The Story of Bill Gates the wealthy young man

Nathan Hobby who writes in "An Anabaptist in Perth" wrote the following; it is a perspective which resonates::

I find it easy to understand unbelief in terms of the rich young ruler who has kept the law, but will not give away his riches and follow Jesus. Of course, it’s not an issue of evidence or even belief at all; it’s an issue of commitment and sacrifice. If the reason most people were not Christians was because they were not willing to give up things and follow Jesus, then it would make sense to me. Jesus’ demands are huge; his path is narrow.

I suspect that the scales in Western Church have tipped at least the argument to me seems scuewed towards belief in a "blind faith" where a belivever has to overcome the miraculous such as the virgin birth, miricles, the resurection etc etc to be a believer.

During our holiday I had a conversation with a Christian who said that he didn't think you could be a Christian without belief in the resurection quoting Paul. My standard reply now is : I don't know and I don't think it matters.

You have to unpack belief; Do you belive the that the message behind the resurection is true? Yes I do, there is truth in the story and new life. Do I belive that they really happened. Truthfully I don't know.

Marcus Borg has a bit to say about this in his book "The heart of Christianity" CH2

Ulitmatley I don't think it matters because I agree with Nathan in the above quote. The Church has more to loose without 'commitment and sacrifice' compared to evidence based belief.

Nathan touched on Bill Gates in his blog, and I couldn't help but think of him. Comparisons between him and the biblical 'Rich young man' are hard not to make. (Mathew 16: 19-30)

I'm sure he would be an 'evidence' type of guy messing around with computers so much of his life. What he gives away is phenominal, and he gives it away in a smart way; you just have to listern to him on TED. I think his comitment is there.

But who can know the Heart....

 

Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity, Sin and Salvation

I continue my jaunt through Marcus Borg's 'The Heart of Christianity"; the next chapter is 'Sin and Salvation'.

This is an interesting chapter as I am under the belief that we all have within us the potential to do wrong. Sin if you like. You just have to look at corrupted nations where ordinary soldiers without thinking where complicit in extermination, torture and other horrid things to people. The other thing which I can apply to myself; I can have a tendency to take the easy way even if it hurts other people, even if I don't know it. Now what does Borg say, a few thoughts

Sin

• Sin and the language of forgiveness dominates Christian 'imagination' it is 'central'. See this in the service and liturgy. Borg writes that basically you could some up that 'Something is wrong'
• Borg takes three definitions of root sin:

1. Niebuhr: "hubris" or "pride"
   
2. Tillich: "estrangement"
3. Unfaithfulness

(I could relate to 1 and 3 but I've never had that feeling that 'God' has left me or vice versa)

 

• Borg believes Christinity would be beter off to use lots of biblical images for the 'human condition' other than just 'Sin'. Eg 'in exile, blind, lost, self-centered, wounded, sick, paralyzed. In using multiple images it also expands the remedy instead of just 'forgiveness'.
• One of the other reasons that Borg preferes using multiple images for the human condition is that. The use of sin emphasises 'individual sin' as opposed to 'social sin' (In college the term I herd was 'structural')

Salvation

 

• "Salvation" like "Sin" is loaded and has multi-layers
• Salvation is overly emphasised with the afterlife:: As such a requirement of who is in and who is out. (Borg is not keen on this)
• Salvation is emphasised in the Bible for this life. OT there was no clear affirmation of an afterlife until Daniel. Previously Israel didn't believe in an OT (I wonder what Borg thinks of the term Sheol?)
• By the time of Jesus the Jewish majority believed in and afterlife
• Jesus belived in the afterlife but didn't talk about it much
• Borg writes that 'Salvation' is primariy a 'this world' experience. Broadly it is about "Wholeness" to be healed. Borg also gives a list of images of salvation found in the bible eg "Light in our darkness", "Liberation for captives", "food and drink" etc.
• There are also "Macro stories" of salvation eg the exodus from Egypt, exile in Babylon.

"Strikingly, but not suprisingly, the New Testament understanding of Jesus correlates with the macro-stories of the Hebrew Bible. Thus the storie of Jesus beocmes a story of salvation."

• Salvation is personal as well as Social. Salvation is often presented for the individual but there is also of the social a "peace and justice within the community." (I'm suprised there isn't even hinted at an 'Environmental element to all of this)

Salvation and reponse:: quoting Desond Tutu "God without us will not, as we without God Cannot" As Christians we need to be an active part of the transformation.

 

Sin, Salvation and Repentance.

 

• repentence, sin and salvation are usually all clumped together
• Repent is mainly 'resolve' not primarily "contrition". A returning to God.
• Repentence in the New and Hebrew Bible are esentially the same.

The Afterlife

 

• I found it interesting " I don't have a clue about what happens after death";(An amazing admission. I have had a friend who read this book and this section absolutely spooked him!)
• Borg writes of the history belief what happens wtih life after death for Christians, it has been varied.
• Borg ends the Chapter with an admoinismnet of 'hope', even if he is unsure of an afterlife.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity, Ch 5, Jesus the Heart of Reality (Part 2)

Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity, Ch 5, Jesus the Heart of Reality (Part 2)

The second part of the chapter involves the theology of the Cross; which I thought needed a post by itself.
Borg doesn't deny Jesus execution. He believes that the reason for it was primarily because Jesus of 'his Politics- a passion for God's justice'. Where Borg differs radically from Evangelical scholars is the how the 'post-Easter' early Christians interpreted his death. One of the most well known is the 'atonement' theology'; 'Jesus died for your Sins'.  Borg finds Atonment theory problematic

...atonement theology doe not go back to Jesus himself. We do not think that Jesus thought that the purpose of his life , his vocation, was his death. His purpose was what he was doing as a healer, wisdom teacher, social prophet and movement initiator. His death was the consequence of what he was doing, but not his purpose.

....Jesus kept up what he doing even though he knew it could have fatal consequences.

Borg summaries five differnt interpretations of the Cross which scholars have had through the ages.

1.  A 'Regection-and-Vindication understanding of Good Friday and Easter'. Authorities regected Jesus but God Vindicated Jesus. This understanding stays the closest to the political message.
2. The 'Defeat of Powers' , again this is close to the political message of Jesus. Not only is it against the Romans and aristocratic rulers (I presume aristocratic rulers he means the Jewish ones of the time) Borg refers to Walter Wink as the 'dominion system which is built into human institutions. 
3. The Cross as 'the way'. To die to old ways and raised in a new ways of been.
4. A revelation of Gods love for us.
5. Lastly the sacrificial system where Jesus died for our sins. Borg writes that

..."Jesus died for our sins"  was originally a subversive metaphor not a literal description of either God's  was purpose or Jesus vocation. It was metaphorical proclamation of radical...

It is interesting to reflect that at certain times I have had an understanding of the first four mention. Yet the last, the sacrificial system I've previously looked at as literal. Borg's understanding has been a revelation to me.  I like his understanding 'Jesus is a metaphor for God', and in many ways looking at Scripture through this grid.

Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity, Ch 4, God the Heart of Reality

Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity, Ch 4, God the Heart of Reality.

Borg makes an important point initially in the Chapter; to be called a Christian you need to accept the reality of God. He then points out an amazing statistic 95% of Americans believe in God while in the UK this figure is 35%! (Makes me wonder what it is in Australia, probably closer to the UK).
Borg talks about world view and then two concepts of 'God'; these are

• Supernatural Theism :: God as 'person like', with a person like being there is a separates, between God and the world. God as 'up in heaven', 'out there' beyond in the Universe. The clearest expression of this according to Borg is with Paul's writing.
• Pantheism::  God and the world relationship is different. 'An encompassing Spirit'. The universe is very much entwined with God. Pantheism does not speak of divine intervention as as Supernatural Theism rather a God of divine intention and divine interaction.

A side aspect of this chapter is prayer. Why pray intercessory or petitonary prayer  with a panentheistic God. Borg's answer

Panentheism does not deny the efficacy of such prayer. Its framework allows for prayers to have effects, including prayers for healing. It does not rule out extraordinary events. But it refuses to see efficaious prayer or extraordinary events as the result of divine intervention. It does so for more than one reason. Intervention counters its notion of God: it does not see God as absent, but present. Moreover, it sees the notion of divine intervention as having an insuperable difficulty: if God sometimes intervenes, how does one account for the non-intervention? Given all the horrible things that happen, does the notion that God ever intervenes make any sense?

(This above paragraph was a light going off in my head. Many of problems that I inherently had with Christianity disappeared. Especially in the light of suffering in the world and praying for it.)

Borg goes onto write some of the issues regarding supernatural theism many of which I agree with

• most westerners only have this as the only worldview of God.
• Panentheism is just as biblical as supernatural theism if not more.

God as Personal

God as personal has difficulty with a Panenthiesm view of God it is much more suited to a Supernatural theism.  Though whatever God is like we still have to interact with him which becomes personal because that is what we are. I get the impression that Borg has not yet acquired the language or able describe how a 'personal' panethestic God interacts. He discusses the word 'Transpersonal' "more than personal"

The Character of God

Borg starts off writing that the Character of God shapes our faithfulness as well what the Christian life is about.

Basically you could sum it up as Law vs Grace. That the Church although might point to Grace but it traditionally leans in the direction on Law. Ultimately Gods Character is one of grace and love.

Marcus Borg, The heart of Christianity: Ch3 The Bible The Heart of Tradition

The Bible The Heart of Tradition

In this Chapter Borg affirms the place of the Bible in Christian tradition. Borg writes that the way the Bible is treated, as infallible has cause many to question and even leave the church and Christianity. Borg suggests three adjectives as an alternative to Biblical literalism these are historical, metaphorical and sacramental.

Historical:

• This is the easiest for me to grasp. 'The bible as a product of the ancient Israel's and the early Christian movement.
• Through human authors during these two periods it was there response to God
• It reveals God in there everyday lives.
• Not 'absolute truth' or 'God's revealed truth' Rather relative truth to the authors time and place, how they saw things.
• When the Bible is approached like this issues such as the conflict between science and faith disappears. Laws of the bible are not seen as laws of all time, eg the difficulties of Leviticus.

Sacred Scripture :

The Holy Bible is a result of historical process not due to its 'divine origin' It is sacred due to its status and function.
To be a Christian means that the Bible is foundational to our identity and vision.

Illuminating Power of Historical Function

The new paradigm uses a 'historical-metaphorical' interpretation.

Historical- The historical context is of utmost importance. What the words means for the community it was originally written for.
Truth as a metaphor- 'a more than literal meaning of language'
[This really stuck me as a way that I could re-read the Bible, certainly it has enlightened the way I read scripture and apply it for myself. Interestingly when people use illustrations in there sermons they are actually using the 'metaphorical approach']

Borg goes onto briefly suggest the major reading of Scripture using a metaphorical approach. One example of which there are a few.

'The story of Gentile wise men coming to the birthplace affirms that Jesus is the light not only for Israel but for all nations, for everybody, Jew and Gentile'

A major point that Borg makes is that the metaphorical interpretation is beyond just a historical factuality.

The Bible as sacrament.

This  way of seeing the Bible I had not really come across before, and I could imagine myself thinking it was some sort of Catholic thing. I think it is important see Borgs definition of 'Sacrament', as once you read it you can see how the Bible is a Sacred.

'... a finite, physical, visible mediator of the sacred, a means whereby the sacred becomes present to us. A sacrament is a vehicle or vessel of the sacred'

Marcus Borg, The heart of Christianity: Ch2 Faith the way of the heart

 

The heart of Christianity: Ch2 Faith the way of the heart

This chapter starts by defining how most people inside and outside the Church define 'faith' : 'believing a set of Christian beliefs to be true.' To be a Christian there is a need to affirm the 'right' beliefs to be true. This form of beliefs turns belief into a head matter instead of a heart matter.

Borg goes onto mention four meanings of faith::

Faith as Assensus: faith as belief as just mentioned. A recent phenonemon with the advent of enlightenment and beyond. What happens is questionable things are true. Doubt
I like what he writes latter on in the chapter about Assensus, 'We cannot give our heart to something that our mind rejects'

[Comment, after reading this It gave me great clarity of my own life, I had been looking for the assensus and bypassing my heart, occasionally the heart was touched but not often.]

Faith as Fiducia: Instead of believing in a set of propositions about God, it is just trust in God. Borg an illustration from Kierkegaard 'faith is like floating...If you struggle, if you tense up and thrash about, you will eventually sink. But if you relax and trust, you will float.

Faith as Fidelitas: faithfulness or even better fidelity. Not faithful to some sort of doctrine or creed but to God. A faithfulness to God and also what God loves.

Faith as Visio: A way of seeing the whole, seeing it as 'what is', nourishing, bringing us into existence and a giver of our abstinence. Filled with beauty and at times 'terrible' beauty.
The way that I look at it as 'If all things turn out for the best' and a trust in this.

[comment:: This for me Vissio is the most difficult to understand, I'm still not sure I get it.
This part of the chapter was a bit of a revelation for me. One of my constant struggles was with faith as 'assensus'. I think if people had an understanding of these broader definitions of faith then the amount of 'doubt' would be reduced.]

Borg dosn't  write that we need to eliminate altogether the idea of assensus; it is still a very important part of what it means and defines Christianity to be. Borg gives his own broad 'Assensus' of what it is to be a Christian these are::

Being a Christian means affirming the reality of God
Christian faith means affirming the utter centrality of Jesus
Christian faith means affirming the centrality of the Bible

[Comment: I like the broadness of this, it is what I can affirm]

 -Borg goes onto discuss the word 'Credo' the giving of ones 'deeper self' not just intellect.
-premodern understanding of faith is a relational understanding of Christian life.

I like the last paragraph it sums up what it means to be a Christian

...the central meaning of faith. Given the premodern meaning of "believe," to believe in God is to belove God. Faith is about beloving God and all that God beloves....'

Marcus Borg, The heart of Christianity: Ch1 The heart of Christianity in a time of Change

Over 2010 I picked up Marcus Borg's 'Heart of Christianity' in the local library. It was a book which was perfect for me at the time. Usually though with any book that I read I scribble all over it, a way for me to interact with the text. Due to the it been a library book I couldn't do this. So I'm re-reading the book and this time interacting with summaries some of the main points of each chapter....

Marcus Borg, The heart of Christianity: Ch1 The heart of Christianity in a time of change.

This chapter looks at what is at the 'heart' of Christianity and reflects on some of the major contemporary conflicts such as::

• Ordination of women
• Gays and lesbians
• Christian exclusivism

These are very serious issues which if you are in Christian or in Christian leadership you need to work through.  I don't think it is good enough to just to say, my pastor told me or its in the Bible.  For me the last two have been particularly prickly for me...

Borg goes onto say that Christinity is going through a paradigm change. He writes about two paradigms::

The earlier Paradigm::

• Grounded in the authority of the Bible.
• Bible as divine
• A literal interpretation

Earlier Paradigm vision for Christian life::

• faith as believing is central :: As Christianity has become more unbelievable due to rationality/modernism/enlightenment, the need for faith as a belief has become more important.
• afterlife is central:: A big carrot eternity
  
• Christian life is about requirements and rewards:: What we believe and do to get the afterlife. The minimum belief in Jesus. 
   

Emerging Paradigm::

Basically a response to enlightenment/modernism


Historically:: Bible written as a historical product for two communities- ancient Israel and the beginnings of the Christian community. Bible was not written for us. Historical approach emphasis interpretation of the bible.
Metaphorical:: Not interested in the 'historical factuality' rather the meaning. The stories ask not did it happen rather, what does it mean for us?
Sacramental: Something visible and physical where the Spirit become present to us. 'sacrament is a means of grace, a vehicle or vessel for the Spirit'

The first two points have changed how I read the Bible, while the last point 'sacramental' how I interact with the the world looking for things that may be a means of 'grace'

Overlap of the paradigms

• affirmation in the reality of God
• Centrality of Jesus
• Importance of a relationship with 'God as know as Jesus'
• The need for the world to be transformed.

Borg uses the words of an 'un-ending conversation' that it will continue to evolve as we interact with the Bible, our history and each other.

Rowland Croucher's Review of Marcus Borg, The heart of Christianity

Rowland Croucher, from his site John Mark's ministry has put up a favorable review of Marcus Borgs book "The heart of Christianity". I really like where Rowland comes from so I thought I'd make a link.

You may not agree with everything here, but I would now put this book in the Top 10 thoughtful Christians, 'ex-Christians' and 'wannabe Christians' should read. Borg is irenic and respectful: a few times he says 'If your paradigm works for you, fine. You don't have to agree with what I say and buy into this Emerging Paradigm. But at least give it some thought.' He's also humble enough to say from time to time (e.g. about the after-life) 'I don't know'. Theologically he's to the left of Brian McLaren, and to the right of Spong. (See McLaren's A Generous Orthodoxy for an equally important book offering an intelligent purview of contemporary Christianity. [1] Borg says McLaren's thinking is a 'form' of the Emerging Paradigm).

On the side. I was reading this book in a waiting room in a medical clinic at Cowes. A lady came up to me and I think had read the front cover of the book 'The heart of Christianity'.
She said to me 'Your on the right train....'
Interesting considering I think I'd spotted her while checking out the local pentecostal Church, and I bet she would not cope with some of Borg's conclusions.
Maybe her comment was prophetic?

The heart of Christianity, Marcus Borg

The heart of Christianity, Marcus Borg,

Some times you will read a Christian book and it just fits with what you need to read. This was one such book for me. One aspect that I wanted to get a bit better grip on was 'liberal' Christinaity, or as Borg would put it 'progressive'. I have for a short while trying to read Bultman and Tilich. But I found them  hard going, to the extent I would just get bogged down in the first couple of pages and just give up. So for the first time I was able to understand what was meant by 'metaphorical' and 'Sacrament'.

For me the book gave important glimps into

: The idea of metaphorical and sacrement

: pluralism of religions

: panthiesm in Christinity

: The different meanings of 'Faith', not necessarily a literal interpretation.

: Salvation and Sin

: The Kingdom of God, mainly in regards to a political social justice and equality.

It is interesting that Borg attends the American equivalent of an Anglican Church. I can now understand how there is such a great divide between the Anglican communion.

I also think that this writing is valuable. Especially for people who come from a evangelical or fundemental background and find a litural understanding as unbelievable. That they find there only option; to throw in Christiantiy all together. This book is truely a way forwards for these people.

I'm looking forward to the getting my hands on his co-authored book with NT Wright, 'The meaning of Jesus'. It will I hope contrast and bring more clarity to evangelical and liberal theology.

deception

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jacbt/ / CC BY 2.0

In reading the book 'The Heart of Christianity' by Marcus Borg, he makes the point about deception in regards to an 'open' or 'closed heart':

A closed heart affects the mind, the reasoning process itself. Rather than the mind being in charge of this deeper layer of the self, the heart controls the mind. The heart can even deceive the mind in the process we call "rationalization," that is, self-interested self-justification. We often believe our own deceptions. The phenomenon of self-deception (always easier to recognize in others than in ourselves) is fascinating: there is something "in me" that can deceive me. Thus the closed heart is associated with lack of understanding and a darkened mind.

I found this insightful as well frightful. It can have implications in regards to true love, to fundamentals in a personal faith. All that is near and dear.

It caused me to pray.:

Lord give me an open heart
Where motives are pure
Where yes means yes
Not only for me,
but for those around me.
Yes an open heart.