Knowing the Mind of God

As I was writing last week, I was reminded of an experience I had while I was searching for a new call. When I was being considered for a position at a particular church, I had the opportunity to interview with a Committee on Ministry of a Presbytery via email. (I will not disclose which church, COM, or Presbytery this was -- I will only say that it is NOT the church, COM, or Presbytery with whom I am affiliated now.)

Here's one of my "favorite" questions about what I had to say in my PIF (Personal Information Form) from a member of that COM:

Under the heading "Key Theological Issues" in Amy's PIF she states: "All Christians must recognize that whenever we claim to know the mind of God we are guilty of idolatry; it is God who calls us and claims us as members of the body of Christ, and not we who call upon or claim God as our own." I need some help in understanding what she is saying here. I would like to ask her: are you saying we cannot know the mind of God at all? Can you explain your statement a bit more, especially in relation to God’s work of revealing to us God's will, God's truth, God's mind so that we can come to know more about God and God's ways for right living? If God can make God’s will known to us, what do you mean when you say it is idolatrous to claim to know what God has revealed? I don’t think I understand what you are trying to say on this point. (see 1 Corinthians 2:9-16, esp. 10-11)

Here is how I answered the inquisitive (and, dare I say, seemingly anxious) individual:

God’s will and God’s truth are, indeed, revealed to us in the person of Jesus Christ by the Spirit of God, and through the Scriptures (again, only by the illumination of the Holy Spirit). Yet, while we (the Church) have received “the Spirit that is from God,” that does not mean that we now “know” the mind of God. Our finite, human minds cannot –- individually or in small groups -– ever fully contain or ever posses the mind of God. As Paul writes, “we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end…For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. (1 Corinthians 13:9-12).”

It is the Church –- the full Body of Christ –- that has received the Spirit of God, and it is only together as a Body of Christ that we are able to begin to know the mind of God; and when God’s Kingdom is made complete, then our knowledge of God may also be complete. When we as individuals or groups (churches, denominations, affiliate groups, etc.) claim to “know” fully the mind of God, we are quick to forget that we are only a part of the Body of Christ; to claim that somehow one group or another is able to have the knowledge that God has is to once again fall prey to the lies of the Tempter.

In 1 Corinthians 2:12, Paul says that “Now we have received…the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.” Later in his letter, Paul goes on to more fully explain these spiritual gifts, taking great care to remind us that we are members of a body; we cannot live without one another (1 Corinthians 12). In order to accomplish this -– in order to live together as one Body of Christ –- we must have love for one another (1 Corinthians 13). Therefore, this is why I say this in my PIF: “The Church is called to live out the truth of Christ’s command to 'Love one another as I have loved you'. As we are confronted by a barrage of political and social issues, it is vitally important that the Church find ways to be open to persons of all political, socio-economic, and theological standpoints –- we will only be whole when the Church is able to embrace persons of differing views.”

When will we dare to get over ourselves, admit that we don't have all the answers (and that we couldn't handle it even if we did), and just let God be God...?

The Cartoon Song: A Reflection

In the late '90s, Christian radio stations were abuzz with the hidden track on the album Past the Edges by Chris Rice: Cartoons.



Without question, it is a catchy, fun little song. It presents us with a simple hypothetical to consider: What if cartoons "got saved"? And it is clever to imagine how those famous cartoons would say "hallelujah". And yet, as imaginative as this song is, the message that it sends leaves much to be desired...

The song suggests that "Beavis and that other guy" won't be or can't be saved. The slight pause and one word dismissal of "nah" makes at least some people in the live audience laugh -- there are some who cheer, even -- but, I don't see the humor or joy in it. Why is it that we think that these two cartoon characters can be so easily tossed aside? Is it their choice of dress? Is it their choice of music? Maybe it is their presumed education level or their choice of language? Why is it so difficult to imagine Beavis and Butthead getting saved?

The answer really all depends on your understanding of salvation. Some people believe that salvation is totally dependent on our actions -- that is to say that we humans have a kind of authoritative role in whether or not we are saved. Some say -- either with their actual words or with their actions -- that salvation is based on our believing something or doing something or saying something, as though our being saved or not is dependent upon our "works".

I don't agree with this understanding. You see, I don't believe that we humans (or cartoons, for that matter) have any authoritative role in "being saved". Salvation has nothing to do with any choice that I could ever make. It has nothing to do with any magic words or special incantations. It is not something that comes about because of our "works". Salvation is not something that we do. God - and God alone - is the one who acts through Christ. If salvation is dependent on me and my actions/choices, then that would mean that God is bound by me...and that is a really weak God! Salvation is a gift from God -- pure and simple.

So, I have to wonder... why say "nah" when considering what it would be like if Beavis and Butthead were saved? Is God not capable of extending the gift of salvation to characters like them? God doesn't hesitate to save Fred Flinstone, a character who frequently mistreats his wife. God readily saves Scooby-doo and Shaggy, who are known trespassers (and long suspected drug users). God has no problem saving someone like Yogi Bear, who is an admitted thief. And yet, according to the song, God has no interest in saving two teenage boys who like to watch MTV.

Really?!? I'm just not buying it... I wholeheartedly believe that God is fully capable of saving Beavis and Butthead! Do I know that God would save them? No. I don't know that any more than I can know if God would save anyone else! I don't claim to know the mind of God. This is why I find it rather upsetting that there are "Christians" who dare to make judgement calls like Chris Rice has in his song "Cartoons". There is no good reason to suggest -- even in jest -- that God has no interest in or ability to save someone...

Jesus said -- without mincing words -- that we are not called to make these kinds of judgements. "Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get (Matthew 7:1-2)." It is pretty clear that none of us are in any position to decide whether or not God would save someone. If we're going to be judged according to the judgments that we make, then I am going to follow the rules of love and grace...

If There Is A Hell...

The violent behavior of Fred Phelps that has recently been revealed by his estranged seventh-son, Nate, comes as no surprise. Any person whose entire "ministry" revolves around hate is bound to exhibit violent behavior. (I don't think that I have ever heard any reports of this "pastor" of the Westboro Baptist "Church" even saying the word love.)

At the end of the article, Nate Phelps (the son) says this: "So since the United States is taking steps to move in the direction of equality for gays in America, he says that has doomed America... So anyone who is connected to America, so anyone who is supporting America in any sense is subject to the wrath of God."

So... here's what I'm wondering... The Westboro Baptist "Church" benefited from the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in their favor. The court decided that they have the right to do what they do, right? So... doesn't that mean that they are "connected to America"? I mean, they live in America. They live under the rule of the U.S. government. They were just supported by the highest court in America.

So...according to their own claims regarding what happens to those who are connected to America...doesn't this mean that (due to their association) "God Hates Westboro Baptist Church"?

Just wondering...

Roll Away Your Stone...

What stone could you roll away today?

Who Does This? Really?

So...it seems that the gal in the video that I posted yesterday - the one thanking God for answering prayers to convert atheists by causing the earthquake in Japan - was making up the whole thing.



Now, on the one hand, I am incredibly happy to find out that the video wasn't legit. But, on the other hand... Who DOES this sort of thing??? I mean, is this meant to be entertaining? Is it meant to be a political statement of some sort? Is it designed to make other groups of people look bad by pretending to be the most rotten apple in the bunch?

Parody or not -- "troll" video or not -- what was posted was just plain wrong. And the "oops, my bad" pseudo-apology doesn't really cut it for me...