Moral Exemplar A Theory Of Atonement For Now?

Tony Jones has a new short eBook out on atonement theories. One of the thing he points out is that different theories answer different questions. The Ransom theory, (think C.S Lewis The Lion the Witch and The wardrobe) answers the question of how we deal with the devil? (the white witch). The Penal Substitutionary theory, (this is the one you grew up with) answers the question how do we deal with sin?

I'm interested in asking is what is the problem are people dealing with now? And therefore, what is an appropriate theory of atonement to be using.

I'm going to suggest it's not the Ransom theory as almost no one is wrestling with Satan and Satan's power. Anyway, for the past 1000 years most Xns have not been comfortable giving Satan as much power over God as the Ransom theory does. Similarly, I don't think the Penal Substitutionary Atonement theory will be helpful as few people I come across are wrestling with sin. This is not to say that either are not true, in some way, they are just not particularly relevant.

Now, I know there are some "PSA is the gospel" type people thinking this is heresy and I'm sure if we were to ask the average non Xn did they think they were perfect, they'd say no. It's just that they just won't see themselves as so horribly depraved they deserve complete exclusion from God. Now the usual move from a PSA evangelist is to explain that God sees your relatively small list of sins as just as bad as being a serial killer paedophile, hence the non Xn person is deserving of complete exclusion from God. It's not a great argument. Partly because Jesus (who we're claiming is just like God) seemed pretty comfortable hanging with sinners but mainly because it just makes God look like a complete jerk.

With that little aside out of the way we come back to the question, what is the problem people are dealing with now? I'm going to suggest that the question many people are asking is, how do we live in the world? Now, I know that many (including Tony Jones in this homebrewed Xy interview) are looking for a way that Jesus death and resurrection might address the systemic sin in our world, but I don't think we're going to find that. I think it'll be hard to find a theory to address that in the same way that it was hard for early Xns, who under Roman occupation saw similar if not much more extreme examples of systemic sin and injustice.

Whether it's the Roman Empire or our much more elusive capitalist empire. We are still left with the question of how do we live? How do we live when most of our clothing is made in sweatshops and there is not an obvious alternative? How do we live when taxes are being spent on war but there is no way to redirect our taxes from war to health care? How do we change the way refugees are treated when both electable political parties treat refugees appallingly? I believe, How do we live in a broken, corrupt, fallen world is the big question of our age. It is the question particularly in the west because we are not mere serfs trapped within a oppressive feudal system. No, we have a sense of freedom, a sense of connectedness and and a sense of potential to affect change that is perhaps unprecedented.

With this in mind I believe it is time to revisit the earliest atonement theory, The moral exemplar. This theory is that Jesus Christ is seen as a moral exemplar, who calls us toward a better life, both individually and corporately. Tony Jones talks more about this in this post.

Part of the problem of the Moral Exemplar theory is that Jesus death and resurrection seems not only secondary but completely dispensable.  I'm not sure what earlier adherents of the theory would have argued but, to me it's completely indispensable. Here is why. For most of the people I talk to the question is not "What is good?" or "was Martin Luther King or Oscar Romero good?" (to name but two Xn heroes whose actions changed systemic injustice) instead the question is how can we do the same?

How can we with our overwhelming senses of responsibility to get a good job, buy a house and a car, send our kids to a decent school, save for retirement and insure our health and our stuff. How can we overcome this all consuming reality and do something radical, something dangerous that might change the world? To do such things is too risky, too irresponsible. To challenge this way of thinking we need someone to break the current time space reality and show that reality is different, we need God to show us that what we think is reality is not actually reality. This, I contend is exactly what Jesus death and resurrection does for us. Like the red pill that Neo takes in the Matrix, Jesus opens our eyes to a new reality, a reality where the deaths of people like Martin Luther King and Oscar Romero are not deaths in vain. Where our greatest fear, death, is taken away and we are freed from spending all our time making our lives as safe and secure as possible. Indeed we are free to live in the radical way that Jesus did. "For freedom Christ has set us free".

Christus Victor - Alternative to Penal Substitutionary Atonement

Usually I don't just copy and paste other peoples stuff. But, Tony Jones wrote such a great summary of Christus Victor, an alternative understanding of the Atonement, I've reposted it below. You can read it on his blog here.

In 1930, a relatively unknown Swedish bishop and theologian revived an understanding of the atonement that had largely been forgotten for 1,000 years. Gustaf Aulén’s book, Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Atonement was translated into English the next year, and it’s stayed in print ever since.

The Christus Victor model, Aulén argues, was the predominant theory for the first millennium of the church, and it was held by the majority of the church fathers whom we still revere. Along came Anselm and changed the game — for reasons I’ve written about before and will discuss in an upcoming post — and CV was relegated to history’s rubbish bin. Until Aulén.

Today, CV has had something of a resurgence. ;) That’s been led by Greg Boyd – who’s personal brand was called, until recently, Christus Victor Ministries — and others.

CV falls under a broader umbrella called the Ransom Theory. In this understanding, the original sin of Adam and Eve placed all of humanity under subjugation to Satan. Christ, the second person of the Trinity, came to Earth and died, giving his life as a ransom for many.

At this point, CV may sound like the penal substitution model that many of us grew up with. But that’s where Aulén said we’re wrong. The early church did not understand the death of Christ as paying a penalty in some transactional sense that only God’s son could pay. The crucifixion is not, in that sense, cosmically necessary to reconcile God and humanity.

Instead, Christ’s death is God’s victory over sin and death. God conquers death by fully entering into it. God conquers Satan by using the very means employed by the Evil One.

Thus, the crucifixion is not a necessary transaction to appease a wrathful and justice-demanding deity, but an act of divine love.

God entered fully into the bondage of death, turned it inside out by making it a moment of victory, and thereby liberates humanity to live lives of love without the fear of death.

It’s a beautiful thing, the crucifixion, in this view. And, for those of us who are robustly trinitarian, it maintains an egalitarian view of the Trinity — one in which the Son and Spirit are not junior partners in the atonement.

Jesus Was A Suspected Terrorist

Imagine a Muslim man walking through the streets saying "Allah will rule this nation!" he'd get strange looks and someone would probably call the police thinking he might be a terrorist. After all he's part of a minority religion, a religion that's tolerated as long as it does not affect the wider community. Furthermore we have a society and rule of law that functions perfectly well. In fact we think it's the best system in history.

This is exactly the situation Jesus was in. Part of a tolerated minority religion in a wider society and rule of law which (at the time) was considered as good as it could possibly get. Yet Jesus cries out "the kingdom of God (not Caesar) is at hand change your ways and believe this good news (not the news that the roman empire is as good as it gets)" It's highly inflammatory talk. Especially since there were Jewish revolutionaries (terrorists from the Roman point of view) trying to free the Jewish people from the tyranny of Rome.

I can't help but think that right from the start Jesus would have been a suspected terrorist. Sure he might of been doing some kind things - a facade to win people over. But, he did clash with the mainstream religious leaders - like extremists do. Everyone would have suspected that deep down he must be plotting something violent (Roman soldiers pull out swords to arrest him) because, that is the only way that kingdom of God could over throw Caesar's reign over the people.

My Big Gay (affirming) Post

This is a big issue. To assume that the debates about Homosexuality in Christian churches are just about sexuality is, I think, to miss why people argue so passionately about it. Conversely to say that it's all about biblical interpretation is also to miss how deeply our own beliefs about sexuality affect us. For many who believe that homosexuality is a sin, at stake is not whether two people are in a relationship but rather it's reading something in the bible which seems to clearly say something is wrong and then choose to ignore the bible and to ignore what their tradition has said is a sin.

Personally, I take the Bible pretty damn seriously. I grew up not just evangelical but Sydney evangelical. I think it's helpful to start by trying to set aside the passages in the bible and ask if their was to be passages in the bible what might we expect them to say. This will either help you to tackle the issue afresh or tell you which way you are biased towards.

I like everyone have a few underlying beliefs which colour the way I read scripture and I feel I should lay out.

1. Homosexuality is not a choice and especially not at high school, when usually people start to figure out there sexuality. High school people may want to be different from their parents but they desperately want to be like everyone else. I cannot imagine a scenario where someone would choose homosexuality. My own heterosexuality was forcefully thrown upon me by my hormones not by any choice. Three of the guys I hung out with at high school have identified as gay I just can't imagine them choosing that as an option in the same way you might choose what you have for lunch. (sadly, in a poor reflection of my own high school studliness they averaged more girlfriends than me)

2. I had thought of homosexuality a part of fallen world something analogous to say someone who is born blind. Something that wasn't meant to be or not part of the ideal but, none the less in the same way I wouldn't ask a blind person to give up their guide dog and live as if they weren't blind I wouldn't ask someone to give up their homosexuality. Lately, however, I've found it harder to think this way. Partly because I know a few more gay people but probably more because I have son with Autism. Before my son I would have seen autism like homosexuality, as a "disorder", part of this fallen world. As I get to know my son his autistic traits are something that make him who he is. In the same way each person's sexuality is also deeply ingrained in them and makes them who they are. I'm now wondering whether people who are not neurotypical or sexual-typical are just a part of Gods wild and varied creation. (See "theology of pizazz" for more on this text and MP3)

Of course these ideas will colour the way I read the bible as does anyone else's beliefs and ideas.

That said lets jump into the Bible. Very often I've seen gay affirming types dismiss the bible as an old homophobic text that can be ignored because it does not keeping pace with modern western values of what is loving and moral. This, I think is, dangerous. Rather, I'd like to propose revisiting scripture in the same way as people have around the issues of slavery, race and gender equality. Wondering if there are other ways to understand texts that we've always been told can only be understood one way.

Fortunately there are only a very small number of passages. I've done lots of reading around this but to avoid making this post enormous I'm going to look at them in pretty light detail but hopefully enough to give a good outline about my thinking around them.

Leviticus 18:22: this passage is part of a ritual manual for Israel's priests. This prohibition follows after the prohibition of the idolatrous sexuality of worshipping Molech, whose cult included male cult prostitutes and bestiality. Leviticus also has a set of "every sperm is sacred" type passages (no sex during menstruation for example) all designed to keep a small isolated people in the wilderness alive and growing. Like all cultic practices the practice in Leviticus 18:22 is described as an abomination.

Sodom and Gomorrah: Should I bother with this one? No. You can google it. Plenty of conservative scholars will say that Sodom and Gomorrah's sin was not homosexuality. Even Ezekiel 16:49 says "This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy."

1 Corinthians 6:9: The NRSV translates this word (used only here in the New Testament) as "Male prostitute". The family that this word belongs to is used in Matthew 11:8 and Luke 7:25 where Jesus describes robes as being "soft" (NRSV). The first time word was translated as homosexual was 1958 by the Amplified bible. None the less lets say The NRSV and the more conservative NIV (who also uses male prostitute) translations are correct. If we can see heterosexual prostitution as a sin but not a heterosexual relationship then the same should be true for homosexual prostitution and homosexual relationships

1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10: the Greek word (Arsenokoites) is again rarely used, only twice with no context. The NRSV translates it as "sodomites" which all things considered isn't too bad. The word refers to someone who rapes or dominates someone (male or female) using anal sex. Just like in the Sodom story. Again if vaginal rape doesn't make vaginal sex a sin then logically the same would apply to anal sex.

Romans 1:24-28: For me, this is where the rubber really hits the road. We're not talking about an Old Testament book with laws that Xns mostly ignore (Take almost any random passage in Leviticus) or the the translation of just one word in a list of sins with no other context to the meaning.

Romans 24-28 describes the consequence of something that has happened, that is the people have sinned and this is the result. Romans 20b-23 lets us know what this something is; worship of false Gods. I think (from what I've read) that this most likely refers to the worship of pagan fertility gods. This worship often culminating in ritualistic orgies that involved anal sex with priests and priestesses.

The word translated as natural in the key passage of Romans could also be regular or usual. So that is to euphemistically say men were having anal (unnatural) sex with women and even with other men. These of course were usually men with wives at home, hence the extra astonishment over the sex with men.

What all of these verses have in common is that they are denouncements against domination and abuse as well as against pagan worship. This is, I believe, is why lesbian sex is so absent from all these verses and the rest of the Bible.

This is just my rough thumbnail overview. If you want more detail, gaychristian101.com is not a bad place to start particularly if you're a more evangelical leaning kind of person.

So does all this mean that Paul thought homosexuality was not "unnatural" in the way we think of the term "unnatural"? Quite possibly not. If Paul's own urges to be heterosexual were as powerful as mine are and given that he was surrounded by ritualistic anal sex as a key part of pagan worship and pederasty a part of Greek and then Roman Culture - which would usually involve heterosexual men dominating or abusing someone beneath their social standing it would be difficult for Paul to imagine homosexuality outside of these pervasive contexts. Having said that I don't think Paul could imagine a world without slavery. Or, could imagine a world where women were not considered property and were educated to the same level as men. That doesn't mean he wouldn't say that in Christ there is no male or female, no slave or free, no Jew or gentile, and no straight or gay.

Now, if you're one of the many people who read this in horror feeling I've watered down scripture and I'm just being a wet liberal, It's worth asking ourselves why do you care so much? More about this issue than say divorce? Divorce being something that's far more plainly written about in scripture, yet we are generally prepared to say "it'd be great if it didn't happen but since it has lets make sure all involved get as much love and support as they need". If you find yourself getting heated up and thinking "but this is different!" it's probably worth asking yourself why. It won't (probably) make you think differently about the issue but it will help you realise what you are bringing to the text before reading it.

I have written this post like all my other posts primarily for myself. To document the thinking that I have gone through and to explain how I can be both Christian, evangelical (as much as I hate Xn labels this is probably still the one that comes closest to describing me) and gay affirming. 

The Bible, Historical Events And A Helpful Analogy

You've probably heard people (scholars) say that there is lots of stuff in the bible that is not historically accurate. This is sometimes out rightly rejected but more often than not clarified by a statement along the lines of "well historical biography is not the style that the gospels (or other books) were written in". Which leaves the lay person asking "so what style were they written in? Make it up as you go along style?" Well I think I may have a modern day writing style that is analogous to many of the biblical writings (particularly those dealing with events that have taken place in history) It is the political cartoon.

The political cartoon accurately and often in a very quick way tells exactly what is going on without necessarily being historically accurate. So in centuries to come someone might look back at two cartoons of the historical event of the Australian prime minister meeting the American president, one cartoon might have the prime minister laying prostrate before the president and another might have the prime minister kissing the president's bum. Now a historian might tell us that it is unlikely that either events took place and that the two cartoons contradict each other. But, as 21st centurary cartoon readers we know that these cartoons are actually an accurate telling of what is going on, in many ways far more accurate than a photo of the two leaders shaking hands ever could be.

I've found the political cartoon analogy really helpful. If ever I hear someone say that something in the bible didn't or couldn't happen the way it is recorded to ask is this similar to how a political cartoonist would have recorded this event?

Relationship or Power

A great zoologist has been working with apes for years. She has finally made a major breakthrough with an ape she has been working with and knows that the next baby ape she starts with she will be able to unleash it's mind and give it the power to think reason and love to so the same degree as any human. Will she do it?

A computer programmer has been working on artificial intelligence for years finally he has cracked it he has designed a robot with software that lets it have independent choice and the ability to learn new things just like a human. Will he build the robot?

The question in the two scenarios is the same. If you could create a human like being would you? It’s a dilemma because by creating a human like being you are relinquishing control of that being. They will have the power to love you or leave you or do things or be someone you don’t like. Once you train the ape or build the robot to be like a human you are no longer “all powerful”, they control how you relate to each other.

Xns will often describe God as “all powerful” without even a moment’s thought. As humans if we were to give something the some human qualities that will reduce our own power, but also increase the possibility for relationship. Having created two children in my own image (so to speak) I am very aware that although I maybe powerful I am not all powerful and once they become adults (completely in my adult image) I will have virtually no power what so ever, only possibility of relationship. If we believe that God has created us in God’s image and desires to have a relationship with us, maybe we need to stop calling God “all powerful”.

After 9 11 We Need An Angry God - Some Thoughts 10 Years On

The usual wisdom is that it was belief in an angry god is what caused a handful of people to get into planes and crash into skyscrapers and then caused a much larger group of people to get into many more planes and drop bombs on to people who lived in countries which were kind of close to the country where most of the first handful of people came from.

Furthermore, an often remarked criticism of the Bible is that in the God of the Old Testament is full of anger but the god of the new testament is full of love. This criticism is supposed to be a debate clinching argument because we, as a society, believe that you can't be both full of anger and full of love and that anger is an altogether bad emotion. If you were to hear someone say "my child has anger issues" no one will turn around and say "that's great you must be so proud". Instead there might be a bit of consoling about similar issues in their own children and how that anger might have been subdued through a combination of therapy and medication.

Our ideal citizen does not have "anger issues", our ideal citizen swims with the tide of the way the world is and learns to accept things as they are. Less than ideal citizens would include Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Oscar Romero and Jesus. All angry. Angry about the way their people had been treated by the ruling authorities. All full of anger and full of love. Key of course is that that they were angry and non-violent. And it is non-violence that is key to understanding the gospel.

As I look around at the litany of injustices in the world I am angry and I am sure God must feel the same. I contend that God did not just pour out Gods anger on Jesus making God satisfied and unmoved by the events of our world. Maybe instead God has channelled God's anger into an act of non-violence. The act of becoming a man and laying down his life for others in the crucifixion. An act that would be a window into a new paradigm a paradigm where violence loses and love wins because the grave could not hold Jesus.

God is still angry and God is calling us to follow the Jesus path of non-violence. Our anger is to fuel loving acts of non-violent action.

Like the terrorists on 9/11 I sense that something is unfair in the world and I want that to change. We both believe that God is angry about these injustices. The difference between us is that the anger of my God causes God to humble God's self to the form of a man who would act out love and not violence even if that meant death on a cross.

Ten years on if you are angry about 911 or about the west's response or that the 911 anniversary will receive more attention than starving millions in the horn of Africa, then join God and follow Jesus on the path of non-violent action in a new paradigm where violence loses and love wins.

I've Accidentally Become A Pacifist

I'm sure there was a time when I used to believe in the need for armed forces and that at times these would be the best way to resolve conflicts. As I’ve grown older I’ve grown even less conservative and now I’m a pacifist. I don't when this happened I only really thought about it the other day. It just crept up on me. As Toni Campolo puts it “I can’t think of a circumstance where Jesus would pick up a bayonet and run it through someone”. If we are called to be like Jesus then why would we live differently. Jesus with all the supernatural power of God was murdered like any garden variety insurrectionist. His passive resistance resulted in his own death and that, is the danger of deciding to follow Jesus. To follow Jesus is to walk to the cross.

Atonement Alternative

I've often written critically about atonement illustrations like Nicky Gumbell's Nazi camp story. So I thought it was time to write an alternative illustration. Of course like other illustrations it doesn't capture the entire gospel it just captures one aspect.

The hike started to take a turn for the worse. We had reached the summit of the mountain and we were on our way back when we discovered an avalanche had cut off the path home. The sun was starting to set and jack, our guide, confirmed our fears that the moans in the distance were indeed bears. Jack lead us to the opening of an abandoned mine. "this is going to be our only way out" he suggested "I've never been down inside but it might lead out somewhere pass the bears". A few decided to stay at the mouth of the mine most of us followed jack. The mine shafts got narrower and narrower. Some of the lager and more claustrophobic in the group stopped to see if we would come back after hitting a dead end. The rest of use winded our way single file through the mine until we came to a small hole where we could hear running water below. The opening was big enough for one and the ledge below was big enough for just two. The stream was going to go somewhere and it was big enough to for someone to swim in you just needed gills to breath until you found air somewhere. Jack turned to the hiker who had gone down with him and said he was going to swim. Through and see where it went. A while went by went by until jack resurfaced "it gets us out just take a deep breath and follow me. Don't try and come back though you'll probably drown and block the path for everyone else." So jack left then a second hiker got down on the ledge with the first hiker. By the time I got there this story had been relayed to me by at least a dozen people. As it was my time to relay the story back to the person behind me. I wondered why I was believing it could everyone be just going to there death? I held my breath but my faith in jack and swam believing life would greet me on the other side.

Conservative Theology Or Conservative Liturgy

So which one do you have? If you are honest with yourself it's probably one or the other. This is often what anchors us in the faith. Radical ideas about liturgy (or Xn practices in general) are usually found in more theologically conservative churches and radical ideas about theology are usually found in more liturgically conservative churches. I grew up theologically conservative and liturgically liberal. As I age I'm becoming more theologically liberal, not for the sake of it I think that many of my ideas are just less orthodox than they used to be. Certainly not unusual for someone my age. But, as this happens I'm increasingly looking for patterns of life and liturgy (Xn practices) that I can use to help anchor me. I suspect that somewhere between practice and belief God hangs out. God's a pretty slippery sucker. As I try letting go of some theology in order to get a better hold of God I find myself needing some practice to hang on to. Maybe belief and practice are like the two side rails on a pathway. God is in the middle and if we just hang on to one we'll completely miss God we have to let go but we need the other rail for when we fall off the path again.

The God Who Was Sorry

For me one of the most fascinating parts of the bible is when God repents of making humanity in the story of Noah (Genesis 6:6). Fast forward to Jesus and you've got Jesus being the Passover lamb. The Passover lamb is the object that takes the blame. Put the two together and you've got a God who is sorry and takes the blame for sin.

If we were to ask Is God responsible for the mess we find ourselves in? Before we can even ask the question or try make a judgement about what proportion (if any) we want to blame god. God has already said sorry for the mess and taken the blame. That's powerful. Particularly in an age when no one wants to admit they are sorry or take any portion of blame for fear of the consequences. Rather they would wait for a court or other higher power to prove their guilt.

Starting An Unintentional Community

Last year I got to meet with someone doing a church plant in my area. He's a paid worker leading a small group of people from the same church that's moved into the area to do a church plant. An intentional community of sorts. I always get excited about this kind of thing so I organised to meet with him and hear what they were doing. After being asked a few questions about how evangelical I was I got the feeling that I was not the kind of person they are looking for to be part of their community. Although I expressed interest to meet with other people who are part of the plant, I was told just to look at their infrequently updated website.

The conversation felt very much like my initial church surfing in the area. The underlying message from each church was always the same. "this is the way we do things here... Join in and do it our way or don't"

It's frustrating but nothing out of the ordinary. Turn up to a liberal church and tell them you believe in 7 day creation, or turn up to a conservative church and tell them you think the first 11 chapters of genesis are myth and you'll get the same awkward treatment. It's because you're the kind of person that they never intended to have in their community.

As Xn communities we're comfortable with people who believe the same as us and we're comfortable with people who might journey with us until they end up believing the same as us. Basically church is open to anyone on the line between unbelief and belief just like us. It's the way that we as church communities keep control of what we believe. For as much as Xns talk about going on a journey with people we always want that person to end up believing the same things we do and usually learning those beliefs from us or in the same way we did. If you've found yourself believing something other than what the orthodox for that church is they don't know what to do with you. Apart from maybe hope you go away.

This is perhaps one of the reasons I get so irritated when I sense someone trying to sniff out if I'm evangelical or liberal. They want to know if I fit on their line between unbelief and what they believe. If I fit we can work together if not then we'll usually talk platitudes about all believing the same gospel but then work completely independently of each other.

I'd like to propose an unintentional community? One where a group of Xns with wildly diverse beliefs and ideas work, live and play together.

Jesus Death And Resurrection: Exodus 2.0

At the edge of the river a tribe asks where are we going? The answer is "in to the dessert", in to certain death. In to a place where they would barely have the resources to survive long enough to work out what to do next let alone live there. Taking justice into their own hands they ran away in to the dessert, in to death, at least this way they would die of their own causing and not at the hand of a tyrant. The miracle of the exodus is that they survived. set free into a new world.

This Easter as I look into the cross a place more certain to kill even than the desert. I cannot help but think of that first exodus. Jesus walks straight into death at the hands of unjust political and religious systems. But like the first exodus survives and paves the way for a new way of living. a New way of living where it is ok to pursue a life of justice and righteousness above all else because the unjust even those with the power to kill will not triumph. Even if we die death will not be the end.

Where Was God At Easter?

Having pondered about the inadequateness of the penal substitution metaphor for some time. Every so often I'll come across yet another part of the bible where the penal substitution metaphor justice doesn't cut it. This Easter was no different. The question I wondered was who was God with at the crucifixion Jesus or the Romans. If you believe in the trinity then god is with Jesus on the cross, if you believe in penal substitution then god is with the Romans sending Jesus to die on the cross. Penal substitution can be a helpful metaphor but only when it is a metaphor among many and not the only metaphor.

Can You Be Rich And A Christian?

Most Xns I know are not prosperity gospel devotees. But, they will say things like "there's nothing in the bible that says you can't be rich and a Xn". I got to thinking recently is that true?

Firstly what is rich? Most people I know wouldn't consider me rich. Mainly because they live in a better suburb have higher incomes and drive nicer cars than me. But compared to people through out time I am friggin’ loaded and compared to people round the world I am also friggin’ loaded. Purely by having running water a flushing toilets more clothing than I can wear in a week, a perfectly functioning mode of transport that will get anywhere around the city I live, a telephone, Internet connection, food that is so cheap and plentiful it only takes up 20% of the family budget and stable housing that I will one day own outright... means I am extremely rich. This is far far more than almost anyone in the world past or present could even imagine being possible.

None the less most people I know would not consider me rich. So one of the problems is that the average westerner understands rich as simply having more than most of those around you. So for someone with more than average in a poor suburb might feel richer than someone less than average in a rich suburb even though the first person might have less than the second person.

None the less lets look at some of the texts...

Mathew 19:21 The Rich Young Man

Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me."

Proverbs 23:4

Do not wear yourself out to get rich; be wise enough to desist.

Luke 16:13

No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth." God The Pharisees, who were lovers of money , heard all this, and they ridiculed him.

Acts 5:1-5

But a man named Ananias, with the consent of his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property; with his wife's knowledge, he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles' feet. "Ananias," Peter asked, "why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, were not the proceeds at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You did not lie to us but to God!" Now when Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard of it.

The first Xns to be chucked out of church is a couple who die because they sold their own property and didn't share all proceeds with everyone. Can you imagine a church visitors card with...

[] I would like to find out more about becoming a member if this Church (N.B this will involve selling all you own and contributing that to a common pool)

Matthew 19:24

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

Here Jesus is comparing the biggest known object with smallest known hole. Although I've often heard people say this just means it's harder not impossible. I don't think could be right. Surely the point is that this is something that is physically impossible.

Psalm 49:1-9

Hear this, all you peoples; give ear, all inhabitants of the world, both low and high, rich and poor together. My mouth shall speak wisdom; the meditation of my heart shall be understanding. I will incline my ear to a proverb; I will solve my riddle to the music of the harp. Why should I fear in times of trouble, when the iniquity of my persecutors surrounds me, those who trust in their wealth and boast of the abundance of their riches? Truly, no ransom avails for one's life, there is no price one can give to God for it. For the ransom of life is costly, and can never suffice, that one should live on forever and never see the grave.
rich to grave rest of us restored

1 Timothy 6:10

Money is the root of all evil

The list goes on and on... Especially from Jesus. Here are some of Jesus sayings about money. (Care of www.pcusa.org/stewardship/bigtent/jesusmary.pdf)

Money and Possessions

• The Rich Fool—Luke 12:16-21
• The Shrewd Manager 16:1-8
• The Talents—Matthew 25:14-30; Luke 19:11-27

God’s Ownership

• The Cost of Discipleship—Luke 14:28-33
• The Faithful and Wise Servant—Matthew 24:45-51; Luke 12:42-48
• The Great Banquet—Luke 14:16-24
• The Master and his Servant—Luke 17:7-10
• The Shepherd and his Flock—John 10:1-18
• The Tenants—Matthew 21:33-44; Mark 12:1-11; Luke 20:9-18
• The Thief—Matthew 24:42-44; Luke 12:39-40
• The Two Sons—Matthew 21:28-32
• The Unfruitful Fig Tree—Luke 13:6-9
• The Unmerciful Servant—Matthew 18:23-35
• The Watchful Servants—Mark 13:34-37; Luke 12:35-40
• The Wedding Banquet—Matthew 22:2-14
• Human Prosperity and Poverty
• The Lost Sheep—Matthew 18:12-14; Luke 15:4-7
• The Rich Man and Lazarus—Luke 16:19-31
• The Widow’s Mite—Mark 12:43-44
• Bigger Barns—Luke 12:16-21

Gratitude

• The Workers in the Vineyard—Matthew 20:1-16
• The Pharisee and the Tax Collector—Luke 18:9-14
• Woman Anointing Jesus—Luke 7:36-49
• Following God in Finances
• Two Masters—Matthew 6:24
• Deny Self and Follow Me—Matthew 16:24-26
• Don’t Worry About Life—Luke 12:22-34
• Good Measure will be Given Back—Luke 6:37-38
• Much Given, Much Required—Luke 12:48

Eternal Reward

• The Hidden Treasure—Matthew 13:44
• The Lowest Seat at the Feast—Luke 14:7-14
• The Sheep and the Goats—Matthew 25:31-46
• The Valuable Pearl—Matthew 13:45-46
• The Wise and Foolish Builders—Matthew 7:24-27; Luke 6:46-49

And, it's all through the law and the prophets too. One of the things that marks the God’s people being how they care for the poor. This was taken up by the early church who were well known for how they looked after the poor.

For most of us we don't think as ourselves as being greedy when we are accumulating wealth. We usually talk about being good stewards of our money. Saving it for a rainy day but Jesus even challenges this kind of thinking.

Luke 12:22-34

He said to his disciples, "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear. For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? If then you are not able to do so small a thing as that, why do you worry about the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you—you of little faith! And do not keep striving for what you are to eat and what you are to drink, and do not keep worrying. For it is the nations of the world that strive after all these things, and your Father knows that you need them. Instead, strive for his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well. "Do not be afraid, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give alms. Make purses for yourselves that do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

When it comes to stewardship I'm pretty sure that most of what is talked about as good stewardship is how we handle other peoples money not how we handle our own So it's more like how we handle the company expense account or how charities handle monies donated in grants. Not whether we buy a share portfolio or invest in property.

Obviously the prosperity gospel is about a neat a fit with the text as Satan worshipping random acts violence gospel. When it comes to the question can you be rich and a Xn. I reckon the answer just has to be no.

A few years ago I went to what I'd describe as a Xn money scam seminar. Kind of a "God wants you to get rich quick and here's how". The question was asked can you handle the responsibility of looking after huge amounts of cash for God? I could feel the whole room itching to yell out "yes!!!" In a moment of quiet introspection I thought you know what I don't think I could be appropriately generous if I had loads of cash. I'd live in a better suburb drive a better car and buy a real nice guitar. Years later I''m still living in a suburb that is synonymous with unemployment or at best blue collar but not trade qualified. So, it was quite a surprise to see one of the seminar lecturers living in the same suburb as me. I wondered did everything fall flat for him or is he earning huge dollars but choosing to slum it. I just wasn't brave enough to ask.

The Theology of Fight Club: The Talk From The 10 Year Anniversary Screening

Last month I was part of some Fight club 10 year anniversary celebrations. It was a bit of a Fight Club month. I was asked to write an article for the transit lounge about the theology of fight club and At the 10 year anniversary screening I did a talk to a packed Perth crowd of 12 (it was a small room so it was packed) about the theology of Fight Club too. Below is a copy of the Transit Lounge article and a copy of the talk. I would have like to have spent a lot more time on it so it's a bit scattered and disjointed none the less here it is.

Transit Lounge Article

I can still remember walking out of the cinema through the streets of Fremantle, stunned and feeling like I had seen something truly unique.

Ten years on, I have seen Fight Club (directed by David Fincher) and read the book, written by Chuck Palahniuk, numerous times.

Although denounced by some as a very unchristian film, it continues to resonate strongly with me and my faith. I see one of the film's two protagonists, Tyler Durden, as a Christ-like figure.

The premise is this: Jack works for an unscrupulous company earning good money with which he orders furniture for his apartment. Jack is living the good life—the American Dream—and finds it completely numbing and meaningless. Along comes Tyler to liberate him from this life.

In Christian theology we often talk about liberation and it is usually with regards to poorer people being liberated from oppression. Something a rich, white, Western male like myself can appreciate but cannot relate to.

In Fight Club, Tyler forces Jack to face the current reality of his world: injustice, love of money, obsession with the trivial; and to liberate him from that.

Below is a list of some of my favourite gospel and Fight Club parallels...

Fight Club: Only when Jack truly gives up his will to live is he saved.
Jesus: Luke 14:26. "Whoever comes to me and does not hate even life itself, cannot be my disciple.”

Fight Club: Jack quits job and Tyler destroys all that he owns.
Jesus: Matt 6:24-34. "No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other.”

Fight Club: Jack has no family; those around him follow Tyler Durden and his followers become his family.
Jesus: Mark 4:34-35. "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother."

Fight Club: The first assignment for fight club members is for them to start a fight and lose.
Jesus: Matt 5:38-39. "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.”

Fight Club: Tyler Durden destroys both Jacks' apartment and the buildings of credit card companies in order to make everything go back to zero so that no-one is in debt.
Jesus: Luke 18:22. When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me."

Be warned: the film is graphic and brutal and deserves its R rating, but if you are looking for a film to show disaffected adult Western males that exemplifies liberation, I can’t think of a better place to start.

Talk from the Anniversary Screening

Two years ago I was doing alpha course and Nicky Gumbel told a horrific story of a Nazi death camp. It’s the story of a family man found guilty of some petty offence and sentenced to death. A priest steps in and is killed instead of the family man which the Gestapo agree to.
Nicky then went on to explain that we are like the family man and Jesus is like the priest, which is all fine and dandy until you realise that God is the Gestapo and that the priest died so that the family man can be friends with the Gestapo.

Now I’m sure we’ve all heard analogies like this. Stories like this to try and explain what Jesus life and death did. Stories like this is what theologians like to call an atonement narratives. That is it’s a story that describes the atonement “the reconciling, redeeming, liberating activity of God in Christ.” Obviously there’s bits of the Nazi death camp story that echo bits of the gospel but obviously any metaphor where a loving God is represented by a cruel guard at a Nazi death camp has got some problems too.

Now if you’ve been around in Xn circles for a while you have probably heard many stories like this. I can remember one from my youth group that involved a train and station master who puts his son in the road of the train to save the people on board or something like that.

Have people heard these kind of stories? And they’re usually slight variations on the same theme? To be technical that theme is called penal substitutionary atonement.

My problem with this story is that I think the gospel and what God has done through Jesus is too big to encapsulate in just one story. It’s about like Jesus talking about the Kingdom of God he didn’t just stick to the KOG is like a mustard seed he used many analogies. And that’s what we have to do with our atonement narratives. The atonement is like a multifaceted diamond. If we only stick to one story then we’ll end up making the gospel look like just a plate of glass. Of course there will be no one story that describes the “the reconciling, redeeming, liberating activity of God in Christ.” Completely.

This is where I’d like to introduce fight club. Now I’m willing to bet you haven’t been to a church service were the pastor has said ”let me just play you a clip from fight club to illustrate this point” In fact the First time I met Nathan à Baptist College à are you reading Chuck Phaulinuk à He looked so surprised I was sure I was going to get a ear bashing about it’s horrible morality etc.

Fight Club is in essence a story of liberation. In rich western Xy most Atonement Narratives talk about acts of reconciliation or redemption. Liberation occasionally might be framed in the story of sex addict or drug addict – who comes to the youth group to tell his testimony and how he has been set free. I certainly remember hearing that at my youth group, I also remember half the guys thinking they should get out of youth group and get into sex and drugs.

Personally I think it’s tragic that we have missed out talking about liberation. My generation were born into a world where it was impossible to buy a shoe that had not been made in a sweat shop and where third world inequality and environmental degradation was just seen as part of the natural order. Our parents worked hard to give us heaps as I got set to inherit this hard work I couldn’t help but notice the injustice that had been left in it’s wake. So we said no thanks for a while bought cheap flannelette shirts and Nirvana records. But most of us have given up that idealism and like our parents have a well thumbed IKEA catalogue on the newspaper rack. I grew up in a generation that were the heirs of oppression. We could see the injustice in the world and new we were destined to benefit from it but had no way to change it.

Perhaps this is one reason why we as a generation loved escaping into movies like the Matrix and TV shows like Buffy the vampire slayer were there is some greater reality a computer program or vampires that would give us meaning because everything else staring us in the face would pale into insignificance.

It was specifically for generation X males that Chuck Palahniuk wrote the novel Fight Club for. Fight Club is a story of liberation from a society where the only valued role in life is to be an oppressor. Jack the main character in Fight Club works day and night for an unscrupulous company earning good money that he uses to fill his apartment with furniture. Fight Club is a novel for a generation “raised by television to believe that someday we'll all be millionaires and movie stars and rock stars.” (Fight Club the film) A generation raised to believe in the American dream, that we can be anything we want.

In Fight Club liberation comes in the from of the character Tyler Durden who convinces Jack to hit rock bottom. That is, to give up the desire to become a movie star, to not play the game, trying to be famous or powerful, to not even bother with his job or apartment to just drop out of the rat race altogether. For Tyler Durden hitting rock bottom is not a simple submission to the powers around. Rather it is to live in spite of the powers around despising all that they value. For me this is encapsulated in the way Tyler Durden says “you have to give up” to Jack. I could totally imagine Jesus saying this to the “you have to give up” rich young ruler or Zacchaeus the tax collector who gives half of what he owns repays people he has cheated four times what he has taken from them.

Jack is liberated by giving up on the what the rulers, powers and principalities of this world view as important. A respectable job, a nice house and nice furniture to fill it.

Paul famously wrote in Galatians for freedom Christ has set us free. But ask many rich western Xns what they have been set free from and I bet they might struggle. We often we would fall back to our Nazi death camp model and say something like freed from death and freed from judgment. Which is certainly true and will make a difference when we die but it can be hard to see how that can make a big difference while we are alive. What I like about what I see in fight club and in Jesus. Is that rather changing what might happened if you died tomorrow they change what might happen if you live tomorrow.

Fight Club is a violent film, I’d argue it’s Possibly the most violent pacifist movie ever made. It’s tough and confronting liberation is often similar to Jesus when he asks us to give up everything to follow him. Part of the reason why the book Fight Club may resonate with someone who identifies as a pacifist is that no one is forced to join and no one is allowed to just watch. Part of the ethos of Fight Club is to take down the current social order by sacrificing / causing violence to yourself. Participant disturb those around them primarily by hurting themselves and not hurting other people. The only time participants go and fight someone who is unwilling is with the strict instruction that they are to loose the fight. It is an exercise in empowering the other person rather than intimidating them. Like big moment at the end of the film were Tyler blows up empty bank buildings, wiping all debts causing a jubilee. Jesus big moment turning tables in the temple was also a violent act that doesn’t hurt anyone.

But like the Nazi story I started with Fight Club is not a perfect metaphor – It’s going to be hard to find a Xn justification for urinating in food and splice pornography into children’s films.

Probably one of the reasons that we don’t think Jesus when we see fight club is because doesn’t fit into classic penal sub framework. But to prove my point here are some gospel parallels with the film. I’m sure there are more.

Fight Club - Only when Jack truly gives up his will to live is he saved.
Jesus - Luke 14:26. "Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.”
---
Fight Club - Jack quits job and Tyler Durden destroys all that he owns.
Jesus - Matt 6:24-34. "No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.”
---
Fight Club - Jack has no family, those around him following Tyler Durden and his followers become his family.
Jesus - Mark 4:34-35. "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother."
---
Fight Club - The first assignment for fight club members is for them to start a fight and loose.
Jesus - Matt 5:38-39. "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also;”
---
Fight Club - "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We are all part of the same compost pile." Tyler Durden
Jesus - Matt 7:1-5. "Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbour’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?”
---
Fight Club - Tyler Durden destroys Jacks apartment, and destroys the buildings of credit card companies in order to make everything go back to zero so that non one is in debt.
Jesus - Luke 18:22. When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "There is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me."

At the end of the film Jack ends up living a life consistent with the beliefs of Tyler Durden. Doing this leads to him attempting suicide. At this moment Tyler (his mentor and example) dies and Jack goes on forever changed by Tyler. Jack asks himself “If you wake up at a different place at a different time could wake up as a different person”

The Theology of Fight Club: A 10 Year Anniversary Screening

If you live in Perth Western Australia. You could come to this event...

The Theology of Fight Club: A 10 Year Anniversary Screening

It's ten years this month since Fight Club hit Australian cinema screens. For many, it is probably the most unchristian film they could think of - violent, subversive and nihilistic. But for some Christians it's actually a theologically important film, and not nihilistic at all.

You're invited to celebrate a decade of this life-changing cult film with a special screening and talk:

"Theology of Fight Club" a talk by Chris Summerfield followed by Fight Club, the movie itself

7:30pm Friday 20 November 2009
Christian Centre For Social Action
879 Albany Hwy, East Vic Park (cnr Canterbury Tce)

Cost: suggested $5 donation to the Centre's aid work in East Timor

Please RSVP so Nathan and I know if we need to put out more than two chairs.

The Weakness of God

When I was younger I used to sing “My God is so big so strong and so mighty there’s nothing my God cannot do.” Now I’m older I’m not so sure. This is a post that I have been mulling over for a while and have finally decided to buckle down and write, short as it is. Recently I was reflecting on my life as a Father and how my view of the concept of “Father” has changed. I grew up with an image of God as Father. When I was young, God as father meant a God who was powerful, in control and can do anything. Now that I am a father I don’t feel like I am powerful or control. It is almost impossible to convince my children (all under four) that I am the boss and in control. I can’t make my daughter her eat all her dinner, I can’t make my son fall asleep on time. I can sit her at the table or keep him in his room at bed time but that’s not the same thing.

I am now thinking that God has created a world were his influence and power are quite limited, like me as a father. When God intervenes it is often subtle, God is not in the storm but that still small voice. The big intervention that Xns celebrate is when God came to the world as an obscure Jewish man with no great political power. A man who we would describe as servant rather than ruler.

If we are to believe that “My God is so big so strong and so mighty there’s nothing my God cannot do.” It means that every time some kind of evil happens that God (who can do anything) is just sitting passively by letting it all happen. This just does not concur with my understanding of what God is like. In the story of Noah when evil things are happening God doesn’t tweak things at the edges to make things a little better instead God anguishes over having created humans, something where he is can’t just do anything to change the situation. He finally resorts to flooding the world – itself something so horrific he chooses never to do again. I think an explanation of why God doesn’t just come in and do something dramatic.

I believe that God still intervenes in the world but that intervention tends to be through people, God changing and empowering people to do great things. I can get my daughter to bed by giving her a horsey ride, fairly little effort on her behalf but she has to want to get on that horse.

The Beginning of another Alternative to Penal Substitution

I sometimes wonder if the only reason that Xns have successfully been able to tell their non Xn friends about penal substitution is because when they say “let me tell you about penal substitution” they’re expecting to hear a story about two lesbians and a sex toy.

Then when we start telling the story about the Nazi prison camp (a story used in Alpha courses) the one where a prisoner is about to be shot by the prison warden for some very minor offence. When an innocent fellow prisoner steps in and says shoot me instead, which the prison warden does. It’s a horrible shocking story. As shocking as anything Hollywood could come up with. Then as we say “Jesus is just like the innocent guy who dies”. I wonder is the quiet respectful response that we think people are giving is actually shock and astonishment as they process that we have just told a story about our loving God who is best represented by a cruel Nazi guard who is happy to kill an innocent man for a petty offence.

So how can we describe of the atonement

In my head at the moment I’ve got this image of Jesus, in his death, diving through the walls of reality as we know it and then coming back resurrected. This means that if we follow Jesus we will not die it means that God is bigger than what we see. The problem with being Christ like, being reconciled to God is that it seems to be all in vain but in Christ’s death and resurrection we are invited to take up our cross and follow him and be part of a new Kingdom that cannot be stopped even by death.

How I’ll flesh this out into a fuller atonement theory I’m not yet sure. It’s just a start. And I’m sure just like the penal substitution theory it will not completely explain all of the atonement, hopefully it might be just another face on the diamond that is all atonement narratives and that helps us to fully understand the atonement.

We Gotta Get Out Of This Place: A Theology Of Spirituals

I remember a friend of mine playing “Do Lord” at a churchy conference and apologising for the incorrect theology in the song. Like many old spirituals it looks forward to being whisked away. Tom Wright devotees will say that the song should be about resurrection and “Kingdom on earth as it is in heavan” minded people will argue that we need to start bringing the Kingdom of God to earth now. This particular had mostly people who would agree with both these tings, me included. I still sing these spirituals and in fact more so as my personal thrology has moved away from a “let’s all get a ticket to heaven” orientation. Not only because they are great tunes but because I appreciate the theology.

It’s easy to talk to a middle class western person, like me, about resurrection and re-creation. I can look around at my beautiful (slightly flawed) surroundings and imagine how this could be made perfect. For the poor of the spirituals living in terrible conditions this is much harder. Given the conditions they were in a recreated earth would be so different from what they knew that they might as well call it heaven.

Similarly, the thing that stops me being a part of some kind of kingdom of God change in the world is most usually my own apathy. For the poor of the spirituals they were powerless, the best they could hope for is that one day God would step in rescue them and take them to a better place. Which I might say is a recreated earth but I’m sure they would stand aghast at call heaven.

So I will continue to enjoy singing my “theologically incorrect” spirituals because I want to remember not only the tunes of these people but the conditions that they lived through that produced this wonderful music. For me it is a way for a brief musical moment of joining in solidarity with the poor.