Maturity and the Christian Faith

This week I turn thirty and I thought it would be fun to look at the changes in my own belief system and the influences that have brought about such significant changes. I hope this can be educational to show that one's belief system should not grow stagnant and remain the same throughout a person's life, but that as a person matures so should their faith.

I was raised in a Christian home with a fundamentalist bent. I was taught to read the bible, to love Jesus, to pray, and to go to church every Sunday. I was taught that I was a sinner who needed forgiveness and that without Jesus I could not be saved. I went to a conservative church growing up that taught us to "witness" to people (a term that means proselytizing, or gaining converts). I was taught to feel guilty about my sins and to always ask Jesus for forgiveness when I sinned.

My first major crisis of faith came when I was a senior in high school. I was raised in a religious bubble where I just assumed that what I was taught was right and was never exposed to anything beyond my Christianity. Imagine my surprise when searching the internet one day I came across a website that "proved" the bible wrong. I felt like the earth was crumbling around me and I didn't know what to believe; my faith had never been challenged before. My bible teacher in high school (I went to a conservative Christian high school) introduced me to Josh McDowell, thus beginning a major shift in my belief system where I fell in love with Christian apologetics (defending one's faith) and desired to become something of a theologian.

During this period in my life, while in my early 20s, I was an outspoken fundamentalist college student, defending such doctrines as the trinity, the inerrancy of the bible, and the salvation only of Protestant Christians. When someone supported a belief I felt was unbiblical, I jumped on them with such an attack that I'd make Pat Robertson proud. I was outspoken against gay marriage, against abortion, and against any religion that was not remotely close to looking like orthodox Christianity. Then would come the most significant moment in my life.

In 2009 I became a hospice chaplain and would meet my mentor Dr. Lynn Euzenas. Both have had the biggest impact in my life. Ministering directly with the sick and dying has made me change my priorities in life. For the first time in my life I was in a position where my heart would be impacted even more so than my head. As I have worked with those who are sick and dying I have realized that many of the arguments for particular doctrines do not matter because what is important to God is not right teaching but right love. I Corinthians 13 teaches that love is the most important attribute of a Christian, and I finally understood what that meant. What is right doctrine without love of one's fellow human being? What kind of Christian are we if we would rather criticize a gay man for his orientation than love him for being a child of God? This is what I learned from my mentor and this is what I have learned from my ministry with those who are in the greatest need of love, those who are sick and hurting and fearful.

I no longer find it necessary to focus on sin, mine or another's. I still believe in the trinity but don't feel that God needs much defending. I think he's got a thick skin and can handle things himself. I no longer believe in the inerrancy of the bible because, frankly, it talks about the sun rotating around the earth which is scientifically incorrect. I no longer believe homosexuality is a sin and instead feel it important to show my love to my gay brothers and sisters in Christ because they are as much children of God as I am. I still believe abortion is wrong, but I will love those who have had and who have performed abortions as much as I love anyone else, because that is what Jesus says is right.

What I hope we can learn from this is that by sticking with a particular belief for the sake of being right we end up wrong in the end. By holding to a belief for one's entire life a person is so arrogant as to believe that he cannot possibly be wrong. We cannot grow stagnant in our beliefs but must constantly monitor for outmoded beliefs that especially hold us back from loving anyone. Our guideline for tossing out a doctrine should be this question: "is this doctrine preventing me from showing love to my fellow human being." If it is the case that a doctrine is causing love to be held back, we must toss it out and forget it, because it is not what Jesus would want us to believe. Let us therefore be mature believers and love one another as Jesus has loved us.

Blessings,

-Brandon

P.S. Don't forget to stop by amazon.com and purchase my book What Did Jesus Do for your kindle. It is still free for the next four days.

Your Sins Don't Matter, You Do!

Today I want to share with you a beautiful story of the value Jesus gave someone who was otherwise criticized for her behavior. The story can be found in Luke 7:36-50 of a woman who was called a sinner, and likely was a prostitute, who came to a meal Jesus was having with a Pharisee and anointed his feet with her tears. The response from the Pharisee was one of condemnation as he said, "if this man was a prophet he would know what kind of woman this was he was letting touch him." The Pharisee immediately condemned the woman, whereas Jesus provided her with value. His response to the Pharisee was to share a story of two debtors, one who was forgiven a small debt and another who was forgiven a large debt. Jesus asked the Pharisee, "who loves more, the one forgiven a little or the one forgiven much." Of course the Pharisee's answer was the one who was forgiven much. Jesus continued by praising the prostitute's faith.

What I love so much about this story is how Jesus took a woman that was ridiculed and condemned by the religious establishment of his day, and instead provided her with value and worth. You see, that is what Jesus did. When he saw someone who was hurting emotionally or was alienated by the religious authorities, he accepted them and welcomed them into his circle where they received love and were shown a worth that they had never experienced before. We read of Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners who were rejected by the religious elite. We read of Jesus sitting down and listening to a Samaritan woman who was criticized by her community for living with a man out of wedlock. Jesus forgave an adulteress woman who the religious elite were ready to kill, and he touched lepers whose community made to live outside the city limits. Jesus never rejected a single person he encountered, but instead brought them acceptance and love, no matter what their position was in society. Whereas the religious leaders in Jesus' time would consistently take away from the worth of others, Jesus consistently provided worth to everyone he interacted with.

What we can gain from this story is two-fold: first, you are valuable as a human being. Nothing you do can take value away from you. Your worth is based on the fact that you are part of God's creation and has nothing to do with successes or failures you have committed. Your value is safe and secure in Jesus. So when you are feeling like you have done something wrong and are feeling guilty, just know that Jesus forgives you and values you immensely. As difficult as it is to forgive ourselves sometimes, it is something we have permission to do because God forgives us without any questions asked. If you are uncertain about this, just look at the many people Jesus forgave without any hesitation. Let me say it again, you are valuable as a human being no matter what.

Secondly, we are to show people that same worth that Jesus shows us. That means when we see someone who has sinned, or who we perceive to have sinned, it is our duty not to condemn them or shun them as the Pharisee did with the prostitute. Instead our duty is to show them the forgiveness, love, and value that Jesus showed the prostitute. That means instead of judging women who have had or are contemplating having an abortion, we should show them love and acceptance. That also means that if you view homosexuality as a sin (something I myself do not) you treat them as forgiven and accept them just as Jesus would have and does. It does not matter what other people do or what their background is. It does not matter what another person's faith is, we treat them as Jesus would have: we accept them. That is what Jesus did.

Thank you, and don't forget to stop by amazon.com where you can purchase a copy of my book What Did Jesus Do: Using Jesus' Interactions in Scripture as a Basis for Our Interactions Today, for kindle. Again, thank you and God bless.

-Brandon

Jesus and the Non-Christian with Great Faith

There is a famous story which illustrates perfectly the inclusiveness with which Jesus showed to humankind while he was here; it can be found in Matthew 8:5-13 and reads thus:

⁵ When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. ⁶ “Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed, suffering terribly.”

⁷ Jesus said to him, “Shall I come and heal him?”

⁸ The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. ⁹ For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”

¹⁰ When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. ¹¹ I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. ¹² But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

¹³ Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! Let it be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that moment.

First off, a Centurion was a leader in the Roman military who oversaw 100 men. The Centurion was of Roman, and not Jewish heritage and would have practiced Mithraism as a religion. Mithra was a Roman god who was worshipped by the Roman military and would thus have been worshipped by this Centurion. This man with greater faith than Jesus had seen in all of Israel was therefore a pagan and did not even worship the one true God. Yet Jesus declared that his faith was greater than he had seen in all of Israel.

The first thing I want you to notice about this passage is that Jesus, knowing everything I have just stated, did not even hesitate to start heading to the Centurion's house the moment he was asked for help. Jesus did not begin to question the man about his faith, he did not ask the man for reasons why he should help him. Jesus, with no questions asked immediately began walking toward the Centurion's house because Jesus saw a need, felt compassion, and wanted to help.

Secondly, the man did not worship Jesus or become one of his disciples. He simply knew what he had heard about Jesus and went to him like anyone who was about to lose a loved one would have. His intent was not to convert to another religion or drop everything and follow Jesus. We read elsewhere that the man went back home and we presume that he went back to his normal life. And yet Jesus called his faith "great."

My reason for going through this is that Jesus did not hold back his blessing due to the Centurion's religious background or what he did for a living. What mattered to Jesus was that this man was hurting and he needed help. So Jesus felt compassion. Jesus allowed his blessing to rest on this man despite what he already believed.

Secondly, Jesus called this man, who wasn't even a part of Jesus' own faith tradition, a man of great faith. It did not matter to Jesus what god this man worshiped, or even that this man chose not to follow him after the healing; he still found it prudent to call this man's faith "great."

So what makes us as Christians so exclusive in the way we act. Why when people need help is our first question often "do you love Jesus?" It does not make much sense to me that when Jesus was so inclusive in his message, that we have become so exclusive in our message. A person can only have incredible faith if they are a Christian, according to us. And yet this man was neither a Christian nor a Jew and Jesus was able to call his faith "great."

Today we exclude people even when they are Christians. If someone is a Christ-follower but gay they are allowed no part in our services. If they come from the wrong denomination we deny them entrance into our church. And yet Jesus was able to call this strict pagan man a man of great faith.

Henry Brinton wrote a beautiful article about the welcoming table of Jesus. In it he discusses how Jesus' meal table is so large that there is always a spot open for those who wish to join. He also mentions how we have tended to shrink that table over time. I think it is time we as Christians once again work to enlarge our table to allow for a much more inclusive Church.

There are people in our community hurting and needing help, love, and compassion. When they seek these things from the Church they are often met with condemnation for one reason or another. We tend not to look past their tattoos or drug habits, their homosexuality or their foul language, their crazy hair or strange outfits. Instead we see what we disagree with and treat them with disdain. Instead, let's be more like Jesus by seeing what we have in common with them: our humanity. When we view people as human, it becomes easier to look past those things we disagree with and include them in our houses of worship. Let's show more love and compassion to all people we encounter today!

Please take the time to stop by amazon.com and purchase a copy of What Did Jesus Do for your Kindle today.

Blessings,

-Brandon

What Did Jesus Do: The Book Release

I am proud to announce that I have finally published my book and it is available here, on the Amazon Kindle store. Currently the book is not available in print or on iBooks, but I am working on that. What Did Jesus Do? is available for $4.99 U.S. and looks good on all devices. The book description can be found below. Thank you for your support.

Blessings,

-Brandon

In What Did Jesus Do: Using Jesus’ Interactions from Scripture as a Basis for Our Interactions Today!, Brandon Parks utilizes in-depth Biblical interpretation to analyze Jesus' interactions with three groups of people in Scripture: 1. religious leaders, 2. those within Jesus' discipleship, and 3. those outside Jesus' discipleship. Using this information, Brandon gives the modern day Christian guidelines for interacting with similar groups of people today. With this information, Christians can foster better relationships with people and learn ways to interact with people that are more in line with the way Jesus interacted with people in his day.


 

Judge Not: Jesus, Homosexuality, and the Bible

I'm not sure at what point Christians decided to take upon themselves the task of cleansing other people from their sins. But at some point it happened: Christianity saw itself become the moral police who would call out people for their sins and institute practices such as excommunication. It became the task of each individual Christian to make people aware of their sins and bar them from participation in certain church activities such as being involved in leadership. Now, obviously if someone is involved in sinful activities that could actually do harm to someone else, those people should be barred from participation. However, we as Christians haved missed a crucial teaching of Jesus' that often goes unheeded. That injunction was to not judge sinners, and that we should remove the log from our eye before focussing on the splinter in someone else's eye.

 

Jesus was clear that when he spoke against sin, we were to take the information he provided us as a way of being self corrective instead of being critical of others for their sins. That of course does not mean we need to be guilt laden, since Jesus' death and resurrection atone for our sins. But we are to take the commands of the Bible as ways of instilling obedience in our own lives, not other people's.

 

When Jesus criticizes us for "looking at the speck in our brother's eye instead of focusing on the plank in our own eye" in Matthew 7:3, he is criticizing those who condemn others for what they perceive to be sin while ignoring the very real sins in their own lives. It is important to remember that God will judge us the way we judge others, which means that if we judge people for sinning, God will remove his grace from us and judge us for our sins. The converse of this is that the more we show compassion and acceptance to others, the more compassion and acceptance God will show to us.

 

I just read an article which discusses an ad that the mayor of London rightly removed which praised the curing of homosexuality. The ad was placed by conservative Christians who call homosexuality a sin and work to cure homosexuals of what they call the "disease" of homosexuality. This is a direct violation of Jesus' words in Matthew 7 asking us not to judge others. This is a more prominent form of what happens in the Church everyday. There is a profound problem in the Church today involving the criticism of other people's sins and the desire among Christians to "fix" sinners. Many of us make it our role to be the moral police of our community. It is important that we realize that regardless of what we perceive to be a sin in another person's life, that which is in our eye is always bigger than that which is another person's. Therefore, we should do our best to focus on improving our own lives instead of obsessing over the sins of others.

Blessings,

-Brandon

 

Does Paul Condemn Homosexuality?

In celebration of my soon to be released book, What Did Jesus Do, I am posting a portion from chapter three, discussing how Christian leaders have mis-represented the Bible at times, interpreting it in ways it was not intended. In this section I discuss how Romans 1 is so often used to condemn homosexual behavior, when that is not the purpose of the passage at all. Here I go in-depth explaining what Paul's purpose is and how we can better interpret the Bible today. Enjoy!

One of the most commonly twisted passages in Scripture today comes from Romans 1:26-27:
For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

This passage is often quoted in order to bring judgment and condemnation on homosexuals for their behavior which, in turn, makes them feel alienated from the Church. When Christian leaders speak out against homosexuality, and are asked, “where is homosexuality prohibited in the bible?” they invariably point to these verses as the authority that once and for all condemns homosexuality as a sin.

I will not deny that this passage is describing same sex behavior. There is no doubt that this passage says women and men traded natural relations with the opposing sex for unnatural relations with the same sex. What is important is to take this passage in its context. Within the book of Romans, Paul is engaged in an argument in which he is describing God’s saving activity in which He brings humankind back into a right relationship with himself. He is laying out a logical argument in which he is showing why the saving act of Jesus dying on the cross was necessary for us to be brought back into the intended relationship with God. Paul is arguing in Romans 1-7 that the reason we need Jesus to be brought back into right relationship with God is because all of humankind has lost this right relationship by entering into sin. This passage is understood better when we go back earlier in the first chapter of Romans. The crux of Paul’s argument comes in vv 17-18 where Paul begins, “For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, ‘The one who is righteous will live by faith,’” and then goes on to say, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth.” Beginning verse 18 with “for” Paul is using verse 18 to support verse 17 (Moo, 1996, 99). The righteousness of God is God’s saving activity to bring all of humankind back into a right relationship with him.32 This saving activity, as it is revealed later in Romans, was Jesus’ death on the cross and resurrection (Romans 3:22, 24, 26; 4:24; 5:1, 11, 15, 17, 21; 6:3, 11, 23; 8:1, 2, 11, 34, 39; 10:9). If verse 18 is supporting verse 17, then what this passage is saying is that God’s righteousness was revealed in Jesus because of the wickedness of men and women which revealed God’s wrath. Because of God’s wrath being revealed in the wickedness of humankind, God’s righteousness was revealed through Jesus’ death and resurrection. In other words, because of the wickedness of humankind, God’s wrath filled the earth. In order to end His wrath, it was necessary to send Jesus to die on the cross and rise from the dead in order to bring humankind back into right relationship with God.

What is important is that in verse 18 we read, “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness” (emphasis added). Paul is not singling anyone out in the list of sinful behavior that follows. Paul is trying to point to the underlying sin in all humankind that makes God’s saving act in Jesus necessary. We read in Moo’s commentary that “Verse 18...begins with a universal indictment: all people stand condemned under the wrath of God” (Moo, 1996, 97). So Paul is going to argue for universal condemnation as the state of humankind prior to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Romans is a letter directed mainly to the Jewish Christians in the Roman church, and one of the issues Paul is addressing is the feeling of superiority the Jewish Christians had over the Gentile Christians.33 Essentially, Paul is laying out an argument that will put the Jewish Christians on an equal plane with the Gentiles. The way Paul does this is by setting up a case against the Gentiles in chapter one, placing the Jews in a superior, yet vulnerable, position, and then pulling their superiority out from under them. Paul, then, begins his argument at the end of chapter one, which serves to condemn the Gentiles. Moo supports this with two points: 1. “the passage is reminiscent of Jewish apologetic arguments in which Gentile idolatry was derided and the moral sins of the Gentile world were traced to that idolatry,” and 2. “the knowledge of God rejected by those depicted in 1:18-32 comes solely through ‘natural revelation’” whereas the Jews were “responsible for the special revelation they have been given in the law” (Moo, 1996, 97). So Paul is trying to bait the Jewish Christians in Rome to feel condemning of the Gentiles for their “sinful” behavior because he is trying to prove a point. The point comes with a twist in Romans 2:1 where Paul says, “Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself, for you who judge practice the same things” (emphasis mine). The situation Paul is describing in chapters one and two is the situation as it would look before the saving act of Jesus Christ. In other words, Paul is trying to tell the church in Rome that all are condemned without Jesus regardless of what their behavior is. We are all on an equal footing without Jesus, and we are therefore all on an equal footing with Jesus. So what we have in Romans 1-2 is a depiction of the sinful state of humanity as a whole (the Gentile and the Jew) which, therefore, needs the saving grace of God through the act of Jesus’ death and resurrection. We are smart to remember that Paul goes on to say in Romans that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23). Paul was not singling out any sin in Romans as wrong, or as being worse than any other. In fact what he was doing was placing all sins on an equal plane. He was simply describing the state of fallen human kind. Therefore it manipulates Scripture to point to Romans 1 as a prohibition of homosexuality and, therefore, a justification of excluding them from worship in our churches. We might as well exclude everyone from worship in our churches since all have sinned.

It is really interesting that the passage many Church leaders point to as a judgment against homosexuality is a passage which, in its context, condemns those who judge sinful behavior. This passage says there is no difference between sinners. Moo discusses the fact that homosexuality being singled out in Romans 1 has to do with the fact that this is not something Jews would have participated in because of how ingrained it was in their culture that homosexual behavior was impure and sinful. Yet Paul says that the Jews, in their own sinfulness, have done the same things (Romans 2:1; Moo, 1996, 113-117). What this passage in Romans does, more than anything, is condemn us today for doing the same thing the Jews were doing in the church in Rome, considering ourselves superior because we have the law on our side, when in fact the sins we have committed have made us just as guilty.

Again, the point of Paul's letters is not to condemn people, but to show people how truly loving, and merciful, and compassionate God is. Let us begin showing this side of God to people.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Easter and the Crucifixion of Jesus

With Easter coming up on Sunday I've been thinking a lot about Jesus' death and what he died for. I think it is often helpful in my spiritual walk at times to try and reframe some of my beliefs, not necessarily to overrule them, but to help me think of new ways a particular doctrine might be relevant.

Jesus' death is often associated with salvation for wrongs done. The question arises "why did Jesus die on the cross," and the answers come pouring in: "he took on himself the sins of the world," "he received the punishment that was due us," "he paid the debt we owed." And so it goes that the most often given answer for the reason of Jesus' death was to somehow atone for wrongs done.

Now, if you read my last blog, you know that I had a way of reframing sin as a person's hurts rather than bad behavior. This view causes us to feel empathy toward "sinners" rather than condemnation. What if we used this reframing as a way of looking at Jesus' death and resurrection. Jesus did not die to atone for sins but to bear our pains and our burdens. Jesus wasn't receiving punishment, but was taking upon himself the hurts of humankind.

We read in Isaiah 53:4 that the Messiah would "[take] up our pain and [bare] our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted." This prophetic passage even addresses that we will miss part of the point of the death of Jesus. Now, I do not deny that Jesus' death was in part done to atone for our sins. I am simply looking at an additional way his death can be viewed.

This view makes God the Father less of a cruel God who would make his son take on the punishment of the world, and more of a compassionate God that would allow his son to bear our pain and our suffering; maybe because he knows Jesus can take it.

Each one of us has a burden to bare that brings us pain. Sometimes this results in addiction, sometimes behavioral problems, and sometimes mental problems. I want all of you to know that you are good just the way you are and that God has felt our pain by suffering on the cross. By his resurrection, he showed that with him we can overcome the burdens we bare. Unlike the message we so often receive from the Christian Church, Jesus is full of love and compassion and cares about each one of us with no amount of judgment or criticism.
Blessings and happy Easter,
-Brandon

Sin: It's Not What You Think It Is

During much of this past week I've been thinking a lot about the concept of sin. I understand that sin is a concept that is clearly addressed in the Bible, but I am wondering how much that concept has been misinterpreted and misused over the past two thousand years. Traditionally the term sin has denoted wrongs committed and has been used for the purpose of condemnation and has caused the alienation of many people because of the so-called sins they have committed. So how can we look at sin differently that might help clear things up and portray scripture in a more accurate light?

Last week I discussed sin as being a symptom of a problem rather than the problem itself. What if we look at sin this week as a hurt or a pain that one experiences? One of the definitions for the Greek word typically translated as sin is "to miss the mark," or "to be without a share in." These are both things that cause a great deal of distress and pain in the person who misses the mark and is without a share in. So it is reasonable that "sin" refers to a hurt of some kind which may result in bad behavior.

I think this is a better definition because it doesn't allow for the exclusion of someone because of a sin, but instead welcomes greater love and compassion toward sinners. Defined the traditional way, sin tends to bring about criticism by people for the way a sinner might live his or her life. If you are gay you are seen as a sinner by many in the church who will then shun you. If you have had an abortion, you will be excluded from certain church groups. The pastor gets up to the pulpit on Sundays and preaches against sin, bringing about a feeling of condemnation in those who are in the pews.

Defined in this new way, sin breeds a sense of empathy from those who sense the pain of the "sinner". Instead of creating an atmosphere of exclusion, sin now brings people together because people want to help those who are in pain. When we view sin not as a wrong committed but a pain felt, it lends itself to a more loving church body that wants to bring in sinners instead of keeping them away.

This interpretation also changes how we interpret the saving act of Jesus's crucifixion. Instead of Jesus being punished for our sins, an interpretation which breeds more guilt in me than relief, Jesus bears our burdens and our pain, making what we bear a little less burdensome. This accords with the words of Scripture where Jesus tells us that his yoke is easy and his burden light, easing our burdens. It also is in tune with Isaiah 53:4, a prophetic passage about the Messiah, which reads, "Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.". Not only does this prophetic passage interpret sin in the new way we have interpreted it here, but it also predicts that we would interpret sin in the traditional way in which we have by calling the crucifixion a punishment from God for our sins. It seems to me this newer way of interpreting sin is more biblical than the traditional way.

But what about those passages in the Bible where Jesus and John the Baptist are telling people to repent and turn away from their sin? Here is how that comes to be translated. The term "repent" means to turn away from one thing and towards another. What these men are saying is that I can turn away from my pain and face Jesus where I will receive comfort. When repentance is called upon by us, it is repentance from our hurts toward a man of compassion, Jesus Christ, from whom we can be healed and comforted from all of the pain that we experience in this life. Won't you repent with me and turn away from what is causing you pain, to receiving the ultimate healing from Jesus?
Blessings,
-Brandon

Sin is A Symptom, Not the Problem

In many, if not most Christian churches today we often hear messages condemning sin and asking us to make a change in our lives. These messages are often filled with guilt-laden comments, guilting us into making a change in our lives which, because of the way the change is brought about, does not last for long and we end up deeper into our "sin" than we ever were before. Why does this phenomenon take place? It is because in the Christian church we are addressing the wrong thing when we address sin. When a person goes into the doctor with a pain, the doctor can treat the pain or look for an underlying problem. People don't normally have pain without an underlying problem. If the doctor treats the pain, the thing causing the pain might get worse and the pain might therefore get worse. In order to fix the pain, the doctor must ignore the pain and fix the underlying problem. Every sin is a symptom of an underlying problem that is going untreated in the Church. What is the underlying problem? Emotional pain.
The only reason people get involved in sin; whether it be drinking in excess, cheating on their spouse, involvement in pornography, etc., is because they are trying to self medicate. If you ask an alcoholic about their childhood they will tell you that nothing they ever did was good enough for their father. If you ask a porn addict, they will tell you they never got enough attention. What is condemnation and a guilt trip going to do to those already feeling such pain? It is going to drive them deeper into their sin. Criticizing an alcoholic for their drinking is going to make them want to medicate even more by drinking even more. Instead what the sinner needs is an increase in love. Let's take a look at what Jesus did with sinners.
The best example in the bible of Jesus's response to sinners comes in Matthew 9:9-13 where Jesus is walking along and sees a tax collector named Matthew sitting at his tax booth. Tax collectors in Jesus's day were seen in the same way as gay couples are seen today by many in the Church. Jesus did not condemn Matthew for his tax collecting. Instead, Jesus invited Matthew to follow him and even ate at his house with other tax collectors. Instead of showing condemnation, Jesus showed care and compassion by loving and accepting the tax collectors; giving them what they likely had never experienced before. The religious leaders of Jesus's day, on the other hand, did what the Church tends to do with sinners today: it condemned the "sinners" and Jesus for eating with sinners. Then Jesus gave his famous line: " it is the sick who are in need of the physician, not the healthy."
Jesus knew that sinners enter into sin because of the pain they are feeling. He knew that it was ridicule that drove them deeper into their sin. He knew that the only cure for sin for them was for him to befriend them and love them. By accepting them for who they were, Jesus helped the men and women of his day to overcome sin. The next time you see someone sinning, don't criticize them for sinning; that will only drive them deeper into their sin. Instead, empathize with the pain they must be feeling for them to be driven to sin, and show them the love and acceptance of which they are in such desperate need. And hopefully the pastors of our churches will follow our lead and end the condemnation that so often comes from their pulpits.
Sincerely,
-Brandon

What Religion Am I?

For many of you the answer to the title question may seem obvious; you would say I am a Christian. If you had asked me a year or more ago what religion I belong to, I would have said Christian also. But I'm not sure this label fits me anymore, and let me tell you why: it is because I do not believe that Jesus himself accepted any labels for himself, and I believe that labels represent everything that Jesus was against. It creates a me-against-them mentality that Jesus was adamantly opposed too. Search in the Bible and tell me where Jesus claims a religion for himself. You can't because he doesn't. Sure, Paul labels himself a Jew, but the famous mantra is not "what would Paul do" but "what would Jesus do," and Jesus did not accept labels.

I do not want anyone to be mistaken; I believe in Jesus, I read the Bible, and I pray to God. But I am open to people of other faiths. I make no attempt to convert people from their belief to mine. How arrogant is it of me to say "I am right and you are wrong." Instead, I want to be like Jesus who accepted the Mithra worshipping Centurion who had more faith than anyone in Israel (Matthew 8:5-13). I want to be like Jesus who accepted the pagan Gentile woman with whom he had the longest dialogue in all of Scripture whose faith was so great (Matthew 15:21-28). Jesus applauded these people who worshipped a different god than he did, yet ridiculed the religious leaders of his day who belonged to his own religion.

By claiming a religion, I am doing that which Jesus worked so hard against: building boundaries. Jesus worked to tear down the boundaries that his religious group set up. His religious group set up boundaries between those who were clean and those who were unclean. Lepers could not remain in the city or have any contact with their family or friends. They were required to remain on the fringe of the city. Jesus allowed for them to reenter once he healed them. The clean were not supposed to dine with the unclean, yet that is exactly what Jesus did, and he was rebuked for it. Yet he wanted to establish that there was no boundary to be placed between the clean and unclean. Jesus overthrew the moneychangers at the Temple in Jerusalem because of the broken Temple system which created such boundaries that the farther in you go into the Temple, the less types of people were allowed in, until finally only the high priest could enter into the Holy of Holies. It was upon Jesus's death that the curtain of the temple was torn, thus tearing down the final boundary that was established by the Jews between humankind and God.

Now, think about the kind of boundaries one is setting up by calling themselves Christian. They are placing themselves in a position opposing other groups, such as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists. The immediate connotation that enters the head of one who hears that someone else is a Christian is, "oh, he/she thinks they are right and I am wrong." Immediately there is a sense that that person has that he/she needs to defend him/herself. One then turns to think of all of the cruelty that has been done in the name of Christianity. It is rare anymore for a non-Christian to hear the label "Christian" and think in positive terms. Instead the term works to build walls instead of bridges. To conclude, I do not know what to call myself, but I can no longer call myself a Christian. I do not deny Jesus the Christ. What I do denounce is this label which has become a term not of respect, but of derision.
Sincerely,
-Brandon

Would Jesus Be Welcome in the Church?

The title question of this post is based off of an interview with Rick Warren done recently in his News and Views Blog where the Senior Pastor of Saddleback Church and author of A Purpose Driven Life defends against attacks from those who are saying he has compromised his faith recently because of eating with a group of Muslims after Ramadan ended. The attacks claim that Rick Warren is sacrificing his Christian faith by eating with the Muslims which is a sign of collaborating with them to form a new church. Rick Warren simply calls it "being a good neighbor." He goes on to question whether Jesus would even be allowed in some of these churches which protest so strongly against actions that even Jesus himself might be caught doing. So the questions arises: "would Jesus be welcome in the Church today?"

If a Christian today who is seen eating with Muslims is said to be compromising his faith, then it certainly seems like Jesus would be considered by those same believers also to be compromising his faith when he eats with tax collectors and prostitutes. If association with a particular group that one considers to be antithetical to Christianity makes one less of a Christian, than certainly Jesus fits that bill.

We can look even further and see how the behavior of Christians that go to bars is viewed. My Senior Pastor's son was killed three and a half years ago outside of a local bar. Many people were stunned by the brutality and raged against this heinous crime. Unfortunately some could not get passed the fact that a pastor's son was at a bar. The issue of the evil of the attack didn't even come to bare in this situation for those who questioned the integrity of this "supposed Christian." But wouldn't Jesus go to the bar today? He sat and visited with people that were seen as the vilest scum of the earth, like the Samaritan woman, or the Gerasene demoniac who could only find solace among the tombstones. Why not say that Jesus would also visit bars and prisons on a regular basis. I can imagine Jesus going down to skid row and death row. I can see him hanging out with the crips and the bloods. These are today's versions of the people we see Jesus hanging out with in the Bible. And yet if any of us were found with these types of people, we would immediately be seen as backsliders and expelled from the church.

The moment a Christian becomes accepting of homosexuality and speaking up for gay rights, that person is immediately singled out in the church as a heretic and made to leave. Do Christians not see and understand that their behavior matches exactly the behavior for which Jesus so adamantly criticized the religious leaders of his day. Among those religious leaders Jesus was seen to be a drunkard, a reveler, a rioter, and someone who laughed too much. He was the life of the party. And he certainly would not have been welcomed in the Church today. He would have been viewed as a heretic and a backslider. This is certainly something to think about the next time we begin to criticize someone for their "anti-Christian behavior."
Blessings,
-Brandon

What Did Jesus Do?

I realize that I have been absent for quite some time, and to my faithful followers I do apologize. In the time I have been absent I have been busy with other endeavors, one of which includes the book I have been working on and have since completed. I am currently trying to format my book to publish via iBooks Author for the Apple iPad. I intend during this time to continue to write articles for this site and will be happy to answer any questions and comments that you may have. Thank you for your kindness and devotion in following my blog.
Sincerely,
-Brandon