I'm sitting here on a lay-over in Miami blogging at the Admiral's Club and feeling extremely sleeeeepy. Eric Noah Wilson and I are meeting with the folks in Orlando today about the ZOE conference there next summer. We fly back tonight.
So, last night I watched the conclusion of the special dramatization of the 9.11 events and then some news coverage that followed on ABC. Knowing I was hopping on an airplane at 6am the next morning, I needed about 10 Lexapro tablets when it was all said and done. FOR THE LOVE. If the Taliban wanted to create terror, they could have just skipped the bombing and gone straight to Charles Gibson and the 20/20 team. I am not under any misguided notions that we are safe from attack. In fact, I believe it's likely that they are always planning some new attack. But, there was no shortage of sensationalism in their reports last night.
The sad thing is...flying, living post 9.11 causes me to look with different eyes. It makes me more paranoid, more suspicious, more prone to profiling. I hate that.
As I watched last night it occurred to me again what a crazy upside down kingdom we belong to in Jesus. Jesus...the guy who chose not to wage war. Jesus, the guy who asks me to turn my cheek. Jesus, the Son of God who gave His life for us so that we wouldn't have to die. Now that...that is crazy, upside down, hard to comprehend, self-less love. And then he asks us to love our enemies? What could that possibly mean? Surely he didn't mean for us to follow His example. Surely. hmmmm. Really, Lord?
Something else occurred to me last night watching this movie. These men and women (terrorists, Taliban, etc) who become martyrs...they do it out of love for God...love for God and hatred for those who oppose their view. (does that sound like anyone else to you?) There was a line in the movie last night saying, "Christians teach that we should turn the other cheek. We will give our God more love than that. We will wage war for our God."
I realize that this is a very sensitive issue, but doesn't it seem like we sort of live somewhere between those two points of view? We have not fully embraced Jesus in his admonition to love our enemies and turn the other cheek. Neither have we decided to wage a holy war. But our culture certainly seems to be caught in this weird place of picking and choosing as we walk around with WWJD wrist bands. It makes me uncomfortable. I do it too.
The longer I live, the more I realize just how much Jesus is really calling me to. Some days I'm ready, other days I struggle. I'm just so incredibly grateful for his love that is transforming all of us. Thank you, God! You don't leave us like You found us! Please, Lord, continue your healing, transformative power in my heart. I desperately need it.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I'll take your first example and change it like this...
"Jesus says turn the other cheek, but I'm going to stand with signs spewing hatred and call you names out on the city streets showing just how much His love can mean."
It sickens me.
As overt as their actions are...I have my own. We are so in need of mercy, aren't we?
"their" meaning the hate spewers.
I think that sometimes in the struggle to figure out what "being Jesus" means in our culture, it feels as though we "live somewhere between those two points of view". How often have we wished that things were black or white... and how often have we personally benefitted from the fact that they are not?
And in the meantime, we struggle. What does "being Jesus" really mean? Does it mean allowing the local bullies to terrorize the schoolyard without consequence, in the name of "peace", or does it mean sacrificing your life in defense of those who cannot defend themselves? Does it mean that evil reigns unchecked in this world because ours is a "spiritual kingdom", or does it mean that Christians become engaged enough in their culture to use their God-given influence, talent, and yes- power- to benefit the world around them, so that others might also have the freedom to choose Christ? The sad part is that this struggle is waged by fallen, fallible people like us who get it wrong as often as we get it right. God help us.
Let's also remember that turning the other cheek is not a whimpering, simpering reaction to being struck down. We have to remember that this is given in the context of loving enemies, for the Jews (the subjugated) to love the Romans (the oppressors).
The passage is itself reads: 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.
For someone to strike you on the right cheek is basically (for lack of a better term) a bi...slap. A right handed person is hitting you with the back of his hand. It is a mark of degredation. To turn the other cheek is to turn the left cheek to them and say, "Strike me like a person, not an animal." To turn the other cheek is an act of defiance to the person in power.
How does that apply with terrorism? I'm not sure, but it does call for love.
We have boiled it down to black and white. It's called religion. And as Bono says, "...religion has often gotten in the way of God."
Justin, I understand your point about the Lamont book, but if I put down a book everytime I disagreed with the author, I'd have missed a lot of good books. The first ten pages made you think and feel deeply. Sounds like good art to me.
And yet "civil rights" would not exist had they not been won by the blood of people who believed that there are times when you have to fight for what you believe. The civil rights movement was made possible first by those defending our Republic established under the Constitution, and later, by those who believed that the constitution granted equality to people of all colors (my apologies for simplifying a very complex war in this way). We have the luxury to sit at our computers freely debating these issues and critizing others' "violence" because other people fought for our right to do so. Freedom, whether spiritual or physical, always comes at a price. Although Jesus repeatedly taught that his mission on earth was to establish a spiritual kingdom, I also don't see God (aka Jesus) portayed in the Bible as a pacifist. The hard part is knowing the difference between a "time for war and a time for peace".
Since this originally began as a post on the events of 9-11, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts about the people who fought back on Flight 93. What exactly would "turning the other cheek" mean in that context?
Turning the other cheek is a about self defense, not the defense of others. Jesus is calling for us not to defend ourselves. There is plenty of Biblical material that calls for the defense of others, especially the poor, the orphaned, the widowed, etc.
Phil's comment about the kind of slap Jesus is talking about is something I have heard before. However, I think it’s bogus. From my understanding (my seminary classes and readings in ancient literature) there is no evidence that this or that sort of slap meant anything in Roman/Greek/Hebrew culture. It might have, but no one knows. It did mean something in the Renaissance, if that helps.
Sorry Phil, but I think that is probably an illustration invented by priests and preachers who were uncomfortable with the possible pacifistic implications of the text.
I agree that it's possible that you're correct, Thomas, but isn't the fact that Jesus uses a specific example as to the cheek significant? I'm not seminary trained or even some kind of priest type person ;-) but it seems like if weren't important, he wouldn't have specifically pointed out the right cheek.
I also agree that it's not about retaliation on our part. I think we're on the same page there.
As an artist, I believe the line is drawn on "good art" when it encourages hate.
Every good and perfect gift is from God himself. "Good" instead a relative term here. It's pretty specific. Good comes from Him. Hatred does not.
Anne Lamott long ago crossed the line in her political rantings shrouded as spiritual mediations. Justin you were right to avoid her book. I read "Traveling Mercies" and that was enough for me. Try visiting her blog. Odd, I seldom see Jesus there, but often see vile hatred and political rantings in the name of our Father.
Brandon, I agree with you. This type of behavior and hate spewing sicken me.
I understand that spiritually, it should not matter where you live; God expects you to serve wherever he places you. But the implications of living within a free society with the influence, wealth, resources, and power- even military power- which we enjoy are enormous. I believe Christians have a responsibility to the world around us, to defend the defenseless and "stand up for those being hurt". Sometimes that means nonviolent protest. And sometimes that means defending what is right with more than words. The men and women who actually *are* laying down their lives in the middle east would take exception with the insinuation that somehow their sacrifice does not count as "laying down your life".
Are you really prepared to say that never engaging in military conflict is "peacemaking"? Do you really believe that peace will result or the hurting people in the world will be helped if our country simply tries to "talk nice" to the terrorists? Perhaps we should have allowed Hitler to have his way, or Emperor Hirohito to have his way... Should we have stood by with our "nonviolent protests", praying for peace to come while millions througout Europe and Asia were being slaughtered at their command? I'm sure those people would have appreciated the thought. Or should Christians simply be thankful that there are secular armies willing to wage war, so that we don't have to get our hands dirty?
We struggle with how to accomplish the Kingdom purposes on this earth and what it really means to "love your neighbor" and "turn the other cheek" in the world we live in, just like we struggle with a multitude of other NT issues- issues that have real spiritual casualties, if not physical ones. The answers have never been easy, nor are they now. We will have to agree to disagree, and I am certain that, as usual, neither side of the debate has it all right.
Thanks for the food for thought, guys; I have a lot of respect for you all, even if I don't agree *all* the time! :-)
Sandy, you seem to imply that justice mostly comes by force or the taking of lives? Although I agree that war may be necessary, our purpose in war must be clear and just and our actions in war must be clear and just.
Why do we have the right to choose a war full of death, force and hatred on the entire middle east when we don't give the right or power to the genocides in Africa from a small "majority" of individuals?
I think after we decided we weren't gonna win the Korean War, we've clearly and justly kept peace there. It may not be right in our eyes, but we must remember the Jews wouldn't have been considered treated justly in the eyes of Americans today. Heck we'd wage war against everyone and then God wouldn't have done what He wanted to do.
To Snapshots comment, I'm not trying to defend Anne Lamont, but if language or situations that sickened me were my criteria for putting down a book, I would have missed out on a world of challenging thought and deep personal questioning of my own faith that resulted in much growth. I'd also have missed out on some great reading. Huck Finn for one, and as the father of two daughters, Genesis 19:30-38 for another. I just read that last night and it made my stomach turn.
You certainly have the freedom to read, watch and listen to whatever you want, but sometimes I have to see the picture of the starving child to get off my backside and help feed her. God has spoken deeply to me through John Irving, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Stephen Sondheim as well as C.S Lewis, Oswald Chambers and even on occasion, even Max Lucado.
Some great discussion here, guys. Thanks! Sorry to post and bail. Was traveling literally all day. Our flight got in from Orlando at 9:45pm last night.
Sandy, I really appreciate your words. I've struggled with those same things...still do. Justin, your thoughts are important too. Some of them are similar to my own. As I mentioned, it's absolutely not black and white...at least to me. And that's the difficult part. It would be a lot easier if it were just spelled out.
My goal here wasn't to give a directive. It was more to open the creaking, slimy doors of my brain to try and air out an issue I'm wrestling with. I know...it's a scary place. But these days, it can use all the fresh air it can get! :)
We all have our convictions and it's good to share them. I think it actually gets us down the road with communal discernment. I'm encouraged by all of you. And, I really appreciated your comment Sandy about not having to always agree. Thanks!
B
Snowball...thanks for the advice. Let's rename your blogger name, "Captian Obvious".
We did that because we had to fly American. Otherwise we would have taken the easy SWA flights.
Post a Comment