Getting along
Today is the 20th anniversary of the Rodney King beating. It's hard to believe it was that long ago, because I can still remember it clearly. It turned my stomach then and, to be honest, it bothers me still to see his name tossed around on this blog from time to time as an off-hand way of poking fun at others. For those of you not familiar with the real Rodney King scenario, there is some info on Wikipedia; there is a video HERE of the actual beating; and there is a video HERE of the "Can't we all just get along" footage.
That's not really the main point of this post though. I suppose it's merely coincidence that the Rob-Bell's-new-book controversy is happening at this time too. For those of you not yet up to speed, just google "Rob Bell controversy," or something similar, and I'm sure you'll find plenty of info. Jason Boyett shares about it in his post "Thoughts About Rob Bell, John Piper, and Justin Taylor." It's not long, and I highly recommend you read it. To quote Jason, "This is why people hate us. There is no meaner, more hateful person on Earth than a Christian who suspects you have gotten your theology wrong." I don't know if that's entirely true or not, but I suspect there's more than a little truth to it.
Another article I was recently reading touched on the same topic. Don Miller wrote "How Infighting Will Kill the Church." Again, it's very short, and I suggest you read it as well. I'm not sure it will actually kill the church (I don't think we could kill it if we tried - who do we think we are?), but he makes a good point. Don starts his article by saying,
Most of my friends who no longer attend church, and the majority of my friends no longer attend, have left over petty arguments about theology. It's not that they left because people didn't agree with them, they actually left because they got tired of hearing other people argue about their interpretation of Scripture.
Later he said this:
I am wondering whether the church in Europe decreased in size and impact because of loose, liberal theology, or because the church got divided and people got tired of the fighting. You never hear about that loose European theology, but you do hear a lot about bitter fights over theological squabbles... If the church dies in America, it won't be because of liberal theology, it will be because people don't sense Christians actually understand or respect Jesus' prayer in John 17.
Now, I had hoped to put all this together into a nice little package addressing our current squabbles over 'We Believe' and the credentialling issue. It hasn't really come together, and I don't know that I have the time right now to spend on it. But it seems to me there is something we can learn.
For one thing, I think it supports the idea that just because we say we believe Scripture doesn't really explain what we mean by that. Lots of people believe Scripture but have totally opposing views on things.
For another thing, I think it supports the idea that we need to be careful how we discuss our differences. Do we need to discuss these issues? Absolutely. Does it matter HOW we discuss things? I think that might be even more important.
I would just like to encourage everyone to keep these things in mind. I will be the first to admit I have struggled with restraint on this blog many times, and have made some downright stupid comments (no one has deleted more comments on here than I have!). I just hope we might be mindful of the impact our statements and discussions have not only on ourselves, but on others as well. I have so appreciated this blog as a place for open discussion and the sharing of ideas. I would hope it might continue as such. But might we do so with honesty and humility, rather than with exaggerated claims and arrogance. Might we be respecters of our brothers and sisters both within our tribe, and even those we know in name only. Might we submit not only to the authority of Scripture, but to the hope that through us - those we agree with and don't agree with - others might come to know Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
Call me what you want. I am not so naive as to think we can all agree. But I do believe we can all get along. Or Jesus was a fool to pray for us.
Peace and blessings, my friends.
posted by dan at 12:47 PM
7 Comments:
testing
Dan,
That came right through. Try making a post. We can delete it.
My comments have always come right through, it's just when I put up a post that it doesn't. I put this one up last week and it never came through, and I re-posted it this morning, and again it didn't come through. I also put up a "test" post after rejoining just now, and it hasn't come through yet either.
I guess this blog just doesn't like me. Not a big deal. Thanks for trying.
Dang, Dan! Good stuff. I'll say again that I think we need to work through these big-picture things first and foremost.
When I studied church history, the focus of my interest was revivalism. What I noticed is that times of revival were often times of paradigm change and they were times when people in the church didn't get along very well at all. It seems that we don't do "out with the old, in with the new" easily.
One of my favorite biographies of George Whitefield regularly contained lists of articles written in opposition to him.
Of course, not every moment of controversy was for the good. But, in a faith built on a call to repentance in which people like Moses and Elijah and Isaiah, Jeremiah and John the Baptist are heroes, getting along may not be the best barometer of how well we are living in the Spirit and in the will of God.
Who's surprised that I'd take this view?
Dan,
Great post. I've often said that most people get hired by a church for "big" issues like theology, etc. Many get fired or leave for "mundane" issues like being incapable of treating someone else like a human being. In other words, maybe we've confused which are the big issues.
so i've been wrestling with this for awhile, having seen a lot of controversy over various people and ideas in recent years.
dan, i appreciate what you're saying about how easy it is for us to become graceless and for brothers to go at each other's throats, even over pretty small, secondary or even tertiary issues. i struggle with this quite a bit myself, as i tend to deal well in black and white and concentrate so much on the content of my speech that i often forget about the tone.
having said that, how do we handle Matthew 23, where Jesus (the One "full of grace and truth") rips the pharisees a new one? or Galatians 1:6-9 and 5:10, where paul proclaims condemnation on the judaizers? or the Letters to Timothy, where paul even names specific people and their judgment?
i agree, we must be gracious and humble people. but how do we deal with these texts in light of that? how do they inform the way we think about grace, and how we handle heresy?
walt,
I've been thinking over the challenge that Dan issues in this thread. I think it's an important one.
In the CGGC we take John 13 very seriously and it is in John 13 Jesus says, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved so you must love one another.
The 'have loved' part refers to His washing of the disciples feet. That's what He had just done. He had not gone to the cross.
I think the church doesn't do the New Command very well. When Jesus washed the disciples feet, He served them, He humbled Himself and He loved them in a way they would never have asked.
But, He also stood up to Peter, confronted him and said, "If I do not wash you, you have no part with me."
Life in His body in obedience to His Lordship is characterized by an intense love for one another in which we take everything about each other very seriously. We can do that in a frivolous and narcissistic way and end up squabbling with each other over trivial things and making ourselves appear foolish in front of others. Or, we can do it as He did it when He washed the disciples' feet.
Sadly for me, I often lack wisdom in knowing how to love as He loved.
Post a Comment
<< Home