is thirsty give him drink. In so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.” Do not be over come by evil, but over come evil with good.
As believers we must learn how to live with our ideals in the face of the world’s evils.
When Adolf Hitler who caused much grief in the world was declared dead the then Senator Howard Taft of Ohio was asked to speak at his local Universalist Church, a denomination that doesn’t not believe in Hellor judgment. Taft stood up before the people and said “I am pleased to announce to you that Adolf Hitler is in that place that you and I don’t believe in”.
The feelings of relief and need for justice and even vengeance was partial satisfied when Taft consigned Hitler to Hell.
For me when of I heard of Osama’s death, a somber mood came over me I was glad he was gone and no longer instigating evil deeds. I had a mild sense that justice had been served and good can win out and the hope that now maybe the whole world will see Osama for what he really was, a man an obsessed by his own self-righteousness. He made himself a god judging who should live and who should die. Osama represented the worse of what an individual human being can do, the worst of what we can become by taking others down to hell with us.
Our national response to Osama was the Iraq and the Afghan wars. This became a part of the evil inflicted on the world. Osama killed his thousands but we the USA ended up killing our tens of thousands in these wars. Osama and his followers created a false dream causing young people to sacrifice their lives as suicide bombers, as an insurgency army, as the army to bring about a Caliphate, as martyrs who would inherit heaven because they have pleased God by killing thousands of people including other Muslims. The worst evil ends up calling evil good and convinces other to believe thereby destroying everything. We saw this with Hitler and the Nazi movement, Pol Pot and the Kamerouge, Mao in China killing millions of his own people in the name of the highest good, a communist state. In Rwanda one tribe slaughtered 800,000 of another tribe in the name of an ideal, racial purity. When evil is called good, no one is safe.
Osama has now passed even as all the other sources of evil in the last century and we are glad. There is relief but it is not a party time. It is time to reflect in order not to let the problems and process repeat itself.
Our response reflected our ignorance of other cultures, of Islam, of political and economics realities in these regions and ignorance especially of how America effects this area of the world by our power, money and culture. Not that we could have fixed it all but at least we could have been more understanding over the many years that it happened. The greed in our own culture was allowed to run wild and roughshod over other peoples and culture. Does this excuse the actions of an Osama and Alkaida. No but our understanding could mitigate the clashes of culture and values.
Our economic policies in the USA did as much to hurt our own people allowing two wars to be put on the tab so to speak while lowering taxes for the wealthy class. Allowing unrestricted greed in the economic community to cause the collapse of the economy and then asked the tax payer to foot the bill creating an even more deficits and then turning around and blaming the average middle and working class people after wiping out their savings, their retirement plans and even taking their homes. And in the recovery who got their money and life stabilized first, the rich; the bankers and the Wall Street community while everyone else has to slog through the mess hoping to come out with something for a future And now our demographics are going to create even an worse struggle due to the number of retirees, our health care system or lack thereof ( much of it is a greed problem) and the educational system which has failed many. We have bred our own underclass by refusing to share the wealth in a constructive way so everyone can live a better more productive life. And we have carried our same attitudes into the world at large so that poverty and diseases are destroying whole societies while we still take their raw materials and cheap labor to better our own bank accounts
Our policies are part of the reason the world hates us.
If class warfare comes to the USA it is not because the lower classes started it. It is because the wealthy have arranged to keep most of the goodies for themselves. The class warfare in Russia was cause by those who ignored the poverty of the people so the ruling class got what it deserved, a revolution.
This is the spirit in the world that is reacting to the USA. Our seeming arrogance which is truly ignorance is inciting people to action against us.
All people are God’s children and God wishes all to come to repentance and knowledge of the truth. The USA is not the most favored nation of God. As believers how are we showing love for all people. Power and greed are big turn offs for people so do we teach our families about a proper perspective about our place and our responsibility in the world and for the world. As Christians we look to Jesus for direction about how to live in the world. He was always seeking the welfare of others with no thought to class or power. We are called as much as possible to live in peace with all people and we are to care for the least among us. Our caring is to be a reflection of God’s caring for the world. We need to be willing to be a voice crying in the wilderness ,a voice against the powers of the day, so that God’s concerns are incorporated into our way of life. We need to challenge the wealthy and the powerful especially if they are bent on aggressive action and to intercede on behalf of the powerless.
The life and death matters that are always before us must be held up as issue that God cares about. We are invited to be ambassadors for God presenting his concerns for all people and invite the rich and powerful to share in this work as God’s agents..
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
litmus test for faith
Ask PastorCarl blog Litmus test for the Christian faith 4/2011
,
Q:The reader, Jason, wants to know if Pastor Carl is an orthodox believer holding to the traditional view that Jesus was the true expression of God in human form being the second person of the trinity.
A:This has been an important issue for the church throughout all her history. The early creeds of the church; the Apostles from the 8th century, the Nicene from the 4th century and the Athanasius creed from the 7 /8th century, tried to made clarifying statements to express the basic teachings of the church concerning the nature and person of Jesus the Christ, of the Father who is God and of the Holy Spirit, the advocate and comforter and who is the same as Jesus.. The necessity for doing this was that the Christian scriptures did not spell out these items or ideas in a clear didactic way.
The idea that there is only one God came from the Jewish origins of Christianity and it was clearly stated by Moses, “Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one” (Deut 6:4). This is called the “Shama” and it is recited daily and weekly by the religious Jewish community reminding them of their relationship to the true and only God...
Jesus and all his disciples were Jewish and prayed this prayer daily so how then did Jesus become a deity. The New Testament reveals that God is a complicated being. A DR G Vos, a 19th century professor from Princeton Theological Seminary, wrote a book titled “The Self Disclosure of Jesus” in which he shows that Jesus reveals his true identity as the Messiah and the son of the God as well as being a full human being during his earthly life which can be found in the New Testament. These ideas can not be deduced by human logic but can only be received as revelation. So the Biblical texts of both Old and New Testaments for the Christian church had to be understood clearly before the creed could succinctly express these truths. The New Testament language about Jesus raised these issues: Jesus called himself the Son of Man which is a reference to Messiah in the Prophet Daniel’s writings. Jesus said of himself he was the way, the truth and the life, he was the bread of life, he was the resurrection and the life, he was the living water, he was the door, he was the good shepherd. All references that only God would use to disclose himself. I know of no human who made such claims. He also said “I am who I am” (John 8:58) which is how God identified himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14). Jesus could be charged with blasphemy, a capital crime in Israel, for making such a claim, and in fact the crowd was looking for stones to stone him at that point. They understood the seriousness of his words.
St John identifies Jesus as the Logos or Word who was God while at the same time saying he was incarnate, God in human form. “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” ( John 1 :14) So is he god or a man? After the resurrection the disciple Thomas had to see Jesus for himself to be convinced he came back from the dead. When Thomas saw him he fell to his knees and confessed to Jesus calling him my Lord and my God.. Such words would not come from the mouth of a Jewish man unless something startling happened. Jesus accepted this worship and confession of faith.
The Holy Spirit is called God by St Paul and is the comforter who is the same as Jesus. There are many more texts and ideas of this nature that caused the church to clarify its understanding in these matters.
Almost on every pages page of the New Testament it talks of God in terms of the 3 persons; Father, Son and Spirit while never denying the idea of one God and never promoting the concept of three gods. The word Trinity was coined to express the New Testament’s ideas about the deity. Trinity being three in a unity or oneness; three persons yet one in being. Again not a logical concept rationally figured out but an idea received because the revelation says this is what is.
The church adopted these ideas as expressed in the 3 creeds and not to confess them meant in some circles you were excluded from the church.. There was much fighting about these creeds and Christians killed each other over the necessity of confessing them.
But these creeds did not stop the discussion of the trinity doctrine. In fact at the Reformation period John Calvin and Servetus debated these issue and eventually Servetus was burned at the stake for his heretical views.
In the 19th century because the churches were fighting about the nature of God and the idea of Trinity, a split occurred and the Unitarian denomination was formed. People preferred to practice the deeds of the faith instead of using their energy to do battle with people who had a different understanding of fundamental truths.
I myself believe in the orthodox teaching of the church like the Trinity, the Deity of Christ and the place of the Holy Spirit as part of the Godhead but I do not believe that we are saved because we confess an orthodox creed nor are we lost because we confess a less than orthodox creed. Salvation is not understood by human rationality but it is a gift received by faith. The ancient Christian church of South India (first or second century origins) and the Coptic churches of Egypt and Ethiopia, and the Middle Eastern churches do not express the same exact creeds that we do in the western churches. There is no scripture that says unless you make a faith confession correctly you can not be saved. If there was an early litmus test confession, it might have been the words “Jesus Christ is Lord.” This is the common confession the World Council of Churches recognizes as to what all Christian can say and it unites us as members of the Universal Christian Church. There is no absolute test or litmus test in scripture to assure someone of their faith. Through the ages Christians have created test for other to pass to be included in the fellowship. On the other hand trying to clarify doctrine and teaching is a good thing as long as it is used to help.
We are invited to believe in the true and living God and whomever God is willing to accept has salvation. None of us has the complete correct confession. The best expression of God will not be known until we are in heaven. In heaven I feel sure there will be many more surprises for us regarding the nature of God. The great news is God is gracious; God is love and loves us. The scripture says “Christ died for our sins but not ours only but for the sins of the whole world”( I John 2:1-3). So as far as I am concern everyone is invited and included in God’s plan for the salvation of the world.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
No Formula for Faith
Q: What changes have you noticed in people’s religious viewpoints throughout your lifetime? For instance have you noticed people have become more or less self-reliant? More or less communicative? More or less community oriented? Do you think those changes make them pursue religious activities differently or impact their attitudes towards churches differently?
A: I have given some thought to your questions, and my response has to be anecdotal, because I do not have the sociological skills to give a more scientific viewpoint. I have the testimonies of people who believe in God, and I have my own experience and my observations. I did check out a few resources where your interests are discussed, for example NPR has a weekly program with Christa Tippet in which she interviews religious thinkers on such topics. Bob Abernathy has a weekly TV program on public television called Religion and Ethics. You can also check out The Pew Foundation, which does a lot of research and surveys opinions on the topic of religion in America. All three resources have archives which are available to the public.
Now for my own views: First of all, I do not believe you can create a formula that guarantees an outcome of “believing” or “not believing”. Every experience of life is unique. When a person has a spiritual life, it is determined by how that individual engages with the Divine and with other believers. There are commonalities in people’s faith experiences, but there is no formula for faith.
Most believers have a sense of “soul”—an inner sense of connection to God. At some point the believer’s heart or soul was awakened to the presence of the Divine and becomes aware of a spiritual reality. This awareness can bring some very fundamental changes to a person. It gives a basic security about life; the individual feels he or she belongs to the Creator of this vast universe. For some, the quest for spiritual connection includes an intellectual aspect, a rationality upon which to build a life. For others it is primarily experiential—having a transcendent encounter with God and finding emotional peace. These are not mutually exclusive experiences, and they can be complimentary.
Once the soul is awakened to God, a person of faith may choose to engage in service to others, or not; to engage deeply in community, or to engage deeply in solitary contemplation; they may focus more on how they speak about their faith than on their actions, or vice versa. And of course all of this can evolve and change of the course of a lifetime.
For some believers, finding their security in God frees them to give of themselves in service, and the institutional religious body offers such opportunity. Some give themselves completely over to a life of service, (e.g., Mother Theresa, Dorothy Day, and others less well-known.) Joining with other believers gives them a sense of community and strengthens their sense of mission. They may feel that finding a spiritual community enables them go on to become the person God intended them to be.
Not everyone fits this pattern. Some believers cannot fit into the cultural norms of a religious body, so instead they privately expressing themselves in ways that reflect their experience with God. And some believers find themselves in organized religious groups that do not offer real opportunities for service. These communities become overly concerned about doctrinal expressions and thereby ostracize others. Some may have social customs which are treated like religious precepts, which cut others out of their fellowship. Still other groups have moral codes which they feel must be imposed on others, even though the issues are not universally agreed upon.
So to try and answer your questions: it is “yes and no” at every stage of life. Many believers become more community-minded—as seen in the many synagogues, churches, mosques and temples—while others prefer to live isolated lives like the hermits of old. Many turn outward looking to be of service, helping people in their own community, as well as reaching out around the world through relief organizations. But others prefer lives of contemplation, like the monks and prophets of many faith traditions.
The psychologist Dr. Carl Jung once said, “I never met an integrated person under the age of 65”. By this I believe he meant it takes a lifetime to begin to put all the pieces of life together so it makes some sense. As people of faith age they tend to become more accepting, realizing everyone is just trying to figure life out. People who converted in their youth and found great strength in their early spiritual beliefs often later retreat from their insistence that everyone have the same experience. They come to accept other people’s spiritual experiences as valid without feeling threatened, and realize that only God can judge the human heart as to its truthfulness and validity.
There is so much more to say on these issues, but I will leave it to the experts who do the interviewing, tally the results, and write papers.
A: I have given some thought to your questions, and my response has to be anecdotal, because I do not have the sociological skills to give a more scientific viewpoint. I have the testimonies of people who believe in God, and I have my own experience and my observations. I did check out a few resources where your interests are discussed, for example NPR has a weekly program with Christa Tippet in which she interviews religious thinkers on such topics. Bob Abernathy has a weekly TV program on public television called Religion and Ethics. You can also check out The Pew Foundation, which does a lot of research and surveys opinions on the topic of religion in America. All three resources have archives which are available to the public.
Now for my own views: First of all, I do not believe you can create a formula that guarantees an outcome of “believing” or “not believing”. Every experience of life is unique. When a person has a spiritual life, it is determined by how that individual engages with the Divine and with other believers. There are commonalities in people’s faith experiences, but there is no formula for faith.
Most believers have a sense of “soul”—an inner sense of connection to God. At some point the believer’s heart or soul was awakened to the presence of the Divine and becomes aware of a spiritual reality. This awareness can bring some very fundamental changes to a person. It gives a basic security about life; the individual feels he or she belongs to the Creator of this vast universe. For some, the quest for spiritual connection includes an intellectual aspect, a rationality upon which to build a life. For others it is primarily experiential—having a transcendent encounter with God and finding emotional peace. These are not mutually exclusive experiences, and they can be complimentary.
Once the soul is awakened to God, a person of faith may choose to engage in service to others, or not; to engage deeply in community, or to engage deeply in solitary contemplation; they may focus more on how they speak about their faith than on their actions, or vice versa. And of course all of this can evolve and change of the course of a lifetime.
For some believers, finding their security in God frees them to give of themselves in service, and the institutional religious body offers such opportunity. Some give themselves completely over to a life of service, (e.g., Mother Theresa, Dorothy Day, and others less well-known.) Joining with other believers gives them a sense of community and strengthens their sense of mission. They may feel that finding a spiritual community enables them go on to become the person God intended them to be.
Not everyone fits this pattern. Some believers cannot fit into the cultural norms of a religious body, so instead they privately expressing themselves in ways that reflect their experience with God. And some believers find themselves in organized religious groups that do not offer real opportunities for service. These communities become overly concerned about doctrinal expressions and thereby ostracize others. Some may have social customs which are treated like religious precepts, which cut others out of their fellowship. Still other groups have moral codes which they feel must be imposed on others, even though the issues are not universally agreed upon.
So to try and answer your questions: it is “yes and no” at every stage of life. Many believers become more community-minded—as seen in the many synagogues, churches, mosques and temples—while others prefer to live isolated lives like the hermits of old. Many turn outward looking to be of service, helping people in their own community, as well as reaching out around the world through relief organizations. But others prefer lives of contemplation, like the monks and prophets of many faith traditions.
The psychologist Dr. Carl Jung once said, “I never met an integrated person under the age of 65”. By this I believe he meant it takes a lifetime to begin to put all the pieces of life together so it makes some sense. As people of faith age they tend to become more accepting, realizing everyone is just trying to figure life out. People who converted in their youth and found great strength in their early spiritual beliefs often later retreat from their insistence that everyone have the same experience. They come to accept other people’s spiritual experiences as valid without feeling threatened, and realize that only God can judge the human heart as to its truthfulness and validity.
There is so much more to say on these issues, but I will leave it to the experts who do the interviewing, tally the results, and write papers.
Monday, March 21, 2011
The Sky is Falling
Q: Do you think this is the end of the world? An earthquake, a tsunami and thousands dead, and now a nuclear disaster... It’s too much!
A: “The sky is falling, the sky is falling!” said Chicken Little.
“How do you know?” asked Henny Penny.
“I saw it with my own eyes,” answered Chicken Little.
When we experience something with our own eyes, we tend to universalize the event. It must be true, because I saw it. The recent earthquake and tsunami were experienced and seen by millions of people, either in person or on television. This is why the questioner asks me, “Is it the end of the world?” It feels like the sky is falling; the end must be near. Now add to our reader’s perspective global warming, melting ice caps, terrorist attacks, revolutions, food shortages, economic woes, wild weather patterns, and exploding volcanoes, topped off with a near-meltdown at the nuclear reactors in Japan. Someone I know referred to these events as the Apocalypse, the final catastrophe.
The last book of the Bible is called Apocalypse—a Greek word which when translated into English is Revelation. The book describes the Second Coming of Jesus the Christ, who is to return to Earth to both judge and redeem us and to remake the heavens and the Earth. The Revelation is the appearing of the Lord. Because the Book of Revelation includes descriptions of large, global disasters, disasters of this size tend to trigger in Christians thoughts of the End Times. However, the Bible doesn’t specify when these disasters will occur or when Christ will return.
Is the sky falling now? Disasters, both natural and human made, have been part of the world from the beginnings of time. Since the universe was created, it has been constantly reorganizing its geological make-up through ice ages, glacial melts, volcanic activity, tectonic shifts, floods, etc. This has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years—but now we humans are on the scene to observe, measure, and evaluate these events and judge them as disasters. Yet humanity continues to endure through these monumental shifts. We have seen wars, holocaust, crimes against humanity and all types of natural disasters, always thinking that this must be the end. Yet the world continues to go on.
Modern Christians (and maybe all humans) tend to see the workings of the world only in terms of how it impacts us. Science and philosophy, on the other hand, tries to understand the system of the universe, in which humans are only one part, and how it all works together. In The Good Book, Reverend Dr. Peter Gomes, a recent chaplain of Harvard University, writes, “Rather than place God at the center of our universe, we have placed ourselves at the center of God’s universe and determined that we are the object of his existence rather than the subject.”(p. 316). Gomes calls this “egocentric Christianity.” Thus when disaster strikes, we feel that God owes us an explanation and deliverance.
Asking God to explain disasters and the End Times is a long tradition. Jesus is asked about it the Gospel of Matthew (Chapter 24). He describes wars and false Messiahs, but then says, “The end is not yet.” He says that when the end comes, it will be like flash of lightning, and everyone will see, “the Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven.”
This is not the end. How do I know? The Apocalypse—the Revelation of Jesus—has not yet happened. The sky may seem to fall from time to time, but there is no need to ask, “Is this the end?” Because Jesus promises that when it is the end, we will all know it at once. We will see Him coming, and the new Heavens and the new Earth will begin.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Tempest in a Teapot?
Q: What is the controversy about Rob Bell and his new book? Can you give the heart of the matter? People are up in arms over it. I know his book hasn’t come out, and they are basing it all on the promos and the bookseller's description, but even that seems vague.
A. There is a hot debate going on in evangelical circles about Rev. Rob Bell’s book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. Rob Bell is the popular, thoughtful pastor of the Mars Hill Community Church and has a strong voice in the evangelical community. The book is due out in a few days, but it has been heavily advertised, creating speculation that Rob Bell is a Universalist, which means he might believe that in the end everyone will be saved.
In his video promo Bell suggests such a possibility, creating the buzz and interest in his publication. He points out that if only Christians are saved, billions of other people will be in Hell forever, for billions of years. Can we imagine the God of love doing that or allowing it to happen?
For evangelicals, accepting Universalism goes against the teachings of scripture, as they understand it, and therefore against the source of our knowledge of Jesus. The logic goes: if the Bible is wrong about Hell, then how do we know it is right about Jesus? Historically, the existence of Hell has been a basic teaching in most Christian denominations, and the more conservative believers hold to this fundamental doctrine.
In scripture, Hell is expressed in picture terms, such as darkness, torment, the lake of fire, etc. The actual word used is Gehenna, a Greek word taken from the Hebrew, Valley of Hinnon. This valley actually existed outside the city of Jerusalem’s wall. People would throw their garbage over the wall into the valley. The trash continually burned, smoldering away with worms (maggots) crawling in the trash, as in any urban garbage dump. Jesus uses these very words to describe Hell: “The place where the fires continually burn and the worm dies not.” It would be Hell to live in the valley of Hinnon. Jesus uses the word Hell or Gehenna in Matthew 22:11-14 and Matthew 25:41-46.
How literal does Hell have to be, if the word itself is only an image of a miserable situation? At the same time, conservative evangelicals will not risk denying the words of Jesus because that has, historically, implied a denial of Jesus himself.
In past eras Christian Evangelicals, or at least the more conservative among them, have drawn lines in the sand, saying that to deny any particular scriptural truth is to deny the validity of the Bible and therefore lose the source of our faith. In the 1920s, the doctrine of the Virgin Birth was the test question for orthodoxy. This debate fueled the Fundamentalist /Modernist controversy in the American Church. Another debate still active today is over the Genesis creation account: Was the universe created in a literal seven days, or did it take millions of years of evolution under God’s guiding hand? In the late 19th century, Universalism was the test question, and now it has returned for another round of discussion. So this explains, at least in part, the intense interest around Rob Bell at this time—will this prominent evangelical leader pass or fail the orthodoxy test?
The ideas in Universalism may seem less scandalous when you consider that Universalism itself has been around more or less as long as mainstream Christianity. As far back as the second century A.D. there have been Christian scholars, such as Origen and Julian of Norwich, arguing for universal salvation or exploring Universalist themes. You can Google “Christian Universalists” to get a broader picture of their history in the church.
As to the existence of Hell, scripture shows us that God can change His laws without changing His character. Think of all the laws of the Old Testament that no longer apply to the Christian church (rituals, dietary laws, etc.). These changes were hotly debated in the early church (see Acts 15) and caused great anxiety especially for the Jewish Christians—but the change was part of God’s plan. So, what if the eternal fires of damnation and Hell are eventually extinguished or commuted? Who will charge God with being untrue to his word? Isn’t the love and grace of God our greatest hope? This teapot tempest among evangelicals about the existence of Hell is not a major concern for the church at large.
With regards to Rob Bell's book, it is bound to be a successful publication. Whether he planned to stir up this controversy or not, this tempest has guaranteed him good sales, and we can also hope that Love Wins is a word from God to this generation.
Other references:
The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)