This sermon was delivered on April 26th, 2015 at West Loop UBF.

Introduction

A bit of disclosure is in order here: Since September of last year, I haven’t been attending church on a weekly basis. I’ve attended Catholic Mass a few times and have taken communion and have also had ongoing conversations about the Bible and life with others and have done my own personal study on biblical topics, but nothing like being plugged into a faith community on a regular basis. To some this may be disconcerting or off-putting, like who takes a half a year off of church and then preaches a sermon? But I thank Rhoel for reaching out to me and befriending and simply talking to me on a human-to-human level. One thing that I really appreciate about the West Loop community is you all’s desire to understand and practice the gospel in a loving manner. So I thank you all for accepting me and giving me the privilege to speak here today. I don’t take this lightly and I don’t want to waste your time, but instead I want to hopefully communicate an important point about the gospel that I think we, including myself, often miss. I’ll attempt to make my point in thirty minutes or less and end with a nice cherry on top which is an example from my own life.

What Does it Mean to be “Spiritual” Anyway?

I mentioned how I’ve been taking some time away from organized religion. I felt as though I needed to do this because I was growing increasingly weary of experiencing this disconnect, that I observed, which exists between the concepts of spirituality or “otherness”, that is something beyond our physical world, and the very material reality that we live in today. To put it bluntly (and with an example to follow), I got tired of sitting in church week after week and hearing things that sounded lofty and spiritual, but were not portable to my everyday life. And believe you me; this was not the fault of the church per se, because if anyone knows me, I love lofty ideas. This is more of an internal battle or beef within me.

At some point last year, the big question that I asked myself was what impact does spirituality have on us on a daily basis, that is, how does this line up with our present-day, physical reality in an impactful way? The form of Christianity that I was largely familiar with was one in which that aforementioned disconnect reached a tipping point on some key issues for me. For instance, in Western Evangelicalism, we are often taught as of first importance, that Jesus has forgiven us of our sins once and for all. Now, I don’t dispute this at all and it’s something that I certainly rejoice in. But a type of thought pattern which was pervasive in my own life was this idea that as believers, we are forgiven largely as individuals and as long as we individually are forgiven, then we are right with God and all is well with the universe. The problem with this is that we don’t sin in a vacuum; often times, we wound each other through our sins and if we are honest with ourselves it’s not enough, that when we sin against someone, to say “you know what, Jesus has forgiven me of my sins, so let’s leave it at that and move on”. On one level that’s true, but on another don’t we actually need to seek reconciliation with the other person; isn’t forgiveness at the cross meant to be an entryway into new relationships built on honesty and repentance? Or on the flip side, if I or someone else is wounded by another, we may often think to ourselves, “Jesus alone will heal me of my wounds by way of his sacrifice on the cross”. We tend to both diagnose and treat our wounds in this way; we overly-spiritualize and try to superstitiously wish away our real hurt and pain. And some wounds are spiritual, but there is also the very real, nitty-gritty task of processing our human emotions.  And still the task of reconciliation, and in some cases seeking restitution from the one that wounded us, remains. Don’t you think? But like I said, there is often this disconnect in Christianity where we are encouraged to see ourselves as these spiritual beings who only need spiritual solutions to our very real problems.

I also thought about what David said in Psalm 51:4, where he says “Against you, you only, have I sinned…” While it is true that all sin is, in a sense, against God there is a very real human dimension to what David did. After all, Nathan spells out what he did very bluntly: He killed Uriah the Hittite with sword and stole his wife. Furthermore, David wasn’t even man enough to murder Uriah himself, but indirectly used the Ammonites to do so. Nathan doesn’t pull any punches in regard to the very real people that David hurt; he doesn’t put a spiritual spin on the situation in any way, shape or form.

I’ll tell you what’s also an even bigger problem with this over-spiritualization: Jesus never advocated this. Look at what he says (right after the Lord’s Prayer, which is largely seen as a “spiritual” exercise between a believer and God):

“14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.” – Matt 6:14, 15

Very interesting that Jesus would say this; in the Lord’s Prayer, forgiveness does not appear to be the primary thrust of the prayer, yet Jesus deems it important enough to add a sternly worded epilogue specifically about forgiveness between God and others.*

And consider Jesus’ words here:

22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

It seems to me that Jesus is connecting these “spiritual” acts of forgiveness and worship between God and man to the human relationships that exist in our everyday lives. It’s as if he’s saying that no matter what our relationship is like with God, if we aren’t treating the real human beings in our everyday lives with integrity and compassion, our spirituality doesn’t really amount to much.  And this makes sense because think about who Jesus is; he is God incarnate or God made flesh. He is the very intersection between this spiritual otherness that we define as God and human beings just like ourselves. It’s as if God is saying in Jesus that our spirituality is inherently tied to our physical world, our own humanity and the communities that we are involved in.

Incarnational Ministry vis a vis Empathetic Communication

This incarnational aspect of God is what I want to “flesh” out through Acts 17. This is one of my favorite passages in the Bible for in this we are given a vivid example of God’s desire to communicate spiritual truths to us on our human level.

This was during Paul’s second missionary journey, which transpired between the years 50-52 A.D., (he did three in total) and before he arrived at Athens, he was driven from first Thessalonica and then Berea (where he famously met the “Noble Bereans”).  He was driven out of those regions by Jews who wanted to destroy his gospel-preaching efforts. For the sake of Paul’s safety, he was escorted to Athens with the hope that Timothy and Silas, his traveling companions, would join him there at a later time.

Upon arriving in Athens, Paul is deeply bothered by all of the idolatrous statues in the city. Surely Paul understood that it was Rome’s practice to subsume the religions of those that they subjugated. It was to keep the idea of Pax Romana (which was really not peace) intact. But in Athens it was overkill; one ancient is quoted as saying that Athens had over 30,000 idols [1]. I’m sure that Paul was alarmed by the fact that the Jews in Athens could possibly be syncretizing with the culture around them and thus missing the message of the gospel contained in the Holy Scriptures. Think about how many times that Isaiah denounces idol-worship. In fact, this is one of the key points of his sermon to the philosophers later on. So Paul takes the initiative to engage the Jews and the Greek converts to Judaism (called God-fearing Greeks) in discussions namely concerning the Messiah using the OT. From what Luke records, the idea of the resurrection of Jesus particularly piqued the interest of some of the Greek philosophers and so they begin debating with him. They probably regard him as some unsophisticated, primitive Jew (because remember, Greek culture at the time was hot and Athens in particular was seen as an intellectual bastion of sorts.) They probably argued, “Hey, we have all sorts of gods who are immortal, but an obscure Jewish guy from Palestine sure ain’t one of ‘em.” But nonetheless some of the people were interested in what Paul had to say (Luke notes that a lot of people were content to simply pontificate about the latest ideas at the time). So they took him to a place called the Areopagus, which functioned as a place of settling matters of jurisprudence.

Paul seizes this opportunity, taking the floor and launching into his gospel message. Notice how he begins his dialogue. “People of Athens! I see that in every way are very religious.” This was actually a commendation, because he affirmed the fact that they were somehow seeking to worship or reach out to God. And also notice the fact that he addressed them as Athenians. He didn’t open up his sermon by saying, “Non-descript people group who I’m preaching to, repent or burn in hell!” Rather he started with a positive affirmation which was actually quite true.

Next, Paul exploits one of their idols, using it as an entry point to introduce his God to them. He says, hey you guys have this inscription to an unknown God, and wouldn’t you know I happen to know something about a God that you guys don’t know about so take a listen to this:

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

This is such a profound message of God’s initiative to reach out to us. He corrects the idea of man’s tendency to make God in his own image, thus fashioning idols and temples and so forth; he turns this notion completely on its head by saying that no, we are in fact made in God’s image. And he’s not dependent on us, endlessly requiring our servitude so that he may be both appeased and sustained. Furthermore, he’s not a vending machine that only blesses us when we do something for him. Rather, out of his own loving initiative, he is the one that ultimately serves us and gives life and provision to us. And look at what Paul is doing; he’s essentially giving the message of the entire OT without using OT quotes or references. He understands that his audience doesn’t have the OT as a reference point, so he communicates biblical truths in a way that they can understand. In fact, he intersperses quotes from their own poets and philosophers. Aratus, a Cilician Stoic philosopher and poet remarked that we are God’s offspring. And the Cretan philosopher Epiminedes wrote that “in him we live and move and have our being.” These are beautiful statements which completely undermine the sentiment that we have come about by happenstance; indeed, God was intimately involved in everything from choosing our skin color and ethnicity to determining where we would be born; God infuses his own image into us so that through interacting with each other, we would come to know him in his fullness (theologically, this is called the variegated or multi-faceted nature of God). So it is no mistake that we are who we are, rather it is God’s perfect wisdom to put us in the optimal position where we could reach out to him and know him.

Finally, Paul closes with the revelation of God’s appointed judge, Jesus Christ. He will rule the earth with justice and judge every act; he will put everything in its proper place. A foreshadow of this kind of perfect adjudication is found in the resurrection and thus vindication of his Son; he was unjustly put to death, but God rose him from the dead in effect reversing the edict of guilt showing that he had power over such definitive decrees. Not even the stark reality of death can overcome God’s desire to mete out justice. In fact, Christ is justice personified and that is why he prevails even over death. This is a massive comfort to those who long for justice in this world; those who are involved in combating sex trafficking and tackling civil rights and equality issues. In the person of Christ, we see that mankind’s ultimate trajectory is toward becoming a perfectly just and loving being like him.

Through a comparison of the tenets of Epicureanism and Stoicism (link to ppt slide), we can see specifically how Paul contextualized the gospel to his audience. (The red and blue circled items are tenets which line up with Christianity while the strike-throughs do not) Note a few things here: 1) Paul affirms some of the positive aspects found in each philosophy (namely, free will and determinism). And he corrects some things which are vital to understanding Christianity and knowing the incarnational nature of God. For instance, God is theistic rather than deistic and understanding our existence does not come from abstract wisdom (logos) but rather through knowing God the person in Christ (Logos). Paul has a keen understanding of his audience and out of love, he can empathize with some of their beliefs and make a meaningful connection with them.

How God has Contextualized the Gospel to Me

Several years back I developed something called the Evil Survey, where I simply ask students about the problem of evil. After all, this is an issue that the gospel seeks to rectify and it hits home with everyone, religious or not. So the method is to simply ask questions and understand people’s world views. It doesn’t use any biblical language and avoids asking both leading and loaded questions. Through this, I’ve had many eye-opening conversations with people from all kinds of backgrounds including believers, atheists, Muslims, Hindus, agnostics, former believers and so forth. Notably, what I’ve come to learn through this process of listening and asking questions is that 1) people genuinely long for someone to listen to and either challenge or affirm their worldviews and 2) I have to respect where people are at in a given moment in their lives. It’s as if God has been evangelizing me or teaching me the gospel through this, making me more human in the process. And this comports with a statement made by the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer,

“The first service that one owes to others in the fellowship consists in listening to them. Just as love to God begins with listening to His Word, so the beginning of love for the brethren is learning to listen to them. It is God’s love for us that He not only gives us His Word but also lends us His ear.

So it is His work that we do for our brother when we learn to listen to him. Christians, especially ministers, so often think they must always contribute something when they are in the company of others, that this is the one service they have to render. They forget that listening can be a greater service than speaking.” [2]

Though he’s speaking about the Christian community here, I believe full and well that we should apply this to those outside of the church. Additionally, I work in a multi-cultural environment where rather than preaching to my colleagues, I have taken the approach of simply seeking to understand where they are coming from. What are their life narratives? For instance, as someone who has migrated from the Middle East, what is it like to now live in America? What are the challenges, what do you like and dislike about it? What do you think about life and spirituality? Again, this process has served to humanize me and it has made me realize that as human beings, we all stand together in a sort of solidarity in that we are trying to make sense of life and seek some kind of meaningful purpose.

Counter-intuitive, Unconditional Love

But the main way that I have come to know the gospel in a contextual manner is through my wife. My wife and I are almost complete opposites. She’s always on time, has a schedule for everything and is detailed oriented to the tee. She doesn’t like to talk much either; she’s a doer. I couldn’t be more annoying to her. I’m always late, I take my time and I’m a lofty thinker and my head is usually stuck in the clouds. Plus, I like to talk. A. Lot. I always ask her, “What’s on your mind?” and I want to engage her in some kind of theological discussion, to which I receive the proverbial eye roll and sigh from her.

All this said, over the years, I’ve come to find out that my wife is one of the most loving people I have ever known. She puts up with so much of my stuff. If marriage teaches you anything, it’s that yes, you’re a jerk. See, mom will never admit this to you, though she knows it’s true. She’ll love you till the day you die but your wife loves you enough to tell it like it is. But my wife loves this jerk. She accepts me as I am and affirms the good things she sees in me on a daily basis. I’m simply floored and smitten by this kind of love. I’ve come to the conclusion that her unconditional love is God’s incarnate love to me. It’s fascinating how counter-intuitive his love can be. I thought that love would be putting me with someone who is the same as me, but in fact, it has come through two seemingly opposites. But this is wonderful, because through her I’m able to view an intriguing and captivating side of God that I would have otherwise never known. And now we have these beautiful children who are a product of this incarnate love. When I look into their faces, I’m amazed and taken aback at what God has done. We’re all vastly different in our little family unit and thus we’re put in a position where we can each grow in our humanity, that is, in Christ’s image together. So my family has sort of been the church to me over this past half year or so.

My Hope for the Church

In closing, I want to remark on a saying that I used to hear in ministry. It’s that you don’t have to necessarily like your fellow church members but you do have to love them. This is one of the most misguided sentiments I have ever heard. How are you going to love someone that you don’t like anything about? The gospel affirms each of us as individual and unique human beings. While the cross reveals the ugliness of our sin, it also helps us to look past this in order to see the beautiful images of God in one another and simply appreciate, learn from and behold that beauty. When we look at one another, we are looking into the face of Christ, I believe. Wouldn’t it be great to simply relate to one another in the church in this way? This is my prayer and hope. I’m starting first in midst of my family members. And who knows, I may someday again commit myself to a particular church fellowship. Thank you all for listening and God bless you all abundantly.

[1] Kayser, Phillip G., “Ruins of Athens – The Curse of the Athenian Model of Education”. Biblical Blueprints. 2009. Pg. 4 [http://biblicalblueprints.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/RuinsOfAthens.pdf]

[2] Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. “Life Together”. 1954.

*[Author’s note] This originally said, “Very interesting that Jesus would say this; there is nothing about forgiveness in the Lord’s Prayer, yet this is right at the end of it making a seemingly important point.” This is of course wrong. I’ve both read and written about the Lord’s Prayer many times, so I might chalk that glaring error up to confirmation bias; I felt strongly about making a point about forgiveness and so I viewed the prayer a certain way. Good lesson in objectivity or the lack thereof we sometimes display. This could also indicate that I simply need someone to proofread my material beforehand :)

In a nutshell, Enns explains that the OT writing process most likely started around the time of David’s reign, when there was relative peace and tranquility within the kingdom, and ended during the postexilic or second temple period (referred to by some as the “inter-testamental period”). Contrary to what many think about the second temple period, in that it was largely silent especially from a prophetic point of view, this was most likely an extremely active time for Israel’s scholars in terms of recording, editing and compiling the nations long-held oral tradition as well as historical records (e.g. The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel is referenced in the book of Kings as a source). The motive behind this activity was Israel’s desire to make sense of their national failure; they wanted to look back at their history, which was inextricably permeated with broad-sweeping theological ideas, in the hopes that it would provide some clear answers for their present plight as well as a road map for the foreseeable future. Enns quotes Old Testament scholar and theologian, Walter Brueggeman [1] who says,

It is now increasingly agreed that the Old Testament in its final form is a product of and response to the Babylonian Exile. This premise needs to be stated more precisely. The Torah (Pentateuch) was likely completed in response to the exile, and the subsequent formation of the prophetic corpus and the “writings”  [i.e., poetic and wisdom texts] as bodies of religious literature (canon) is to be understood as a product of Second Temple Judaism [=postexilic period]. This suggests that by their intention, these materials are…an intentional and coherent response to a particular circumstance of crisis….Whatever older materials may have been utilized (and the use of old materials can hardly be doubted), the exilic and/or postexilic location of the final form of the text suggests that the Old Testament materials, understood normatively, are to be taken precisely in an acute crisis of displacement, when old certitudes—sociopolitical as well as theological—had failed.

While no interpretive model is free of erroneous thinking, this particular model is one that deeply resonates with me. Even from a casual reading of the OT, it is fairly obvious that an editing process took place and, upon further inspection, that all of the texts put together as a whole present a cohesive theological and historical message. In terms of the editing process, we have the death of Moses recorded at the end of Deuteronomy, which would be implausible had he been the sole author of the book. I’ve seen quite a few strain mightily to reconcile phenomena like this; for instance some would say that Moses’ death was revealed to him beforehand, thus giving him the ability to record it. I am the type of person who likes to look at the evidence, regardless of how unpleasant it is, head on. In light of the scholarship of the past century or so that has informed Enns’ interpretive model, I can no longer embrace interpretations which vociferously attempt to hold on to fantastical and implausible ideas concerning the authorship of the OT. This being the case, I do not subscribe to naturalism or materialism; I believe in the occurrence of the type of miracles which are recorded in the Bible.

An Inspirational Analogy

I am by no means a conspiracy theorist, therefore I do not believe that there existed a nefarious or duplicitous motivating reason as to why the OT was edited the way it was. The way I see it is that God certainly inspired those who were editing and compiling what would eventually be known as the Old Testament; he used a multiplicity of human agency for this creative, thoughtful and expansive (in terms of both time and geography) reflective process. This kind of inspiration comports somewhat analogously with how the Christian community today finds its bearings and maps out a future for itself in human history.

As those indwelt by the Holy Spirit, believers are powerfully moved, with great effect, to contribute their godly gifts to the furtherance of His cause. They pray for guidance, think, write and speak reflectively about their current collective place in history as well as ponder and plan out their future endeavors. Many are convinced that they are being inspired by God both directly as well as indirectly through one another, in various ways. And this proves true when something radically heart-changing and truly impactful in human history takes place through the church, of which there are many examples.

Destructive Dividing Lines

My previous point speaks to another issue I have with a narrow or rigid view of Scriptural inspiration. Often times, the church marks out its intellectual limits by way of its interpretation of particular passages of Scripture. This may be beneficial in some cases, but recently, it has led to the loss of the creativeness, thoughtfulness and fearlessness of the church, thus preventing its message from resonating with those in our present day and age.

The entire evolution vs. creationism/intelligent design debate is a perfect example of this. The creationist (young and older earther alike) hopelessly binds themselves to such a narrow interpretation of what the first several chapters of Genesis “clearly say” as to become a laughing stock and a source of derision to those espouse well-founded, modern scientific findings. This is absolutely tragic and unnecessary because in the first place the OT was never meant to address everything under the sun, so to speak, but rather was meant to inform the theological thought processes of an ancient people group.

Therefore, this particular assertion from the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, which is to be taken as authoritative by evangelicals, places a burden upon Scripture which it simply cannot bear (and was never intended to, for that matter):

We deny that biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may be properly used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood. (Article XII)

And secondly, if the saying “all truth is God’s truth” is accurate, then certain parts of the body of Christ are needlessly and harmfully demonizing those who embrace certain observational truths discovered by modern science.

Of course, many will argue that Enns introduces a slippery slope, which in some respects may indeed be true. For instance with an interpretive model like his, how much of the OT should we take to be true or historically reliable? What if archaeological evidence eventually reveals that some of the things recorded in the OT are embellishments or outright false? What does this then say about the nature of inspiration and furthermore about the character of God?

These are genuine concerns, but might I submit that there is already present a slippery slope on the other side of the argument which is driving the church further and further back into a brand of fundamentalism which says that it is “the church versus those godless and agenda-driven scientists” or “biblical inerrantists versus those syncretistic, liberal bible scholars” or what have you.

A Weight Lifted

For my part, I desperately wanted to believe that there was a magic bullet that would prove everything in the Bible as factually true; that if given enough time and with enough archaeological investigation, scholars would exactly match every claim stated in our sacred text. To be honest, this type of view ironically led me to be very uneasy because for instance, the veracity of the Bible and thus the trustworthiness of God rested on the claim that, at one point in history, humans lived for several hundreds of years or that there was a literal Noah’s ark, that the entire world was flooded or that Isaiah was the sole author of his eponymous book.

Through modern scholarship, there appears to be very convincing alternative explanations for the things written in Scripture that chafe against our modern sensibilities. Are these findings mere coincidences or could this be evidence of God leading us into necessary, deeper, albeit uncomfortable truth? Some critics would shoot back that in the liberal scholar’s attempt to think outside of the box on theological matters, they run the risk of going so far off the deep end that they will lose God altogether or sully his name. But I echo the Franciscan friar, Richard Rohr’s sentiment in which he says that ideological boxes are good for a time; they provide a necessary foundation for many things, however they are never a good way to continue or to end.

At some point we have to put ourselves in the midst of the uncomfortable and inconvenient facts that reality presents to us for this is ultimately where life-changing, beneficial truth is found. As Christians we should know that, both factually and experientially, standing in the center of various paradoxes is where we begin to discover the nature of God. While views like Enns’ introduce a different kind of uncertainty to my walk with God and the Christian community, I believe that this will ultimately help me to continue in a healthier type of communion with Him and his people.

Some questions for our readers

• What is your view of biblical inspiration and why does it matter to you?
• In what way is the church’s battle against certain ideologies held by secular society helpful or harmful?
• How can an interpretative model like that of Enns serve to either add to or detract from our view of Scripture and/or God?

[1] W. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 74-75.

Our purpose is to foster open interpersonal communication on spiritual matters that leads to Christian community:

Christ + Communication = Unity

Unity is not the same thing as uniformity. Christians do not all think alike. There are some basic beliefs that we hold in common, but there is a diversity of opinion on many issues within the Body of Christ. As the gospel welcomes people of every tribe and tongue and nation, it also challenges us to stretch ourselves beyond what is comfortable. The degree to which we imitate Christ is not measured by how much we love those who are similar to us, but by how much we embrace those who are different.

This website is not intended to promote or denigrate UBF or any organization. Our purpose is to serve people by giving them an independent forum to learn, to think, and to express themselves in a healthy and friendly manner. We hope that this website will

• foster multi-way conversations among friends
• open new channels of communication and friendships among people of different ages and backgrounds, overcoming prejudice and stereotypes
• help members of UBF develop stronger connections to the broader Christian community
• help us to see multiple sides of difficult issues and truly learn from one another, even when we do not agree

Though some in UBF, particularly long-standing leaders, will either denigrate or disagree with the mere existence of this site, I’m of the opinion that the four goals listed above are being fulfilled (albeit in a messy but honest manner).

While there exists a slew of silent readers who make their presence known through either ‘liking’ or ‘disliking’ articles and comments, the most vocal participants here are those from the so-called ‘lost generation’. These are current and former UBF members who were passed over for key leadership positions for a variety of vaguely-defined and, in some cases, unfair reasons. Though I am a perpetual pessimist, I don’t agree with the aforementioned moniker (and for the remainder of this article I would like to refer to the ‘losts’ as the ‘founds’). The reason being is that it seemingly invalidates everything that that particular generation went through. To the contrary, due to the sheer volume of composite life experiences and knowledge of the found generation, I believe that they are playing a vital role in the current, changing ministry landscape. From an ideological point of view, the conversations I’ve had with the founds on this site have been beyond eye-opening and helpful. In turn, these new ideological views have positively augmented my relationships with others in UBF. As conversations with others in my peer group indicate, I am not the only one who has benefited from the dialogues here.

As a member of the younger generation in UBF, I have a request or plea for those in the found generation. First, let me begin by stating that I’m thankful for those of you who are willing to communicate with those in the younger generation in an honest and discreet manner. Again, I’ve benefited greatly from such conversations. These conversations have consisted of serving as a sounding board for new ideas, providing helpful and compassionate counsel as well as biblically sound resources from other ministries.

One suggestion for the site is for those in the found generation to write articles geared toward the younger generation as to how to artfully, respectfully and courageously engage older members and leaders in UBF. My strong belief is that change in UBF will be a bottom-up approach. This is currently happening and in order for it to continue, those with substantial ministry and life experience have to continually invest in and inform the younger generation. This is obviously occurring on this website, but my hope is that it would become a more focused and balanced practice here.

I also understand that many who have begun to break out of the UBF paradigm, whether while remaining in UBF or leaving, are still grappling with overcoming wounds and negative thought patterns which were imposed by the ministry. Still, it is plainly obvious that you all have much to contribute to the younger generation, if only to point them toward good resources and gleanings from your own personal life experiences.

Lastly, I would ask that those who are writing books about their experiences in UBF consider blogging their books on ubfriends as well. This would serve to make the ministry more transparent. Additionally, blogging such material will reach a wider audience and thus perhaps promote even more dialogue.

For my part, though I have experienced the negative side of the ministry, I can also say that I have been immensely blessed by the genuine believers within the ministry. I came to the ministry in 2003, almost immediately after Samuel Lee passed away. Since my time here, I have seen many positive changes in some of the elders and older missionaries. I’ve also established some significantly deep friendships while here. My experience being what it is, my future publications will most likely be concerned with writing about the positive aspects of UBF. However, when need be, I will also be painfully and brutally honest about any negativity I witness in the ministry. And as one who is obsessed with the idea that ideological viewpoints play a vital role in informing healthy practice, I aim to publish articles on broad-sweeping topics such as hermeneutics, cultural contextualization of the gospel and the like. In my previous article, my aim was not to promote the idea that we should refrain from discussing the unhealthy practices of some of UBF’s key leaders. Instead, I wanted to take a healthy step back from the incessant railing against said leaders so as to frame our perceptions and accusations in a more objective and judicial light. At the end of the day, it is entirely your prerogative as to what you wish to publish. I’m merely presenting a request to have more focused dialogue which is in line with the site’s audacious yet attainable mission statement.

Though I am trying, I honestly struggle to understand those who came to the ministry in the 80’s and 90’s and stayed for a considerable amount of time. If I ever come off as unsympathetic or glib, please call me out and most importantly pray for me to understand the perspectives of others.

My hope is that the ‘losts’ may see themselves as the ‘founds’ who have much to contribute to a growing generation of leaders within UBF. To paraphrase Isaac Newton, the vantage point of the younger generation is either greatly reduced or heightened by how much they are able to glean from the generations that preceded them. As the younger generation in UBF engages in conversations with the biblical text, church historians throughout the ages and the visionaries and contemporaries of our day, we would be undeniably remiss to neglect those in the generation that, in some sense, paved the way for us. As I said, ‘lost’ is an ill-prescribed moniker and if anything they are actually the missing link or the key to understanding UBF in its current state. Let the lost then, as they pursue and engage the younger generation in profound conversation, become the serendipitously found.

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.” – Eleanor Roosevelt

This is probably one of the most condescending quotes I have ever read because it makes me feel small-minded and petty and it makes people like the late Mrs. Roosevelt seem as though, through some kind of innate or perhaps cultivated superiority, they are above the rest of us slobbering, half-witted plebes. Here’s an idea Eleanor, why don’t you take your high-mindedness and shove it? I mean, how can I not be focused on that irritating wretch who is making my life a living hell? I know I’m a wretch, but does that give any license to others to be so? And after all, what about my feelings? Well, apparently Eleanor Roosevelt didn’t give a rip about my future feelings when she uttered this. And for good reason; I mean for one, she didn’t even know that I would exist and secondly she’s kind of right. God is in the business of saving people, but he does so by drawing us out of ourselves and out of our disillusioned view of people into his loving presence. When we allow Him to superimpose His divine ideas on our feeble ones (the definition of repentance, or at least mine anyway), then we can wade through the undulating mess we call human relationships which at times cause us to pull our hair out and at other times give us reason to hug each other. When we are in Him and He in us then we can rightly view our relationships with one another.

Just to realistically frame this train wreck that we are all a part of, it has been repeatedly proven that UBF’s leaders are not willing to consider (that is, without a great degree of defensiveness, skepticism and ad hominem attacks) any of the well-thought-out large-scale suggestions that have been presented to them in person or posted here; akin to the existence of gravity, it’s essentially an empirical truth at this point. Yes, it’s absolutely tragic and disheartening, but what’s more unfortunate is that we often allow ourselves to become jaded and cynical due to this. Eventually, one has to allow the cold and insensitive advice of Winston Churchill to warm their hearts. These cherished words once bellowed from the depths of his oft-inebriated gullet:

“If you’re going through hell, keep going.”

To undertake an enterprise such as this, we frankly need balls (or if you’re female, you’ll need chutzpah instead) or put less frankly we need grit. Not only this, but we need a generation which will think in new and fresh ways, continually educating themselves and dialoguing so as to mutually edify one another as well as keep each other from veering off into heresy, or what I call Rob-Bellism (notice here I’m not merely speaking pejoratively about a person, but rather an idea about a person; see the difference, hm? Ah, I knew you’d eventually get it). My brother from another mother, Ian Turner, recently dropped a sick article in this vein; I won’t link to this though because I want as much traffic as possible to come to my article, thanks.

In my opinion, UBF will not change through directly railing against the leadership and their paradigms. As Friend intimated, it most likely will come through a bottom-up, subversive kind of approach. We have to not only push to make big ideas like the cross, the trinity, christotelic preaching and all of the other ideas that personally appeal to me (but not speaking in tongues because John MacArthur or uh, MacArthurism states that this is from the devil) front and center but we also have to develop genuine relationships with older, hard-lining missionaries and leaders. This may seem impossible, but it’s not. You have to keep prodding and poking until they open up; you have to get so uncomfortably close to them that they will eventually become comfortable enough to share with you their own life stories and current agonies as well as joys.

Ultimately, you want to see them not as an actual person, but as a figment of your imagination that will go away with time. No wait, let me try this again. Ultimately, you want them to see just how utterly wrong they are and how right your theological positions and ideas about ministry are. Ok, this isn’t working correctly for some reason. So ultimately, you don’t want to communicate in a self-righteous tone or manner, even if you know that you are right. Instead, you have to communicate in such a way that says that you care about them; you care enough to enter into their life stories and pray for them accordingly. You have to care enough to lose sleep and sanity over the numbing illogicalities that often result in human and cross-cultural relationships. That’s what this whole Christian enterprise is about. That’s the big idea, from my perhaps myopic vantage point (I say perhaps because chances are that I’m totally right).

Continuing on with my irrefutable wisdom, at some point, you have to attempt to implement your neat and inspiring ideas on a local level. I don’t know how this looks in your particular chapter, but pray and talk to others about what is needed, both inside and outside of the ministry. For instance, if you think that UBF leaders need remediation in terms of learning basic communication skills, then implement this in your local chapter as a pilot program. Will you face some pushback and potential demonization? Probably, but that’s what makes life fun. As long as you are not driven out of the ministry, keep pushing the envelope. Some of the most awesome church stuff (I don’t have a lot time to be my normal, articulate self, right now) and historical change have been borne out of stubborn and gritty (and in our case hopefully Spirit-led) people hanging in there for something that they were deeply convicted about.

So why don’t we use this forum to talk about big ideas which will help us to frame our entire Christian experience in a better light? Taking a page from John Y’s book of self-serving chicanery*, you can check out some of my awesome comments in this vein here and here (and for the love of God please give me a thumbs up; I so desperately need your validation). And I get that we want to protect young students from falling into the multiple quagmires presented by the UBF paradigm, so maybe we could leave it up to Chris Z to post all of the hidden UBF history that no one knows about or we could continue to hock the books that are being promoted here. Or we could take a positive approach and post things about the importance of critical thinking and seeking out multiple sources of input through books and other ministries.

What say you ubfriends, shall we discuss ideas or people?

*You may remember his ground-breaking, seminal (and only) article, that he wrote with some other guy. Even though I’ve currently one-upped him in the article writing department, John happens to be one of my favorite persons to call a brother and converse with these days.

This is the first article in a series I’ve entitled “Sophomoric Musings”. I view my musings as sophomoric for two reasons. The first is that the word sophomore is Greek in origin meaning ‘wise fool’. I’ve lived as a Christian for a little over ten years now. While I feel as though I have amassed some experience that may deem me as relatively wise, in reality I’m still a pretty foolish person. I don’t see things objectively, so my musings are infused with a bit of quackery as well as insight due to just having lived up until this point. Secondly, the term sophomore refers to a stage just above the novice or freshman level. These days, I feel as though I’ve entered into the second phase of my Christian life. I’m not sure if I can say exactly when or where the transition happened (the Red Line stop at Belmont on July 10^th… nah forget it), but I definitely feel as though I’ve had a major paradigm shift as of late in terms of how I relate to Christ, His church and the world around me. This post is an articulation of what I’ve been feeling as of late. Hope you enjoy or even cry preferably tears of joy, but I’m not averse to those induced by sheer terror either; all I can say is that Dr. Ben taught me well in this regard.

On www.ubfriends.org we’ve all been struggling to articulate what exactly it is we desire to occur in UBF. We all have dreams and wishes and quite often, they fail to come to fruition in this lifetime. However, the process of imagining them unfold perhaps keeps us somewhat sane. A dream I’ve conjured up has to do with the beginning of change. Actually change occurs beneath the surface and behind the scenes but usually it burgeons forth in some kind of inaugural moment. So what I’m imagining is that particular moment. It would be in the form of a sermon given by a prominent pastor/leader in UBF (insert any figure you have a preference for).

Some Like it HOT

It’s a hot, stuffy, bright day in the afternoon; the sun is shining through the windows and brilliantly reflecting off of the adjacent wall, illuminating all of the intricate crevices etched into the stucco over time. The sun light almost looks heavenly, angelic as it configures into a neatly ordered, splayed-line pattern due to being fractured by the window blinds. The ceiling fans are spinning quietly while the AC motor is pushing cooled air through the vents at a low and steady hum. Hot, but bearable; to my dismay, not hot enough for me to doze off. The sanctuary is packed with about four hundred people or so, stuffy with must and all of those peculiar summer scents; the smell of perfume and cologne become amplified in this heat and that sneeze smell seems to travel at least ten times more now than it does when dispersed in cold air. The pastor is supposed to be delivering a sermon on the Great Commission in what would be an otherwise predictable lecture for most UBF members. I’m about to go into autopilot mode, thinking about what I have to do to get ready for work on Monday. I also keep fixating on this unsightly stain on the back of the chair of one of the parishioners. “What is that?” I ask myself, maybe a smear of chocolate or something less savory. Man, I would like some chocolate right about now, I think to myself. Looking up at the Pastor in his three piece suit and tie, with my eyes ready to glaze over, I listen to the words slowly tumbling out of his mouth, more like slow pouring molasses on a warm summer day. I notice that his demeanor is somewhat hesitant, uneasy this time around, which is unusual. He looks very forlorn but determined to stand in the pulpit and deliver his message. He seems to have a one thousand pound burden weighing him down. This makes me perk up and open my ears to listen. He begins to speak (the rest of this post is his sermon).

Today, I was prepared to give a sermon on the Great Commission. Throughout the years this has been the linchpin of UBF ministry. Many people have come to our ministry because of it and also many have left because of it. Well today, I’d like to take a little detour from what I initially began to write about Jesus’ statement in Matthew chapter twenty eight, verses eighteen and nineteen. For some time, the Gospel, the pure grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and all of its implications has been working in my heart in a new way. I’ve been struggling with how to articulate my feelings about this, but today I believe that I have something very important to say that will perhaps shape the context of our ministry for years to come.

I’ve thought about some of the misguided things that our ministry has done in the past, things which I used to justify.  And while over the past few years I’ve apologized somewhat for these things, I know in my heart of hearts that a genuine apology has never been given from me or others in senior positions. This truth came to a head recently when somehow the Holy Spirit opened my eyes to see how injurious many aspects of UBF’s ideology actually are. While God blessed us in many ways with a unique mission, we have also egregiously sinned against God and against His precious sheep in various ways. Not only do I have a deep sense of anguish and remorse about this, but many others, both former and current members, are coming forth baring their hearts and seeking some semblance of remorse from long time UBF leaders. I deeply apologize that both I and they have been silent for so long. Perhaps in private conversations we have even vented our angst concerning the ministry and even apologized, but publicly we have never attempted to disclose such things. I stand before you today and state with a spirit of deep contrition, repentance and earnestness, that our ministry is indeed very broken. (He pauses as if on the verge of shedding a tear; the sanctuary is captivated in stunned silence).

In the rest of my talk today, I’d like to share my thoughts on why this is the case and some possible remedies. To be honest, I don’t have this written down in sermon form; what I speak to you today is from my heart and I would like to engage all of you in the most genuine manner possible. Shep… I mean John (authors’ note: not actual name of a person), (at this moment, John looks up at the pastor, mouth agape and eyes widely transfixed upon him) I want to do away with these foolish titles, what I’m saying is that I’d like to talk to you today… to you… to all of you from the earnestness of my heart. It’s time to shed all of these facades. Let me continue with my train of thought on some of our problems.

Yes, We Admit it, Soylent… Green… is… Made of People

(An Admission of Gross Wrongdoing)

Specifically, I believe a significant portion of negative aspects in our ministry stems from our narrow definition of the word ‘ministry’ (he makes quote signs with his fingers as he’s saying this). Particularly, we’ve relegated our ministry mainly to the campus setting. Focusing on campus ministry is what worked for us in the past; as you all know, it is the very foundation of our ministry. But the problem is that we trusted in and chose the foundation of campus ministry more than the foundation of Christ and the Gospel. Not only this, but we’ve enforced our view of ministry with an uncompromising, iron-like fist. We have abused our positions of authority in order to keep our legalistic view of the gospel intact. Because of this, many espoused and suffered from an injuriously myopic view of ministry. The stories of personal tragedy are simply gut-wrenching and in some cases too much to bear without shedding many tears; the abuse is on a catastrophic level that no one should have to bear; in fact, Christ died in order to take up such wounds and burdens. Not only that, but because we have never sufficiently acknowledged or addressed this problem, these tragedies still occur today, though perhaps unbeknownst to many here, even to some of our young leaders who should be in the know. This being the case, more than anything, I would like our ministry to focus on inward healing as well as conscientiously contacting those who have left the ministry in the hopes of building bridges aright with them.

Before we hold another international or staff conference, I would like us to focus exclusively on this effort. Even to those who are in foreign mission fields, I’m not asking that they stop doing missions, but that they partner with us and acknowledge that our ministry has grave problems that can no longer be ignored. One thing I have in mind is redefining what UBF’s mission is. At the website www.ubfriends.org, as on online community in Christ, former and current members have been sifting through and trying to interpret the good, bad and ugly aspects of our UBF heritage, it’s really quite interesting. Anyway, upon reviewing some of the former statements about these heritage points by our own UBF leaders (www.ubf.org/node/155) in conjunction with reading ubfriends blogs and comments, I have concluded that our internal doctrine is woefully, woefully misguided and needs immediate revision. Surely, there is some truth contained in them, but the first and foremost heritage point should be adherence to the gospel of God’s grace. I’m not sure about how to redefine the rest of our heritage points and to be honest I don’t really care. For far too long, the gospel given by Christ has been overshadowed by these eight or twelve heritage points. If I were to take a page from Martin Luther’s legacy, I would post one thesis: the Gospel of God’s grace.

I Don’t Want Your Money; I Want Change

I’m not sure how all of this will unfold, but I believe that this is the very long, overdue and necessary starting point to rebuilding UBF’s foundation rightly. Just to give some specifics of what necessarily has to change, I want to give some directives that I hope you will find beneficial. First of all, today, you may or may not choose to stay after service and pray two by two; you can pray in groups or however you like (some in the congregation let out a snicker, a chortle or nervous laughter, looking at each other as if to confirm that they all heard what the pastor just said). In terms of ministerial practice, if you have conviction about seeing your home or your workplace or any other place as your mission field, please with our blessing serve with the grace of our Lord Jesus there. You are no longer relegated or tied to the campus to do ministry there; please feel free to serve anywhere as you see fit. (literally a millisecond after the pastor is finished, one of the older missionaries shouts out, “This is heresy!” and storms out. The pastor momentarily loses his composure, but regains it and continues on with heightened resolve). Moreover, if you believe that God has called you to do social justice ministry, we will wholeheartedly support you in this endeavor. Actually, we would like to do something revolutionary. We would like to have committees to oversee each of these areas, that is the home, workplace and urban evangelization. Not only these areas but any other area you propose, we are willing to let you have the freedom to build up these ministries under the UBF banner. Also, we would like to encourage you to visit other churches and build relationships with those outside of UBF. You don’t have to come here every Sunday; take some time to explore the rest of the Christian world. This may come as a grave shock to many of you, but I’m telling you, get out and get to know other people besides UBF people (at this, the crowd begins to stir and talk to each other in disbelief at the statements coming from the pastor’s mouth). In all of this, we just ask that you not use your freedom in the Spirit as an excuse to do evil, but rather to love. In this way, we want to become a multi-faceted, healthy church which is what many have vied for and advocated in the past as well as present.

In the coming weeks we would like to launch a series entitled, “What is the Gospel?” For many years, we have presumed to know what the gospel means but it is obvious that we need to go back to the basics and learn the truth about the very crux of Christianity. We will also hold workshops on how to practically apply the gospel in all of our various relationships. We will not look to UBF heritage to define the Gospel; rather we will look to the Bible, church history and also the current work of many contemporary theologians and pastors who have exclusively focused on this issue. Any major conference will have this theme from now on. I don’t know for how long, perhaps until Jesus comes. But by the authority given to me by the Chief Shepherd Jesus Christ, as a lowly under shepherd of His church, I am resigned to teaching you only about His Gospel, as explained by the whole of Scripture in both the Old and New Testaments, until the day I die. If I ever, ever step out of line and Lord authority over you or try to take the place of the Chief Shepherd, I will submit to church discipline and if need be resign; this is how seriously I take my commitment to purity and integrity in leading you.

Chicken Wings and Drinks On Me

Lastly, some practical advice, not a command, to you today is this: If you have children or family that you have not seen for some time because you have been so busy with ministry, please go home and hug them. Tell them that you love them and that they are more important than any mission, that in fact they are the mission; your mission is to love them with the love of Christ. For older missionaries who have strained relationships with children who have either left the church or have remained in a begrudging manner, please call them and apologize to them; tell them that you are sorry and that your only desire is for them to know the grace of our Lord Jesus. I give this advice to any shepherds who have wounded young students in the past. Also, for those who are peers, if you have any grudges, please don’t delay coming to the cross to reconcile; this is much more important than the work of campus ministry or any other endeavor that you wish to undertake.

From now on, we will listen to any and every story of abuse or misfortune you have suffered because of UBF. In fact, we want to hold both open and private forums for such dialogue to occur. We can do this over a meal in someone’s house or in the sanctuary right here before this giant cross emblem. Yes, as leaders, we might initially become defensive or even angry at some of the assertions, because these things are very difficult for us to face and own up to. But we give you our word, we will hear you out and we will seek real reconciliation to the best of our ability. We will shed tears with you and talk for many, many hours. However long it takes, we will seek to understand you and come to a solution at the foot of the cross.

These are very trying times for our ministry, but something such as what I laid out today absolutely must take place if we are going to do right by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. May the grace of our Lord Jesus be with you today.  Oh and lastly, if you want to go out and have a beer, drinks on me at Hawkeyes near UIC; can’t beat the ten cent wings either. We can ride my purple dragon, Bubbles there (author’s note: hey, I did say this was a dream). Thank you and God bless you.

On the Verge of Waking Up

Many of the parishioners are clueless as to what to do; even the piano player is at a loss as to what hymn to begin playing. “How about we just end service right here?” the pastor says. Some people remain in their seats in shock, others begin to file out and discuss what they have just heard. At the same time, a long line forms beginning at the podium where the pastor once stood and terminates at the rear sanctuary door. Personally, I’m puzzled as to what exactly just happened, but at the same time I feel as though precisely what I dreamed of wanting to transpire just came to fruition. It’s hard to believe this because dreams are often illusory and hard to remember, seemingly impossible to grasp. I think to myself, perhaps this is just another one of those dreams. I sooth myself with the notion that whatever occurs on this side of heaven will always be imperfect and bittersweet, but what will happen on the other side is in fact beyond our wildest and most imaginative dreams for it is a reality grounded in truth and perfect justice, authored by God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit in whom there is nothing false or malicious.

Concluding Remarks

Some may not appreciate the humor put forth in this article; I haven’t tried my hand much at it so maybe it’s a bit off… or way off. But the reason for the levity is captured best by a quote from Elton Trueblood in his wonderful little book entitled The Humor of Christ,

“Any alleged Christianity which fails to express itself in gaiety, at some point, is clearly spurious. The Christian is gay not because he is blind to injustice and suffering, but because he is convinced that these, in the light of the divine sovereignty are never ultimate. He is convinced that the unshakeable purpose is the divine rule of all things, whether of heaven or earth (Eph. 1:10). Though he can be sad, and often is perplexed, he is never really worried. The well-known humor of the Christian is not a way of denying the tears, but rather a way of affirming something which is deeper than tears.”