If there's any one thing that Jesus spoke and taught about most during his public ministry, it was the kingdom of God/Heaven. Through numerous parables, comparisons, stories, and word-pictures, Jesus was constantly trying to hammer the reality and truth of the kingdom into people's heads and hearts.
So what is this kingdom Jesus was talking about? Is it a religious institution? Is it a collection of religious laws? Is it the church? Is it the whole of Christendom - all of our organizations, buildings, programs, activities, doctrines, record companies, magazines, and TV networks rolled up into one big lump? Is the kingdom merely those people who know and follow Christ? Is it something we as Christians are supposed to be building, a centuries-long construction project, or is it something that already exists, finished and complete?
In the Gospel of John's famous chapter three, Jesus had an interesting late night conversation with a man named Nicodemus, one of the religious leaders of the day. After Nicodemus tells Jesus that he believes He has come from God, Jesus replies that "unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." When Nicodemus makes it clear that he doesn't understand what "born again" means, Jesus adds that "unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."
Until recently, I always took that passage to mean that you don't get to go to heaven unless you get "saved" as modern evangelical Christianity defines it. While that may be essentially true, it doesn't seem to be the point that Jesus is trying to get across. Quite simply, He's saying that there is this thing called the kingdom of God that no-one can see or enter without first being born again - which implies that once someone has been born again, he or she can both see and enter this kingdom.
It's important to note that the verbs used for both "see" and "enter" are used in the present tense and do not refer to some future sweet by-and-by. Even more interesting, the verb used for "see" - the Greek work Eido - carries more meaning than just physically seeing something with the eyes. It also means to have knowledge of something gained through experience or to "see with the mind."
So then, is Jesus saying that by being born again of water and the Spirit - obeying Christ in baptism and actually receiving the indwelling of the Holy Spirit within us - we become capable of perceiving this kingdom (which was apparently already in existence when Jesus and Nicodemus were conversing), entering this kingdom, and gaining experiential knowledge of this kingdom? I'd say yes, that's what Jesus was saying.
So where is this kingdom, what does it look like, and what is it made of? Jesus states plainly when speaking to Pontius Pilate that His kingdom is not of (part of, located in, or originating from) this world or Kosmos, which denotes the sum total of the material universe and everyone living in it. Essentially, Jesus is saying that His kingdom exists beyond not only the political or religious systems of humankind, but outside (or other than) the entire physical universe as well. Scripture tells us that God is a spirit, and it would stand to reason that His kingdom exists in this spiritual dimension.
But what does it mean for us to perceive this spiritual kingdom, and how should that bear on what we do and say? I think Christ explained this in describing His own relationship to the Father? In several places in John's Gospel, Jesus indicates that He is not speaking or acting by His own initiative, but rather according to what He hears and sees the Father speaking and doing. Jesus was obviously able to perceive what was going on in the spiritual dimension - a capacity and a relational connection which the Father passed on to His followers through the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Could that be what the kingdom of God is all about - God doing, speaking, and moving in the spiritual realm, which is then mirrored in the physical realm by people perceiving this spiritual activity and following suit in their own lives?
Consider Christ's model prayer to the Father: "Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Does the kingdom really need to be any more complicated than this simple agreement between heaven and earth, God and man?
Here we come to what I believe to be the primary blunder of Christian history. Through gradual increments, we stopped seeing the kingdom as something God is doing and something which we need to perceive, enter, and submit our lives to, and we started viewing it as something we're supposed to build in God's honor through our own efforts. We started building temples for God to dwell in, we established organizational structures patterned on human government, and we started measuring the success of our endeavors by material, worldly standards. Eventually, most Christians came to view their own institutional creations as the kingdom of God on earth, and that way of thinking still persists in a big way today.
Unfortunately, we have largely lost the essential element of spiritual perception and the essential truth that the kingdom is something we can never build on our own steam and wisdom; we're just not qualified for that task.
Truth be told, we're not even qualified to assist God in building His kingdom. We're not called to be kingdom builders; we're called to be building materials (living stones) in God's building project - just check out II Corinthians, 2:18-22 and I Peter, 2:4-5. Another way of saying it is that we - our lives and our relationships - are being built together by God into a new kind of kingdom.
At best, we can only build earthly imitations of God's kingdom through human efforts, in the same way that the tabernacle built by Mosses was merely a physical symbol of something that already existed in the spiritual realm. But while the physical tabernacle served its purpose in that time frame, the need for it vanished when Christ opened the door for us to enter as priests under His high priesthood into the spiritual original (see Hebrews, chapters 9 & 10).
With all that said, I think we as the modern church need to look for ways to disengage from our own efforts to build earthly imitations of God's kingdom and rediscover how to perceive, live in and submit ourselves to what He is building and doing.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Monday, March 3, 2008
Shedding Our Religious Skin
Throughout human history, religion has consistently remained one of the most powerful, influential forces on planet earth. More wars have been fought in the name of religion than any other single cause. Entire nations and empires have been founded and sustained on religious foundations. And, by and large, religion has spawned more institutions, organizations, building projects, and scholarly endeavors than other aspect of human culture and society.
So, what then is true religion? What is the difference between true religion and false religion? Are religious pursuits and institutions ordained by God? Did Christ come to start a new religion or was He doing something else? Is it possible to follow Christ while rejecting organized religion? Is religion necessary or is it a hindrance in pursuing a relationship with God?
To begin my attempt at answering these questions, I'll go right back to the place and time in which I believe religion has its genesis - that being the book of Genesis itself. I think the first roots of religion were planted with the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden and the introduction of sin into this world. I would even go so far as to say that religion in all of its forms (excepting none) is the direct result and product of sin and has become a primary element of a fallen world system, right alongside politics and economics.
To say that religion is the product of sin might sound strange, irrational or even heretical, but I challenge you to consider the possibility.
The most tragic result of Adam and Eve's fall was the loss of direct relationship with their Creator. And that was not all - they also lost the purity of their relationship with each other. The fact that they sought to cover their nakedness with plant life gives evidence of this. At that point, they weren't hiding from God; He had not yet shown up on the scene. No, they were hiding from each other. Those same fangs that still poison our relationships today - insecurity, selfishness, fear, and the twisted desire to control one another - had entered that first marriage.
And when God came calling, they hid themselves altogether, initiating a rift in their relationship with God - a rift that would be widened into a great gulf by their descendants.
Still, the sense of loss and the deep-rooted need to restore these relationships has never left humankind, and over time humans developed a systematized way of trying to fill that hole - namely, religion. You see, while religion reflects man's desire to reconnect with God, it all too often serves as a substitute for actual relationship. Basically, it allows us to feel good about ourselves and imagine that God is pleased with us while, at the same time, we get to keep a measured distance from God.
And that, of course, goes back to the sin issue. The taint and shame of sin drives us to hide and run from the Lord, and, what's worse, sin makes it impossible for we fallen humans to close that distance and fix what was broken through our own power or wisdom.
I find it interesting that, after booting Adam and Eve out of the garden, God took the time to make clothes for them out of the skins of animals, apparently animals He slaughtered with His own hand. Beyond providing some much-needed protection against the elements, this also spoke symbolically to their spiritual state. Sin has to be covered before the eyes of a Holy God, and Adam and Eve's attempt to cover themselves and their own sin was not adequate to the task. Covering sin requires blood and sacrifice - a reality that gave rise to the animal sacrifices that were central in all the ancient religious systems, both pagan and Jewish. It also pointed forward prophetically to Christ, whose blood would eventually cover sin once and for all.
In the case of pagan religions, this reality was twisted to the point that their objects of worship became either blood-thirsty monsters or mere supernatural projections of fallen humanity.
But what about the ancient religion of the Jews? Wasn't that given to them by God?
Sure, but, if you examine Scripture closely, you'll find that He did not do this as His first choice. The history of the Jews began when God initiated a personal relationship with a guy named Abram (later called Abraham). A few centuries later, God entered a relationship with Mosses and, through Mosses, tried to establish relationship with the entire nation of Israel. The Israelites, however, made it very clear during their sojourn in the wilderness that they did not want to talk to God directly and they were still attached to the systematized religion of the Egyptians. Following God's direction day to day was just not enough for them.
At this point, God gave them the Ten Commandments, the civic laws of Mosses, and the Levitical rules and rituals by which to conduct this new religion. In essence, God gave them a more elaborate, detailed set of animal skins with which to cover themselves. But this was not meant to be a permanent state of affairs.
In his letter to the Galatians, Paul makes it clear that the law cannot restore the relationship between God and man. The law was given as a curse for disobedience, and it was also given as a tutor to prepare the children of Israel for faith in Christ. Besides, practically every aspect, object, and ritual involved in the ancient Jewish religion pointed symbolically forward to Christ. God gave the Jews a religion specifically designed to serve as a temporary standby until He could reveal the fullness of His plans and purposes in Christ.
But when their Messiah finally showed up on the scene, offering restored relationship with God through Himself, many (particularly, the religious leaders of the day) were just not ready to give up their training pants for spiritual clothes. Sadly, they had come to love their religion and their position within that religion more than they loved God - though they would never consciously admit that (even to themselves). Christ offered them the opportunity to know God in a personal, intimate way, but they preferred their post as experts on the subjects of God and religion.
Christ also opened the door to restored, loving relationships between people. And that, as far as I see it, is why Christ established His church. Quite simply, the church is Christ infusing His supernatural brand of love into human relationships and presenting this collection of love-centered relationships as a picture of Himself for all the world to see.
Religion, at best, was only a prep school for real, loving, Spirit-led relationships, and, as far as I'm concerned, the need for religion, religious institutions, and religious structures all ended with Christ. He is our high priest, our king, and our bridegroom, and we are His temple, His people, and His blushing bride. Jesus is all in all, and no religious embellishments are needed.
The reality, however, is that this religion called Christianity has come into being in the centuries between us and the early church, and, unfortunately, this religious entity has arisen largely at the expense of love-centered relationships. Gradually, step by fateful step, the relational was replaced by ritual, intellectual constructs, and organizational structures. Belief systems were substituted for personally knowing God, and liturgies and programs were substituted in place of relating to each other in Christlike love. Even the absolute essential of salvation through faith was replaced by the ritualistic administration of sacraments within the Roman Catholic Church. Practically every real and living spiritual gift that Christ gave to His church was replaced by dead, man-manufactured imitations. In essence, the Body of Christ crawled right back under the same kind of religious oppression and legalistic curse that Jesus came to free us from.
Maybe, that's because (in some pathetic way) we're more comfortable there. As I stated earlier, a religious context (rather than a relational context) allows people to keep a measured distance from God while giving the appearance of serving God. It's a perverted preference that goes right back to the fall of man. There's just something about fallen human nature that prefers jumping though some religious hoops and following a set of rules and rituals to actually dealing with our fallenness one-on-one with the One who made us. Religion also makes room for what I call the separation of church and life - basically compartmentalizing your responsibilities to God as something separate from how you conduct yourself and relate to others outside a designated religious structure or meeting.
More than anything, I think religion is an instrument of control - or rather, it gives us the illusion of control over that which rightfully holds authority over us. A well-trained pet deity on a leash is much safer than a living God who just might move in ways that we're not used to or comfortable with. And subscribing to a set list of religious doctrines and dogmas is much easier than being a perpetual student of both Scripture and the Holy Spirit. Religion grants human beings the imaginary authority to determine what God will or will not do, and it endows some humans (namely those with religious titles and job descriptions) with the power to place limits on how others can relate to God and their fellow man.
Christ paid the price of our sin with His own blood, He opened the door wide for us to have restored relationship with God, and He went through a lot of trouble to teach us how to live in right relationship with each other. I think it's high time to shed the dead snakeskin of religion and get back to the simple life of love and fellowship that He intends for us.
So, what then is true religion? What is the difference between true religion and false religion? Are religious pursuits and institutions ordained by God? Did Christ come to start a new religion or was He doing something else? Is it possible to follow Christ while rejecting organized religion? Is religion necessary or is it a hindrance in pursuing a relationship with God?
To begin my attempt at answering these questions, I'll go right back to the place and time in which I believe religion has its genesis - that being the book of Genesis itself. I think the first roots of religion were planted with the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden and the introduction of sin into this world. I would even go so far as to say that religion in all of its forms (excepting none) is the direct result and product of sin and has become a primary element of a fallen world system, right alongside politics and economics.
To say that religion is the product of sin might sound strange, irrational or even heretical, but I challenge you to consider the possibility.
The most tragic result of Adam and Eve's fall was the loss of direct relationship with their Creator. And that was not all - they also lost the purity of their relationship with each other. The fact that they sought to cover their nakedness with plant life gives evidence of this. At that point, they weren't hiding from God; He had not yet shown up on the scene. No, they were hiding from each other. Those same fangs that still poison our relationships today - insecurity, selfishness, fear, and the twisted desire to control one another - had entered that first marriage.
And when God came calling, they hid themselves altogether, initiating a rift in their relationship with God - a rift that would be widened into a great gulf by their descendants.
Still, the sense of loss and the deep-rooted need to restore these relationships has never left humankind, and over time humans developed a systematized way of trying to fill that hole - namely, religion. You see, while religion reflects man's desire to reconnect with God, it all too often serves as a substitute for actual relationship. Basically, it allows us to feel good about ourselves and imagine that God is pleased with us while, at the same time, we get to keep a measured distance from God.
And that, of course, goes back to the sin issue. The taint and shame of sin drives us to hide and run from the Lord, and, what's worse, sin makes it impossible for we fallen humans to close that distance and fix what was broken through our own power or wisdom.
I find it interesting that, after booting Adam and Eve out of the garden, God took the time to make clothes for them out of the skins of animals, apparently animals He slaughtered with His own hand. Beyond providing some much-needed protection against the elements, this also spoke symbolically to their spiritual state. Sin has to be covered before the eyes of a Holy God, and Adam and Eve's attempt to cover themselves and their own sin was not adequate to the task. Covering sin requires blood and sacrifice - a reality that gave rise to the animal sacrifices that were central in all the ancient religious systems, both pagan and Jewish. It also pointed forward prophetically to Christ, whose blood would eventually cover sin once and for all.
In the case of pagan religions, this reality was twisted to the point that their objects of worship became either blood-thirsty monsters or mere supernatural projections of fallen humanity.
But what about the ancient religion of the Jews? Wasn't that given to them by God?
Sure, but, if you examine Scripture closely, you'll find that He did not do this as His first choice. The history of the Jews began when God initiated a personal relationship with a guy named Abram (later called Abraham). A few centuries later, God entered a relationship with Mosses and, through Mosses, tried to establish relationship with the entire nation of Israel. The Israelites, however, made it very clear during their sojourn in the wilderness that they did not want to talk to God directly and they were still attached to the systematized religion of the Egyptians. Following God's direction day to day was just not enough for them.
At this point, God gave them the Ten Commandments, the civic laws of Mosses, and the Levitical rules and rituals by which to conduct this new religion. In essence, God gave them a more elaborate, detailed set of animal skins with which to cover themselves. But this was not meant to be a permanent state of affairs.
In his letter to the Galatians, Paul makes it clear that the law cannot restore the relationship between God and man. The law was given as a curse for disobedience, and it was also given as a tutor to prepare the children of Israel for faith in Christ. Besides, practically every aspect, object, and ritual involved in the ancient Jewish religion pointed symbolically forward to Christ. God gave the Jews a religion specifically designed to serve as a temporary standby until He could reveal the fullness of His plans and purposes in Christ.
But when their Messiah finally showed up on the scene, offering restored relationship with God through Himself, many (particularly, the religious leaders of the day) were just not ready to give up their training pants for spiritual clothes. Sadly, they had come to love their religion and their position within that religion more than they loved God - though they would never consciously admit that (even to themselves). Christ offered them the opportunity to know God in a personal, intimate way, but they preferred their post as experts on the subjects of God and religion.
Christ also opened the door to restored, loving relationships between people. And that, as far as I see it, is why Christ established His church. Quite simply, the church is Christ infusing His supernatural brand of love into human relationships and presenting this collection of love-centered relationships as a picture of Himself for all the world to see.
Religion, at best, was only a prep school for real, loving, Spirit-led relationships, and, as far as I'm concerned, the need for religion, religious institutions, and religious structures all ended with Christ. He is our high priest, our king, and our bridegroom, and we are His temple, His people, and His blushing bride. Jesus is all in all, and no religious embellishments are needed.
The reality, however, is that this religion called Christianity has come into being in the centuries between us and the early church, and, unfortunately, this religious entity has arisen largely at the expense of love-centered relationships. Gradually, step by fateful step, the relational was replaced by ritual, intellectual constructs, and organizational structures. Belief systems were substituted for personally knowing God, and liturgies and programs were substituted in place of relating to each other in Christlike love. Even the absolute essential of salvation through faith was replaced by the ritualistic administration of sacraments within the Roman Catholic Church. Practically every real and living spiritual gift that Christ gave to His church was replaced by dead, man-manufactured imitations. In essence, the Body of Christ crawled right back under the same kind of religious oppression and legalistic curse that Jesus came to free us from.
Maybe, that's because (in some pathetic way) we're more comfortable there. As I stated earlier, a religious context (rather than a relational context) allows people to keep a measured distance from God while giving the appearance of serving God. It's a perverted preference that goes right back to the fall of man. There's just something about fallen human nature that prefers jumping though some religious hoops and following a set of rules and rituals to actually dealing with our fallenness one-on-one with the One who made us. Religion also makes room for what I call the separation of church and life - basically compartmentalizing your responsibilities to God as something separate from how you conduct yourself and relate to others outside a designated religious structure or meeting.
More than anything, I think religion is an instrument of control - or rather, it gives us the illusion of control over that which rightfully holds authority over us. A well-trained pet deity on a leash is much safer than a living God who just might move in ways that we're not used to or comfortable with. And subscribing to a set list of religious doctrines and dogmas is much easier than being a perpetual student of both Scripture and the Holy Spirit. Religion grants human beings the imaginary authority to determine what God will or will not do, and it endows some humans (namely those with religious titles and job descriptions) with the power to place limits on how others can relate to God and their fellow man.
Christ paid the price of our sin with His own blood, He opened the door wide for us to have restored relationship with God, and He went through a lot of trouble to teach us how to live in right relationship with each other. I think it's high time to shed the dead snakeskin of religion and get back to the simple life of love and fellowship that He intends for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)