#progGOG

Stuff you should know and why - Pt. 1

The next several posts are dedicated to the stuff that has come out recently and that I want to recommend to everyone to encounter. 

I know that I can "Facebook" this stuff out and give you a direct link to the article with some silly comment attached to it. However, these articles and videos are too important for you to just see the link and clink on it when you have time (or there is no one posting some funny pictures on Facebook that you would rather look at). 

Which is why I will share the link to the article and the write why I think everyone should know it. Close readers will be able to pick up not only why I think you should know this stuff but also where I stand on the matter. 

So the first article I want to share is The rise of the Religious Left by Jonathan Merritt.

The reason I think you should know this is that the religious right's voice is becoming diminishing while the religious left's voice is growing. Some see this as a threat and others see this as progress while others do not have an opinion. Regardless of where you stand, the data suggests that the voice of Christianity for the first thirty years of the millennial generation may be all together different over the next thirty years.

 

Because we are all duped. #progGOD

Over the past several months there has been a challenge put out by Patheos and curated by Dr. Tony Jones called #progGOD. The point of the challenge is to invite progressive Christians to say something constructive about a particular topic rather than just deconstructing. This post is my response to the third question, "Why a crucifixion?" (The first two questions were "Who/What is God?" and "Why and incarnation?")


In college I asked the question, "If Jesus died for our sins, then why did he have to be crucified? Why wouldn't he just commit suicide?"

I was unable to find someone who was willing to entertain such a morbid question, and when I did I was told one of two responses. The first: "It was God's will." The second: "Rome crucified anyone who was a threat to the state and and the ministry of Jesus was a threat to the state, so he was crucified." 

The first response seemed to reflect a morbid God, but it at least had a sense of God in the response. The second response upheld the political threat of the message of Jesus but it also seemed to removed God from the entire process. This is my attempt to find a response that upholds the political understanding of the death of Jesus while also finding space for God, 

My understanding of Rene Girard is that Jesus was the one who exposed to the world just how destructive it is for a society to resolve tension and disagreements by finding scapegoats to kill. Humanity has been duped by this way of seeing the world. We all are looking for scapegoats to blame in order to feel better about the problem, which allows us to never really deal with the problem and only buys us time before we find our next scapegoat. Even today we have our scapegoats from Michael Brown to Steve Bartman

When you and I, at times, identify when someone/something is being scapegoated, is a result of the crucifixion. 

Jesus exposed the tension between all the different factions, Zealots, Pharisees, Sadducees, Rome, Herodians, etc. And when this tension is exposed and elevated, then, humans being duped into "knowing how to resolve the tension", seek out their scapegoat. Jesus was the perfect scapegoat for many factions and thus these factions sought out ways to kill him. 

Jesus, knowing his life was the way of the scapegoat, understood that he could not be run out of town and thrown off a cliff like any scapegoat. Jesus knew that if he died like any other scapegoat that humanity would still be caught up in a cycle of violence and that we would forever be entrapped in the web of deceit of the Satanic cycle of violence. 

This is why Jesus eventually understood that his death was to be the way of crucifixion. If he was going to be the scapegoat for the factions of his day, then he was going to the the scapegoat that also liberated humanity and exposed the cycle of violence.  

Today the world is saved from this cycle of violence because God in the life of Jesus, was not a victim of suicide or of a mob killing like countless others. Jesus' crucifixion was the way that Rome chose to kill Jesus and in that death God chose to reveal the nature of cycles of violence. The fact that Jesus saw the system of scapegoats as a lie of violence is evidence that Jesus was able break the cycle. To put it another way, Jesus was not like any other human, Jesus was indeed God.

Have you ever wondered why Pilate, the ruler of the land, would listen to Joseph of Arimathea and approve that Jesus off the cross? Why did Pilate not also remove the two thieves off their cross? Could it be that the longer that Jesus hung on his cross the more his death exposed the fact that he was an innocent scapegoat - And if we scapegoat the innocent then anyone could be the next victim in an endless cycle of violence.  

Even someone like you or me.

Jesus was crucified in order to reveal that God does not desire sacrifices. That the tension in the world cannot be resolved by violence (even violence with a 'divine sanction'). In the crucifixion we see once and for all that God has not ever demanded or required violence/sacrifice/scapegoats, but that God used that system against itself to reveal something deeply profound about the way humans think about violence...

We all are duped.

The incarnation and Marshal Mcluhan #progGOD

Again Dr. Jones has challenged progressive Christian bloggers to write a response to a question. This time he requests responses to  "What the Incarnation tells us about God, human beings, creation, the Cosmos, the End Times, Heaven, Hell, salvation, or anything else...from a Progressive Christian perspective."

And so, I submit to you a short blog reminder that when it comes to understanding the importance of the Incarnation, Marshal Mcluhan is right: The medium is the message.

I am not a scholar of Mcluhan by any stretch, so I could be missing the mark on this, but Mcluhan it is my understanding that Mcluhan wants us to understand that all mediums have messages laced within themselves. Mediums are not neutral in their dissemination of content, mediums matter.

We generally think the content of the message is more important than the medium we choose. This seems to make sense. Preachers gather in groups and  talk about what they will preach. They are looking looking for the teachings that the Bible is giving witness to. Preachers generally don't talk about the messages that the medium of the spoken word carries with it. 

But if you think about it, mediums do carry messages that are very powerful. For instance, when Kennedy and Nixon debated it is well documented that those who heard the debate on the radio thought Nixon won. But those who watched the debate on the new medium of television thought Kennedy won.  

If the mediums are neutral, then all that should have mattered was the content of the debate. But The mediums influenced the content of the debate to the point that your choice of medium influenced your decision of who won the debate!

Mcluhan stated, perhaps hyperboliclly, that the content of the message "has about as much importance as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb.”

God has chosen many mediums to share content: from the stone tablets to a burning bush to a talking donkey. These mediums are so powerful that we get the message God is saying just by the selection of the medium. 

  • Stone tablets - what God has to say in this message is as solid as rock 
  • Burning bush - God is a mystery that is beyond comprehension
  • Talking donkey - There are things that are unknown by humans but nature understands

The incarnation (that is God being "in-fleshed") tells is another, nay the ultimate, medium of God. The medium of God becoming human says a lot even before this God-Man is able to talk:

  • God deeply cares about relationships
  • It is more important to go to someone rather than hope they come to you
  • There is something sacred about humanity
  • There is something about life with all it's highs and lows that is worth participating in
  • God is not found in the heavens but walking among us
  • If God empties God-self and becomes mortal then what does that tell us about humility

You are a smart reader, you can add your own to this simplistic list.

There is a reason that Christians identify that the greatest revelation of God is Jesus*. Christians understand that the medium of God becoming human says something deeply about God's love for humans and the world.

The sermon on the mount, while excellent, is just stenciling when we look at the message found in the medium of the incarnation. 


*It is worth pointing out that if we feel that the Bible is the greatest revelation of God, then we are elevating the medium of the Bible over the medium of the incarnation. Frankly, I think that is called idolatry.