Writing theology is a ambitious task in and of itself. But embarking on a systematic theology is daunting, but that is just what Dr. Thomas Jay Oord is doing. His A Systematic Theology of Love is a planned multi-volume work. Volume One is currently available and its subtitle hints at the contents: God and Creation. Most systematic theologies currently available are within the Reformed or Calvinist tradition. In fact, one of the best selling systematic theologies is Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology is the top seller in systematic theologies. This may be partly because it is the default for Southern Baptists who are currently the largest Protestant denomination in the United States. Worldwide, things are different, but you get the picture. Of course, popularity does not indicate the value of a work. This is especially true in theological works. Something can be very popular, but also very bad. Thinking in terms of Wesleyan-Holiness theologies, systematic works are few and far between. I believe this is partly due to the nature of Wesleyan theology being seen as practical and Holiness theology as primarily revivalist in nature. But these are stereotypes and stereotypes have a way of falling apart upon close examination.

Oord’s Systematic THeology of Love builds upon Wesleyan-Holiness, Open and Relational, and Process theological work. I can see the foundation of Dr. Mildred Bangs Wynkoop’s book A Theology of Love, H. Ray Dunning’s Grace, Faith, and Holiness: A Weslyean Systematic Theology, and other works within Oord’s own theological heritage. Of course, this work expands and goes beyond those earlier works, but you may be able to take the person out of a particular Wesleyan-Holiness denomination, but you cannot take the Wesleyan-Holiness theology out of the person.

It is important that Oord begins with God and Creation, because those are the building blocks of a solid and faithful systematic theology. But volume one also deals with the definition of love which Oord honed in Pluriform Love. Oord also takes a tact very different from many theologians by using the humility we all so desperately need by saying that “I could be wrong about all of this, of course.” (Oord) In a world in which being right is often seen as the attitude we should hold, Oord’s admission is key to understanding the spirit in which his systematic theology is born.

From and Open and Relational view, starting with God is key to understanding both the open and relational aspects of who we claim God to be. Oord’s previous works on love, amipotence,* and the nature of God as uncontrolling love features throughout. But Oord builds upon those ideas to form them into a systematic investigation into God. From the who, to the place of mystery, Oord weaves a cogent argument for who he claims God to be. I firmly believe that Oord is expressing the logical progression of Wesleyan and Holiness theologies of God within his discussion of God. Contrary to critics, the God revealed in Oord’s work sounds very much like the image we are given in the Christian scriptures.

The second building block of volume one is Creation. Oord’s discussions center upon God as always creating which I find compelling. But Oord also shows the flaws with ideas like creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothing). Scripture does not support the idea of creatio ex nihilo if wee read closely. Oord points out that creatio ex nihilo was originally a gnostic creation. God could not start with a corrupted thing like matter after all. Oord’s direction also embraces recent advances in science and our understanding of the universe. While I am partial to the idea of multiverse, Oord describes what I term a sequential-verse. God is always creating and that even means creating out of the death of universe upon universe.

Additionally, Oord explains that God invites us to participate in creation. This is where an Open and Relational theology truly comes into its own. We are invited to participate and work in creation. I see this as the ultimate and over arching tending of the garden. The very thing humans are first invited to do with God was tend a garden in the Genesis accounts of creation. Oord sums up concerns with creation in this way:

Science can’t, on its own, answer the question of why there is something rather than nothing. But theology also can’t answer this question alone.105 The most plausible doctrines of creation, therefore, integrate insights from science, theology, and metaphysics. Or as Alfred North Whitehead put it, “You can’t shelter theology from science, or science from theology; nor can you shelter either of them from metaphysics, or metaphysics from either of them. There is no short cut to truth.” (Oord)

Rather than try and create conflict with science, or worse twist science to prove a theological assumption, Oord embraces science while understanding its limits. He also understands the limits of theology within his humble take on possibly being wrong. For me, any time a theologian writes or says out loud the truth that we could be getting this wrong, I tend to listen more carefully. Those theologians who know they could be wrong are ones worth listening to because they approach theology with that truth.

Oord’s A Systematic Theology of Love belongs in any serious theologian’s library. Especially if you disagree with the conclusions. Because what if you are wrong?

Disclosure

I am a supporter of Tom’s work on his systematic theology and have been able to read early work and give feedback as he wrote. While I received a complementary copy of teh book, I also purchased a copy.

After each trope, there is a wondering. After seduction we get a wondering of how the other half die:

Words are weapons
Sharper than knives
Makes you wonder
How the other half die
Other half die

After pride we have the wonder of living:

Look at them go
Look at them kick
Makes you wonder
How the other half live

Do you see the two sides of the same thing present in the lyrics? We are seeing each from the other view. How does the other half live through the evil without consequence? How do the others die? Words are weapons. A friend with an M.D. and I have a chat one time in which I was asking if words actually caused pain to younger generations. I was trying to understand the reaction to words that seemed much more visceral than my Gen-X context. He mentioned that yes, he believed that words could cause actual physical pain. He went on to say that our generation was desensitized to the pain and that was sad. In other words, the capacity to cause pain with words was lost on us unless we paid attention. That hit hard as someone who loves a good snarky comment or biting satire. Those are valid, but I began to unsderstand that they are only good when used to punch up so to speak.

The chorus is catchy as it just repeats the theme of the song. But the sexy dance rock drives the lyrics so well.

Devil inside
The devil inside
Every single one of us
The devil inside
Devil inside
Devil inside

I believe it is vitally important for us to remember that we all have the capacity to do evil - even the entirely sanctified. Our free agency of choice is still present. But I believe we must also believe that those we look up to or follow are capable of evil. I wish more white American Christians could believe themselves, their leaders, and their political heroes capable of evil. The world might be in a better spot if we could see past the logs in our eyes. This brings me to the systemic lyrics.

Here come the world
With the look in its eye
Future uncertain
But certainly slight

Look at the faces
Listen to the bells
It’s hard to believe
We need a place called hell
A place called hell

That last line has stuck with me since I first heard it. “It’s hard to believe we need a place called hell.” That was in the late eighties when we still had the looming threat of nuclear war. What a quaint time. Now we face existential threats on an ongoing and ridiculously absurd rate just from our own governments making stupid choices. Of course, the systems are only as good as the people we choose to lead them. I think white evangelical Christians have been horrendous at choosing because we allowed politicians to tell us what we believe. Just look at how many Roman Catholics don’t understand that the Popes are always speaking from straight up doctrinal and theological clarity within their tradition. If only we had as much courage. Instead we keep bringing hell on earth for people.

Subscribe now

It is not just in grand existential terms. But also in small and seemingly insignificant choices that we bring hell. In my own denomination, the fundamentalists have lost patience with hounding fellow clergy who reject fundamentalism and embrace our actual doctrines that they have chosen a new method of attack. When those you oppose refuse to cooperate and teach contradictory doctrine, attack the places they teach sound doctrine. Guilt by association may be a logical fallacy, but who doesn’t love a good logical fallacy. Of course the irony is that often the fundamentalists are literally teaching against our essential doctrines as they claim the venues of teaching somehow rub off on the teachers.

In other words, they think it is that which comes from the outside which defiles. Dr. Richard Beck refers to this as the disgust response in his book Unclean. But is also a response we see in scripture. In the Gospel of Mark chapter seven Jesus is asked by the Pharisees and teachers of the law why his disciples don’t perform a ceremonial washing of hands before meals. This was scandalous to the religious leaders. Jesus replies in his usual way, but says something incredibly important. He explains to the crowds that it is not what comes from outside that defiles because it is taken in through the mouth rather than the heart. He also says those things that come from the outside end up in the sewer - you probably get the point. Jesus then says it is that which comes from inside that can defile. INXS hits that point with Devil Inside.

I’m gonna get in some theological weeds for a moment. Whatever you may think of the idea of evil, it is problematic to try and personify evil. Scripture uses the terminology of The Accuser (The Satan) and other phrases, but never personifies that the same way that Trinitarian personhood is used. Brian Zahnd likes to say The Satan in a sub person as a theological understanding. I agree because when we setup a dualistic understanding of God versus evil, we place too much power in the idea of evil. That’s how we get to ideas like “the Devil made me do it.” Our own guilt is shifted in the blame of evil on outside forces. What’s always funny to me is how selective that concern can be. When we choose evil, we are responsible. Yes, there are places we find ourselves in that we sometimes feel compelled to make certain decisions, but they are still our decisions. Trauma response may also push us toward unhealthy choices, but their is no Devil pushing us independent of our own minds and hearts.

A takeaway here is that if we are teaching “sound doctrine” in an open venue that may not stand for that doctrine, the unsoundness is not going to rub off on the speaker. That is an external concern. It is also a silly concern. The principle of “the appearance of things” rules too many accusations and fallacies. Here’s how Jesus describes it:

He said to them, “So, are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile, since it enters not the heart but the stomach and goes out into the sewer?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, “It is what comes out of a person that defiles. For it is from within, from the human heart, that evil intentions come: sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, debauchery, envy, slander, pride, folly. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” (Mark 7: 18-23 NRSVue)

I always find it interesting that deceit, slander, pride, and folly get listed with sins like murder. I mean technically using certain logical fallacies can slander and deceive. Here’s a subtextual comment. It is much easier to slander with fallacious claims than to do the hard work of understanding. It is also sin to use deceit to cause people to believe falsehoods. IYKYK

We all may have a devil inside, but the implication is that we also have goodness in us. Genesis is pretty clear on that count and New Creation is a fulfillment of the promises of relational holiness. The fact that we Wesleyan-Holiness folk keep reaching for the lies rather than shouting about our hope of prevenient grace is sad. We can sing INXS’ Shine Like it Does rather than Devil Inside.

This is the story
Since time began
There will come a day
When we will know

Shine like it does
Into every heart
Shine like it does
And if you’re looking
You will find it

Sounds a bit like prevenient grace and that is Good News.

Share

(In the spirit of different points of view, here is one from my friend Bob)

Forget what you’ve heard. Set your biases aside and just listen. I recently tuned into a podcast featuring Joel Osteen, pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas. He reaches millions online and leads one of the largest churches in the country. The podcast is found here:

There’s no denying that Joel draws plenty of criticism—most of it aimed at his theology, which, to be fair, I also find somewhat shallow. But that’s not the angle I want to take here. It’s an easy critique, and frankly, not the most interesting one.

Instead, I want to approach this from a different perspective. Maybe it’s time we cut Joel a little slack, and here’s why.

Whether you admire Joel Osteen or question his theology, one fact stands on its own — the man chose to stop collecting a salary and fund his life through the marketplace instead. According to the interview, he’s a best-selling author, and his books regularly appear on the New York Times best-seller list. He doesn’t need a church salary. Joel has been very open about his income. In a world where trust in religious leaders continues to decline, a pastor who doesn’t need the church’s resources is refreshing. Whatever you think about Joel, at least know that he’s not taking money from the offering plate; he’s working to create content that millions of people pay a fair amount to access. I have no problem with that, only respect.

Does Joel Osteen live a lavish lifestyle? You be the judge. By many accounts, he keeps things relatively modest in the day-to-day. He drives himself to Lakewood Church in a twelve-year-old Audi sedan—hardly the image of excess. There are no yachts, sprawling car collections, or private jets attached to his name, and the Osteens have been known to fly commercial. And flying commercial has not been without its challenges!

His wife, Victoria Osteen, did have a widely publicized dispute with a flight attendant years ago that led to a lawsuit. The claim was that she became verbally aggressive, but the jury ultimately ruled in Victoria’s favor. Situations like that can arise in the close quarters of commercial travel.

Joel and Victoria do live in a large Houston home on a couple of acres within a private, gated community. Given their income from book sales and investments, that level of living isn’t especially surprising. In fact, many people in a similar position would likely make the same choice—for privacy, security, and the well-being of their family. I get it, this comes with the territory. There are a lot of crazy people who would be knocking on your door at 2 AM. So, no judgment there.

Joel’s temperament is another reason we should give him a break. Joel is as cool as a cucumber, both in and out of the pulpit. How do I know? Secondhand, but credible knowledge. A former boss of mine met Joel Osteen in 2014 when I was working for a black car service in Phoenix. Joel and his family were in town for Super Bowl XLIX, and while I was hoping to get the assignment, my boss took that one.

He ended up spending a couple of hours with the Osteens, navigating the chaos of Super Bowl traffic while shuttling them around the city. Despite the delays and congestion, there were no outbursts, no frustration, not even a stray complaint. They were calm, composed, and genuinely pleasant—model passengers. Cooperative, respectful, and generous tippers. What more could you ask for?

Joel has a reputation for maintaining that kind of composure. He doesn’t crack under pressure—no meltdowns, no tantrums, and no drama. Some might say he’s too laid back, though it’s hard to see that as a flaw. Better yet, it is a fruit of the spirit (Gal. 5: 22-23).

Joel Osteen is deeply committed to fidelity in marriage. He and Victoria Osteen have been married for nearly four decades, which places them in rare company. Many of Joel’s peers in the mega-church leadership community have been remarried or have withstood affair accusations. Over the years, there hasn’t been any credible evidence of infidelity or scandal attached to their relationship.

Joel has also consistently empowered his wife, elevating her as co-pastor of Lakewood Church and frequently ministering alongside her. The enduring visibility of their public ministry together speaks volumes. Sometimes the most compelling theology is lived rather than argued. In that sense, Joel’s long-standing marriage to Victoria bears witness to the God they love and serve.

Speaking of Joel’s theology, let’s take a closer look. While many people evaluate him as if he were a pastor or trained theologian, I do not. He has no formal theological education or pastoral training, nor does he present himself as a serious voice in doctrinal matters. There’s little evidence of careful exegesis, sacramental depth, or engagement with historic Christian tradition. For those reasons, I don’t place him in the category of a pastoral leader. He often gets tagged with other prosperity preachers, but he’s nothing like a Kenneth Copeland or Benny Hinn when it comes to the theological fallacies they spew.

So what is he? More accurately, he functions as a motivational speaker, life coach, and Christian counselor. I’ve often described him as the best big brother I never had. He’s consistently encouraging, positive, and non-judgmental. Qualities I’d love to have in a big brother. Suffice it to say, these qualities resonate with millions, and understandably so; the world could use more people like Joel, not less.

Expecting him to meet the standards of a pastor feels misplaced. While he prays and delivers sermons, he does so without the grounding typically associated with pastoral ministry. Are his sermons really sermons in the traditional sense? I don’t think so. That said, his influence doesn’t strike me as particularly harmful. His theological positions are relatively easy to challenge, and he doesn’t seem interested in defending them. In fact, he has no history of being defensive of his content. He delivers it and lets people digest it for themselves. If he represents a theological concern, it’s not a major one.

Several years ago, I reached out to a pastor who was battling deep discouragement and depression. Call it heresy if you want, but I prescribed a steady diet of Joel Osteen—not to refine his theology, but to restore his hope in ministry. Sometimes what we need most isn’t a sharper doctrine, but someone who believes in us and, with a genuine smile, reminds us that things are going to be okay. That’s where Joel excels. He’s the smiley face preacher for a reason.

If I’m worn down and struggling, I’d rather hear from someone who can lift my spirits than from an ivory tower theologian. The most effective encouragers are often those with a simple, grounded faith, and Joel embodies that. He doesn’t complicate things or demand intellectual heavy lifting. He’s straightforward and approachable, and he’s built an audience around lifting people up rather than weighing them down. Many of our churches could benefit from this approach. People need to feel it is possible to have the weight lifted. Does your ministry give people a lift or a letdown?

One more thing—I genuinely admire Joel Osteen’s commitment to a healthy lifestyle. He’s known for eating well and staying consistent with his workouts, and it shows. For a man in his 60s, his physique and appearance are impressive. Some people claim he’s been treated with Botox, but I’m not sure about that. Joel has never admitted it. Not a big deal anyway. I’m more curious how he maintains that perfect helmet of hair. One heck of a hair spray brand that’s for sure.

Let’s be honest, religious people don’t always model great habits when it comes to physical health. The track record among many ministers is, frankly, pretty poor, and the example can be discouraging. But Joel breaks that mold. He’s built a home gym, stays active, and plays tennis regularly with his son. A few years back, a photojournalist captured a shirtless beach photo of Joel on vacation in Hawaii, and the dude was ripped!

That kind of discipline is rare, especially in ministry contexts. At 56, I know how much work it takes to stay healthy, and in that regard, Joel is genuinely motivating. I work out, eat healthy, and it takes a lot of effort!

You can criticize Joel Osteen for his theology, his lifestyle, or his role at a megachurch—and some of those critiques may be fair. Joel himself likely wouldn’t push back; he’d probably just shrug it off with a smile and keep moving forward. But before going too far down that road, it’s worth pausing for a moment of self-reflection. Are you doing even a fraction of what he does to encourage, uplift, and help others? And when you think about it, is theological perfection a prerequisite for entering the Kingdom of Heaven? If it is, we might all be in trouble!

I recently read the new book Apple: The First 50 Years by David Pogue. Stick with me if you are here for faith or theology. The book is a fascinating and glorious trip through the history of one of the most influential and profitable companies in the wold. Pogue got access to history. people, and artifacts encompassing the entirety of Apple’s history to the present. I remember the wonder of seeing and using an Apple II and of the moment when computers became more than a curiosity when I sat down in front of a Macintosh for the first time. Our first family computer was a Commodore SX64 (an ostensibly portable C64), but my first personally purchased computer was a Macintosh and I have owned Macs since 1990. I even had Macs during the dark days of head scratching models and the constant obituaries of the company.

Apple has always been a company that focused upon making technology usable for everyone. Their innovation was not always in being first to do something, but in making that something “insanely great.” Many times Apple leapfrogged competitors by choosing to remove features that relied on old technology to introduce a better way of using that technology. One of the very first instances of this was the original iMac that excluded a floppy drive. Apple was right, floppies had their day and by the late 1990’s it was time to move on. I wonder what the critics from them would think of modern MacBooks that rely solely on solid state memory.

While the quantum leaps of the first decade of the twenty first century are no longer the norm, Apple still finds ways to innovate and do things differently. And that brings me to a personal story involving Apple, vision casting, and the frustration of thinking in the past. I will use a personal story to explain this and show how easily we can get trapped into thinking that strategies and behavior will not change. Apple has also done things that people claimed would fail. The Apple Store idea was panned by most, but it is incredibly successful to this day.

Subscribe now

In 2010 when the iPad was first announced, I was I.T. Director for a regional non-profit. One of my responsibilities was peering into the unknown and seeing where we might be in the future. What tools, applications, and technologies would support and enhance our mission was something always on my mind. I spent time with the various departments and types of work in our organization so I would understand pain points, how systems worked, and how people used the tools we had. That was also a way to understand what tools we may need in the near and even distant future.

One innovation was standardizing on the iPhone for employees because we could take advantage of the breadth of applications and communication tools present in iOS. We also had PDAs and rugged devices for specialized work, but the promise of the iPhone was less friction and more connectivity. That could be a good and bad thing of course, but communication was enhanced with that decision. The early data plans Apple convinced AT&T to go with also saved us money by allowing for unlimited access to the network at a mice price.

Back to the iPad. When I watched the unveiling, I immediately saw the potential of the iPad for business and creation. My technology committee was made up of volunteers who led technology and consulting in many areas. The chair of the committee brought a new iPad to a meeting and I began talking about the potential. But like a wet smelly blanket over my enthusiasm, they said that the iPad was only a consumption device. They went on the say that the iPad was basically a toy and reading and web browsing were neat, but it would not be a tool. I was discouraged, but I did get some encouragement from others on the committee who could see the potential rather than assumed limitations. In fact, I work for a company owned by one who encouraged me back then.

I did not let that interaction stop me from thinking. It drove me instead. I was certain the iPad could improve on the current laptops used by our teammates who visited other agencies for inspections and presentations. So I bought an iPad with a cellular plan and put it in the hands of one of the team. I asked him to use it as much as possible and make notes about his experience. It was my small little “skunkworks” and it immediately showed promise. I won’t bore you with all the details, but all day battery life, the ability to get to information quickly, and even using the screen as a flashlight in a pinch were instant hits. Now I had to tell my boss that we had done this. He did not believe it was a great idea before I showed the experience data.

I then started work on a system to enable the iPad to capture the data we needed and get that data into our system. At the time, we had to collect the data and then re-key it into our system. My solution wasn’t perfect but we managed to find a tool that would allow us to create forms that would dump data into an ingestible format for our main operations system. Now I just needed to get funding. I worked with our grants team and sent a proposal for a technology grant to purchase several iPads and pay for the first year of data service and the third party form tool. The minute we deployed the iPads, the team reported higher satisfaction with their work and mentioned how it freed them up to do the relational part of their jobs. The iPad became a tool that improved work and the impression of how the work supported the mission of the organization.

I had taken a position at another non-profit when the annual technology meeting for my then former non-profit’s national organization happened. But the manager of the team used my presentation plan to show others like our organization what we were doing and it was one of the most popular sessions. Several others adopted a similar set of tools. All centered on a product I was told was simply a toy.

Sometimes, I feel like churches fall into the same mindset as that technology committee chair. We get so blinded by the way things have been done or successful strategies from the past that we keep trying to use them and we don’t see the potential for different ways of doing things. I’m not arguing for doctrinal innovation, but I am saying that the ways we present and engage our faith can be innovative and creative. What worked in the past may no longer be relevant. When we keep looking back we risk becoming frozen in time. When we reject actions because “we’ve never done it that way” we may just miss seeing the way others are drawn to faith. True, faith is not like technology, but the principles of vision and creativity work regardless. These are the things I think on when reading books like Andrew Root’s Evangelism in an Age of Despair or Ryan Burge’s The Vanishing Church. We are doomed to repeat failure if we keep going back to what may have worked ten or twenty years ago.

Maybe we need more dreamers. Or maybe we just need people o do as Apple dared us in the late 1990’s to “Think Different.”

Share

I’ve figured out the prosperity gospel. I recently suffered through a nearly 3-hour podcast featuring famed prosperity preacher Kenneth Copeland. The podcast is available here:

Copeland repeatedly called the Bible a book of covenants. Certainly, there are two major divisions in scripture, the Old Covenant and the New. There are other covenants, such as the Noachian, the Abrahamic, and the Davidic. Blessings and curses bind these covenants; the terms are outlined and recorded in scripture, especially in books like Genesis and Deuteronomy. In the Old Testament manner of thinking, God always keeps God’s part of the covenant, and if the faithful hold up their end of the bargain, they can expect God to deliver prescribed blessings.

Copeland’s idea of covenant follows strict Old Testament guidelines. He fails to account for developments in the New Testament. He doesn’t have a concept of progressive revelation. And yet his approach also resembles modern-day legal understandings of bilateral contracts. He reads Old Testament accounts through the lens of a legal transaction. In other words, if the faithful do their part, God is obligated by agreement to do God’s, which of course leads to a transactional relationship. A transactional view of God is essentially a “What’s in it for me” approach, where individuals view their relationship with God as a legal or economic exchange—good actions or faith are rewarded with blessings, while disobedience leads to punishment. Bing! The light went on. I get it now.

Copeland elevates the Bible to a troubling degree (see the video), speaking of it almost as if it were a fourth member of the Trinity—placed alongside Jesus and the Holy Spirit. In this framework, Scripture is treated as possessing a kind of creative power, where its promises obligate God to act on covenant terms. The dynamic resembles a courtroom exchange: presenting Scripture verses as legal evidence, building a case, and pressing for a favorable ruling. By quoting Scripture and fulfilling the outlined covenant responsibilities—tithing, sowing, faithfulness—believers are led into prosperity. In essence, this is the core logic of the prosperity gospel.

I’m very glad to be a part of a tradition that is discovering the story of scripture. The Bible is a book of transformation, not a ledger of transactions aimed at delivering material blessings. The “What ’s-in-it-for-me” approach of transactional faith is antithetical to the way of life displayed by Christ in the Bible, where obedience and self-denial may lead to the abandonment and divestment of earthly attachments. Scripture is meant to form us, drawing us into a living relationship that results in an unbreakable union with God. The idea of a covenant is better understood as a sacred partnership with God and not a contract. The “blood oath” is bound by love, loyalty, and shared destiny. Jesus fulfills the idea of “blood oath” in rescuing and redeeming humanity, thus forming the pillars of the new covenant, a new relational reality.

Copeland’s impoverished view of God and misguided understanding of Scripture leave much to be desired. Millions have been led astray by these teachings. If you have pastored for very long, you have no doubt run into some version of the prosperity gospel. Copeland continues the tradition of those who have gone before him. His mentor, Evangelist Oral Roberts (now deceased), became famous for his “die-or-donate” claim in 1987. Roberts claimed the Lord was going to call him home to heaven if he did not raise 8 million dollars. In this covenant God made with Roberts, he either raised the money or the Lord would call him home. The widely publicized episode revealed a view of God who makes covenants that must be kept, or dire consequences will prevail, even death.

Once again, we learn that one’s view of God shapes how one lives and operates in the realm of faith. If ever there was a time to deliver the “good news” of the gospel, it is now. Holiness is good news. The dark psychology of the prosperity gospel is not good news. In the New Covenant of grace, we embrace a God of love who renews the mind and transforms the heart. Thanks be to God, we have something much deeper than a legal transaction strictly enforced by a covenant agreement. We serve a God who embraces us and enters our lives.

If you would like to explore how one’s view of God determines the nature of their relationships, check out my book, Putting a New Face on God: How you see God shapes your life, available on Amazon.

There’s been a lot of metaphorical ink spilled within Western Christian circles over our decline. I truly believe most of those concerns miss the point. This is mostly due to the fact that we cannot seem to understand the world has changed. But, we are also our own worst roadblocks to the wonders of God. The constant differences between our claims about who we worship and what the Christian life entails versus how we conduct ourselves in public, speak about those we are trying to reach, and whine about a culture that never really existed is striking. We may as well be running around trying to convince people about the existence of Bigfoot or The Loch Ness Monster than a God who loves.

Subscribe now

The gulf between what we claim and what we actually do is often so large that I wonder if we even believe the former. What is it about hate, anger, and fear that seduce us into embracing them rather than love, peace, and kindness? Newsflash, whatever it is we are afraid of, it isn’t contagious. I keep thinking about the Gospel of Mark when I hear Christians worry about imagined fears. Twice in that Gospel Jesus mentions that only things from within can defile us. That things on the outside cannot defile us. Even if we are influenced, it is because we are already open to the outside influence. Maybe we are not as attuned to Jesus as we claim.

I recently attended an event in which myself and several other pastors heard from and engaged with Dr. Richard Beck. In his discussions of joy and hospitality I felt something tickling the back of my mind. In his book The Shape of Joy, Dr. Beck argues that joy cannot come from within us; it is only something that comes from without. In the context of Jesus’ claims, that means that the joy of others cannot cause us harm. Dr. Beck also talked about the difference between the way we think of things making us unclean and the way Jesus made things clean as a “holy contagion.” Christians say that true joy is found in Jesus. For us Wesleyan-Holiness folk prevenient grace allows for the joy we encounter in the world when others might reject that joy. All joy comes from God, but it is not exclusive to Christians in other words.

Yet, we act like we are arbiters of joy. We even police the ways that people experience joy. Too many times we appear to be a people of holy sourness rather than holy joy. Beyond that simple attitude, I continue to wonder at our language and behavior because it often has no likeness to the way Jesus spoke or acted. In fact, we too often act like pharisees demanding purity of thought and deed beyond that which is illuminated in scripture. How in the world do we expect people to be drawn to our message when so much of that message is about how horrible they are for existing? I’m not even talking about the grand Calvinism/Arminianism divide, but simply calling those who disagree with us evil. demonic, satanic, and using the language of dismissal.

Is it any wonder Christians are thought of as hateful? We literally use the language of hate and we very vocally support others who speak this way. In our drive to be not like the world, we have instead wrapped the ways of the world within Christian imagery. Ironically, we end up defiling the things of God by embedding the things of Old Creation within supposed Christian thought. We are walking and talking contradictions. We are incarnate credibility gaps. All the talk of multiplication and growth doesn’t matter if lives are not being changed.

Even though decline is slowing it is leveling out at about one convert to six people leaving the faith. (Pew) There was much rejoicing in my own denomination when the numbers showed a slight uptick in attendance last year. But, the underlying numbers still show a steady decline in members. That points to more spectators than participants. But I also wonder about attendance. We try to create algorithms to measure online attendance, but those numbers may be inflated. So maybe we did not really see an increase in attendance.

Are we making disciples? Attendance doesn’t tell us that. Discipleship is transformed lives living like Jesus. That’s hard to measure. So many of the people within churches are discipled more by influencers and politicians than pastors and teachers and it shows. Add to that is our own penchant for throwing up roadblocks. We spend so much energy trying to prove God exists that we have failed to show who the God we believe exists truly is. We demand sacrifice not mercy while God is continuing to demand mercy not sacrifice. Like I said, we may as well be trying to convince people that cryptids like Bigfoot or Nessie exist.

American white evangelicals have an unwritten list of things you must add on to Christianity to be a TrueChristian™. These include embracing Republican politics without question, supporting violence when it is being perpetrated by those they support, and believing some fairy tales. This may be controversial, but ideas like the Rapture and pseudo science are not a part of scripture. Rapture is a fairy tale told by those for whom power is ascendant rather than love. It is a grand conspiracy of epic proportions and completely misses the true meaning of Revelation in scripture. But is really makes for good drama and captures the imagination. Rapture theology is the theology of violence writ large. Violence that misses the point of the cross.

The Gospel is not about God’s violence, but humanity’s violence. The cross is the fire God promises to use after the Flood. In light of the fact that the Flood does not accomplish the removal of humanity’s love of violence, God shows us the end result of our violence in the death of the incarnate logos. We make Jesus bleed, that act is not God’s act. That’s the real scandal here. But wow do we keep missing the point of fire and of the cross.

We harm our own claims when we insist upon a literal reading of obviously poetic liturgy in passages like Genesis chapter one. And we harm our faith when we insist that God brings violence. We continue to layer roadblock upon roadblock. Is it any wonder we are not people who attract those who could be transformed by an encounter with New Creation? We keep trying to sell Old Creation.

Come to think of it, I understand this better. Many Christians are taught a conspiratorial and cryptid like version of faith. No wonder our claims ring as hollow as the fiction of cryptids. Bigfoot and other stories are fun and interesting, but they are only stories. If we want to show who God is, maybe we need to start living like people who believe in God rather than being a people of cryptids.

Share

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/02/26/decline-of-christianity-in-the-us-has-slowed-may-have-leveled-off/

I’ve been thinking about Samwise Gamgee from The Lord of the Rings this weekend. He is the true “hero” of the story of course, but there’s something else I believe about Sam. Aside from Tom Bombadil, the wizards, and a few elves such as Galadriel, Sam is one of the most powerful beings in Middle Earth. But Sam is a hobbit. True, but I think that is part of Tolkien’s genius and the point. The louder and more visible beings are not typically the most powerful in Tolkien’s world. If we pay close attention, it is the singers, storytellers, and the gardeners who have real power.

Subscribe now

This is a concept that works in the “real world” as well. I remember being in a room many years ago in which the company I worked for was discussing an agreement with a startup. The two primary partners of the other company were presenting their business plan as well as the outline of their tech. One partner spoke more than the other. He also mentioned their capital raised. After the presentation was over and the partners left the room for our team to discuss, our president/owner asked the team who we believed to be the money and idea guy of the two partners we had just heard from. Most of our team mentioned the louder partner. But I mentioned that the other partner appeared to be more calm and silent throughout. I assumed he was observing our team like we were them. The president revealed that I had guessed correctly. The quieter partner was both the money guy and the one most responsible for the tech.

It is often in the silence that we see true strength. The same idea exists in C.S. Lewis’ deep magic in Narnia. True power does not need to announce itself. True power exists in moments of silent pondering, friendship, and love. Sam embodies all of these. He ponders even though he doubts his own wisdom. Sam is a true friend who is willing to sacrifice his own desires to help his friend. Sam loves deeply. He loves the Shire, his garden, his people the Hobbits, and his friend Frodo Baggins. In that love we find the source of Sam’s tremendous power. There is nothing that can penetrate and destroy Sam’s love. Not even his own doubts about himself can hold back his love.

Even in what Sam believed to be the darkest hour he steps into his power by bearing the weight of the One Ring. Sam believes his friend to have been killed by the Shelob so he is determined to continue Frodo’s quest.

And then he bent his own neck and put the chain upon it, and at once his head was bowed to the ground with the weight of the Ring, as if a great stone had been strung on him. But slowly, as if the weight became less, or new strength grew in him, he raised his head, and then with a great effort got to his feet and found that he could walk and bear his burden. (LOTR)

Sam’s strength grew in him. Or we might say, Sam recognized his strength. Even Sam’s temptation from the ring is to become the best gardener of all. There is a foreshadow here in that Sam is the one who is able to remake the Shire into a place of goodness. A nod to new creation possibly? But Sam learns that Frodo is alive and he risks himself to save his friend so they can continue the quest together. It is Sam’s love for Frodo that holds his anger toward Gollum/Smeagol and ultimately allows Sam to treat Smeagol with mercy. That strength of being able to hold mercy is the only thing that saves Middle Earth in the end. Without mercy, the entire quest would have failed, because Frodo failed in the last moment. But mercy, which is only possible in great strength, saves the day.

Sam’s quiet power is deceptive. This is Sauron’s greatest weakness because he cannot fathom power held in mercy. The great battles in The Lord of the Rings are only distractions that allow the merciful to carry the One Ring to its destruction. Tolkien knew the horror and evil of war. So his own mythology creates a solution in which violence is ineffective. Tolkien sees mercy and love as antidotes to violence. Only the great power of mercy is able to save the world. That should be a familiar strain to Christians, but I feel we too often trust in the powers of this world to take care of evil. The problem with that is we introduce additional evil in that act.

I was reminded of this idea when teaching a Sunday School class based upon Tim Gaines’ book Walking the Theological Life. We were looking at the story of Mary the mother of Jesus and her revolutionary pondering. We too often listen to the noise. This line from Tim’s book struck me: “This, I suspect, carries a common temptation for theologians. In a world where the loudest voices seem to set the categories and the agendas, there will likely be a stirring among those who care about the world to use our voices, as we rightly should. It is at this point that theologians need to remember to use their voices as theologians.” (Gaines) Theologians should use our voices as theologians, not influencers or powers. Our talk should be about new creation and how we come to understand who God is rather than constantly trying to be louder than the other voices. Yes, that is hard.

This is where the idea of quiet strength. Of strength through the quiet and the pondering comes into play. It is the way of Samwise Gamgee. It is the way of Mary, theotokos (mother of God), it is the way of discipleship.

Pondering in silence will allow us to center God’s activity rather than our own. It opens the space for us to be theologians, precisely because the thing we will say flows from what we are seeing in the activity of God. This is what distinguishes theologians from other activists and social workers; our work is the overflow from the arena where we have seen God’s distinctive work intersect the world’s deepest needs. Being able to see that and then to sing will often require silence. (Gaines)

God’s presence working in the world is our invitation to join in that work. We do this because of our experience with the one whose power and holiness are only present in love. We cannot engage in creation if we are shouting. No, quiet strength requires mercy to hear. It is really hard to hear if we are shouting. Quiet power recognizes the possibility of mercy rather than the folly of violence. God wants us to join in the work of quiet mercy. But do we wish to join?

Share

GAINES, TIMOTHY. WALKING THE THEOLOGICAL LIFE Discovering Method for Theology in the Lives of Biblical Characters. INTERVARSITY PRESS, 2024.

Tolkien, J. R. R. The Lord of the Rings. Illustrated edition. Houghton Mifflin, 2021.

There’s a fascinating phenomenon ongoing in white evangelical influencer culture. They appear to be getting talking points from a common source that is politically connected. It is hard to miss if you pay attention to several of the influencers. There are exact soundbites, edited clips. and arguments they are making within their very narrow and fundamentalist understanding of Christianity. It is infuriating more than sad, because those voices are discipling so many people who do not have the knowledge to understand how bad the disinformation being spread is. But this is really a tale as old as time. The people of God are often led around by the ignorant, the attention seeking, the influence seeking, and the wolves. Ironically, many who accuse others of being wolves sure look a lot like wolves when you look closely. Wolves are a metaphor for those who sneak and deceive to gain trust and then destroy just to be clear.

Here’s what the wolves have been up to:

First there were claims that Democrats are satanic, demonic, and evil. But that’s been going a round for a while. Of course, their reasons are usually a mishmash of contradictions. But, they usually involve positions in opposition to current Republican and administration policies. Opposing wanton violence overreach, and overly violent tactics is somehow demonic. That’s a bit of a head scratcher. I do understand the inclination to assume that Democratic abortion policy is demonic, but it may help to understand that abortion rates typically go down during Democratic administrations. In fact abortion rates were plummeting overall until 2016.

But now, they have turned their sites on James Telarico, a senatorial candidate from Texas. Once again, there are soundbites, edited clips, and wild claims. I would accuse the influencers of lying, but I suspect they are being given these materials since they are exactly the same across all influencers. One claim is about Telarico’s position on immigration. The video they share and comment upon is highly misleading. If they took the time to see the whole comment, they would not be able to make their claims. The video they all share has Telarico saying that he believes immigration policy “should be like a front porch with a welcome mat...” The clip stops and the influencers go on and on about how evil this thinking is. Let that sit for a moment. But it gets worse. If you are at all familiar with southern religious rhetorical cadence you notice the pitch in Telarico’s voice and expect a second comment to come after “mat.” There is more to that comment. It is spoken in a homiletic cadence expecting an “and.” That’s what happens. The actual quote is “like a front porch with a welcome mat, and a lock on the door.” That really changes the idea behind the quote and exposes the disinformation spread by Christian influencers. Why? James Telarico scares the Republicans who attempt to claim that Christians must be Republican.

Now that last part is obviously false. No human political party or system is “Christian” in reality. Christians can vote and participate within all sort of systems, but none of them are explicitly Christian or have a monopoly on Christian thought. I have seen the influencers claim Telarico is a heretic, not a real Christian, using Jesus as a mascot, and demonic. I see irony, because the influencers are acting like wolves, using Jesus as a mascot, and sometimes promote ancient heresy like Gnosticism. Honestly, James Telarico is just a candidate we don’t see very often - the white mainline Protestant Christian Democratic candidate. Christians are not rare in the Democratic party, but there are fewer white mainline Christians than in the past. Mainline Protestant Christians are not heretics. They are not evangelicals, but evangelical does not define orthodoxy. Telarico is a seminary student and current Texas State Representative. He’s a Presbyterian and currently pursuing a Masters in Divinity at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, a Presbyterian (USA) affiliated school. Not heretics, not demons, but the are Presbyterians.

Telarico sounds like a Christian in the mainline tradition. But he also is within the stream of prophetic voices like Isaiah and Jeremiah who continually call the people of God back to their calling. The idea that God desires mercy, not sacrifice. The tradition that calls upon us to let go of the idols of self and empire and have hearts broken open for holiness. What Tim Gaines calls becoming undone in like Isaiah.

I am ruined!” is not something we expect someone to say when something good is taking place. It is, however, the only thing Isaiah can seem to say when he is encountered by God. “Being undone” is how some translations put this destabilizing exclamation. It is a phrase that can be read in different ways with a different tone each time our eyes fall on it. On one pass, it may be Isaiah lamenting. On another it may be a breakthrough of discovery. Often, in the theological life, both are happening at the same time. There is virtue to be found here, because the undoneness of a person is a signpost of theological virtue. (Walking)

The attacks against Telarico are similar to the attacks that come when Christians who desire power encounter Christians who desire mercy. Those who want power tend to act with disdain toward those who desire mercy. People have completely gone overboard because James Telarico said that God is non-binary. But that is correct. You may not liek the terms he uses, but God is neither male nor female. God is spirit, not flesh. Yes, Jesus was distinctly male, but the First Person of the Trinity is neither. If we go back to Genesis, we can see that male and female both reflect the image of God. Therefore God is non-binary. I guess if you are a dualist, God could be a binary with Satan as the opposite, but that’s heresy.

There is a fair bit of irony in the way the influencers are going after James Telarico considering their unfettered support of the current U.S. administration. So much so that they are contradicting their own statements day to day based upon administration messaging. Who is the wolf now? That is the danger of placing trust in empire or human beings - those tend to not be Christian at the core.

Of course the main point here is that Christians can be involved in politics in all sort of systems and parties. When we start claiming Christians cannot be or vote certain ways, we put ourselves in a place that is not for us. The Church catholic (universal) prays, fasts, and seeks guidance from God when determining orthodoxy and heresy. The great ecumenical creeds are outgrowths of this careful and measured response. Modern evangelicals are just a small piece of the grand story of God and so they do not speak for Christianity in general, nor do they define historic Christianity. Another great irony is that fundamentalist evangelicals share more in common with liberal theology than they want to believe. They do reject some historic credal ideas. They also tend to create a dualistic Gnosticism which labels the physical world as evil and the spiritual world as good.

A little acceptance that we might be wrong and a tremendous dose of humility would really help us avoid the current crisis. But those are hard and require work. They also don’t play well in this current marketplace of outrage. It is is far easier to demonize those with whom you disagree. Calling human beings who are simply expressing a difference in political opinion and middle of the road Christian thought exposes the lack of any real thinking or argument. It is schoolyard bully tactics and it is wearing incredibly thin.

This also exposes how incredibly ignorant of historic and orthodox Christianity most influencers are. You can disagree with interpretations, but unless they are actual heresy, you cannot label disagreement as heresy, demonic, or satanic. The latest rumblings place liberation theology and the traditional American Black Church outside orthodoxy. This has led to truly racist language and proposed policies from pastors and politicians. Clergy in my denomination have freely used the language of religious bigotry even though that is forbidden in our now essential doctrines of our covenants.

The bigotry is not a fringe thing either. It is weaving its way into mainstream evangelical speech and thought. But when you see God as an angry dude (usually white) you tend to see the actions of angry dudes as godly rather than ungodly. The Church is more of a mycelial* network of love and mercy spreading throughout the world in constant connection and relationship. But too many see the Church as a martial organization moving in conquering action throughout the world. The former leads to life in peaceful and connected love, the latter to hatred and death.

We Christians claim that human beings are made in the image of God, maybe we should start acting like we actually believe that.

• fungal networks like mushrooms, etc.

Gaines Timothy. Walking The Theological Life: Discovering Method for Theology in the Lives of Biblical Characters. IVP, 2024.

A major issue with religious fundamentalism is that it reduces faith and the experience of faith. This reduction creates propositional ideology that is often at odds with the very religion that fundamentalism claims to be protecting. Sure, it usually sounds like a good idea. “If we can just make sure that everyone believes these things then we’ll keep the faith.” Or even a listicle style thought. “10 Tricks to Stay Faithful, Number 7 Will Blow Your Mind.” It’s absurd to reduce religion to propositions. But it is oh so popular. There has been a streak of fundamentalist thought within the Church of the Nazarene (COTN) for a very long time. The majority tend to keep it at bay, but we are in the midst of a resurgence of fundamentalism driven by fear and a misunderstanding of what is happening to Christianity in the United States. There are sectarian groups and clergy within the COTN, but they have been mainly on the fringe. They form partnerships, bring resolutions, and tut tut at the “progressives.” Back in 2012, the COTN published an excellent book to explain who were are historically as Wesleyans and how that is counter to fundamentalism. That book is entitled Square Peg: Why Wesleyans Are Not Fundamentalists. It’s an excellent book that walks through our traditional understanding of scripture and how our understanding of it and God are counter to fundamentalism’s reductions.

Subscribe now

Which is why it is strange to see our flagship denominational magazine, Holiness Today feature a board member of a sectarian group and his fundamentalist vision of scripture. From the two clips of a video they have shown, I can get a pretty good idea of where we are going. It sounds very much like the book The ARTwork of God: Accurate, Reliable, and True: Embracing the Bible Through the Eyes of Jesus which sounds good, but the authors are actually making an argument for complete textual inerrancy and a certain literal reading of the Hebrew scriptures. I heartily agree that we should not go walking around in the Old Testament without Jesus (as Brian Zahnd says). But that doesn’t mean we can see Jesus in all things or that Jesus’ words make scripture something it is not. I reviewed ARTWork and I will link that below, but I find a grand irony in the fact that an ordained Elder in the COTN wrote a book that argues against our Article of Faith of scripture. Yes, he tries to get around that with a word game of making all of scripture relevant for salvation.

The first video shared has a member of clergy make the suggestion that we not use “stories” to describe the early books of the Bible, but instead use accounts. (He puts air quotes around stories). His argument is that the word story makes people think of fairy tales, myths, or made up things. That’s true and it is also true that story and account are two very different things. But story is so much more than an account. Story does carry myth, meaning, invitation, and truth. An account has to stick to the facts and squeezes truth into a fact box. Truth doesn’t fit in those. The funny thing is that in the second video teaser shared, we get a theological turn known as Christophany in which we look at pre-incarnation manifestations of God in the Hebrew scriptures as prefigures, or literal appearances of Jesus. These usually stick to physical manifestations and traditionally Christophanies are not recognized in Genesis 1-3. I don’t know for sure as the whole video is not out until March 1st, but the second teaser implies that this idea is carried throughout the Hebrew scriptures.

Christophanies, when extended beyond the traditional assumption of physical manifestation, are easily turned into eisegesis. It is easy to place Jesus where he does not appear when you start playing loose with the interpretive idea of Christophany. A key to understanding the idea of Jesus in the creations stories specifically is to understand that when the Gospel of John opens with “In the beginning was the Word (Logos)” it is a new interpretation of the cosmology of creation. Like much of the New Testament use of Hebrew scripture, the Gospels reinterpret scriptures in light of Jesus. Hebrews 1 is a good way to see why.

Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. (Hebrews 1:1-4 NRSVue)

There is a bit of irony in saying we should use the word account and then start sticking Jesus in everywhere. You see story is the idea when we expand the words of scripture and see a theological truth not present explicitly. This is a form of progressive revelation. We look back to earlier texts with the eyes of knowing Jesus. The deep truth is that God has never not been like Jesus. Therefore, we need to read texts before Jesus in light of the life of Jesus.

The Problem with reduction

But the larger problem is the reasoning behind the premise of using the term account. I believe it assumes that people are too stupid to understand what we mean when we say story in light of scripture. Reducing scripture to accounts, reduces the truth and the grandness of God’s relationship with creation. If we are going to use account, then how do we deal with the two different accounts of creation in Genesis. If they are only accounts, then we need to deal with the different accounts of order and method. But of we see them as origination stories we can see the truths without bogging ourselves down in the weeds of factual arguments. What of we see the stories as part of the larger ongoing story of God. What if we look back at the story of the man and the woman and see ourselves as part of the story of God working in creation. This is an invitation to see that we are in the story and become willing participants when we trust God.

Subscribe now

Thinking we need to use words like account comes from the fear that people won’t understand the depth and weight of the word story. The people in the pews, in Sunday School classrooms, and in small groups are not dumb. They can grasp the idea of story and what it means to tell the story of God and God’s people. One of our failures of discipleship is not challenging people with the harder ideas of scripture and faith. Because story is powerful - way more powerful than account. Stories take us beyond the facts of something into the who and the why. Those are much better things to learn. An illustration from the Lord of the Rings might be helpful here. Sam Gamgee is realizing that he and Frodo are part of a larger story that has been ongoing for millennia.

‘Yes, that’s so,’ said Sam. ‘And we shouldn’t be here at all, if we’d known more about it before we started. But I suppose it’s often that way. The brave things in the old tales and songs, Mr. Frodo: adventures, as I used to call them. I used to think that they were things the wonderful folk of the stories went out and looked for, because they wanted them, because they were exciting and life was a bit dull, a kind of a sport, as you might say. But that’s not the way of it with the tales that really mattered, or the ones that stay in the mind. Folk seem to have been just landed in them, usually – their paths were laid that way, as you put it. But I expect they had lots of chances, like us, of turning back, only they didn’t. And if they had, we shouldn’t know, because they’d have been forgotten. We hear about those as just went on – and not all to a good end, mind you; at least not to what folk inside a story and not outside it call a good end. You know, coming home, and finding things all right, though not quite the same – like old Mr. Bilbo. But those aren’t always the best tales to hear, though they may be the best tales to get landed in! I wonder what sort of a tale we’ve fallen into?’ ‘I wonder,’ said Frodo. ‘But I don’t know. And that’s the way of a real tale. Take any one that you’re fond of. You may know, or guess, what kind of a tale it is, happy-ending or sad-ending, but the people in it don’t know. And you don’t want them to.’ (LOTR)

We are part of a larger story. We look back to Genesis for the who and the why knowing that the how is not important. When we challenge ourselves and those we pastor to enter into this story, we experience a flourishing in grace. That doesn’t mean that we are always OK. But it does mean that we see purpose in our lives as part of the grand story of God. We are invited again and again to see the move of God among us. The God who draws and woos us into relational holiness also invites us to tell our own stories. Communities, nations, churches are defined by the stories they tell. When we tell our stories, we live out the truth of those stories. I can tell you an account of my wife, but that doesn’t tell you who she is or what she means to me. Why would we limit God to accounts?

When we reduce the grand stories of God to accounts, we stick a rusty and dull knife through the heart of living scripture. We turn the purpose of scripture into a dusty old list of accounts rather than a living God-breathed invitation to join the story of God. I don’t get it. Our shared Wesleyan-Holiness tradition has so much to offer a broken and hurting world. When we lop off our historical understanding of scripture and try to jam it into a fundamentalist box, we become something we are not. The Southern Baptist Convention is a cautionary tale, not a blueprint for success. Accounts don’t transform, but stories transcend into invitation to transformation. Stories allow us to enter into them and experience their truth anew each time we hear or tell them.

Insisting on making the grand stories of scripture into accounts blinds us to the possibility of entering stories. It also excludes reason and history. If we are speaking of creation specifically, Eric Vail has an excellent comment on science and faith in the Wesleyan Theology Series Book Creation:

Whether the sciences are speaking about the unfolding of the universe over billions of years or the unfolding of life on Earth, the biblical imagination about creation’s unfolding is valid. God’s activity is necessary for any of it to be possible, God has purposes for creation’s function, and every component has an active role to play. Biblical theology can comfortably dialogue with theories of the big bang, quantum mechanics, and evolutionary biology.

The limitations put upon the imagination of scripture through the shackles of fundamentalism is both sad and not needed. Orthodoxy is not reduced to the absurdity of propositional facts. No, orthodoxy is the shared invitation to know God, to truly enter into the Story of God. When we reduce, we show a mistrust of the Holy Spirit and of God’s move in the world. We need to be telling more stories, not fewer. We need to engage the imagination of generations yearning for beauty and truth in a violent and demanding world. We need to set scripture free to transform our hearts.

To paraphrase Kendrick Lamar:

The audience not dumb
Shape the stories how you want, hey, Andy, they’re not slow

Share

* They typically label normal Wesleyan-Holiness folk as progressive because of the official understanding of scripture in the COTN and for believing in a concern for social justice codified in our Manual

Tolkien, J.R.R. The Lord Of The Rings (pp. 711-712)

Vail Eric. Creation. 1st ed. The Foundry Publishing

It is bad enough that the Christian influencers and Christians who seek power are calling empathy sin. But now, John Piper has decided that lament is bad. John Piper is a patriarchal, Reformed pastor whom you may have heard of. His Desiring God podcast and Ask Pastor John are very popular. His view of God is one that is skewed in my opinion. Of course, he believes the Wesleyan-Holiness view of God to be wrong. But Piper’s view of God is of an all-controlling, capricious, and thin-skinned god. Piper often takes positions which make God out to be a monster. He has told women that they should stay in abusive marriages because women must submit to men in all circumstances. Piper has even said that he believes women should not serve in any leadership position whether religious or societal. It is Piper’s view of God that leads him to question the very idea of lament.

Rick Pidcock writes about this in a Baptist News Global article by summarizing Piper’s comments in a February 12, 2026 episode of Ask Pastor John.

• It is never right, it is always sin, to feel or think or say critical things about God and God’s ways.

• It may be right to feel or think or express perplexity at God’s ways and to seek help from God to understand as much as possible -- to cry out for it.

• It may be right to feel or think or express how painful God’s ways are in your life and to seek God’s help to understand and endure.

• The sin of having critical feelings or critical thoughts of God is not made worse by the sin of expressing those words to God aloud.

• God disapproves of being criticized because it dishonors God, but God forgives those who repent and trust Christ.

You can probably see some problems with Piper’s claims here if you spend any time in The Psalms or Prophets of Hebrew scripture. Questioning God is a theme in those. Criticism of God is part of the human experience of God. But for Piper, God’s honor must be maintained at all cost. Piper’s god is a thin-skinned man who punishes based upon slights to his honor. That is not the God of the Bible, nor is it the God revealed in Jesus. But Piper’s view of God is popular. It is why so many believe that the relatively recent atonement theory of penal substitution is so popular. Piper’s thinking is embraced by many apologists and influencers. Many of whom have no theological training and don’t truly understand the concepts they argue about. Thus the idea that empathy is sin.

The path from empathy being sin to having an issue with lament is not a far trip. But empathy and lament are not only not sin, they are critical parts of the experience of God throughout time. The rejection of lament is a move by those who hold power, who have privilege, and who demand obedience above all else. This is a central thought in the excellent book The Back Side of the Cross by Diane Leclerc and Brent Peterson. They flip the ideas of Piper’s atonement on their head by asking us to consider the sinned against, not just the sinner. Contrary to the sadistic god Piper describes, God is able to absorb our criticism and outcries and reflect it back as love.

Leclerc and Peterson define lament for us. “A lament is a stirring cry, where God is asked to be a better God, indeed, where God is held accountable. Most laments have three groups present: the speaker, God, and the enemy.” (Back Side) I suspect you see Piper’s problem with lament. It is a concept where we might accuse God. Lament is an action we should be willing to enter into - especially with the abused and the forgotten. Piper believes God only desires praise and that anything less than total praise is rejected by God. I really don’t believe the God revealed in scripture is that narcissistic. That leads Piper to say that God’s honor demands our total submission to whatever comes our way. But this is not good news to the hurting. “If Christians fail to follow the model of the Psalter and only offer expressions of praise without any space for lament, such praise can become hollow and ring false in the ears of the abused.” (ibid)

Any rejection of lament should ring hollow in our own ears and lives. I am tempted to use the image of a dominatrix for Piper’s god, but that would be false because Piper believes God to be male through and through. How a holy other God can be either male or female is a mystery. Scripture says that both make up the image of God. But that idea leads to women having equality and Piper ain’t having that. One of the end results of Piper’s theology is harm. “Spiritual abuse can happen when spiritual truths or biblical texts are used to do harm or to manipulate people into dysfunctional thoughts or behaviors.” (ibid) Why are there so many scandals for prominent pastors? Because many hold to the idea that they speak for a God who demands obedience to the ministers of God (if they are male of course).

The logical conclusion of Piper’s view is that God forces harm upon people. Let me be clear, Piper is wrong and I believe his view of God leads to sinful behavior in leaders. But I also see the way that Piper’s view sounds to the abused, hurting, or vulnerable. Leclerc and Peterson help here. “A crucial, but often overlooked outcome of a Christian masochistic view is that a position of demanded submission and acquiescence of one’s suffering as God’s will make resistance to suffering inappropriate and thus impossible to express. The sexual connotation here stands as a vivid analogy, as God forces suffering upon us.” (ibid)

Subscribe now

Piper’s view creates a masochistic religion. The god in any masochistic religion is a sadist by nature. Apologies if you really like John Piper, but he is selling a sadistic god. The fact that so many come to believe in the God portrayed by Piper causes me to lament. The very season of Lent is one in which we make decisions that lead us into solidarity with the hurting, the outcast, and the powerless. Piper wants a God who strikes with anger and gives Piper the authority to wield power over others. Within Piper’s world, women and others who report abuse are sinners who are experiencing the discipline of God as evidenced by their circumstances. The person whose body is being attacked by cancer is under the rebuke of God. Why? Because that view of God means God just does such things for mysterious reasons or that God does such things because you are bad.

Paul the apostle used a slang word for such doctrine - σκύβαλον (skubalon). Most translations use words like dung or garbage. But many scholars believe the modern equivalent would be bullsh*t. Piper’s theology is not good news - it is skubula. It belongs on a dung heap, but his views are popular because they allow for human beings to act like that version of God. Demanding submission and total obedience to capricious ideology.

The truth is that God is a God of empathy. God not only can handle lament. God welcomes lament. We should be a people willing to lament the harm done in the name of God and the harm that happens to our fellow human beings just because. That harm is not brought by God. Here I come to a common theme in my writing. God is a God who is with us. Truly with us and wants relationship, not obedience. God wants our hearts full of love that pours out into the world on others. God desires mercy, not sacrifice.

That’s the good news. God wants us to know who God is. As Christians observe Lent, we think on Jesus’ time in the wilderness. A time when Jesus was offered the power of this world, the power to do as he wished, the power to control. But when offered the world, Jesus said that was not the desire of God.

When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. (Lk 4:16-20 NRSV)

God is not a sadist.

Leclerc, Diane, and Brent Peterson. Back Side of the Cross: An Atonement Theology for the Abused and Abandoned. Cascade Books, 2022.

https://baptistnews.com/article/forget-empathy-the-new-war-is-on-lament/

Ash Wednesday reminds us of our finitude. But it also reminds us of hope. This year I am reminded of a friend who is no longer among us because of cancer. Our friend’s last Ash Wednesday service was in 2023. As I write this, I’m remembering that Ash Wednesday service. We had learned that our friend’s treatment options had run out and that the journey to healing was changing. There are moments as a pastor which become anchors in your ministry. They shape you in ways you may not realize. I still remember the first wedding I officiated as a young man. I also remember my friend’s dad asking me if I gave honorarium refunds several years later when that marriage failed. (He was being funny). But that Ash Wednesday service still hits because it reminded me of how fragile human beings are. But it also reminds me of our tremendous capacity for living in spite of that fragility.

In the moment our friend came forward for the imposition of ashes, my heart caught a bit. As I spoke the phrase “from dust you came, to dust you shall return” and imposed ashes upon her forehead, the weight of those words weighed upon my heart. For in that moment those words were all too real. They were not a theoretical or far off idea. Those words were present in that moment and the weight of them hung in the air over the next several months as cancer’s destruction became inevitable. But that weight is not the totality of the story.

Cancer and other illnesses are a reality. They are often inexplicable in arbitrary ways. My father’s own death from cancer felt fresh when we first heard the diagnoses of our friend. The staff and spouses of staff who were able converged on our church building to pray. My wife and I are the only staff left from that moment, but it reminds me of the ways in which we are there in one another’s pain. When we are in those moments we are reflecting the image of God. None of us had any idea what the next five years would reveal, but we had optimism and sadness.

Over those years, our friend was an incredible encourager for my ministry. She had a knack for recognizing the things we all did well and highlighting those. She also managed to sing, play piano, and participate in the things she loved so well that she feared people would think she was faking being sick. But people knew. We had several close calls where health would fail, but rebound over the last few years. But in every moment our friend carried the beauty of God’s grace and love. She never wavered in her faithfulness.

From dust you came and to dust you shall return. God scoops up that dust. God gets down in the dust, the mud, the very muck of life. God is in the ashes left by pain, disease, and violence. God does not bring those by any means. But God is there with us in every moment. God is a God of empathy and the way God shows God’s empathy is through the person we emulate during Lent.

If, then, there is any comfort in Christ, any consolation from love, any partnership in the Spirit, any tender affection and sympathy, make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or empty conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests but to the interests of others. Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus,

Text within this block will maintain its original spacing when published

who, though he existed in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped,
but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave,
assuming human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a human,
he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death-- even death on a cross.
Therefore God exalted him even more highly
and gave him the name that is above every other name,
so that at the name given to Jesus every knee should bend,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. (Phil 2:1-11 NRSVue)

God is in the ashes, because God knows what it means to be human. That’s empathy. The kenotic picture in the Philippians passage is a picture of empathy. Of walking in our “sandals.” When I imposed ashes upon our friend’s forehead her last Ash Wednesday, I could do that without irony because I understood God was present in the ashes. God was present in her pain and God was sitting with her in that pain. God empathized in that pain and God empathizes with us in our pain, joy, fear, and simply being human.

Being present in suffering. Being present in pain. These are acts of empathy and of grace. God’s being of love may not be able to single handedly solve our pain in this world. But I know that God knows our pain deeply. A God who knows our pain would never inflict that pain. The God revealed in Jesus is not a pain bringer, but a pain bearer. God understands our finitude.

Trigger warning: abuse, self-harm, and pain

There is a lot of darkness in our world. But that is not the default even though many believe that to be the case. To claim that darkness is the default, the way things are, or the way things must be is to accept fate as a reality. Existentially, fate is anti-human. Why? Because human beings have true agency - darkness is not our base setting. If we were to reboot humanity, we would not all wake up wishing to do evil. Yes, many Christians believe in total depravity. But Christians can mean different things by the word depravity. For Wesleyans, we believe that prevenient grace allows human beings to respond to God, but also allows us to do good even apart from knowing God. It is how we can see truth in places that truth may not have been meant originally. But prevenient grace is also that which prevents the chaos of darkness from taking root.

Dr. Diane Leclerc explains another way tot look at what we call depravity as deprivity.

Through the Fall, we are deprived of our primary relationship with God, and our other relationships are consequently distorted; but the capacity for love, and the hope of renewal remains. Prevenient grace enables this capacity to be actualized, and opens our senses to God. Since prevenient grace is given to all, humanity “without God” is a “logical abstraction.”

We are deprived, but prevenient grace enables us to love and opens our senses to God. This is a picture of beauty shining a light into dark places. Human beings can love even when they do not know God. If we can love, then we can see and make beauty as well. When I was thinking of ways to show beauty that reaches into darkness, I remembered a viral video of an America’s Got Talent (AGT) audition from 2021. In the video a young woman who used the name Nightbirde, told her story of cancer and sang an original song titled “It’s OK.” Here’s that audition for you to watch. The song is simply beautiful. But the story and the hope in spite of illness is breathtaking.

It’s okay, it’s okay, it’s okay, it’s okay
If you’re lost
We’re all a little lost and it’s alright

Boom. The sheer optimism of being able to say two percent is not zero percent. Just wow. When that audition went viral, a blog post by Nightbirde also went viral. In that blog post, Nightbirde spoke of her feelings of being sick. How she related to God - including anger. It was a psalm of hurt and hope.

“Even on days when I’m not so sick, sometimes I go lay on the mat in the afternoon light to listen for Him. I know it sounds crazy, and I can’t really explain it, but God is in there--even now. I have heard it said that some people can’t see God because they won’t look low enough, and it’s true.

If you can’t see him, look lower. God is on the bathroom floor.” Jane Marczewski (Nightbirde)

You see, Nightbirde understood that God is there on the bathroom floor; in our pain, and in the midst of darkness. One mistake I believe the white evangelical church makes is to look for God in places of power and influence. To look for God in politicians, the wealthy, and the popular. Maybe we need to look a little lower. But lower doesn’t make us look respectable or pay the bills. But it is definitely where the prophets told Israel to look for God. For then God was among the poor, the outcast, the powerless. Jesus cane into the world as a baby in a place and to a people with no power. His ministry was centered in the poor, the widows, the powerless, and the outcasts. Jesus brought hope to people for whom hope was a distant promise.

Sadly Nightbirde had to drop out of AGT and the cancer finally overcame her optimism in 2022. But the beauty Nightbirde sang and spoke about goes on. I will return to her story in a moment, but I wanted to talk about the ways that darkness can become too much.

Light Shines in the Darkness

Even great beauty can succumb to darkness if we let it. One of greatest impressionist painters (one of my favorite painters) is Vincent Van Gogh. He used color, and beauty to tell a story of inner pain. Van Gogh painted beauty in the midst of his own darkness. That darkness eventually won and he took his own life. The BBC science fiction show Doctor Who has an excellent episode entitled “Vincent and the Doctor.” The Doctor and his companion Amy meet Van Gogh and the Doctor decides to take Vincent into the future to see what he came to mean to many. Here is the clip of that scene in which Vincent sees the way he is remembered.

The Doctor knows that this will not change the outcome of Van Gogh’s darkness, but he tries. He wanted to shine a light of hope in the darkness of a tortured mind. When we look for God on the bathroom floor we have the opportunity to shine light into dark places. The church would be much better off telling the stories of goodness rather than stories of power. Stories of a God who is present in every moment - even in the moments of deep and overwhelming darkness. We need to be a people proclaiming a God for whom there is no place God is not. But that takes courage and a hope of light. Sadly, we too often reach for the power rather than the light.

The Darkness is Real

There is real darkness and evil in the world. Human beings make the decision to do evil. Fear of that darkness can cause us to make bad decisions ourselves. Politicians and others promise peace and safety if only you will support them. There are those who promise the same for a price of only $XXX.XX. But their peace is fleeting and their safety is only present if you support them. The wealthy and the powerful do what they want, to whom they want, and typically do not face consequences.

One darkness is sexual assault and trafficking. The Epstein files are only the latest evidence of the way that the powerful engage in harm to the powerless. The victims of the Epstein class were ignored and vilified. They continue that from the powerful. Recently the Attorney General of the United States refused to look at the victims during a congressional hearing. The AG chose to talk about the Dow Jones Average and defend the decision to not prosecute. Just one reminder that money trumps people for the powerful. Survivors of sexual violence and abuse can be triggered by the repeated justification for supporting those refusing to release or prosecute.

Hope in the Darkness

But there is hope. If we look in the right places. God is there on the metaphorical bathroom floor. God is there with the improperly detained immigrant. God is there with the human beings whose humanity is diminished by the words of the powerful. God is present in the moments of beauty that inspire. Back to Nightbirde, whose performance on AGT inspired others. Like the Doctor attempting to show Van Gogh hope, Nightbirde shone light into a youth choir in South Africa. The Mzansi Youth Choir heard Nightborde perform and it led to them recording the song “It’s OK.” They took this to AGT themselves shortly after Nightbirde passed away from her cancer. Their perfomance left Simon Cowell as speechless as Nightbirde did when she told Cowell that “you can’t wait until life isn’t hard anymore before you decide to be happy.”

We may never know the impact we can have on the world by simply sharing beauty in the darkness. The light shines into darkness and the darkness cannot overcome it. Humanity needs beauty so badly. I hope the church can be a beacon of beauty rather than an apologist for darkness.

Leclerc, Diane. Discovering Christian Holiness: The Heart of Wesleyan-Holiness Theology (p. 217).

With artificial intelligence everywhere, pastoral leaders have instant access to vast amounts of knowledge that previously required hours, even days, to uncover. You can have AI research a sermon topic, draft a lesson plan, diagnose a problem, and perform many other tasks modern ministry requires. Information is no longer scarce and the way information is accessed by a pastoral leader is changing.

Consider books: an expansive library was once the prized possession of vocational pastors. Not any longer. Why labor through a book when that information can be at your fingertips in seconds? With over three decades in ministry, I have books stored in four different locations in my home. What do I do with them? Yet this is the moment we find ourselves in. Information comes to us differently. Don’t get me wrong, I still love my books!

This massive shift in how we receive information raises important questions: What kind of intelligence really matters? How is the role of pastoral leader significant in the age of AI?

While AI can quickly collect and share information, it cannot weigh it with wisdom. That’s where you come into the picture. The discerning heart of a pastor is irreplaceable. Reliable sources of information never go out of style and it is your spiritual insight that gives it meaning. A Pastoral leader must help people recognize what is true, what is harmful, and what brings life. Most importantly, a pastoral leader helps people connect their heads and hearts. We can deliver valuable knowledge and information, but if it isn’t internalized, we’ve failed in our role as pastors.

AI can help solve complex problems and even assist with strategy, but it can never replace a missional calling. Pastoral leadership is rooted in a call to service, and that calling is sacred and unique to who you are as a person. AI can only reproduce what already exists; it cannot blaze new trails, create a new wineskin, or pioneer new frontiers in ministry; that work belongs to you.

Ten years ago, I launched a ministry to reach a specific group of young men with no playbook, no borrowed wisdom, and no ready-made strategy. I had no idea what I was getting myself into and I had many failures along the way. My soul was burdened for young men and I found myself working out a strategy in the midst of actually doing the ministry. In ministry, strategy and soul must move together. And that is something AI can never do.

AI can assist you in writing sermons, but it cannot breathe life into those sermons. I am not currently serving in a preaching role, so I listen to many sermons. I’m beginning to hear sermons that are written with AI assistance. I’m not entirely opposed to this idea, because it can help with precision, wording, and phrasing. But overuse of AI can push authenticity into the margins. When I listen to a sermon, I want to know I am hearing a prophetic voice, not a machine. The preaching moment is intended to bring dry bones to life. Transmitting information doesn’t change hearts; heartfelt messages, bathed in prayer and anointed by the Holy Spirit, do. When I listen to a sermon, I find myself refreshed by hearing words that flow from a perfect heart, not perfect prose produced by AI. I bet I’m not alone.

Many experts predict job losses will accompany the adoption of AI in the new economy. Don’t worry, pastor, your job will never be in jeopardy. Your role as a pastor, priest, and prophet is needed more than ever. People are still hungry for real wisdom, the kind that connects the head to the heart. There will always be a need for pastoral leaders who have gained real knowledge through their own successes and failures, ups and downs, through formal education and the school of hard knocks. And in a world increasingly saturated with artificial intelligence, it’s time we step up and deliver the kind of spiritual wisdom and intelligence that can only come from gutting it out in the trenches of ministry, loving those who are unlovable, and leading people out of darkness. That timeless spiritual wisdom is the real commodity in the age of AI.

You may also like:

Where is God? That’s a question we often ask when things get dark or when we see horror, injustice, and evil. Some shy from this question, but it is an excellent one. The Hebrew scriptures are full of this question. Where is God? Will God save us? The prophets attempted to answer the question by saying that God was with the outcast, the oppressed, the poor, those crushed by the powers of the world.

The answer can seem complex or even end up being an appeal to mystery. But, what if the answer is simple? What if the answer is God is with the hurting and the marginalized? But what about making the world better? What about bringing about New Creation? Paul tells us the truth. The Church is the Body of Christ. That means that the Church is an incarnate body reflecting God in the world. The Church should be doing the work of New Creation. But we fail miserably because we so badly want power. We want to control culture, force people to live like us, or simply get rid of people not like us.

This reality is part of what Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. was speaking about in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. He was writing to white clergy in churches that should be speaking out, but were afraid to rock the boat. They were afraid to be seen as allies with the out group of that time. The intended audience was not the racist clergy arguing that African-Americans were sub-human or had no souls. No, the audience was those who knew racism and unjust laws were wrong but stayed silent. This was a reminder that the Church was to be part of those bringing the solution and prophetically calling the government to live up to the promise of liberty and freedom.

I don’t think I’m special, but I do have lived experience that informs my thinking and my recognition of evil. The Church can hear and see if we wish to. If we dare to embrace empathy. After all, the one we claim to be disciples of is the ultimate example of empathy. The word we see use for this is kenosis self-emptying. My friend Dr. Tom Oord used the phrase essential kenosis many years ago to describe God’s nature. That phrase has been refined into the concept of God as Amipotent. A God of power in uncontrolling love. In God’s amipotence, we are invited to participate in creating. We are invited to participate in the act of New Creation. Making the world a better place.

I learned both empathy and that I had a vastly different experience than human beings of color when my family moved to a rural neighborhood which was then outside Clarksville, TN. (the neighborhood is in Clarksville now). The first I heard of something different was my parents talking about the realtor trying to steer them away from the old farmhouse and land they liked. He mentioned property values in hushed tones. The reason, you see, is that except for walking horse farms a couple miles down our gravel road, we would be the only white family in the neighborhood.

I received an education in dissonance. This was the late 1970s and southern schools taught a skewed history. The experiences I learned about in the neighborhood were very different. I learned of segregation. I learned of inequality in education and how the color of skin determined where you were and were not allowed to go. I heard stories of lynchings from elderly men. But I also heard stories of liberation and hope. Then there was the music. Gospel sung with a guitar on an old dusty porch. Jazz, early hip hop, and stories of struggle and hope. The schools finally caught up, but not with the gritty reality of the lived experiences of those who experienced hatred as government policy.

In that context, I was not surprised by the racist meme the president of the United States shared*. I was also not surprised by the defense given by Christian influencers like Allie Beth Stuckey, Alisa Childers, Frank Turek, and others. I am surprised by the continued silence from Christian leaders. Some are speaking, but even a clearly evil and racist things doesn’t qualm the fears of the loss of something - what that something is other than money and power I don’t know. We are so quick to name things as evil, but when faced with evil within, we shy away. There is an uncomfortable something swimming under the surface. Some large church pastors and leaders are beginning to tell us to speak of the positive and beautiful. Things they accused many of us of being “progressive” or “liberal” for desiring. They want us to just get along now that their world is being shaken by reality. But it’s hard to stomach that concern. They promoted those whose voices are divisive and even hateful.

The stories of others is more personal than mine. My experience is of the stories handed to me, but I know those who experienced this in that same time period. Felicia Murrel speaks of this reality in her book &: The Rstorative Power of Love in an Either/Or World. This is about the 1970s and early 80’s - the same time frame in which I was hearing stories of oppression, others were still living it.

In the small rural North Carolina town of my youth, Blacks lived on one side of the tracks and whites on the other. The grocery stores, diners, convenience store, post office, schools, and gas stations were across the tracks, on the white side of town. On our side of the tracks, only a small store my great-uncle owned, the candy lady’s home, and three predominantly Black churches were easily accessible to us. Even in the late seventies and on into the early eighties, we stepped off the sidewalk when white people walked past, turning our gaze downward or to the side, never making direct eye contact. We paused our movement to let them enter establishments first, and on the rare occasion that we got to eat at Jones’s (the local café), we called in our food order and then crossed the railroad tracks to the café’s back door, where we gave our money to the one Black worker and retrieved our greasy hamburgers and hot dogs in a small paper sack. Nothing about this life seemed abnormal. This was our story. (Murrel)

It is Black History Month in the United States. The ongoing reality of racism in personal and systemic forms is a reason why we need such a month. My own experience reminds me that history excludes the voices of many people. The reality of the harm done by the Church being explicit or implicit in racist attitudes still haunts us. The power of political figures to shape the language and attitudes of Christians is stunning. Especially when so many warned of such a thing happening. It was just supposed to be liberals who sent armed agents into the streets to enforce behavior and compliance.

We can learn from people who have had different experiences, especially when those experiences expose our own complicity in harmful systems. Dr. James Cone saw hope in the cross.

African Americans embraced the story of Jesus, the crucified Christ, whose death they claimed paradoxically gave them life, just as God resurrected him in the life of the earliest Christian community. While the lynching tree symbolized white power and “black death,” the cross symbolized divine power and “black life”—God overcoming the power of sin and death.

The power of sin and death is Old Creation power. God has overcome that through the kenotic act of self sacrifice on the cross of human violence. That’s New Creation power.

Where is God? God is there in every moment. But if we want to see our world transformed, we are part of God’s solution. Carrying hope, mercy, and love into a dark and violent world. Speaking prophetic truth into the harm done by the powerful - especially if we gave them that power. We can see God in the faces of the outcast, the immigrant, the person who does not look, worship, or vote like us. Light shines on the darkness and the darkness cannot hide. If we refuse to be the light, the darkness threatens to overcome. There will always be those who steadfastly refuse to give into the dark. Maybe that can be us in this moment.

*I know of the explanations, but which do we believe. The administration made so many claims yesterday, it could make your head spin. But the constant claim from the president is that only he and his top advisor hold the keys to his social media accounts.

Cone, James H.. The Cross and the Lynching Tree (p. 41). Kindle Edition.

Murrell, Felicia. And: The Restorative Power of Love in an Either/Or World (pp. 22-23). Kindle Edition.

Then he came to the disciples and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, “So, could you not stay awake with me one hour? Stay awake and pray that you may not come into the time of trial; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Mt 26:40-41)

I’ve been struggling to write the last week. I don’t know if it is too many things assaulting our collective consciousness or the large black holes of silence from those whom I believe have a responsibility to proclaim certain doctrines and beliefs. For me personally that is the Church of the Nazarene (COTN). I am sure I have shared this before, but I also have an ever changing subscriber list.

Within the Manual of the COTN, we have a section named the Covenant of Christian Conduct. This section is one in which we claim what a life lived in holiness looks like. The idea is that if we are a holiness people, then these are the ideas and actions that will mark our lives. While the section is culturally informed it is has also been considered doctrine following a 2023 ruling from our Board of General Superintendents. Here is a relevant passage for our current atmosphere in the United States. This is found in paragraph 28.4

We call our people to proclaim and demonstrate
God’s grace and love to the world. Equipping believers for
reconciling love as ambassadors for Christ in the world is the
shared responsibility of every congregation. God calls us to
attitudes, practices of hospitality, and relationships that value
all persons. We participate as joyful disciples, engaging with
others to create a society that mirrors God’s purposes. Our
faith is to work through love. Therefore, the Church is to
give herself to the care, feeding, clothing, and shelter of the
poor and marginalized. A life of Christian holiness will entail
efforts to create a more just and equitable society and world,
especially for the poor, the oppressed, and those who cannot
speak for themselves.

(Leviticus 19:18, 34; Deuteronomy 15:7-8, 11; Isaiah 61:1; Zechariah 9:12;
Matthew 25:34-44; Romans 5:7-8, 12:1; 2 Corinthians 5:16, 20; Galatians 5:6;
Ephesians 2:10,6:12; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:27; James 2:1-9)

The white evangelical church in the U.S. has three distinct groups in terms of attitude and action. This extends to the COTN. The first group is a very vocal group who have fused the political ideology of the Republican Party and the current administration of Donald Trump with their faith. Ryan Burge has some excellent work focusing on this. Tripp Fuller recently wrote an essay and presented a video on this fusion (linked below). The second group is the smallest within evangelical spaces and is those of us trying to speak out prophetically against acts of evil and dehumanization against the very human beings that our faith demands we care about.

Then we have the largest group. This group cares about Jesus and faith, but are largely asleep when it comes to the societal aspect of walking the way of Jesus. This is the group I believe sincerely believe needs to hear from leadership who we claim to be. Our credibility as people of the Gospel is in jeopardy.

Asleep in the Garden

This last group is metaphorically asleep. This is not fully their fault. It is our collective fault. Many churches in the U.S. have focused so much on growth strategies, shallow sales pitches, and organizational survival that the work of deep discipleship in the way of Jesus has been inconsistent at best. You can observe this on any post on social media when a doctrinal point is emphasized but scores of members in the COTN claim that the post does not reflect who we are - even when the post quotes our polity and doctrine. Why is this? I believe our misunderstanding of shifting cultural trends led to us focusing on church growth strategies rather than discipleship strategies leading to transformed lives. The former is easier and is visible. The latter is hard and takes time and intentional presence. Clergy have a responsibility to guide people into becoming more like Jesus. If we don’t do that, people will be discipled by something. That leads to that first group because the loudest white evangelical voices are those who proclaim a fusion of faith and politics.

In the prologue to Peter Jackson’s film version of Tolkien’s Return of the King Galadriel the elf speaks of the one ring being forgotten. “And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost.” Many have forgotten things that should never have been forgotten and those things are at risk of being completely lost. Specifically in the COTN, we have spent so much time emphasizing paragraph 31 on human sexuality and parts of paragraph 30 on sanctity of human life, that the wider marks of Wesleyan-Holiness have been lost. Not simply forgotten, but lost (at least in the U.S.). I pray that this loss is not permanent, but it feels like it when so few are trying to remind us who we claim to be.

We are sleeping through a moment in time when the church could be speaking into a situation offering the hope of New Creation. But because so many sleep we have allowed the voices of syncretism and violence to proclaim Old Creation thinking. It doesn’t matter how many references to scripture are used, they are not teaching the way of Christ. As Green Day says in their song “Look Ma, No Brains,” “nonsense is our heroin”

Waking Up

I have seen a possible fourth group emerging in the last few weeks of January 2026. This group is a combination of some in group one and three who are waking up to a hard truth. This is a truth our non-white sisters and brothers have experienced for the entirety of the existence of the United States. Violence, the refusal to see the human being, lies, and propaganda are spewing into our feeds. But when we see death in front of us, we are sometimes shaken awake. The labelling of human beings is noxious. It is especially wrong when inflammatory language is used by those with real power. I read 1984 and this feels so familiar. George Orwell was a Democratic Socialist who opposed the radical examples of communism and fascism. I believe he would be shocked to hear that people like himself are being called communists as a way to deflect the truth.

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. (1984)

Faced with the truth and inescapable vision of someone who looks like them being killed, many are awakening. But, the pull of old creation is strong. So, rather than follow the example of early Christians or even early Holiness folk, there is a new idea emerging.

‘Let’s Just Calm Down’

That fourth group is now asking people to not be outraged. These things can almost write themselves... You see many of those saying we should not be outraged (especially from group one) have repeatedly shared posts designed to illicit outrage at the “right” people. They have called those who are not Christian, demonic, they have called those who disagree with them politically evil, and they have called those who speak prophetically divisive. Speech can be action when wielded by those who have privilege. Especially when action is made difficult by the powers and principalities.

The fourth group now wants things to be purely spiritual or specific actions taken they agree with. But this is a highly physical problem as well when bodies are being harmed. Many who are just now awakening were quick to label Charlie Kirk a martyr, a prophet, or “modern day John the Baptist.” Yet, when people speak prophetically, or like John the Baptist, speak into corruption of political leaders, they are told to quiet down and do something. Friends, they have been doing something most of their lives. The prophetic voices are invitations to participate in New Creation. An invitation to leave Old Creation where it belongs in the dust bin of history. To heave Old Creation into the ever burning fires of Gehenna. To participate in what God is doing

It is really easy for those who have power or position to insinuate that others need to calm down. But there is a falsity to the concern. Why? Because a pastor whose preached a sermon in which Charlie Kirk was hailed as being a better communicator of the Gospel and a better explainer of theology than most pastors has a privilege that our non-white clergy do not have. When messages that highlight partisan politics get space, but the call of faithful protest and prophetic truth gets told to be quiet, we have a problem. I believe it is best to hear from one of our pastors who has experience that I do not. The Rev. Christine Youn Hung reminds us about a deep truth in our country.

What many of your Black, Brown, and Asian friends might not be telling you, but wish you understood.

When the nation is experiencing collective trauma, it may feel shared. But what has unfolded over the past year impacts bodies of color differently. Violent attacks against immigrants, families being torn apart, and predatory hunts in our communities are happening to people who look like us. Our elders. Our children. Our sisters and brothers. Watching this over and over through the media is traumatizing our bodies in ways you may never have to carry.

When these stories are lied about, gaslighted, or justified, the betrayal cuts deeper than you can imagine.

When white bodies choose proximity to bodies of color, even at the risk of losing privilege and safety, it gives us hope. When some of those same bodies are murdered and labeled domestic terrorists, not only by officials but echoed by friends, it leaves wounds that will scar for a lifetime.

When we see the nation show up in the streets with words and action, we are thankful. And yet that gratitude is tempered by the painful reality that it took the murder of white adjacents to mobilize a movement this large. After centuries of attack on bodies of color.

When we find the courage to speak, it is dismissed as political. But for us, it is survival. Yes, this is a war on moral and theological goodness. It is also a war on our people.

When people call this a fascist regime, we look at each other and think, that has been the felt reality for many of us already.

When we speak up, we are defending our humanity and our worth. We are defending the image of Christ in each of us and the truth that we deserve dignity, safety, and care.

When you speak up, we feel seen and given dignity, safety, and care.

Words Are Action

“More action, less outrage.” Sure, if your position is one where words might call you to think, I get that thought. But outrage is perfectly normal when it is driven by truth and not something created through rage bait, A.I. or propaganda. We should live in discernment. Discernment will very likely call you to feel outrage that the bodies of fellow human beings are not treated as valuable. When the imago Dei (image of God) is not recognized in the faces of those we believe to be beneath us. When Jesus said “love your neighbor as yourself” he wasn’t saying this only applied to people who look, act, or believe like you do. He was explicitly saying to love those whom even the religious leaders have told you to hate. Jesus also did not exclude love from those who show us hate. He tells us to pray for our enemies and, even more, to care for our enemies.

A Far Side comic on my comic a day calendar this week was perfect. You see, when more voices speak, the reality shows that there are more who see the pain and can act and have the power to speak. In other words, there are more of us than there are of the powerful. Words become action. This is especially true when the church speaks in her prophetic role.

Christianity stands or falls with its revolutionary protest against violence, arbitrariness and pride of power and with its plea for the weak. Christians are doing too little to make these points clear rather than too much. Christendom adjusts itself far too easily to the worship of power. Christians should give more offense, shock the world far more, than they are doing now. Christian should take a stronger stand in favor of the weak rather than considering first the possible right of the strong.

- Deitrich Bonhoeffer in a Sermon on 2nd Corinthians 12:9

Voices work. Speech works. Those able to say things is effective in pushing for change. Because of the many voices being raised, there is a crack of light appearing on the horizon. A hope that the powerful are hearing the outrage at lies and violence. A hope that a sliver of New Creation may be blossoming because people dare to speak. I pray that the COTN finds her voice that is so relevant to our current cultural moment. That Holiness people become known for their words of action rather than the silence of inaction.

May the church wake up as Jesus continues to come to us in the garden asking why we keep sleeping.

https://nazarene.org/manual/

Process This

Bonhoeffer's Warning, Unheeded: The Moral Collapse of White Evangelicalism

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about frogs and soup pots…

Listen now

3 months ago · 628 likes · 96 comments · Tripp Fuller

There are many passages of scripture which are abused and used in abusive ways. One of the most abused passages of scripture is Romans chapter 13. The shorthand for that chapter is usually just verse one. “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God.” (Rom 13:1 NRSVue) The hypocritical way this is used is strikingly evident in the ways that many evangelicals use it in 2026 to quiet resistance and outcries for governmental restraint of violence.

Those same voices refused to follow government requests during the height of the COVID pandemic. But now, any mention of the rejection of violence, calls for compassion, or even calling for our government to follow its own laws is met with “Romans 13:1 is good enough for me.” This is a way to say “shut up, you are getting out of line.” It is a passage used by oppressors and those who don’t want the status quo challenged. The slaveholders in the antebellum South used it to reinforce the dehumanizing owning of human beings. This continued in the post civil wars years and was an ideology during the Jim Crow era.

Our non-white brothers and sisters have experienced this snuffing out of demands for justice. Many remain silent until it directly affects them or those who look like them. It is easy for those of us who have been the majority to ignore the reality around us because it is not aimed at us. Until it is. The protesting of oppression and violence was once a concern for holiness folk. But now many holiness folk see themselves on the right side of the tracks and don’t want the attention that prophetic truth brings upon those who proclaim it. So they stay silent, or worse participate in the rhetoric of empire.

Subscribe now

Dr. Esau McCaulley is a conservative theologian who is African-American. He deals with Romans 13 in his excellent book Reading While Black: African American Biblical Interpretation as an Exercise in Hope. This is an excellent book for helping us understand the complex and diverse nature of the Black Church. Because that hermeneutical tradition is not a mirror of white evangelical OR progressive theology. It is a lens of liberating truth and God’s siding with the oppressed and enslaved. I highly recommend the book to anyone who would like a wider understanding of American Christianity not enthralled with patriarchal nationalism. Or if you simply find the trend of famous white male pastors like Dale Partridge, Joel Webbon, or Doug Wilson going full on racist a bit troubling*.

I find McCaulley’s discussion of finding a Christian theology of policing compelling as he exegetes Romans from the point of view of the one for whom empire has stood for power over others. Just to be clear, this is the position of Paul’s early audience. They were not in a place of privilege like white evangelicals in the United States. McCaulley gets to the point of what Paul is talking about.

First, in Romans 13:3-4, it is the state’s attitude, not the soldier/officer as a vocation that stands at the center of Paul’s concerns. Stated differently, Paul recognizes that the state has a tremendous influence on how the soldier/officer treats its citizens. Thus, if there is to be a reform it must be structural and not merely individualistic. This is grounds in a democracy for a structural advocacy on behalf of the powerless. Second, Paul says that the government should not be a source of fear for the innocent. This problem of innocent fearfulness continues to plague encounters between Black persons and law enforcement. (McCaulley p35)

Paul is not saying that empire is always good, but that is what responsible power would look like. Innocence is not a help to many stomped upon by empire. We are seeing images of the innocent in fear because of the methods employed by the powers. Fear is the enemy of freedom and it is the enemy of love. There have always been those whose live are on the edge of fear from the authorities of the state. McCaulley explains this.

For the American Christian this means that he or she has to face the fact that our government has crafted laws over the course of centuries, not decades, that were designed to disenfranchise Black people. These laws were then enforced by means of the state’s power of the sword. Historically in America, the issue has been institutional corporate sin undergirded by the policing power of the state. (ibid p39)

The system carries the guilt of that, but when we recognize that the system is twisted, we can more easily speak out for change. But calls for change get hit with Romans 1. That’s not really the weapon many think. Reading scripture in the fullness of Jesus helps us see that God sides with those harmed by systems. The very nature of sin is systemic. Even in the individual. The jazz great Nina Simone speaks of the truth that freedom is “no fear.”

So when the powers wield fear we should pay attention to what that means. If freedom is no fear, then the things that bring fear are not things that bring freedom. I believe that McCaulley’s claims on a Christian theology of policing to be important. McCaulley places the focus upon a theology of persons.

A Christian theology of policing, then, must grow out of a Christian theology of persons. This Christian theology of policing must remember that the state is only a steward or caretaker of persons. It did not create them and it does not own or define them. God is our creator, and he will have a word for those who attempt to mar the image of God in any person. We are being the Christians God called us to be when we remind the state of the limits of its power. (ibid p40)

The state did not create human beings. The state does not own human beings. The state cannot define who is and is not a human being. That is the purview of Creator (at least for Christians). I think the best response to Romans 13:1 to be Genesis 1:27

So God created humans in his image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. (NRSVue)

I am going to get a little specific so I apologize to those outside the Church of the Nazarene (COTN). But I think this is important. Silence in the face of violence and state instigated chaos is not being discerning. My denomination has made statements about other governments using violence and fear as a tactic to enforce obedience to ideology, yet the current silence on the same in the United States is deafening. I am sure there is a reason. Even if the global church does not feel it appropriate, we do have a regional office. It would be fairly simple. The Northern California District of the COTN is living out the example by simply sharing words from our Manual. Words that fall within a section that became essential doctrine a few years ago.

The NorCal District Church of the Nazarene laments and renounces the unjust use of violence against all peoples, including our immigrant siblings. In doing so we echo Nazarene Manual Paragraph 29.10:

“We call our people to wisdom in their use of time, money and bodies activities subversive of the Christian ethic that promote…violence [and] treating others as objects rather than persons created in the image of God are to be avoided.”

The district is sharing this daily on Facebook. They have gotten thank you, but also some making comments against the doctrines of the COTN. One commenter posted a comment saying that “they need to get rid of the immigrants and if that causes violence, so be it.” That doesn’t sound very holy.

The silence is especially disappointing considering the actions of the USA/Canada region after Charlie Kirk was assassinated. Then we were told that a sermon claiming Kirk was a brilliant theologian who could share the gospel better than most pastors was a powerful message. An even more powerful message would be to share the calls and claims of our Covenant of Christian Conduct which invites us to work to make the world a more equitable and just society through the resistance of worldly systems that harm or dehumanize. We have the truth and a promise of mercy; why aren’t we sharing that truth?

I am disappointed, but not surprised. I make the assumption that silence is believed to be the safest option. But what if we could imagine our Wesleyan-Holiness distinctive being light in a time of darkness? That we have a hopeful message of transforming light in the chaos of this world? What if we have a doctrine of entire sanctification in which these powers of this world have no hold? That’s our hope and our true path to reaching the lost and the wandering. Not embracing the powers or the silence, but speaking Holy Prophetic Love into our world and culture.

Here’s a larger context from the Manual, Church of the Nazarene, 2023 for the underpinnings of the NorCal Dostrict’s statement:

28.4. We call our people to proclaim and demonstrate God’s grace and love to the world. Equipping believers for reconciling love as ambassadors for Christ in the world is the shared responsibility of every congregation. God calls us to attitudes, practices of hospitality, and relationships that value all persons. We participate as joyful disciples, engaging with others to create a society that mirrors God’s purposes. Our faith is to work through love. Therefore, the Church is to give herself to the care, feeding, clothing, and shelter of the poor and marginalized. A life of Christian holiness will entail efforts to create a more just and equitable society and world, especially for the poor, the oppressed, and those who cannot speak for themselves. (Leviticus 19:18, 34; Deuteronomy 15:7-8, 11; Isaiah 61:1; Zechariah 9:12; Matthew 25:34-44; Romans 5:7-8, 12:1; 2 Corinthians 5:16, 20; Galatians 5:6; Ephesians 2:10,6:12; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:27; James 2:1-9)

28.10. We call our people to be peacemakers. Because Jesus blessed peacemakers and commanded us to love our enemies, we commit ourselves to being agents of reconciliation in our families, among friends, at the workplace, in our churches, societies, nations, people groups, and tribes. (Psalm 34:14; Matthew 5:9, 43-48; 2 Corinthians 5:18-20; Ephesians 2:14-16; Hebrews 12:14)

29.6. We call our people to reject attitudes and actions that undermine the good of people and devalue individuals. ALL HUMANS are created in the image of God and Christ died for ALL, therefore EVERY person we encounter merits our HIGHEST regard and LOVE. As a people of God, reflecting Christ’s love for the world, we reject all forms of racism, ethnic preferences, tribalism, sexism, religious bigotry, classism, exclusionary nationalism, and any other form of prejudice. All of these are contrary to God’s love and the mission of Christ. (emphasis in the original)

“Freedom is no fear”

”Fight the Power!”

“Perfect love casts out fear”

Share

McCaulley, Esau. Reading While Black: African American Biblical Interpretation as an Exercise in Hope. Kindle Edition.

• Partridge even throws his own wife under the proverbial click bait bus.

This post from September may work as a companion piece to this essay.

Amy Grant released a new song this week. The song was written by Sandra Emory Lawrence. It is a deeply relevant song that dares to shine a light on the turmoil of the day. But that’s not what I want to discuss in this essay. I did get an opportunity to have a conversation with two philosophers and a singer-songwriter and I will link to that conversation below. But I want to talk about the reactions to the song by Christians. My focus will be upon the reaction of the song referring to John Lennon’s song Imagine.

Subscribe now

The verse in question is:

I’m shopping for some groceries
Muzak piped in overhead
They only play the melody
I hear the words John Lennon said
Asking me to imagine
As I fight this cart with crooked wheels
He’s either bent over laughing
Or spinning in his Strawberry Fields

This is a really good lyric. The mundane task of grocery shopping is only interrupted by that all too often busted grocery cart wheel. My friend Hunter pointed out that the cart is oscillating back and forth and not really going fully right or left. Lennon’s anti-war song has become muzak, but when we stop - when remember that it invites us to imagine. It is this line that brought the most angry responses on Amy’s social media; especially from Christians. You see, there is an assumption about the song Imagine which is fed by the demands for purity of thought by the theo-political American white evangelical anger. You see, Imagine makes the grave “sin” of asking a very important question. What if this life is all we have? What if we imagined a different way to see one another unburdened by our assumptions about them shaped by religious dogmas rather than truth?

Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No Hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people livin’ for today

I’ll link the whole song for context, but let’s focus on this verse because it is the one that drove most of the over the top comments.

It is the fact that Lennon asks us to imagine that neither heaven nor hell exist that angers so many. But they miss the entire point by focusing so much on heaven and hell. I believe this is also an error made in general with pop evangelicalism and revivalism. Too much emphasis on things barely mentioned in the Gospels. I know some of you are already bristling, but stick with me. Let me be clear, the Gospel is not about heaven and hell, at least not completely. Yes, Jesus mentions the Kingdom of Heaven, or the Kingdom of God, but when he does it is usually about a present or coming reality in the here and now. Most discussions of afterlife are passing or mentions of a general resurrection. This is important. You see my question for disciples of Jesus is the following:

If there were not heaven of hell, how compelling or inviting is the Gospel? Is the Gospel still Good News?

I believe it is. I believe that the Good News is not reliant upon heaven or hell to be inviting. Why? Because if we start at the beginning of the Gospel Jesus tells us his watchword.

When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. (Lk 4:16-20)

Jesus goes on to include the peoples in that promise that the crowd in the synagogue believed to be cursed and outside of the promises of God. But Jesus does not follow the ideologies of the narrow. His mercy is wide. None of the reading of Isaiah by Jesus mentions heaven or hell. Yes, we do find such discussions in the whole of scripture, but we need to understand what is being discussed. Before you use this as evidence that I do not believe in heaven and hell, you would be wrong. I do believe in those, but I also don’t think they are critical to the Gospel. Heaven and hell are side effects of the Gospel. Throughout Jesus’ ministry he points out the very real hells on earth that humanity builds through oppressive systems and even religious rules. The Kingdom of God, or what we might call the Kindom of God in a culture where kingdom carries a different idea than what Jesus meant, is presented as a present reality coming to change the world. It is not a far off reward.

The truth is that the Gospels are very scant when it comes to anything other than resurrection. That belief was a standard of the Pharisees, but Jesus does bring the idea of specific resurrection in his preaching when speaking of himself. I don;t want to root around in the weeds of resurrection, but know that the idea of resurrection into new creation is a powerful invitation. But it is not the same as popular visions of heaven and hell that get conflated with the Gospel. No, the Gospel is the Good News that God is with us. The Gospel is the Good News that God loves us so much that God is willing to be killed by our violence. The Gospel is the Good News that the world has changed, that the Spirit of God is at work.

If the Good News is only good if there is a reward or punishment when we die, then how is it good? Imagine if we told the story of a God who loves the world so much that God is willing to die upon a tree? But that God is raised and drags us to New Creation. The fear of hell only goes so far as does the hope of heaven. When people are living in hells on earth what is to be feared? What if we believed that our mission as disciples is to work with God to rescue the captives? To heal the sick? To help the blind to see? What if our message was a message of truth in counter to the world where gaslighting lies reign supreme? What if we told Good News?

Imagine that God has brought heaven to us
It’s easy of you try
No more hell on earth
People reaching for the sky
By going to their knees*

Imagine we told Good News without all the baggage of our own assumptions? I hope, please help by hopelessness.

Our discussion this week:

*Apologies to John Lennon and U2

Share

What happens when you mix up ideas like accuracy and literalism? Or, authority and inerrancy? You get The ARTwork of God (ARTwork). The core issue with this book is that it manages to conflate disparate ideas and be self contradictory. If I had to guess, I would say that the authors want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to embrace fundamentalism while staying within the doctrines of the denomination in which they are members (one being an ordained pastor). When I first saw a quote shared from this book on social media a wanted to find that it was out of context, so I purchased ARTwork to find out. I was very disappointed.

We can begin with the shared quote; “Many speak of Scripture as inerrant to all things necessary to salvation. The question we might do well to ponder is this: What is not necessary to our salvation journey when it comes to Scripture? We cannot compromise on the fact that God’s Word is accurate, reliable, and true.” (ARTwork p. 111) This statement is a recent favorite amongst clergy in the Church of the Nazarene (COTN) who would rather our doctrine of scripture shift to claiming textual inerrancy. I fully believe that the statement sets one up to be outside and teaching against the official doctrine of scripture of the COTN. Just for education, here’s a quick discussion of the article of faith on scripture within the COTN.

We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, given by divine inspiration, inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation, so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith. (Manual)

First, the doctrine of the COTN makes no claim to the inerrancy of the text of scripture. Inerrantly in the article is an adverb describing the purpose of scripture to point to renewed relationship with God. Inerrantly does not describe the way we see the text, nor does it make any claim of historical, scientific, or other concerns. That is not the purpose of scripture. Second, it is ridiculous to make a claim that every word of scripture is profitable for salvation. This last point is where the authors may have read Richard S. Taylor more closely because Taylor is explicit that not every word of scripture reveals truth.

A third factor is that biblical authority must rest in a distinction between inspiration and revelation. Everything in the Bible is inspired, but not every verse in the Bible in and by itself reveals truth which is to be believed. In order to understand this, we must see clearly the distinction between inspiration and revelation, then the deduction which must be drawn from this distinction. (Taylor, loc 699)

But that is one of the great contradictions of this book. It makes arguments but misses the point of those from a Wesleyan-Holiness viewpoint. Maybe that is because many of the citations are from Reformed thinkers like Wayne Grudem, Ligonier Ministries, and Howard Lindsell. But the authors also cite N.T. Wright as a good resource for understanding the interpretation of scripture. This is a contradiction because Wright would disagree with the premise of the book as well as Grudem and Lindsell’s view of scripture. I believe Wright would be correct in doing so. Quite frankly, Nazarene scholar Paul M. Basset disagreed with Lindsell specifically on inerrancy. (Scripture study article)

Back to my first claim of mixed up ideas. The book contains a quote from a Gallup poll on the Bible in America. Here is the quote from the Gallup article. “The majority of Christians (58%) say the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it is to be taken literally, while 25% say it should be interpreted literally and 16% say it is an ancient book of fables.” (Gallup) The fact is that the official doctrine of the COTN aligns with that 58% and always has. The authors point to this as proof of declining belief in the authority of scripture which leads me to believe they miss the point of authority. In the discussion of literalism, the authors conflate accurate and literal and then leap to authority. There also is an implication of truth and literal being the same thing. But this could be inadvertent because the authors are also not consistent with their demand that scripture must be literal. The truth is that no one is a true literalist. All interpreters choose what they want to be literal.

I happen to believe the Bible to be literally true. That doesn’t mean that I think I should pluck out my eye if I sin (Matthew 5:27-30) or that pillars hold up the Earth rather than the power of God (Psalms 75:3). I believe that Joshua prayed and the sun stood still. I believe that God spoke and the world existed in seven days. (ARTwork p. 113)

You see the problem? Interpretation is subjective, but Wesleyans believe it to be guided by the Spirit rather than the text. In chapter eight, the authors mention that science and the Bible can coexist. I agree with that, but based upon a later chapter, I suspect the argument is not the one made in chapter eight. I think the structure of the chapter may confuse the argument. I think they are being critical of the following quote from a Berkeley document, but it contains the more Wesleyan understanding

People of many different faiths and levels of scientific expertise see no contradiction at all between science and religion. Many simply acknowledge that the two institutions deal with different realms of human experience. Science investigates the natural world, while religion deals with the spiritual and supernatural—hence, the two can be complementary. Many religious organizations have issued statements declaring that there need not be any conflict between religious faith and the scientific perspective on evolution. (Berkeley)

The COTN has a statement on creation which does allow for scientific understanding. The issue happens when we start from scripture in order to understand science. The two have very different purposes. Modernism and fundamentalism attempt to force science and faith to be in conflict. This brings me to another issue. Chapter nine deals with the story of the flood. I get that many Christians see the Noah story as a factual history. But, science does not back that belief. This chapter relies on a single cited source which is not engaging in science. The source cited is a pseudoscientific supposition of what happened based upon a presupposed assumption of the flood story being true. The cited source is made up and not at all realistic. It sounds scientific to the layperson maybe, but it is not science. It is not peer reviewed and it is not a source that would be allowed in most educational environments. I am disappointed that a professor in a COTN institution would use such a poor source. But, that is the only way to try and prove the point.

Evangelicals have spent so much time trying to prove things of faith that we suck the meaning and beauty out of the stories. The truth of the flood exists whether it is factual or not. I wish the authors has spent some time in dialogue with the Wesleyan Theology Series book Creation by Eric Vail. That may have given context for this section. Belief in a literal seven day creation or a literal flood are not required for salvation. Understanding the truth that God is creator and what that means is. That’s what we should focus on as Christians, not descend into modernism’s arguments. This is where the grand conflict between someone like N.T. Wright and Ken Ham becomes a problem for the thesis of this book.

To see scripture through the eyes of Jesus means that some earlier texts have new meaning. This is another spot where the authors could have leaned on Richard S Taylor’s discussion of progressive revelation. Taylor argues that Jesus annulled portions of the Hebrew scriptures. Speaking of Jesus. The authors also make this statement. “When Jesus spoke about the prophets, He did so in such a manner that they were to be taken literally. He references Daniel, Job, Jonah, and Isaiah. He quotes them as real people; not as figurative characters of fable or metaphor.” (ARTwork p.60) Frankly we do not know this to be factual. The text does not reveal this so we make an assumption. If I preach, I may tell a story using Star Wars. I do not explicitly say these are fictional characters. We cannot make that leap with the words of Jesus either.

I don’t mean to pile on, but I would suggest you read several other books as this one does not add anything ans at best is a confusing incoherent argument in book form. The contradictions of the doctrine of scripture in the COTN versus the fundamentalist ideology of Grudem, et al and the good idea that we read scripture through Jesus but that somehow scripture is eternal is not worth your time. Scripture is finite, the Word of God as seen in the Logos, Jesus the Christ, is eternal.

For some better sources read Square Peg: Why Wesleyans Aren’t Fundamentalists, Richard Taylor’s Biblical Autority and Christian Faith, Stephen Green’s The Holy Scriptures, or you could read the linked report to the 2012 General Assembly by the committee recommending rejection of a change to textual inerrancy in the article of faith on Scripture in the COTN. These will give a far better understanding of scripture from a Wesleyan-Holiness viewpoint without an insistence on anachronistic inerrancy or literalism.

This book is arguing for a position outside of the official doctrines of the Church of the Nazarene. This is ironic given that promoters of the book have been involved in the removal of clergy credentials for elders arguing for change within published volumes. This book highlights a credibility gap in the application of Nazarene polity large enough to sail a container ship through. I gave the book two stars because I do believe we should read the bible through the lens of Jesus. However, the authors do not present that case, instead they read the bible through a modernist fundamentalist lens and force those “glasses” onto Jesus.

We need to quit spending so much time trying to prove things and start showing people who God really is. The who has always been the more important idea over the what. We really do waste time when we conflate accurate and true with inerrant.

Bunn Ph.D., Tim; Anstine Ph.D., Tim. The ARTwork of God: Accurate, Reliable, and True: Embracing the Bible Through the Eyes of Jesus

https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/science-and-religion-reconcilable-differences/

https://didache.nazarene.org/index.php/filedownload/didache-volumes/vol-131/892-didache-v13n1-01-scripturestudycommitteereport-king1/file

My friend Bob asked me to watch a Christmas Eve message from his pastor; one of my favorite preachers, Rev. Tara Thomas Smith. Tara is Co-Lead Pastor of Crossroads Nazarene Church in Chandler, AZ. Tara is also one of the best preachers I have ever heard live and I believe one of the best preachers in the Church of the Nazarene (COTN). The core of Tara’s message is a visual comparison between two visions of God and the meaning of Jesus’ ministry. Here’s the video of the message and I ask you to please go watch it before continuing so you have the full context.

“This is good news!” Amen to that second picture. But how often do we hear the first distorted view presented as good news? The first picture is not the Gospel, even though it may be the most popular view in Western Christianity. It is especially popular among American evangelicals. The view of a God whose honor resembles human ego such that it must be upheld by violence is a very pagan idea. This is the Gospel according to empire, expressed by Augustine who has influenced so much of Western Christianity, and honed by modern Reformed Calvinists in the idea of penal substitutionary atonement. I suspect the first picture is what another prominent Nazarene pastor meant when he claimed Reformed preachers give a better picture of the Gospel than most Wesleyans. The idea that God despises us outside of saying a special prayer or thinking the right things is a distortion. This is s distortion that allows us to hate those who do not think as we do, worship as we do, or live as we do. This distortion allows us to see God as a destroyer of those not like us. But that is not God.

When the great schism of the Eastern and Western church finally happened in the eleventh century, it was a culmination of centuries of struggle between the two images of Christianity. While the Western Church was influenced by consolidated power and Roman ideas, the East resisted changes that led to particular understandings of sin, salvation, humanity, God, and the very nature of God. That’s not to say that the two were entirely different, but there are stark differences. The West leaned into legal understandings of sin while the East continued in a framework of illness and harm. In the West, God’s honor and our shame began to take shape through Augustine and later Reformers who took Augustine’s ideas to inevitable conclusions. In the East, the harm done by sin and the need for therapeutic means to cleanse us from sin continued. The very different ideas of hell between East and West are reflections of this difference in focus.

Once the West and East fully went into schism, the Western ideas took root and Europeans used the ideas of our shame and God’s honor to control. Hell became a centerpiece of salvation and God’s wrath became the vehicle to condemn us all to hell without the right formula of response. In this understanding, the God who cannot look up sin became our God. This is where that first distorted picture of God comes from and it is very far from the picture of God revealed in Jesus. The idea that God cannot look upon sin or that God even turned God’s face away from Jesus on the cross comes from missing the point of Jesus quoting Psalm 22 from the cross. The Psalm may begin “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” But it also has this: “For he did not despise or abhor the affliction of the afflicted; he did not hide his face from me but heard when I cried to him. From you comes my praise in the great congregation; my vows I will pay before those who fear him. The poor shall eat and be satisfied; those who seek him shall praise the Lord. May your hearts live forever! All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations shall worship before him., For dominion belongs to the Lord, and he rules over the nations” (Psalm 22, NRSVue)

Psalm 22 is good news. While it may feel like God has turned away, God never turns away. This brings us to the beautiful picture within the second illustration. God is the God who comes to us. God is not across a chasm we need a bridge to cross. No, God is here! “There is nowhere God is not.” Even if we “make our bed in hell, [God] will be there.” This is good news! Wesleyans inherit an Eastern influenced theology. Our theologies of sin, humanity, grace, salvation, sanctification, and others are closer to the Eastern Church than our Baptist or Presbyterian sisters and brothers. Our understanding of grace, especially prevenient grace, is why it is so hard to swallow that first picture of God when people try to shove it don our throats because an online influencer calls our understanding of race “another religion.” The grace that goes before is the evidence of God working in the world. There is nowhere that God is not. I get a chuckle out of the critics of ideas like Amipotence* when they reject the idea of omnipresence. I think a misunderstanding of grace leads to distorted ideas of hell and of God’s nature.

Pastor Tara reminds us the order of grace and that order does not match the typical evangelical ideology of grace or forgiveness requiring our action rather than our response. Jesus continually led with “I do not condemn you” or “your sins are forgiven.” Then he would speak of what comes next in our response to grace and our response to forgiveness. Ours is a responsible grace as Randy Maddox says. Salvation comes when we finally recognize that God loves us so much that we have been forgiven and we are given grace. We are the woman at the well, Zacchaeus, the woman caught in adultery, the Pharisees, the Romans, the thieves on the cross, the man at the pool, the woman who annoints Jesus. Jesus comes to each and every one of us. There is nowhere God is not.

God is the God of prodigals and always has been. The Gospel confronts the systems of shame and fear by saying that God is with us, God loves us, and there is nothing we can do to make God not love us. God is not a God of wrath. No the deep and abiding truth is that the wrath we are saved from is the wrath of sin, not of God. As Pastor Tara puts it; through “our wrath we crucify him while God looks on.” It is our wrath, our violence, our hatred that hang Jesus on a dead tree while God looks on. It is our wrath that we need to be saved from. It is the love of God that saves us into a restored relationship in which we respond to the love poured out in blood to become heirs of that loving character of God.

Isn’t this good news? True, it takes a lot of courage to believe that God loves us no matter what. It takes a lot of faith to believe that, but we are a people invited into faith. A people who should be shaped by faithfully proclaiming the good news rather than reciting the bad news. Let’s be a people of good news.

---

*Amipotence combines Latin roots “ami” (love) and “potens” (power), prioritizing divine love over traditional omnipotence. It posits that God cannot unilaterally control creatures or events, acting instead as a persuasive, necessary influence in synergy with creation.

Have you been watching Pluribus? If you have not, it is a fascinating story. If you have and have not watched the entire season, there may be minor spoilers. My thought on the series from early on is “what if the zombies were nice and wanted everyone to be happy?” I still feel that way, but I’ll explain a bit if you have not seen the show.

The quick summary is that a radio signal is received from space and scientists work to decode it. Eventually we learn that the signal contains a chemical composition which transforms humans into happy people who are all connected. Because the chemicals are eventually spread quickly, many humans die. Our main protagonist, Carol, is not affected by the chemical but her wife is. Like many others, her wife dies from the transformation. Carol is a writer of fantasy fiction, an alcoholic, and a cynic. She quickly realizes that the happiness she encounters is false and wrong. Carol even tries to gather the 12 “survivors” but finds out most are ok with the world as it is. Some want to remain with their families, one exploits the niceness and eagerness to please of “the others.” But Carol is steadfast.

Subscribe now

As the series has progressed, many theories have emerged about the meaning of the story. They are all good theories such as a commentary on A.I. But for me, this is a picture of modern white evangelicalism’s desire for uniformity. Because, I am like Carol in my critique of uniformity. You see, the uniformity has been conflated for unity within white evangelicalism. This is also true for various fandoms like Star Wars and Star Trek. But we can limit our discussion to evangelicalism. The most extreme examples of demands for uniformity come from the apologetics influencers like Alisa Childers, Frank Turek, and Sean McDowell. These three tend to conflate specific expressions of doctrines or dogmas and orthodoxy. This was evident when Kirk Cameron dared to have a reasoned conversation on the idea of annihilation versus eternal conscious torment. Cameron eventually had to respond and renew his commitment to orthodoxy.

But this conflation goes deeper in evangelical contexts. The language used is of happiness, joy, and peace if we are unified. But the word that is being described is actually uniformity. This is the same concept behind much of our struggle to accept immigrants in the U.S. Many evangelicals are terrified that their uniformity will be destroyed. But can someone else really destroy a deeply held ideology? It sure doesn’t appear to. This is where parallels start to emerge with the show Pluribus. Carol comes to think of the vast majority of humanity as “the others” simply because she does not believe them to be anything like her. The others are very happy, at least they appear to be.

But if Carol expresses extreme anger or frustration, the others (all of them) go into a seizure state which can cause death by accident. The others cannot lie, bu tthey also want to please Carol so they get into dilemmas regarding how to respond. The others have strict ideology about killing any living thing, but their sustenance comes from a surprising source. The others appear to be incredibly happy, but is their existence real? It is definitely not an experience driven existence because they experience all things almost at once and as one. There is an almost mycelial nature to the way the others know things. They seem only slightly higher than the fungus zombies of The Last of Us. They want to convert those who are immune to the chemical responsible for their state, but they can’t force it. At least they claim they cannot force it.

Carol sees the others as living empty lives and believes their ideology makes their lives eventually unsustainable. Her mission is to determine how to make things “right” - how to restore humanity to being individuals. As a writer, Carol senses that uniformity is not only boring, it is deadly. The others are very much like the uniformity desiring evangelicals in the United States. They want everyone to think like them - exactly like them. From political views, doctrines, and cultural assumptions, to something as simple as wishing someone “happy holidays;” any deviation leads to outrage or anger. There is an attitude of superiority masking a deep fear of those who are different. If you are “in” then you can understand all the cultural ideology required to fit in. But if you are out, show any degree of doubt about the ideology, then you are excluded and thought to be evil.

This is not an expression of Christianity as described in the New Testament, but it is a dominant force of Christian thought. But it is such a lacking idea that if you are able to step outside of the bubble, you eventually discover that the world is far richer, wider, and exciting than uniformity allows. Like Carol wanting the world to return to “normal,” many of us want a world in which diversity is a strength, where love and mercy are more important than getting the small details exactly right. A place where people don’t need to deconstruct their faith because they are allowed to form a deep and enduring faith even if it looks different. Maybe it would be easier to just allow assimilation to take root, but then what is there to discover and how do we grow?

I really hope something better than the cynicism Carol gives in to in the season finale of Pluribus is in store for the Church. But, we are going to need to let go of the desire for uniformity for the Church to flourish. It is much harder to lose something that is real and allows for questions, than something that is so fragile it requires extensive instructions to follow. I keep thinking back to an ad campaign launched by Apple shortly after Steve Jobs returned in the 1990’s and began the turn around of the company.

Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.

The ones who see things differently.

They’re not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.

You can quote them, disagree with them,
glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.

Because they change things.

They push the human race forward.

While some may see them as the crazy ones,
we see genius.

Because the people who are crazy enough to think
they can change the world, are the ones who do.

Maybe it is time for us to Think Different.

Share