Homosexuality, Robert Schuller, The Crystal Cathedral, and What Jesus Did

Robert Schuller's church, the Crystal Cathedral, made news recently because the choir was asked to sign a covenant that denounced homosexuality. Robert Schuller rightly came out against the covenant saying he knew nothing about it, and rejected the anti-gay sentiment found in the document. I say "rightly" because Schuller himself made the statement that the Church is a "hospital for sinners, not a museum of saints." Even if we were to categorize homosexuality as a sin (something I am not sure I am ready to do) this statement reflects the fact that the Christian Church should not exclude a particular group simply because of a particular behavior. Traditionally, during different times in Church history, Christians have picked out a particular behavior, called it a sin, and excluded anyone who participated in that behavior from the Church. At one point it was anyone who drank, at another it was anyone who smoked, people who went to movies were at one point excluded. At other times, women who lived alone and practiced alternative health care were excluded from the Church, labeled as witches, and killed. So it is now with the GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) population.

This makes me wonder if the Church has not placed the wrong emphasis on sin in its interaction with the outside world (the world outside the walls of the Church). We learn from scripture (and Schuller's statement above) that sinners were meant to live within the walls of the Church, not to be kept outside. In the Gospels, Jesus was constantly battling the religious leaders because they were doing what most churches/Christians do today, excluding people because of what they perceived as sin. Constantly, the Pharisees were criticizing Jesus and the disciples for doing work on the Sabbath; a practice they could label a sin based on their interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus, however, showed a new (or older) way of interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures to redefine what it meant to honor the Sabbath, thereby removing the "sin" label. Maybe he would do the same with homosexuality. Where the religious leaders would have excluded the disciples, Jesus included them in His Church, and they ended up becoming the leaders of the early Church, growing it in ways no one else could have. This was a perceived sin that was in fact no sin at all. But how did Jesus react to actual sin? This is illustrated in John 8 when the adulteress woman is brought before Jesus by the religious leaders who ask Jesus what they should do with her, reminding him that the Hebrew Scriptures command to stone her. Jesus tells them that the one who is without sin should be the first to throw a stone. When Jesus looks back up they all had left. Jesus asks the woman if any had condemned her, to which she replied, "no." Jesus responds, "then I do not condemn you either." where the religious leaders would have excluded this "sinner" from Church, Jesus accepted this woman for who she was. So whether homosexuality is a perceived sin (being no sin at all) or an actual sin, it should in no way prevent us from including the GLBT community into the walls of the Church.

Evangelists, as they witness, traditionally point out a person's sins and try to show them their need for Jesus. But Jesus never focused on a person's sins, but instead focused on their hurts. Jesus' desire wasn't to show people how bad they were so they would come to him, his desire was to show people love and compassion, without having any ulterior motive. Jesus' focus was not to exclude people because of their sins (something he adamantly objected as a bad practice among the religious leaders). Instead, Jesus' focus was to include people because of their hurts.

Somewhere along the line we have become like the religious leaders of Jesus' day, misrepresenting Scripture to justify the exclusion of particular groups from our fold. That is not what Jesus wanted and not what we were meant to do. Let us no longer focus on our differences. Let us instead do what Jesus did by focusing on our common humanity and having compassion and love for others, thereby including them in the body of Christ.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Rob Bell, "Love Wins," and the Universalist

Let me start out by saying that I have not read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." Let me also say that it is my intention to read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." I have, however, been reading a lot of articles about Rob Bell and his recent book in which he argues against the existence of a hell, stating basically that the idea of a loving, caring, Father God, precludes the idea that a place of eternal punishment exists. For a good explanation of Bell's book, see the blogs at the end of my article. Many are crying that Rob Bell is a heretic, that he is a universalist, and that he needs to be excommunicated from the Church. Those who argue for excommunication apparently do not realize Bell is not a Catholic and therefore cannot be excommunicated. Bell denies being a universalist (the belief that all dogs, and all people, go to heaven regardless of their religion). Whether his argument implies universalism or not, I cannot say, only Bell can. And if he denies being a universalist, I have to accept him for his word. He is probably like me in saying that we really cannot say who God does and does not save. That he is a heretic, is what I here plan on disproving.
Bell is doing what more Christians need to do, he is emphasizing love over hate, grace over judgment. Bell believes that the idea of God's unconditional love contradicts the kind of hell we have come to believe in, a place of eternal, never ending punishment for those who deny Christ. How can an all-loving, merciful God send anyone to such a place? How can a Father do such a thing to His child? What if someone never had the opportunity to hear about Jesus? Do they go to hell? What if someone was horribly abused by a Christian who claimed to be abusing in the name of Christ? Does such a person go to hell? If we can argue that hell does not exist, the problem goes away.
We also have the problem of many evangelicals going around and using hell as a motivator to join the Body of Christ. "If you do not believe in Jesus, you're going to hell," they say. "If you continue in your sin, you won't make it into heaven, but will be punished forever, others say." Jesus says, "love your neighbor as yourself." God says, "I desire that all will be saved." Paul says, "there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." So as you can see, our current language does not match up with the love language of Scripture. If we can disprove the existence of hell, then maybe we can get Christians to stop abusing hell for their own gain. When Jesus spoke, love was always his first and foremost concern. The biggest thing Jesus wanted his followers to understand was the importance of showing love and compassion towards others, not hate. What is happening today, however, is that love has been placed in the background so a message of hellfire and brimstone can scare people into becoming Christians. I've said it once and I'll say it again, when Jesus spoke to people, it was out of love and concern for them, not so he could convince them to follow him. If Jesus left an encounter and the person did not want to follow Jesus, or believe in him, that was ok with Jesus. Their freedom was more important to Jesus than getting them "saved."
So what about hell? What are we to believe? Certainly the bible speaks of such a place, doesn't it? There is the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in which, upon dying, the rich man sees Lazarus across a vast space and resting in Abraham's bosom. The rich man is obviously suffering and Lazarus is obviously in bliss. Jesus speaks of a place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And of course there is the imagery in the Revelation. So what are we to think? Let me first say that in the Old Testament, there is no talk of hell. There is talk of "Sheol" which just means the grave and was not a location of the afterlife. There is talk of "Abaddon" which can be interpreted in multiple ways, and is traditionally interpreted as a place of suffering, but without necessary connection to the afterlife. So, the idea of hell (as well as the Devil) was a much later idea and did not start developing until the Jews were exiled in Babylon where they were influenced by the pagan beliefs.
Later on we have 7 passages where Jesus speaks of the children of the Kingdom being exiled to a place where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 8:11-12; 13:41-42, 49-50; 22:12-13; 24:50-51; 25:29-30; and Luke 13:27-28). First, let me point out that none of these passages refers to this place as being eternal. So, whatever this place may be, it may simply be a temporary thing. One of the problems with the idea of a place of eternal punishment is that punishment is a corrective thing. What is the point of correcting someone, if there is no chance to be restored. When a parent punishes their child, the intention is to correct a behavior so they no longer behave in that way. It seems to me that eternal "punishment," therefore, cannot truly serve its purpose and is just cruel. What we know about God is that is not a God of cruelty, but a God of love. If God is love, how can He eternally punish someone. Perhaps, then, this place of weeping and gnashing of teeth is a temporary place to punish person, making them ready for heaven. From my studies, I have not yet found a reference to this place we call hell, being eternal. And Jesus does not use this language to scare just anyone. Again, if you look carefully, these speeches are directed at those who should know better, the religious authorities of Israel. Those were the people Jesus was always fighting with, those were the people that were oppressive and misused the Word of God. These verses are directed at those who should know better than to teach and preach what they are teaching and preaching.
Finally, let me direct you to Jesus' actions. His actions were far from condemning of people. Jesus showed nothing but grace and love to others. A good example of this was to the Roman centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant who was deathly sick. Jesus immediately obliged and even attempted to go with the centurion to help him. He declined having Jesus come into his home because he felt unworthy. Instead he told Jesus that he knew he could heal the servant without setting foot in the home. Jesus said this Roman had a stronger faith than any he had ever known, even within Israel. What is remarkable about this story is that this Roman centurion, would have been a follower of Mithras, a pagan god. He wasn't even a Jew, let alone a follower of Jesus. And yet this man had more faith than Jesus had ever seen. Who are we, as Christians, to say who can and cannot be saved, who goes to hell and who does not? If God desires all to be saved, if God wants none to suffer, why is it so bad saying that either there is no hell and those who do not want to spend eternity with God simply cease to exist, or to say that hell is a place of temporary punishment to prepare the worst of sinners to see God face to face. What is most important is that we stop using hell as a scare tactic and start showing the kind of love for others Jesus has for them. My prayer is that everyone I encounter may know the love of Christ from being with me.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Is Bell Into Hell, a Review of "Love Wins"
The Rob Bell Controversy: Does Anyone Go To Hell?
The Heretical Rob Bell and Why Love Wins

The Power of Presence

Friends,
When the angel Gabriel told Mary she was going to have a baby, conceived of the Holy Spirit, we read in Matthew 1:23 that he says, "'Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,' which means, 'God is with us.'” Jesus represented God in our midst, he brought God's presence to the world. As we read in Scripture of Jesus' life, we come to realize that the greatest gift he gave to humankind was not any miracle he performed, it was not any word that he spoke, but the greatest gift Jesus gave to us was his presence. Sure he performed many miraculous things: healing the blind and the lame, bringing the dead back to life, and turning water into wine. But the purpose of God's incarnation in Jesus was not to heal physical ailments or make a boring party more exciting. Jesus' purpose in becoming one of us was to give us spiritual healing through the gift of God's presence. One of the examples of this in Scripture can be found in John 4 where we read about Jesus' visitation with the woman at the well. Jesus did not perform any miraculous healing in this story, and he didn't even provide any kind of teaching. Jesus gave his presence and brought acceptance to a woman who, as we read about her many husbands and how she was currently living with a man that was not her husband, we realize was not familiar with acceptance. She probably had many people in her village that did not accept her because they saw her as an adulteress because of her lifestyle. But Jesus showed her acceptance, kindness, and love; and most importantly, he showed her God. By providing his presence, God's presence, he gave the woman spiritual healing. Another story that illustrates this is found in John 8 when the religious leaders of Jesus' day brought a woman who had been caught in the act of adultery, before Jesus. They questioned Jesus about stoning her, since that is what their interpretation of the law required. Jesus' reply was, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." When Jesus had looked away, and then looked back, he saw that there was no religious leader to condemn her. Jesus then asked, "did no one condemn you." Upon hearing the woman reply "no," Jesus responded, "then I do not condemn you either." Once again, Jesus does not perform any miraculous healing or provide any fantastic teaching, he simply gives himself, giving the gift of God's presence, by showing compassion and mercy. By being present with others, Jesus gave the gift of the presence of God, which encompasses love, compassion, and mercy.
One of the metaphors used in Scripture to refer to the presence of God is the Temple. In the Old Testament, the Temple represented God's presence in the midst of Israel. When the Temple was built by Solomon, we read in 1 Kings 8 that upon completion of the Temple, and once the Ark of the Covenant was placed inside, "It happened that went the priests came from the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the LORD, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the house of the LORD. Then Solomon said, 'The LORD has said that He would dwell in the thick cloud'" (vv 10-12). To the Jews, the Temple held God's presence in the midst of Israel. When Jesus, in all four gospels ransacked the Temple, overthrowing the money changers and announced that he would destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days, he was illustrating that God's presence no longer dwelled in the Temple, but dwelled in himself. Jesus was announcing that wherever he was, God was. But something remarkable happens when Jesus dies, resurrects, and ascends. He told the disciples that his death and resurrection and ascension would be necessary in order for us to receive the Holy Spirit. We read in I Corinthians 3:16 "Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?" Paul tells the Christians in Corinth that because we have received the Holy Spirit, that we are now the Temple of God. In other words, being Christ-followers, we now house God's presence bring God's presence into the world wherever we go.
What this means for us is that as we interact with other people, it is our responsibility as Christians, as those who house the presence of God, to bring compassion, love, and mercy to others. This means that instead of the judgmental, condemning attitude Christians often bring to others, it is our duty to bring mercy and compassion, bringing God's presence to others by showing them his infinite, unconditional love. It also means that we can stop trying to fix every problem, and help people to rest in God's presence despite the problem they are in. It seems that we too often, when we have no solution and no ability to solve a person's problem, we try to solve it anyway by giving advice and trying to work out a solution, instead of helping the person to rest in God's peaceful presence. As a Hospice Chaplain, I often visit people who are moments from passing. Often what is manifested is what is called "terminal agitation." This means that just prior to dying a person will experience high anxiety and become restless. The typical response is to try and do something to help them. Caregivers will run around like a chicken with their head cut off trying to come up with a solution. Medication is given, blankets are put on them, blankets are taken off them, 911 is sometimes called. The best thing to do in this situation is just simply to be with the person. To provide one's own presence, thus providing God's presence, without trying to perform some miraculous cure or relief, is the best gift a person can give. Sometimes just being their is all that is needed in many situations. Stop trying to give a miracle, stop trying to give the best advice, and learn to simply be. The power of presence, and the relief it can give is amazing and is truly the greatest of all miracles if we just give it a try.
-Brandon