Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Jesus' brain confusion workout

Photo compliments of http://blog.stack.com/
This morning as I read Mark 10 in preparation for one of my morning men's groups, I had a realization of the genius of Jesus' communication style. He often taught in parables and used cryptic language to ensure that it was only by faith that someone could understand his teaching. His stories were simple, relevant and incredibly poignant, yet, if a person didn't have an openness and a humble desire to learn, then they could be confusing or antagonistic, as was the case with the pharisees who "understood that he spoke the parable against them." (Mark 12:12) This was also to fulfill the scriptures, which predicted that "they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven." (Mark 4:12, referencing Isaiah 6:9, 10 and others).

I don't think Jesus taught this way to be cruel or keep some people from "getting it". In fact, I think it was the opposite. He so badly wanted people to repent and acknowledge him that he made a confrontation with the condition of a listener's heart unavoidable. Jesus chose his words carefully to maximize their impact, forcing hearers to wrestle with his meaning and engage not just intellectually, but spiritually. He graciously would explain the parables to his disciples, but not after letting even them stew for a bit. I believe this is why he seemed to always avoid people's expectations, knowing that a little mystery helps til the soil of the soul. Even his silence did this (remember Pilot?)!

This methodology was made clear to me in Mark 10 when Jesus heads for Jerusalem and continues telling his followers about his death. This is his third prediction in which, instead of being cryptic and metaphoric, he speaks with painfully clear words that he would suffer, laying out his betrayal step by step. And the disciples still don't get it! It's likely that Jesus repeats himself here, because in chapter 9, after the second of the three predictions, Mark tells us the disciples "did not understand the saying, and were afraid to ask him." (Mark 9:32) He's trained them to look for the real meanings behind the stories and just when I bet they started feeling confident in their ability to understand their Teacher, he switches things up. He can't really mean he's going to die, right, guys?

Why speak that way and switch up his style if he knew they wouldn't get it? I believe he knew when to play with their expectations in order to bring about a faith crisis. As a brilliant Teacher, Jesus was stretching their minds and hearts, whether it was with metaphor or simple, plain truth. In the workout world, we call it muscle confusion, which is the process of mixing up exercises to "confuse" the muscle fibers forcing them to compensate for the new movements and therefore to grow stronger. Jesus used brain confusion to make the soul grow stronger.

The question for each of us then is whether we are willing to wrestle with Jesus' teaching, whether we allow ourselves to enter into the mystery of the word of God, as confusing and convicting as it may be. Are we ready to hear? Hungry to see? It's much easier to walk away saying, "Oh, he didn't really mean that," or to be offended and disengage. Have you read Jesus' teaching on caring for the poor lately? Divorce? Homosexuality? His return? There's plenty to be confused and/or offended about, but the wrestling in humility to leave your pattern of thinking for His is where faith is found and trained, and where your soul grows strong.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

An Abortion Proclamation

Today, I retweeted this post by Kevin DeYoung (@RevKevDeYoung):
Everyone celebrating Roe should look in the eye a woman who just miscarried and tell her "It was just a clump of cells."
It posted to my Facebook page and I received a private passionate reply, one that I think missed the point of the post, likely due to the guyser-esque emotions that this topic incites. The reply simultaneously defended fetuses as more than "clumps of cells" and sympathized with abortion as an often necessary outlet for abused and shunned women. It obviously affected this person very deeply, provoking a patchwork of dramatic statements that awkwardly quilted an argument both compassionate for women who chose (or were forced) to abort their child and sorrowful over the tiny souls who suffered death even before they could experience birth.

I myself get quickly enflamed by the subject, as I see it as a direct affront to my Christian faith, which sees children as a blessing from God and prohibits murder. An abortion swims about in a broader pool of complex social problems and failures of love, which I find all very frustrating. So as I read the response, my own emotions were jostled, knowing that the words were likely motivated by a knowledge of the subject more acute than theory, but also feeling the conviction of a holy God who weeps and broils over humankind's insistence on violence and death in multitudinous forms. I'm sad this is even a discussion. I'm angry I have cause to be angry. I also feel compelled to speak some of my thoughts and counterpoints, hopefully with some clarity, and to share a call to anyone within reach of my community that may be considering abortion.

It was rightly pointed out by this writer that there are many ills in society that put some women in the position where they feel that terminating a pregnancy is the only viable option. This may include rape, incest, and relationships tainted by abuse, drugs, etc. These cases are not the majority, though. Numbers of women (this was passed on to me by a friend at Life International who talked with many of the hundreds of women who sought an abortion at the clinic that is now their ministry's headquarters in Grand Rapids, MI), chose to abort a child simply for the sake of convenience, like the thirty-something professional woman and her husband who terminated the child in her womb thinking it would too greatly compromise the perfect two child household they had already achieved.  To say that the vast majority of abortions are emergency or abuse related is simply false. Nor can I fail to point out that an abortion, regardless of the reason behind it, is a moral decision, which a woman (and her partner) must take responsibility for. I state this humbly recognizing that there are situations which are very complex and difficult, but the way out is never through a contrary evil. I was recently counseling with someone who said, "Sometimes the only way out of a sin is through another sin." That is bankrupt thinking and one (especially from the mouth of Christian) which belies a tragic absence of faith in the power, sacrifice, and love of our Savior.

This fighting evil with evil ethic is what is behind the suggestion that abortion prevents the tragic lives and criminality of the many unwanted children who are born to women who didn't seek or were prevented from seeking a termination. These children suffer rejection and abuse and degrade society, the argument goes, which apparently is enough to remove the dignity of their existence. It would be better for everybody if they were never born. When I hear this, I wonder how many of these should-have-been-aborted people, no matter how criminal, would agree. The fact that Roe v. Wade actually caused a drop in the crime rate has been convincingly hypothesized by the Levitt and Dubner, authors of Freakonomics (2009). But I still see no ethical justification for murder unless you are a hardcore classical utilitarian, a position that is generally untenable to any person with some appreciation for equality and a respect for basic human rights.

But wherever abortion lies on the ethical spectrum, the fact remains that there is a lot of brokenness out there motivating abortion and creating just-as-bad alternatives for the babies that get a chance at life. This is where people argue against the church especially. I agree that Christians ought to do a better job, both reaching people before violence and/or irresponsibility make abortion an option and supporting mothers and fathers who choose to have the child. However, to fault Christians/society for abortions because they have failed prevent or fix the problem is a tenuous argument. It would be like me saying it's your fault I burned down your house because you didn't stop me from getting a hold of matches. If you know I'm an arson, it would behoove you to take precautions, but I must bear the responsibility for my actions. And frankly, I think Christians do more to serve and support the poor, broken, and orphaned than just about any other demographic. I know for a fact my church would go to great lengths to support and love anyone wrestling with the emotional, physical, and logistical trauma of an unwanted pregnancy.

And so rather than just stew about the world's moral decline and continue to be a part of the stereotypical problem, here is my public declaration and promise to any person, man or woman, within my community's reach who might be considering an abortion: in the name of Jesus Christ my Savior, who laid down his life for me and to whom I am eternally accountable, I will lay down my life for you. If you need help, my family and my friends will be there for you. We will listen. We will cry. We will share. We will work. We will celebrate. We will adopt. We will change diapers. We will make meals. We will love you and we will find a way to help you do the right thing. We will not be perfect, but we will try and maybe if you try, too, we can both find hope and life.

I can be reached at http://recastchurch.com.

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Thanks for my wife, God

William Tyndale comments on Genesis 18–25, the making of the woman (emphasis mine):
The New Testament draws much of its teaching on the sexes from this crowning paragraph of the chapter, which is the dynamic, or dramatic, counterpart of 1:27, 28. The naming of the animals, a scene which portrays man as monarch of all he surveys, poignantly reveals him as a social being, made for fellowship, not power: he will not live until he loves, giving himself away (24) to another on his own level. So the woman is presented wholly as his partner and counterpart; nothing is yet said of her as childbearer. She is valued for herself alone.
I am so glad to be married to my wife. Don Filcek in his January 13, 2013, sermon sits on this important point and I found it impacting. He reminds us that woman wasn't made because men are dummies and need to be taken care of or even because the job of stewarding the earth was too much to handle. It was primarily a social need. It wasn't good to be alone (God's observation, not Adam's), and I love how Tyndale saw this: "he will not live until he loves." God is love and his breath in us gave us soul and the essence of our life is His love animating our existence, and the essence of marriage is and sharing of that love, that life. An opportunity to reciprocate life between two equals, caring and assisting each other, being intimate with and knowing another.I love you, Nicole. Thanks for being my side. Thanks for being my love.