“They all seek some remedy for their sins, but the true remedy, Christ, they do not acknowledge.
You will find in the word of God, no other remedy for your sins, than the one we have pointed out to you, which is Jesus Christ
He is our only and eternal Propitiator, Reconciler, High Priest, Mediator, Advocate, and Peace-maker with God.”- Menno Simons (founder of the Mennonite tradition)
Disclaimer: All dialogue is based on my best recollection and could not possibly be word-for-word exactly what was said. But it’s dang close. Unfortunately, I do not record every conversation I have and my memory is that of a thirty-eight year-old with poor diet and exercise habits. Keep this in mind.
A young man stood at the microphone asking the most astute questions.
“You say people are sinful. How do you define that?”
The bible says we not only do sinful things but we are sinful. Our minds are broken. Our thinking is “futile” (Romans 1:21) and we can’t understand what God is saying to us (1 Corinthians 2:14). We’re all born with emotions that can’t be trusted – they get cluttered by anger and envy and all sorts of “passions” that cause us to desire things for ourselves that God doesn’t (Titus 3:3). We all “turn” away form God and choose to do things our way and not His (Isaiah 53:6). “Every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood” (Genesis 8:21).
“So being sinful is not just what we do but who we are. Because I’m with Mennonites I want to go to the Sermon on the Mount,” I said. Thankfully, there was a little chuckle form the crowd and a break in the tension. The Mennonites read all of scripture in light of Jesus, specifically his words in the Sermon on the Mount. The further I got from the Sermon on the Mount at EMU – say quoting the apostle Paul – the less common ground I found.
“Jesus says it’s not only sinful to commit adultery but also to lust. Not only sinful to murder but also to burn with anger. Some theologians say there is sin of the flesh – the stuff we can see – and sin of the spirit – the stuff we can’t. We sin and we are sinful.”
“What does it mean to be made in the image of God?” he asked.
“I’m not sure,” I said, and I gave a few theories that much smarter men have taught. “I don’t know though.”
He argued that because we’re made in the image of God, we’re inherently good. Not sinful. But, he said, we make choices along the way that are sinful. But we can make right choices and not be sinful.
“So why did Jesus come?” I asked.
“The Romans had enough of him and killed him,” he said. He explained that Jesus was sent to earth as an example to us. His death was also an example.
“So, tell me if I’m understanding you correctly, OK? I really want to understand what you’re saying. Jesus died because he made the Romans mad.”
He nodded.
“I agree with you on that. They killed him for the crime of sedition. But the bible says he also died because sin has to be paid for with death. God is just and will punish sin so Jesus took that punishment for us. So, John 3:16, whoever believes in Jesus now will not have to die but will live with God now and forever. What you’re questioning is the atonement. That’s a very serious thing. A non-negotiable for me. So let me ask you as plainly as I can – Did Jesus die for your sins on the cross?”
“Yes, but,” he said. “He didn’t have to die.”
“I wouldn’t scrape my kid’s knee if I didn’t have to. Why would God sacrifice his only Son if he didn’t absolutely have to?”
“But God has always had a relationship with people. We aren’t separated from God in the Old Testament,” he said.
“I did my best to explain the special relationship between the Israelites and God in the Old Testament, the turning point in Ezekiel 36 when God promised to expand that relationship to all nations. He promised to “cleanse” people from all their “transgressions” and to give them a “new heart” that desired to do things His way. Then, in the New Testament, the book of Hebrews was written to Jews, explaining how on earth Gentiles – non Jews – could now be in right relationship with God, no longer separated. It tells us that Jesus was the once-for-all sacrifice, our High Priest who tore the curtain in the temple separating Gentiles from Jews. Jesus gives all people the possibility of relationship with God.
“The cross was necessary to accomplish all this. Am I making sense?”
Another student, a friend of the first guy, asked politely if he could respond. (Mennonites are nothing if not polite.) The first guy stepped aside.
I was thrilled to see that the young man at the microphone held a bible. But instead of reading from it he reasoned. He reasoned that because we are finite beings we cannot understand an infinite God. He reasoned that there is nothing we can know. It seemed to him that I was too certain of too many things. I was stating as fact what were really just my interpretations.
I read from Ephesians 2:1-9 again.
1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
“That seems to be saying that because human beings are sinful we deserve the wrath of God, but because God loves He sent Jesus instead of wrath. Because of Jesus we can be forgiven and reunited with God forever. We’ve been saved.”
“But that’s your interpretation,” he said.
“I agree that we often interpret scripture without even realizing it but I don’t think I’m-”
“You have to remember that when Paul wrote those words…” He interrupted. I smiled. I hadn’t seen that kind of passion face-to-face at EMU yet. Passion is good.
Common ground.
“…he was writing to a certain group of people at a certain time in certain circumstances and to understand it we have to-”
“I understand hermeneutics,” I interrupted. “The importance of contextualizing, understanding the history, the schism or problem being addressed at that time. I get that. But how does that change our understanding of Ephesians 2?”
“When Paul wrote that letter – ”
“If he wrote it,” a young woman in line at the microphone interjected.”
“Yes,” he said, “if Paul even wrote it. The bible was, first of all, written in Greek and Hebrew and then translated and there were mistakes – lots of mistakes made so that we can’t be certain really…”
“Can I read Ephesians 2 again?”
“I have it right here,” he said.
“Well maybe you could read it for us and tell us when you get to a word that’s been translated poorly. Where are the errors in Ephesians 2?”
“You know,” he said,” this isn’t something I’m confortable discussing outside of relationship. This is impossible to dialogue about without knowing more of your story and where you’re coming from.”
I invited him to stay afterward and talk one-on-one or to e-mail me through my website. We haven’t talked yet, but I’m hopeful. He is in the middle of midterms right now, after all.
“Maybe this is a generational difference,” I said. “It seems like it’s become cool to be uncertain. Seems like sometimes even the most tolerant people don’t tolerate certainty. And there’s a lot I’m uncertain about. There’s even stuff in Ephesians 2 I have questions about. But there are some things so basic to Christianity that we’ve believed them for two thousand years. Mankind is sinful. We are separated from God because of it. He loves us. He sent Jesus to rescue us from death and to have a relationship with us now and forever. I’m certain of this. That’s foundational to Christianity. Non-negotiable for me.”
The tension was high. I didn’t know what to do. Breaking a long pause, someone said, “Sing a song.” So I sang about a broken world. About a Son who heard our cries and came to live with us and die for us down here.
There was still a third article in the newspaper to respond to and singing bought me time to pray about how best to do that.
Shaun, I have read you blog for a long time, but I am hanging on every word of your posts in these series. This is the exact pocket of faith culture in which I was raised. Ever since my personal journey led me away from that perspective in my teens, I’ve found it difficult to explain the worldview I was surrounded with as a child to my fellow evangelicals. When I say that I never heard of salvation as something personally necessary for me, that I had confidence in (or knowledge of) only a few certain scripture passages, etc., my friends are mystified.
Very seldom do my two worlds (past and present) collide. I’m reading your story near tears.
Eye-opening. Thanks for this series.
I just wanted to let you know that I am really enjoying this series!
This could be wrong, but it seems to me from reading this blog for just over a year that your main spiritual gifts are teaching, exhortation, and faith. Much like my main gifts, and I’ve felt just what you stated here, “The tension was high. I didn’t know what to do”. I don’t think you could have presented this to the students with any more skill, grace, or patience. God equipped you to address their issues.
And yet, it seems some walked away with their reasoning still guiding them. So many times I’ve scratched my head at how the human heart hears the Word with the ears, but not with the heart.
When I was 31 I worked as a school teacher. The principal and secretaries were all Christians, though it was a public school. There were also several Christian teachers, but it was the office staff who mainly prayed for me, a single teacher with a distant Catholic background. All I can tell you is that one day I proclaimed Adam and Eve were just characters from a story, and the next day I believed!
It was a work of grace, pure and simple.
We have so little power, and yet God asks us to continue praying for and speaking with non-believers about Him, about His word. In the end salvation is still a work of grace, but we are all changed in the process of proclaiming His truth. The miracles of God, the grace of God, the sovereignty of God, awes us and we feel all the more in love with Him. All the more committed to the eternal over the temporal.
Our prayers for the students will build upon your godly teaching. That’s what we, your readers, need to do right now. PRAY.
Post-modernism is alive and well even among the Mennonites. Who knew? How ironic.
I am currently reading a book called Postcards from Another Gospel and how the “personal interpretation” idea and “having no absolutes” are overshadowing the true gospel message in our day. This is exactly what the serpent did in the garden…. Did God REALLY say?
Seeing it thru your experience in real life makes me even more certain of the absolutes I believe in too. Thank you for standing on that “good news” without waivering.
Well said, Bluey!
Trying not to enter into fanboi mode here, but you are quickly becoming one of my heroes. Sounds like you confronted them with truth in a spirit of grace and love. It’s a beautiful thing. Christine, I agree. I will be praying for these young people.
Can I just come to Nashville and meet you in person and shake your hand and have a cup of coffee with you and Becky and talk about Jesus and the bible and stuff?
Could we make this happen please?
Bring it, Shayne. I’ll brew and pour. You just sit and tell us about yourself. Seriously, if you’re ever in town…
I just live a few hours away. I can drive. I can make a trip if you can make time.
This is good stuff. I seriously can’t wait to read more. I think it is awesome to see how God equipped you for this meeting. This is a great reminder that we can’t be fakes. We have to really be in the Word so that it will be in us when we face opposition (gentle or not).
I couldn’t help but think of 2 Timothy 3:16-17 as I read this: All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
I wish there was a video. Did you just spontaneously break out into song à la Glee, or was there a segue? (In the version in my head it is all spontaneous, and there is a magical orchestra that joins in, too.)
Oh, man, Jenn. That is the best image.
Most of my days are spent imagining life as a musical. Thanks for the chuckle.
And Shaun this is an amazing series of posts. Thank you for sharing.
What if it’s possible that, behind all the protests of translations and contexts here and there, is this question: Why would God himself have to come to Earth in order to save us from the wrath of… God himself? Because that is what the church usually teaches, and that’s what you’re teaching. But that has never made sense to me. And if we accept that framing of the issue, it leads to confusion and misunderstanding. We misunderstand God’s character when we are taught to think that way. As a result of this thinking, many of us separate God and Jesus in our minds–the kind, gentle Jesus saves us from the wrath of the mean, angry God. But, of course, they are not different. As difficult as it is for us to grasp the concept of the trinity, we should at the very least hold on to the fact that Jesus and God are not different in CHARACTER. So Jesus isn’t our defense attorney doing whatever it takes to get us off and save us from an angry God. That’s really not the story the Bible tells! God sent Jesus to save us from the ruler of THIS world–Satan–who has his grip on us. Because of his mercy and grace, God came to Earth as Jesus to defeat Satan and give us a new kind of power–his Holy Spirit–through which we can connect to him/Jesus. And sure, there is a lot of stuff there behind the scenes, to to speak, (ie, in the heavenly realm) that we can’t grasp. But we CAN get an understanding of God’s character–because Jesus shows it to us. So let’s not muddle that up.
I believe what you’re saying is true too, Krissy. At one point in this dialogue in the coffeehouse a faculty member with an evangelical background made the point that there are many metaphors used in scripture to describe the atonement. Randsom. Satisfaction of wrath. Adoption. Purchasing of slaves. Substitutionary penal atonement. Disarming the “powers” (that’s the one you’re explaining so well). At least seven metaphors that I know of!
Sometimes we want to pick just one and go with it. I sure do! Growing up Baptist I mostly heard about substitutionary penal atonement. I tend to communicate that way only. But I sure affirm the other metaphors as well and I need to do a better job making good use of them. They’re all true.
That faculty member quoted C.S. Lewis. Something about how what Jesus did on the cross and through the resurrection is so tremendous that no one metaphor can contain it. And all our metaphors together still can’t but they come closer perhaps.
Thanks for the challenge.
Right. I’m not saying that the other metaphors aren’t “true” (that is, I’m not denying that God is angry about sin). But, as you point out, they are all metaphors, and, however God-inspired they are, they fall short of reality. So I’m just challenging you to use one that helps people understand God’s character–and the bigger, overarching story of the Bible–and that kindles a desire to grow closer to God, not keep a distance. And I know that there’s a fear there (not necessarily in you specifically, but in evangelicals in general) about “watering down the truth.” That is, this fear that if we talk too much about Jesus and don’t keep on coming back to talk about how angry God is about sin, then we’re somehow not telling the true story. I just don’t think that’s true, though. I think that, as we draw closer and closer to God, we understand more and more how sinful we are and how justifiably angry God is about sin. But first we have to draw closer.
By the way, I was telling my husband about my previous comment, and he said, “Why do you bother?” I said I bother because I trust that Shaun will thoughtfully consider my challenge and maybe even challenge me back. And that’s how we learn. So thank you.
I’m working very hard on that very thing right now, Krissy. I bought a book from EMU’s bookstore called “Preaching The Atonement.” It’s a collection of sermons on each of the major metaphors the bible uses for the atonement. I hope it gives me more (not better) ways of communicating what Jesus accomplished on the cross and by His resurrection, and why.
Thanks fo the challenge. The Holy Spirit beat you to it but thanks ; ) I’m listening and taking steps to learn new ways. Thanks, Krissy.
The challenge often becomes picking up which metaphor to apply where. Context and history can give us clues… but it often takes a fair amount of listening to see where ones audience is coming from. As a traveling musician, I think you have a tougher job than the apostle Paul… at least he was in one place for more than a few days. Yet, music touches the soul, and its presence often reaches places where a theological construct could never tread.
As far as certainty goes, consider the history of atonement theories… PSA only came about halfway through the last 2000 years. Ransom theory was oldest, but many contemporary folks find it really bizarre. Hehe, I’ve studied it for years and still find the bit about God playing a fast one a bit odd.
Shaun, I am looking forward to you explaining your thoughts on this more clearly. It seems as though you are agreeing with the notion that Jesus came to save us from Satan? Sure, it may be confusing to think that God sent Jesus (and therefore himself) to save us from his own wrath. But not understanding that point does not make it any less true.
If you take this “ransom” theory out to its full extent, then you are saying that the price Jesus paid was to satisfy Satan (since presumably he was the one who had “taken” us.) But where in scripture is there any evidence to suggest that Satan has a right to demand anything of God? Satan has no such power. If I can share from the book “Bible Doctrine” by Wayne Grudem, “Though we were in bondage to sin and to Satan, there was no ‘ransom’ paid either to ‘sin’ or to Satan, for they did not have power to demand such payment, nor was Satan the one whose holiness was offended by sin and who who required a penalty to be paid for sin.” God’s holiness was offended, and the cross absolutely stood as a payment for that offense, and it separated us from God’s wrath while bringing us back fully into fellowship with him. And yes, by doing so the cross also freed us from bondage to sin (no small point, I agree).
I appreciate that you are working through some things based on your encounters at EMU. We would all do well to set pride aside and dig down into what we believe to make sure that what we believe and what we are teaching lines up with scripture. But at the end of the day, it must line up with scripture or else you and I risk misleading others. I can’t wait to read more of these installments and I am sure that your further telling of the story will answer some of the concerns I have following this particular line of comments.
Jenn, the fact that Jesus’ death and resurrection saved us from Satan has nothing to do with” paying a price to satisfy Satan,” as you suggest. The Bible says that God’s plan was kept secret–Satan not only wasn’t demanding a ransom–because, as you point out, he certainly had no right to do that–he didn’t even know what was going on. He thought he’d won on Long Friday. I hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make, which I believe absolutely lines up with scripture.
Jenn,
Excellent point and fantastic reference. I am really enjoying this conversation for a few reasons:
Everyone, for the most part, is so respectful to one another. This allows growth and reflection upon our doctrine.
Secondly, the sides being argued allow exposure to beliefs that differ from our own, which can lead to solidification or maturation of beliefs I hold.
That said, what you have referenced regarding the holiness of God and the service Jesus performed for humanity upon the cross is not doctrine, it’s dogma. There’s not room for variations here.
When we dismiss the holiness of God, perhaps it is become we suffer from over-familiarity with His love and grace. Love and grace are such a powerful characteristic of God that we cling to this, as it is unlike anything else we’ll experience here on earth. However, His holiness is the catalyst of our fear of God–causing us to fall face down before Him–and fear is the beginning of knowledge and understanding. Understanding of who he was served as Jesus’ primary purpose in his teaching of the disciples.
Great, great discussion.
“He blotted out the handwriting that was against us, opposing us with its legal demands. he took it right out of the way, by nailing it to the cross. He stripped the rulers and authorities of their armor, and displayed them contemptuously to public view, celebrating his triumph over them.” Col. 2:14-15
Marian, I agree that this is a wonderful conversation because everyone is being respectful and giving each other room to work through these things. I don’t know if you misunderstood my reference, but the title of the book contains the word “doctrine,” I wasn’t saying that what I quoted was doctrine per se. (The book is a layman’s version of Grudem’s more in-depth “Systematic Theology.”) I wholeheartedly agree that the holiness of God and the work of Jesus upon the cross is dogma and that it undergirds the doctrines of Christianity.
Krissy, I have to thank you for making me ponder all of these things this week. I think the thing you said that I don’t understand is this:
“God sent Jesus to save us from the ruler of THIS world–Satan–who has his grip on us. Because of his mercy and grace, God came to Earth as Jesus to defeat Satan and give us a new kind of power–his Holy Spirit–through which we can connect to him/Jesus.”
I agree that it was because of God’s mercy & grace that Jesus came to earth, shedding his heavenly glory for human skin, bones and limitations. I also agree that he gave us the Holy Spirit as the means by which we can connect to him. I fully believe that freeing us from bondage to sin was/is an important aspect of the atonement, and I don’t want to diminish that aspect at all. But earlier you stated that it doesn’t make sense to you that “..God himself [would] have to come to Earth in order to save us from the wrath of… God himself…” and that is where I disagree. There are so many verses in scripture that reference that Jesus bore the wrath (God’s wrath) against sin.
And maybe I am just misunderstanding the intent behind your comments (it is difficult to dialog fully on a screen) so please forgive me if I am not properly understanding your words. But believing that I was deserving of the full wrath of God, and knowing that Jesus bore the full weight of that wrath for me, does not inspire in me a feeling of distance from God. It does inspire in me a holy fear (he is God, after all), but that knowledge actually makes me love him even more.
Thanks, Jenn, for your input. I do think I’m probably not communicating what I wanted to say very well, and I’m struggling now as I attempt to clarify in response. First, let me say this clearly: Yes, I believe that we are all deserving of God’s wrath. I agree that the Bible is clear about that. But the Bible is also clear about the fact that Satan is the ruler of THIS world. Aren’t all of our sinful desires and choices a result of that fact? In John 4:31, Jesus says, ” Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.” So the way I understand that is that Jesus saves us from being cast out in judgment along with Satan–he saves us from having the same fate as Satan, freeing us from our bondage to sin. So sure, Jesus saves us from God’s anger–and from his own, since he’s the one who will judge us. But he does so by saving us from Satan, whose fate we would share without Jesus. I don’t feel like we’re saying different things, I just feel like we’re saying the same thing differently. Which was what I was trying to say to Shaun, that maybe a different way of talking about this issue with the audience he was addressing would be more effective. Jesus often uses several metaphors to express the same thing (the kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed and a treasure and a man who sowed good seed…) He gives several metaphors which seem quite different on the surface but which all express truth. We should probably all challenge ourselves to be able to do the same, for the sake of our own understanding as well as for the sake of being more effective in our communication with others.
Did that clarify things, or just muddle it up worse? Thanks again for your input.
I certainly don’t have anything to add but I wanted to click over from my reader and tell you that I am purely LOVING this series. Honestly, I didn’t know I enjoyed it the first day, but I made sure to come back for the second, and then each day after that. And this one – I am blown away. God is awesome and obviously knew what He was doing when He sent you there. (i know – totally cliche)
I can’t wait to continue reading!!!
I really hope this comes out as I intend it to. Sometimes, written word doesn’t, so I promise I mean this as a true, non-judging comment…
How do you know that the boy who said Jesus didn’t *have* to die was really that far off from your thinking? I sort of took it that he was saying that God, in His infinite wisdom, COULD in fact save everyone without sacrificing His own Son. NOT that God would have done it that way; just that He COULD. I don’t know. I sort of feel for this kid because I, too, have been extremely hurt by “Christians” in my life. The judgement, the holier-than-thou attitudes, all those things that make “Christians” look bad –I do understand how people can look at Christians and see all these things because truth be told, Christians FAIL at compassion; true compassion, a lot of the time. At the heart of it all, I AM a Christian. I believe in Jesus, God and the WHOLE thing. I have a special needs child and without my faith; there are days I would have NEVER made it through. That said, I think it’s ok for someone to think that God didn’t have to sacrifice His own son –that He COULD have saved anyone He wanted; via any method he chose. Now, if he is disputing that Jesus WAS the Son of God, that would be different. But I wonder if what He was saying was simply that God didn’t have to sacrifice Jesus to save sinners. He COULD have chosen to save them anyway; just as He did before Jesus. I don’t know… I can sort of see where he might have been going.
Also, I respect FULLY the work that Compassion does. But, I respectfully disagree that not choosing to sponsor a child is an indication of how well your speech went or how much someone got out of it.
I see this too…that Christians can lack humility and compassion and offend people not because of the Gospel, but because of their attitudes. This may be especially true if they were saved very young and have little experience with what they were saved from. I was saved at 31 and have vivid memories still of my sinful past, of my own blindness. I used to think Christians were kooks, then I became one.
The memories sadden me and sometimes I ask God to erase them. Other times I understand that the memories of what I was saved from are my link to humility. When they pop up, maybe it’s a sign from the Holy Spirit that I need to once again get in touch with my own depravity.
If these students grew up in churched families and lived apart from worldliness due to sheltering, I can see why they might wonder “what do I need saving from?” They have to question the purity of their motives then, instead of looking for behavioral signs of depravity. “All have sinned and fall short” just isn’t connecting.
It’s easy to forget that our hearts aren’t any better or softer than the unsaved. I didn’t chose to be spiritually blind for the first 31 years of my life. God is sovereign and it was His will that I remained blind until his appointed time. Why some people may never “see” is a mystery. God is sovereign and I trust his character and I don’t believe I benefit from questioning his methods–wondering whether they are just or not. I do enjoy theology and that’s why I enjoy this blog and its discourse, but sometimes it gives me a headache trying to pick apart the Creator’s mind. I’m more emotional than rational and more drawn to the whole, than to the parts. As the created one I need to remain in awe of my Creator. And obedient to him.
It does break my heart when I see my own lack of humility, and see it in other Christians as well. I understand the anger that arises from this. I have an extended unsaved family who seems, from my point of view, to be getter harder in heart, not softer. It’s very hard but I cling to His sovereignty and justice and I keep praying.
Thank you for pointing this out. As a friend of the person Shaun is referring to, I think you aren’t very far off.
jami, is Christine not far off or is it julie you’re replying to?
I’m e-mailing back and forth with your friend now and I think I know from tat conversation which one you’re referring to but just want to clarify. Thanks, jami.
Jami, I have four homeschooled children running around me, blowing off steam between lessons when I comment. So I rarely write coherent comments.
I am no theologian and I don’t pretend to know how or why someone comes to faith. To me it seems a mystery. I only know we are to pray and share our faith. My impression that faith (truth) was bestowed on me–that I didn’t choose it–may not be something Shaun Groves agrees with. He has more studied, definitive views. So what I wrote is not something I intended as “teaching”. Just my incoherent reflections.
If there is any other way, take this cup from me, but if not, thy will be done.
Did God answer that prayer or not?
I’m thinking he did, and that there was no other way.
I’ve been considering this (about a completely different issue) and have come to the supposition that Romans 12:2 works in reverse as well. “Be not conformed to the world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind _SO_THAT_YOU_CAN_KNOW_ the will of God.” (that’s the ‘Melissa Standard Version,’ emphasis mine). When your mind is still conformed to the world in a matter (even if you’re already saved – we’ve all still got parts that need sanctification), you _can’t_ know the will of God. And with that comes a complete lack of understanding of (certain related) spiritual things, no matter how logically or rationally they are presented. It doesn’t seem to matter what the Bible says. It’s a spiritual blind spot.
It’s weird for me to see these blind spots in others (I’m sure I have them too, but I don’t notice my own). I want to keep debating the point. I don’t understand why they don’t understand my rational, logical, Biblically-based arguments.
Shaun, I’m looking forward to your next post. I get to that same point and don’t know what to do next. To say that we strike a truce isn’t really accurate. But to continue arguing a point that clearly the Holy Spirit is needed for is pointless as well.
I guess my biggest problem though is that my debate partners aren’t nameless students that I’ll never see again, they’re people that I see and interact with regularly. How do you get through that point without permanently harming the relationship?
Melissa,
May I offer a thought on your comment?
You said: “How do you get through that point without permanently harming the relationship?”
Live your life. Let them live theirs. Discuss yes (when they ask you questions) argue no.
Most importantly, love them. Remember, that’s how the world knows we belong to Him…not by how many debates we’ve won, but by our love for one another.
Praying for you…
” Seems like sometimes even the most tolerant people don’t tolerate certainty”
This quote grabbed me. I will not forget it.
Thank you for sharing this.
The confusion in Christianity catches me by such surprise sometimes. I see the gospel as so simple…
I never had to teach my wee ones how to throw a tantrum, lie, or say no when I asked them to obey. I DO have to teach them to think of others.
We were born into sin, JUST as the Word says.
Time to de-lurk! I’ve been following your blog since the last Compassion trip. I am a Virginia native, and one of my best friends is from the area near EMU & many of her family members attended EMU. In fact, her family is very strongly rooted in Mennonite traditions. She has told me that she ended up not going to EMU for a lot of the reasons you have presented in this series. It seems that in the past however many years since her aunts and uncles attended EMU that the culture has evolved from emphasizing peace, mercy and justice within “normal” or “common” theology to what you have described… kind of replacing theology with these ideas.
It is a funny predicament compared to the rest of the country, huh? This has been such an enjoyable series. It has made me think more deeply on both sides… how our relationship should motivate our servitude. Anyway, I look forward to reading much more!
I so admire your teachability along with your ability to teach. And I so appreciate your willingness to acknowledge there’s much we can’t be certain of, but even so, there are a few things so certain that our faith literally hangs on them – namely, the death & resurrection of Christ, and the purpose for it.
Thank you for saying that Amy. I was thinking the same thing, but not quite so eloquently.
Hey Shaun, I’m reading a book now entitled, My Father, My Father. It is written by Sam Soleyn. Sam writes about the current fatherless generation. I thought of this book as I read this blog post, because Sam explains the mentality behind post-modernism and the mindsets of a generation lacking fathering. The interchange you describe here reminds me of those mindsets and the generational gap you articulated. You might check out the book. I’ve read three chapters and can’t put it down, because it’s helping me grasp the mindset of the generation coming up, their thought processes, and how this is affecting our nation socially, economically, politically, and religiously. Thanks for sharing these experiences. It’s all reminding me of the importance of knowing the reason for what I believe. Blessings to you and Becky.
“The tension was high. I didn’t know what to do. So I sang about a broken world….and singing bought me time to pray about how best to do that.”
Too often, when I don’t know what to say or do, I just keep talking in circles. Thank you for sharing a better way.
Also, thought you’d like to know that they’re still talking over there at EMU. Tonight at 9pm. http://emu.edu/events/detail.php?id=17106
“But there are some things so basic to Christianity that we’ve believed them for two thousand years. Mankind is sinful. We are separated from God because of it. He loves us. He sent Jesus to rescue us from death and to have a relationship with us now and forever. I’m certain of this. That’s foundational to Christianity. Non-negotiable for me.”
This where I find myself landing over and over and over again. Nearly everything else has been up in the air for me at one point or another, but this still stands.
This is a great series of posts, it is good reading them in ‘bite-sized’ instalments and I am hanging out for part 6!
Shaun,
I read your blog a lot, but don’t often post. I have to say that this series is the best thing you have ever put on this website. It is so nice to see someone using Scripture so well to explain the key concepts of Christianity. It is a little sad that you are explaining it to other Christians! You are doing some amazing work!
God Bless!
Dang it.
Hi Shaun,
I was at almost all of your events on EMU’s campus. While I think we differ theologically, I appreciated what you had to say and your sincerity.
A couple of things. I remember you saying in the coffeehouse, after you became defensive over what was written in the paper, that we would be “un-Christian” for not coming to you to talk about theological differences, as opposed to just writing about them in the paper. However, I see you blog posts doing a similar thing. Just as there were misunderstandings in the paper, I see a lot of misunderstandings in these blog posts. I don’t think we’re seeing the events on the same page, and that’s ok.
But I did find your Facebook stalking of the persons who wrote the articles a bit disturbing.
I’m just wondering the purpose of these posts. Is it to work out possible insecurities you felt during your time here? To get support/backup from your fan base? To foster conversation? To come to a better understanding of a different culture/faith tradition?
Thank you, Ana! I really hoped students from EMU would join the discussion here. Thank you for going first ; )
You’re correct. I said when we have differences (I didn’t specify “theological”) we need to talk to one another. There are no exceptions for journalists, marginally famous people or bloggers.
I stand by that.
What I’m doing here is chronicling that very process the students at EMU and I walked through. We talked things through, face-to-face, and continue to over e-mail. I’m writing ABOUT how we worked through our differences together, not INSTEAD of working through our differences.
I’ve done my best to do this accurately. I’ve invited three EMU students to read along and correct me as I go. One student suggested one revision early yesterday and I made it immediately. My road manager, Micah, who was there at EMU with me, has reviewed what I’ve written as well and says “it’s pretty dang close.” My pastor also reads my blog, and won’t hesitate to tell me if I behave badly. I’m doing all I can to be accurate and accountable. I invite you to make revisions to the story too. One old guy’s memory isn’t a perfect reflection of what took place for sure!
Help me tell it better. Thanks in advance for that.
I’ve talked via e-mail with one student I messaged through Facebook. She and I have made peace. I messaged her through Facebook, so that she and I could dialogue privately and directly. The only way I could get in touch (because the school newspaper’s site doesn’t have a way of contacting its authors) was to message through Facebook. Her page was public, not private. Even she agrees now, after we’ve talked it through, that this was not a bad thing for me to have done. Unexpected, sure. But not inappropriate.
As for the purpose of all this writing? Learning.
We evangelicals suck at dialogue. Mennonites are pros. At the very least this post in particular shows healthy dialogue, that we can disagree and be respectful and polite. The post about hell helps evangelicals empathize, to better understand why this believe of ours is so unsettling and hard to accept for many. Every post contains multiple lessons I learned. And there are more. The best is yet to come.
In the end – it will end someday! – the Mennonites will teach us something we evangelicals desperately need to learn if we’re going to follow Jesus well. I sure needed to learn it.
Thanks for your pushback, Ana. So glad you joined the discussion here. EMU has made me better. I hope to convey exactly how, little by little. Thanks for your patience.
We can learn so much from you, the master peacemaker. Even telling us that you aren’t blogging because it is Becky’s birthday teaches us how to love. Everything you do sets a loving example. None of this is lost on us, your readers, who are hungry to learn how to live out our faith.
We know you aren’t perfect, but you live your faith well. You never run from controversy, you stand up for the truth in love and with patience, you teach without preaching, you humble yourself and self-reflect and pray, before answering your critics. You are open to the Holy Spirit’s leading. You use your spiritual gifts to His glory.
I believe this answer to Ana is just what He would like it to be. In as much as words on a page can do, it helps her understand your heart.
Ana, we only complement Shaun because in him we see Him. His molding and shaping. We are really giving God glory for the exquisite way He shapes and equips. Because Shaun is a public person, many people see the Lord’s work and they notice it. These complements which look to you like back-up/support from a “fan base”, are just us marveling at Him.
Hi Ana,
I’m going to jump in here for just a sec.
I don’t think any of the commenters here are like, “Yeah Shaun…you tell those crazy EMU students a thing or two!”
So I hope that you don’t feel that way.
Personally, I’m grateful that Shaun chooses to take us with him on his travels, so to speak, because it helps me to see different cultures, ideas and viewpoints that I don’t get to see in my own life. And what I’m taking from this particular series is an idea of what a mature dialogue looks like between believers who have differences.
So often, our desire to be right supercedes our commandment to love one another. And when that happens, wars break out.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know that.
Peace.
Forgive me for not having time to read through all the comments, so if this is covered–my bad.
In all my studies, there has been a single truth that my professors hammered into my head. THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION of scripture (the all caps are either passion or caffeine, sorry).
This is what kills me and why the scripture is often so distorted, leaving so many confused. When we observe, question, draw evidence from, and then interpret…there is only one true interpretation that takes TONS of work to get to…We’re talking hours and hours of work.
Now, after that (after we observe the text in light of culture, ask what the author intended to the original audience, cross over into today’s culture) we can then draw application.
There are many, many, many applications.
A person cannot say this is “my” or “your” interpretation and be dividing the word of God correctly. Yes, this scares the pants off me and leaves me pantless when I teach…a good dose of humility, I guess. But we can say this is “my” or “your” application.
That was mostly passion and only a little caffeine.
It is interesting that you would be writing about this creeping belief system at the same time we are watching it unfold in a couple of 40-somethings. I just spent a weekend hearing how Heaven and Hell aren’t real places, how only Jesus’ words can be trusted in the Bible, how the rest of it is just an archaic tribal story no longer relevant for today, and how “evil” theologians who dare to preach the cross and Jesus as the only way are. The shift was overwhelming to comprehend, because these people once believed. But now, thanks to being wounded by other Christians and reading a few popular books, they’ve chopped up the inspired word of God and kept only the parts that sound loving and kind. I don’t “get” God a lot and I have a lot of questions for Him, but the part about us not being able to have the same thoughts or ways as He does brings me comfort and the assurance that somehow He knows how this all fits together, instead of making me want to toss out orthodox belief.
This latest movement in the Christian culture is something I never saw coming. I’d even say that I was unwittingly on my way in that direction, until I began actually opening up my Bible again and hiding its words in my heart for real. My husband and I feel so much sadness over the changes we are seeing, and our prayer is not just for God’s truth to infiltrate hearts but that none of us would forget and turn away from it.
Without my brokenness, be it awareness of sin or my own frailty, how can I be redeemed and learn how precious grace really is?
Reminds me of that wonderful song by a man named John Newton, who was press-ganged into a life at sea as a boy, became hardened and rough, in order to survive. Eventually he became captain of the ship. Only it was no ordinary ship. It was part of the most lucrative trade of the time: the transatlantic slave trade.
John became a Christian and realised how terrible this thing called slavery was. He abandoned the sea, became a minister and later friend to William Wilberforce, a member of parliament, whose love for God and righteousness gave rise to the decades-long campaign against the slave trade.
Finally, at the beginning of the 1800s(?) they succeeded. What an awe-inspiring victory! Along the way, John wrote what has become one of the most powerful songs ever to be written. It includes the lines:
‘Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears relieved.
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed.’
Grace – the means by which we truly love one another – comes only through redemption. Amazing!
“Press-ganged”
I love how you write, Zoe.
I don’t want to put words into Student #1s mouth. (As you’ll soon see, I don’t understand his viewpoint fully.) But I don’t think he’d say people don’t sin. Perhaps it’s merely a difference of thought as to what “sinful” means.
Love your use of the phrase “common ground” very clever.
I was touched to read this– you did good. So many times when counseling my own kids, I wish I had the perfect words, the ones that would erase doubt, bring peace. I never feel like *I* am quite adequate. But I am always comforted to remember that God has the power to make my words — just the right ones for that person — rattle around in heads and hearts, helping to move that person forward on his/her faith journey. Sometimes it might just be 5 words that find a permanent home in a heart. Sometimes it may be a whole conversation. But I don’t have to say the perfect words for God’s perfect result to happen. The battle belongs to the Lord. Halleluiah.