Jesus Will Sink Your Boat

I want to write briefly on a part of the Jesus story that I had the opportunity to read for my church's worship service today. It is below:

 So it was, as the multitude pressed about Him to hear the word of God, that He stood by the Lake of Gennesaret, ² and saw two boats standing by the lake; but the fishermen had gone from them and were washing their nets. ³ Then He got into one of the boats, which was Simon’s, and asked him to put out a little from the land. And He sat down and taught the multitudes from the boat.

⁴ When He had stopped speaking, He said to Simon, “Launch out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch.”

⁵ But Simon answered and said to Him, “Master, we have toiled all night and caught nothing; nevertheless at Your word I will let down the net.” ⁶ And when they had done this, they caught a great number of fish, and their net was breaking. ⁷ So they signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both the boats, so that they began to sink. ⁸ When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!”

⁹ For he and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish which they had taken; ¹⁰ and so also were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid. From now on you will catch men.” ¹¹ So when they had brought their boats to land, they ^[a]forsook all and followed Him.

While there are many lessons that could be and have been preached on this chunk of scripture, it is stunning that Jesus does not promise the fishermen riches, future business success or to be famous and influential. He gives them some cryptic message about catching people from here on out (whatever that means) and then they follow him. Crazy, right?

Still there is one wild thing to this story that I felt, deep in my soul:

Jesus will sink your boat if you obey him

Have you ever notice that before? These are seasoned fishermen and they'd likely never came up with a catch that almost sank not one, but two fishing vessels. Jesus gives them abundance of life (that is, fish was the ticket to providing for themselves and their families) but so much so that it almost sinks them. Still, they're ready to be sunk. The passage ends with them simply walking away from their boats and effectively "sinking" their lives for Jesus. The future would find these men (with the exception of John) and more dying as martyrs for this Jesus.

So what I wanted to leave readers with was this thought: are you ready to be sunken for Christ? Are you genuinely okay with Jesus derailing your life and taking you away from everything you thought your life might be? Because his M.O. says that that's what he's about. Will he bless? sure. But it'll cost your entire way of life.

Pax,

CM 

Why go to Church?

So, it's been a while since I've posted. I've quit feeling guilty about it honestly; I've come to realize that it's just part of life.

I do, however, endeavor to be more active on here because as of late I've found I have ideas I'd like to flesh out. So here's the topic of the day and it's a big one that I've been kicking around for some 9 months, give or take.

Why go to church?

Before diving in, I'd like to remind the reader that this blog is specifically my open letter to the Christian church, so I'm not going to be discussing arguments for or against Christianity or religion per se. Instead my question is looking more at why a believer should go to a formal church at all. To begin, let me display some of the basic arguments/counter-arguments that many bring to the conversation. I'm going to give these in the form of affirmative statement (AS) - rebuttal (R):

AS1: Christians need community with other believers in order to reaffirm their faith and gain encouragement, correction, growth, etc. in the Christian life

R1: As a believer, one can find community with other believers in ones life without going to a formal church institution. This can be done through social groups, both formal and informal and not always in the same physical location, thanks to technology.

AS2: Christians need a church to help them learn more about the Christian life and how to live out Christ's message, usually via sermons, Sunday school classes, etc.

R2: There is nothing that a church/pastor can teach you that can't be learned by studying on your own, either at a library or online. The church doesn't hold special knowledge that can't be learned elsewhere, though to learn it elsewhere requires a certain level of self-motivation.

AS3: Believers need a place to worship God, both corporately and individually.

R3: One doesn't need to attend a formal church gathering to worship individually OR corporately. Several world religions (including Christianity) have long-standing traditions of worshiping solo and informally with other believers. The institution is simply not necessary.

So where does this leave us? 

Well I'm not certain, to be honest. I for one love going to church because I see a lot of value in the liturgy and tradition of being anchored to the catholic (little "c") church; of course this is an insufficient reason in and of itself, but it's one of my main reasons. Others are because I feel I have something to offer other congregants in the way of instruction and wisdom due to my years of study in theology and the church, but those are of course not all of the reasons.

Mainly, I wanted to point out with this brief article that there is a slew of arguments for and against being a part of or even just casually attending a formal church. I think this topic does take on new impetus for re-visitation in the current religious environment in the west as denominations are dying out and Christians of a new generation are exploring new ways to embody Christ in the world.

I'd love to hear the readers thoughts on the topic; if you are a member or even a regular attendee of a church, why do YOU go? or if you've left the formal institution that is Christianity, why did you leave?

pax,
CM

The Talking God

I've often times throughout my studies in theology come across times of crisis. What I mean by that is that on occasion, I find myself asking a paradigm building/breaking question. The one I would like to tell you about today is the question that came up while I was writing worship music and trying to discern what God had in store for the future of my family. The question was this:

Does God still speak to people in the same way that he did as recorded in the Bible?

So while I was thinking about this for the purpose of discerning what my life is to be about and for the purpose of writing theologically sound music, I think there is a potentially revolutionary outcome that can occur depending on how you answer.

The Relevance

This question is a big one because, depending on how you answer, you may find yourself viewing the stories of God speaking to humanity in Scripture a little differently or you may find yourself reevaluating how you may have thought God spoke to you in the past (present or future as well). For example, if you come down on the side of "yes", that is, God does still speak to us in the same way that he did in the Bible, then you must decide how you think that is. Often times in Scripture, we see God explicitly making verbal conversation with people (e.g. Abraham, Paul, etc.). If this is the case, then we must expect to hear of God speaking verbally to people today. This should push us to evaluate our own theophanies (God encounters) and see if we've heard from God in a clear voice. Without trying to find reasons why we may or may not have experienced this, one can reasonably see that this hypothetical would play out into your life in a much broader way than one might initially assume.

On the other hand, if one decides that God has ceased speaking in the same way that he did in the Bible then we are free from expecting God to be explicit with us in a verbal way. The issue here is that you are then left with figuring out how God does speak, since all Christians agree that he wants to know us and be known by us. Many have suggested that perhaps since the close of the Christian cannon (Scriptures), God uses the Bible as his mouthpiece or since the establishment of the Church as a corporate and formal entity that then is his speaking mode. While this may be a bit more palatable (for it excuses our lack of audible theophanies), one is then left with trying to draw lines between what is indeed divine message and what may be distorted due to human intervention. 

Some Clarity

Just as a spoiler alert, I should say here that I won't be able to give you the whole answer. Not only would that be presumptuous of me, but I would be shouldering a burden I'm fairly sure I cannot bear. So, let me tell you where I came down on this issue and perhaps that will help you to think through it yourself.

I personally do not agree with those who think God suddenly changed his mode of communication. I just cannot find any good reason for this to be done (not that my own reasoning is the highest of authority), I have not found it confirmed in Scripture (though I'm not a biblical scholar, so if you are, please let me know if it's there) and it has not been a unified belief throughout Christian tradition. I think that it makes all the sense in the world that God would still speak to humanity the way he did in the Bible. I, however, also believe that in the cases in Scripture where God is recorded as speaking his explicit will, there may have been literary liberty taken on the part of the writers. 

I believe that God could speak by auditory if he so chose, but from what I can tell in Scripture, Christian tradition and my own experience, God likes to work within the laws of reality which he established from the beginning of time. This means that in order for him to do so, he would have to commandeer a set of vocal chords and, gentleman that he is, God is not in the possessing people business.

So how does God speak? I think that God speaks through feelings and impulses but also through internal confirmations of ideas. For example, I felt that a while back (in answer to my trying to discern the future for my family) God gave me the phrase "eyes forward, hands on the plow" to hang onto for encouragement, direction and support. Now, this phrase is clearly playing from Scripture in which Jesus says that whoever lays his hand to the plow and looks back is not fit for the Kingdom. So I think that (in this case at least) God may have helped me to use the Scripture which I had hidden in my memory to speak relevance into my current situation. Was it audible? certainly not. Was it powerful in my life? definitely. 

You may be wondering how I know it was God at all and not just my own recollection. Furthermore, how does anyone know when God is speaking to them? I have found that there are a few ways one can seek confirmation. Some of them are:

1. God only speaks when you're listening. I know that seems like a no-brainer, but in practice, we tend to say too much when we pray and not spend enough time listening.
2. God's messages are usually (as I've experienced them) messages which I doubt I would come up with on my own. This is usually the case when I am being prompted inside my mind to love or sacrifice when I know I would rather be selfish.
3. God's messages will always align with the Character of God as seen in Jesus. Notice I didn't say "in the Bible" but instead said "in Jesus". There is often misunderstanding when one uses the broad paint brush of all of Scripture instead of the narrow paint brush of Jesus; specifically, without Jesus as the key to all hermeneutics (Biblical interpretation), one can end up with a pretty scary god coming out of the Old Testament. All you need is love and all you need is Jesus; he is sufficient.
4. God's messages will generally align with the Christian tradition. Again, we have to go back to Jesus ultimately (or first?) because Christianity has not always (or often?) looked like Jesus. But because the Church is the body and bride of Christ, we should find continuity between what we think God is saying to us and what he has said in the past to our sister's and brother's in Christ.

Of course I could say more on this topic, but I'll leave the rest to you. Also, read this guy and this guy's blogs as they may have things to say on the matter as well.

Think well, love well and listen well to the Spirit of God which is in you.

Peace,
C.M.

Noah Movie - continuing the tradition

Ok, I said I wouldn't comment on the Noah movie, but I am... Don't worry, it'll be brief ;-)

I went and watched the Noah movie with my wife and was blown away...in a good way. Honestly, the sheer artistic beauty of what was done with that film was incredible. I can think of two specific points in the movie in which I was moved to tears; one out of remorse for the condition of mankind and the other out of joy for the beautiful restoration that God provides humanity with.

I don't want this post to be a spoiler, so I won't give any details here. What I will say is that I think we need to see the movie as a part of a longer tradition of story telling. What I mean is, that we need to frame the movie into a larger context; one that includes the oral tradition of primeval mankind. What I haven't seen a lot of in online commentary is a nod to the flood narrative tradition that is evident in the ancient near east. Mesopotamia, being where Abraham was from, is of particular note with the Gilgamesh epic. In that story there are striking parallels to the Genesis account of Noah:

• Character warned by deity to build a boat to escape the impending flood which is designed to wipe out humanity.
• Boat is built
• Storm happens.
• After waters retreat a little, the boat lands on top of a mountain
• A dove and raven from the boat are used to determine if the passengers can safely return to the land
• Story ends with a sacrificial offering and a blessing on the survivors.

To me, these are too great of parallels to simply dismiss. It should also be noted, however, that there are marked differences as well:

• Where the boat landed
• The kind of boat built
• The duration of the flood
• who, exactly, was saved
• The eventual outcome for the main character
•  And - most vitally - the role of the deities involved

Utnapishtim

In the Gilgamesh epic, none were meant to be saved and it is by the betrayal of one of the gods that Utnapishtim (the hero) discovers the plan and builds his boat. Also, in the Gilgamesh epic, Utnapishtim saves artisans and historians in order to preserve human culture whereas in the Genesis account, human culture is largely the problem that the flood is to solve. Another parallel flood narrative from ancient Mesopotamia is the Atrahasis Epic which also has close parallels with some marked differences such as the flood being planned because humanity was too loud and numerous. Truthfully, the connection between these stories is something that is hard to nail down. What can be said with the most certainty is that it was more likely the case that all of these flood narratives were derived from a single source -- likely the event itself -- and it is not likely the case that any one borrowed too heavily directly from the other stories.

In all of these parallels, we must remember that the importance of the flood narrative is not in its detail, but in its meaning. "The ancient storyteller did not let variations in the traditions he received deter him from his purpose of weaving these materials together to say what he wanted to say about God."[1]

The most important thing to do when watching the movie is to watch it through to the end; here is where we see the true meaning of the events of the story.When we frame the history and tradition of the flood narrative accurately, we can see the work of Darren Arnofsky as a continuation of this tradition of story telling for the purpose of theology and not history or science; we realize that the details are not the primary point of concern, but the picture of God that is portrayed and, to that end, I commend Arnofsky.

I think that it's best put this way:

"Genesis is the book of beginnings and contains the foundations for much of the theology of the Old Testament...An understanding of the book's content and message is essential to the study of the rest of the Bible. It is not a book of science, though scientists are right to investigate its claims. It is not a book of biographies, though much can be learned from the lives of men and women portrayed in its pages. It is not a book of history, though history is the path it follows. It is a book of theology, though its task is not accomplished systematically."[2]

 For those that would like a more in-depth analysis of the movie and its importance to the church today, read here; just make sure you have a good cup of coffee before you sit down ;-) it is truly thorough. Also, keep your eyes out for a post on this topic at my brother's website; he always has good things to say.

Above all else, remember to view things in proper context and let God's Spirit which is in you dictate how you conduct yourselves no matter what your reaction to the movie.

Peace,
C.M.

[1] Tullock, John H., and Mark Harold McEntire. "Chapter 3 Israel Looks at the Beginnings." The Old Testament Story. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009. 2-51. Print

---

[2] Hill, Andrew E., and John H. Walton. "Chapter 4: Genesis." A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 2009. 78. Print.

---