Meta-Stories

Tuesday August 30th, In the year of our Lord 2011
My House, Caronport Saskatchewan
Just returned from work, 6:52PM
Weather = Gorgeous (and maybe a little on the warm side)

While surfing about the internet I ran into the testimony of a man who firmly believes that he lives with the spirit of Bobby Jordan and that Extra-Terrestrials are invading heaven and are also infiltrating our bodies. It got me thinking about how we interpret what is happening around us. Take a look if you like, it's about 10 minutes long.




It's amazing how we make sense of the world around us and to understand how we think. Even people who adhere to some really strange and different ideas about the world believe what they do for very real reasons. The fellow in this video makes reference to personal many experiences that weave together to make sense of what is happening around him. You, the viewer, probably question his view of the world because it doesn't exactly resemble a common understanding of how things are and tends to break the rules of what we call 'normal.' But let me assure you every person believes what they do for valid reasons, even if they are wrong. I don't want to go too much into Epistemology (the philosophy understanding how we know what we know) but I do want this video and your reaction to it to be an illustration.

What thoughts were going through your head as you watched this video? Mental Sickness maybe? Paranoia? This is probably a common response when confronted with such an 'alien' way of viewing the world, but it is not the only way. Personally I thought of demonic activity, especially when he talked about his human spirit friend, dark entities stalking him, and being aware of a reptilian extra-terrestrial inside of him. Then maybe there are those who read my postings who are syncratistic and have no problem interpreting this fellow's testimony into their own understanding of the world. Maybe what he sees as extra-terrestrials are actually manifestations of nature spirits, or the internal struggle of his soul and desires, or whatever else the reader might try to interpret them as.

The point is that all of us adhere to a meta-story of some sort. This fellow is part of a UFO / Spirituality conspiracy meta-story where everything is interpreted to have some sort of greater meaning. When he has a vivid dream or 'vision' he understands it to be a message for him or a revelation, not mental sickness. The materialists among us (those who only believe in material entities) know that this man is insane and needs help because we ghosts and visions and dark entities are not part of the meta-story that we believe in. As a Christian I may not doubt the authenticity of his experiences, but I can not agree with his conclusions. In a Christian meta-story (influenced by study of Scripture, tradition of the community of faith, reasoning of logic, and the Holy Spirit) human souls do not stay on earth but demons could pretend to be ghosts or spirits to deceive people. More importantly the Christian meta-story understands that God is all powerful and that not even aliens (if they do indeed exist) or dark spirits, or demons, or the devil himself, or anything at all can do anything against God or Heaven. Indeed, from my personal knowledge I can tell you that this video demonstrates textbook examples of demonic activity, from perceiving spirits to how the tones grow darker as time goes on the entire story smacks of classic demonic deception (and possibly mental sickness too). How do I come to this conclusion? Because it lines up with my own meta-story which has been shaped by Scripture, Christian teaching, and my own personal experiences.

Then there are those of us who think that we can not have any meta-story. It isn't possible. Even if you only believe things that are logically provable then logic and the tradition of logic is the authority in your meta-story, whereas personal experience and super-natural experience may be the authority in someone else's meta-story. This doesn't mean that at the end of the day that we're all right, but it does mean that everybody sees the world the way they do for very real reasons.

Thought is over
Supper is ready

Greg Out

Christianity, Morality, and Sanctification

Friday, August 26th, In the year of our Lord 2011
My House, Caronport Saskatchewan
Contemplating Morality, 7:52PM
Weather = cloudy and warm but becoming cool
Days are getting shorter


Depending on your spot in the world you may be familiar with the saying

"Real Christians don't smoke, don't chew, and don't hang out with girls who do!"

It's a fun little saying because it rhymes and picks up an interesting property of Christianity in North America. Evangelicalism, being derived from the Puritans with two traditions, the Weslian and the Whitfield, has always striven to worship God by living a 'good life.' As a movement in society we looked at how things like Alcohol and Gambling destroyed lives and tore apart families and said "NO!" We rejected these things as evils of the world to be avoided, unspiritual forbidden fruit of the enemy, and a sin to participate in. The Bible does not condemn Alcohol or Gambling the way that early Evangelicalism did, but it does inform us that our bodies are actually temples of the Holy Spirit (in which case we ought to respect them and not pollute them) and the verses for gambling aren't coming to me right now, but the reasons were derived from Scripture.

There have been many points in history where Evangelicalism has frowned upon certain activities and labeled them a new sin of our age and lumping them in with the great sins of all time: Smoking, Drinking, Tattooing, Piercings, Dungeons and Dragons, Murder, Rape, Sodomy, Incest, Witchcraft, Blasphemy, Molestation, the list goes on. While I think that there have been some very valid reasons why certain things are rejected by Evangelical Churches I also think that we often mistake cultural norm and good principles as "Holy Living."

There are many good reasons for Christians to attempt to live wholly moral lives. First of all it is the nature of all who are enlivened by the Holy Spirit to be obedient to God and to do what pleases Him. Immediately we are confronted with a standard of morality, from our culture, the Church, and our own conscience to do what is good and right and to avoid sin. We seek to be perfect because we love and respect God and so live in reverent fear, the Fear of the Lord as described in Proverbs as the beginning of wisdom. This is a natural tragedy! Natural in that nothing is more natural to the Christian. A tragedy in that the God of Christianity is a God of freedom, who has fulfilled all requirements of righteousness for those who believe, who took the very rules and standards that Christians are still trying to follow today and nailing them to a cross, completely defeating them, making fellowship and community with God possible! Christianity is not about moral living, although it is the only natural thing for a Christian to begin to attempt, but about freedom and love of God. Before almighty God, all Christians are saved by grace, from the fully sanctified saint who craps harps made of pure gold to the self-injuring drug addict murderer! There is nothing, no amount of good living, which puts one above the other.

That is not to say, however, that Christians should not become 'better people' through faith and good works. The Christian doctrine of Sanctification is that God, in his Holy Spirit, moves us to do good and toward perfection. This perfection we move towards does not in any way effect our standing in God's eyes, all are saved by His grace alone. What it does do is free us to further love and know God and serve others. In working through things like anger, distrust, pain, disappointment, addictions, and other spiritual strongholds that are not of God, we are freed from the pain and power these things once had over us and new ways of knowing God (as directed by the Holy Spirit in agreement with all previous Revelation and not our own ideas) suddenly dawn upon us and we are also able to help those who are still under the pain and suffering of what once held us back. God moves us forward, not so that we can justify ourselves, but for his own glory and for our good, because it is better to live wise and righteous instead of foolish and sinful.


All that aside, I also think that we as Christians get confused and label certain activities, like smoking for example, as a something that REAL Christians just don't do. We build a moral framework that is constructed from Biblical roots and applying it to today's time and culture. Suddenly something that the Bible never even mentions is a forbidden sin that will earn you the scorn of the moral church. Sometimes this is indeed a practical and accurate application of the principles and original Spirit of Scripture, and sometimes it is just us reacting to our culture and making rules like the Pharisees which Jesus condemned. Sometimes these rules are very instructive for authentic spiritual and holistic growth, and sometimes they become a quagmire of 'avoiding the appearance of evil' and a condemning finger that is not ever what God intended.

I think that morality and sanctification are not the same thing. The two are related, but they are not the same. Morality has more to do with cultural perspective and a code of do's and do not's. Sanctification is the manifestation of the true freedom in Christ Jesus, not freedom from this or from that, but freedom to do and to move towards the perfection and holiness of God who lives within us whom we seek to emulate and please. So perhaps morality, although it be the most natural thing for a Christian to do, is not necessary, or even a part of what Christianity is. Indeed, morality is the counterfeit to Sanctification, which is a foundation of Christianity.

Lament the Passing of Time

Friday August 19, In the year of our Lord 2011

Distance Learning Office, Caronport Saskatchewan

Remembering to post what I wrote yesterday, 4:24PM

Weather = Cool

The passing of the older generation has always been an unsettling thing I think. Loved ones, family memories, stories, leaders, an entire age is always leaving us. I realized with a heavy heart the reality of this yesterday. No one I knew died, nor was there any news story, I was just thinking. The older generations now, the Baby Boomers and before, are coming to the sunset of their years. My grandparents whom I love dearly, will eventually be gone, and so will their memories, as will the memories of everyone from their time.

I think that the lament for this passing generation should be great, even more so than usual. They remember a time before electricity. Many of them are the last to remember growing up in a small farm house lit by lanterns in their childhood. They worked hard, very very hard some of them. They rode horses instead of cars, they remember the depression or at least the effects it had on their parents, they witnessed more change than has ever happened in the history of humankind. Their time is almost over, and the memories of an entire epoch in history go with them.

And now I wonder what memories will be lost with me and my generation. A childhood without internet? The birth of computers? A physical postal service? A time before the one world order? It hardly seems comparable to what my grandparents will one day take with them. I must learn their stories so that I can tell them to my children and my grandchildren lest it all be lost. Perhaps early lament, even now, is also appropriate.

Random Thought

Friday August 5th, In the year of our Lord 2011

My House, Caronport Saskatchewan

Relaxing after work / supper, 7:24 PM

Weather = clear and warm

I had a random thought just now. What is the light that draws people to Christ in my current spot in time and space. Obviously The Holy Spirit is what ultimately draws people to Christ, but what generally impresses folks about Christianity right now where I am? It isn't the authority of The Church, that ship sailed long ago. It isn't sound argument or rhetorical debate. I actually think that it might be maturity and (of course) love.

Love has always been the greatest commandment to all who fear God and seek to serve Him. Love is the command that Jesus gave his disciples and Paul gave the early church. Love is what we need to be characterized by. Real love is the universal language that everyone understands and it is always in short supply.

But maturity (which was my original thought) is what impresses people these days I think. There is no shortage of spiritual experiences, and church authority tends to make people really angry instead of inspire awe and respect. Arguing people into the kingdom never really worked anyway, not even when it was popular some 50 years ago. What I think really impresses people is integrity, trustworthiness, and wisdom. Or maybe it has more to do with the people I hang around with. Hmm...

Well that was the end of my thought and it didn't really evolve into anything else. I'd be interested to hear what you the reader thinks.

How to do Theology: Looking at Faith and Doctrine

Tuesday August 2, In the year of our Lord 2011

Briercrest Continuing and Distance Education Office, Caronport Saskatchewan

Posting something that I've been working on for a while, 2:31 PM

Weather = Sunny and Warm (unstable)

Over the last few months I have been working on a careful (and slow) reading of Stanley Grenz’s 20th Century Theology: God & the World in a Transitional Age. I know that such books do not really lead to a full understanding of first source material that they evaluate, but I had made a promise to read this book for Senior Theology Seminar with David Guretzki so I had to read it someday. I am glad that I did though. Looking at all sorts of different streams within Christian theology made me stop and think about my own tradition and my personal understanding of theology in general contrasted with how others have understood theology around me. This post will be a manifestation of those thoughts.

First of all I think it is worth noting that I see within theology several different facets that tie together and affect the entire discipline. First of all there is an understanding of God, who He [or as the less Biblically based might have it, She or It] is, God’s purpose, God’s will, basically an entire understanding of (or theology of) God. Secondly there is the understanding of humanity, it’s purpose, eternal status, and how we as human beings should relate to each other and God. Thirdly there is an understanding of how the imminent of today should interact with the traditions of the past, the way things are now (culturally), and how to proceed into the future.

I suppose this would be a three dimensional dialogue of God and man through time. These are just thoughts though, and I am in no way setting out some sort of theological method or a consistent personal view on the topic. Hmm…

So what do I make of all this then? As I look at my own outlook on these topics I realize that my reasoning and views are quite simple and very much faith based. I look at the mighty streams of theology (Hume, Hegel, Schleiermacher, Barth, Tillich, Bonheoffer, Rahner, Kung, Liberation, Narrative, etc.) and think to myself that I am indeed a very simple person. These outstanding theological giants had such a keen understanding and a glowing conviction of theology. All of these have been established on axioms of truth and as I read through each section I realized that in many senses all of them were correct and all of them must also be wrong. They are all correct in that all of them have a specific focus in which they hit upon a nail which is foundational to an understanding of theology, whether it be Hume’s critique of pure reason which moved theology out of the grasp of science and history, Karl Barth’s wholly transcendent God, or Feminist Theology’s drive to make a just and fair society in light of the Christian Gospel. They are all wrong in that in no way and at no time has anyone nor will anyone ever be able to fully understand God, humanity, and how the relationship has progressed through time. I find this encouraging because I know that such a standard is impossible, which means that I am not going to hold myself to it. This does not mean that I will not try my utmost hardest to understand correctly these things, nor is it an excuse to shirk the serious responsibilities in undertaking theology.

Traditionally I have been brought up as a conservative Evangelical, maybe even Neo-orthodox, a tradition that acknowledges the omnipotence of God, sinfulness of man, existence of miracles, divine inspiration of Scripture, and the emphasis on personal faith in the literal historical Jesus Christ as Lord and savior. Growing up I went to Sunday School, Church, Youth Group, and my parents played an active role in my spiritual formation. I believed what I saw as truth all around me, that God is good, that God cares, that God loves me, and that God answers prayer. Mine has been a life touched by the faith of others and empowered by a personal faith in Christ, albeit a simple one. I have always believed that when I stop to pray to God, either out loud or quietly in my mind or heart, that God hears every prayer and answers every prayer. (not necessarily with a yes or no answer) When things happened that were hurtful or that I didn’t understand and especially if they were outside of my control I would trust God and put active faith in Him. Sometimes I wondered if my social-economic status of being a middle class white person in Canada was maybe more to do with God’s apparent answers to prayer, but after asking God about this I had the very strong impression that I was indeed in a very favorable position on this Earth, but that was not mine to choose and that God provides, for me as well as for those who have nothing. It was not for me to know how or if it was just and good, only that God does indeed take care of the sparrows and lilies, and that human kind which is made in His image, is worth so much more than birds or grass to Him. I thought then that maybe this impression was also a result of my social-economic status and a basic reaction of faith, maybe not from God at all. After coming to this point repeatedly in my life I have always had to dismiss it as an unhelpful notion. If God does indeed speak to me then He is God and God will know best how to communicate so that I understand Him. If I mistake my own feelings / intuitions as God’s voice to me then it won’t be long before I am corrected by God or the community of faith. I am of a natural disposition to listen and consider and always pray for wisdom and understanding which is the equivalent of inviting God to come and tell you where you went wrong. But what if all of this understanding, even the reasoning I just state, all a façade for the bleak truth that God does not exist. Well, once again there is nothing I can do about that. Feuerbach’s critique about how we create god in our own image based on the understanding we have is indeed correct, but it does not in any way nullify the possibility of the transcendent God Yahweh. Pascal’s Wager is enough convince me with cold logic if nothing else which is the wiser of the two choices. And then we come to faith, where God makes himself known to you and you just know. It is different from emotion and intuition, although these can be confirmation of faith. It is as Barth says, that God allows himself to be known to you by giving himself to you as subject as well as creator of faith and that unless God gives this faith to you, you cannot have it or even understand it.

After going through the book I look at the axioms and rulings of theologies and shake my head. It is necessary to always attempt to nail down what reality is and how it should work. Unfortunately (or maybe very fortunately) we will never fully succeed. God’s truth is both eternal and subjective. It is eternal in the sense that God’s ways are indeed higher than our ways and that some truths (like the incarnation of Christ Jesus) will always be eternally true. It is also subjective in that God as person decides truth, truth as subjective to the person that is God, but also subjective in how God works with human kind in general as well as each individual person specifically. I believe that this is why there are so many different strands within the Christian faith, the essence of truth, even revealed truth, is both eternal-objective and temporal-subjective. God has become man and has entered into time-space, community, even a very specific time-space community but the manifestation of that reality interacts with the time-space community which it enters into. When the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles just as it did the Jews the Gentiles did not for that reason become Jews like their Lord Jesus, they remained Gentiles and God’s Holy Spirit worked mightily through them! Indeed, the Apostle Paul who witnessed the Resurrected Christ became all things to all men so that some might be saved, he did not follow the strict method of religion as the Judaizers but lived by faith in that God would Speak into the context of the audience and communicate eternal truth in subjective ways.

Historically the church has created doctrines in an effort to understand God and put limits on what is considered authentic Christianity. I believe this has been a natural and helpful process and the only real responsible thing to do in light of the incredible task of theology. The struggle though is to be faithful to this task without putting limits on God, yet we must do that very thing lest the concept of God be confused with ‘inanimate force,’ ‘unintelligible,’ or ‘the essence of being.’ So we create doctrines (or parables) that seek to explain with authority who God is, who we are, and what our purpose is. These are set out with the very noblest and highest intentions but I fear that they will always fall short. And here I begin to doubt myself. I am not quite willing to side completely with Barth on this issue because I think that there are some basic things that are just always wrong and cannot rationalize (even in faith) how some doctrines could not hold true. It would seem that even the doctrine of God’s freedom from doctrines runs afoul its own reef. And now I have confused myself, there has to be a better way of saying what I mean without contradictions.

But yes, we create an understanding of theology, basic tenants for the Community of Faith but God transcends them. This must be so, because the focus of all of Scripture and Revelation has never been to academicize the God-human relationship but to bring life characterized by faith. Our focus should not be on doctrine, but on an active participation with Jesus through the Holy Spirit in the world today. Doctrine without faith is dead religion. However, one should not just ignore doctrine out of hand either! Indeed, we should seek to follow and understand doctrine as a norm for our personal understandings of all aspects of theology. We should seek after knowledge and wisdom of God as though it were more valuable than great treasure! Understanding sound doctrine is just as important as the basic necessities of looking both ways before crossing a street and making sure to wipe after relieving one’s self. It would be foolish to try and start over as though the meditations of two thousand years of Christian thinkers (to say nothing of the movements of the Holy Spirit for two thousand years) are rubbish to be discarded. We cannot separate ourselves from these doctrines or the cultural influences inherent within them, but neither should we fear that the future of true Christianity depends on our puny understanding of eternal truths. Unless such an undertaking is done in faith and its results are empowered by the Holy Spirit then this is the birthplace for much heresy.

We as Christians must live in our times and places on this earth. We cannot live with a 1st Century understanding of theology because the dialogue of the 1st Century has moved on to include other important concepts while also dropping concepts that were important in the 1st Century. But once again, the rules of how to live Christian lives with believers or nonbelievers are not what we are supposed to be focused on. We are supposed to live in faith and act according to that faith in our time and place. The dialogue of our own societies is always shifting, a constant engagement between affirming what is good and trying to change what is not alongside believers and nonbelievers who are doing the exact same thing who all have a different opinion about what is good and what is not. Culture is subjective, so the workings of the Holy Spirit will be different in different circles. In some places God will work miracles and revivals, in some other places God will work quietly through the community of faith. Sometimes this is because God is working with the social environment because that is how they understand how things work, and sometimes God chooses to work against those understandings. In Pentecostal and Apostolic circles the laying on of hands has become a spiritual symbol of God’s work, and indeed God has chosen to work miracles through the laying on of hands, but in Catholic circles it is the symbol of the cross, and in Baptist circles it is prayer and use of Scripture. The essence is active faith, the form varies according to the understanding of the people exercising that faith. Right when we think we’ve nailed down how we think Christian living ought to be done for all people at all times we’ve missed the mark.

I’ve let this post sit for too long and now my thoughts are scattered again.

More later.

Greg Out