the power of the symbol

Finally!  After too long of a hiatus I actually have something worthwhile to write!  It's nice to feel the liberating power of Christmas break, but anyway...


Symbols are a powerful thing... almost too powerful.  The fact that they are so powerful is interesting, because in reality they are nothing.  Their power resides merely in social agreement.  They have the power to direct, condescend, aid in transcendence, etc.

Think of it, we get angry when someone speaks a vulgar word, or expresses a vulgar gesture.
An A+ on a paper/test is highly regarded whether or not any of the information is retained afterwards.
A diamond is a highly valued gem that is, though rare, merely a crystalline construct of tetrahedral carbon atoms.
A large bicep is understood as strength... i.e. Arm and Hammer.  Likewise, fashion.  Who makes up the laws of fashion?  Are there really any rules that make any sense beyond our social setting's unspoken code of conduct?

the monument vs. the mission

My desire as it stands now is to be the pastor of a church.  Considering that that church will probably be a United Methodist church, that is if the conference accepts me, will make for an interesting pastorate.  The United Methodist Church is not unique, and I know the problems that it is experiencing are hardly unknown elsewhere.  However, the challenge will be unique for a guy like me who doesn't hold allegiance to any particular faction within the church, and the allegiances I do hold are to dead guys or ideas and ideals.  It will also be unique because I have experienced church outside of the Methodist church and know that not only is it not all that bad, it is in fact quite desirable. 

This creates a problem.

Lady Gaga: 1 Christians: 0

I read this article:
Lady Gaga and Self Acceptance

It struck a chord in me.  I mean here is a good way to view and love others; the whole "little monsters" thing is part gimmicky, but more so its very much a reality.
Lady Gaga has not only picked up on the monster part, but also the acceptance part.
Both I think Christians have gotten seriously wrong.

my doctrine on doctrine

Doctrine is great, it’s a great way to put theological beliefs and statements into memorable, "carry-on" formats.  The Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, Westminster Catechism, etc. all take big theological systems and put them into a simpler format.  Which is a great thing for the church and the church people, it allows non-clergy to better know their own theology without having to have studied it for several years, and it allows the clergy to better teach it without teaching it for years.  In this way it is fantastic.

Of course with this, and like many other things, I also have my disagreements with how it is used.

cold turkey ain't good turkey

One of the things that I am really against is cold turkey evangelism.  I’ve done enough times to know that I don’t like it.  Of course the argument for it is that you do it with the trust that God will somehow use it for his purposes.  I agree with that, and when I do evangelize I am taking that to heart.

My problem is that it is simply a bad way to evangelize.  It is wrought of love.  Now of course I know that even taking the time to tell them about the Lordship of Christ is loving for me to do, but honestly how loved do they feel?  If all I do is come up and share the gospel with them and then leave them at that what love would they feel?  Would they feel loved that I took the time to come up to them to talk to them about Jesus?  Maybe… if they were already Christian, but if they don’t know Christ yet then what?  If it’s without some sort of continuing relationship what love is really given?  

Loving should go hand in hand with suffering, and there is no suffering in cold turkey evangelism, there is persecution, but not the long suffering that Christ experienced.  He spent 3 years with his disciples only to die without them "getting it" until he rose.  That’s suffering, that expending yourself and not seeing any fruit.  This is the sort of suffering that relational evangelism brings, not cold turkey.  We should expect, and desire, to spend time with people, watch them sin, and never get it.  We should expect them to deny Christ, turn away, make grandiose statements about his divinity and then in the next second be against Christ’s work.  That suffering is much worse than merely being spat upon, that suffering breaks hearts.

I’d be willing to say that that is the model of evangelism that is set up for us.  The gospel isn’t about getting people to convert, it’s about the Lordship of Christ enabling us to truly love and serve God, and, if we are doing that faithfully, conversion will happen whether we want it to or not.  Just going out and throwing out the Word randomly is bad stewardship to.  A farmer sure as heck doesn’t just randomly scatter seed, he does it with purpose and intent, some may fall on the path, but he is sowing seed in the field where he will be sure to tend to it. 

We do have to proclaim it, but it’s different proclaiming a Messiah to people who are looking for one than to people who think they are their own Messiah. And if we are to proclaim it, it should be in the community that we live amongst, that we will be around daily or weekly, not to random people on the beach or a street that we probably will never see again.