The Body as a Tool for Spiritual Growth!

 

The following concepts come (primarily) from the books of Dallas Willard, Richard Rohr & Parker Palmer. When we think about sin, we tend to reduce it almost exclusively to matters of the heart, mind or emotions, what we fail to sometimes take into account, is the direct link of these to the body (maybe this is why demons take such an interest in the ‘body’) to give a simple example; murder, adultery, idolatry, gossip and stealing etc, are all physical acts, and cannot take place without the consent and or cooperation of the body, now these actions or outcomes do not take place spontaneously, because there is always an incubation period, where the final outcome is the physical action. In James 1: 13 it says; …“after desire has conceived it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown gives birth to death (physical action)” In this passage James is explaining the sequential path of sin, it always starts as a desire (its very rare indeed that somebody, completely out of the blue, would kill somebody else, almost without exception a long sequence of events normally lead one to this action).

 

The body plays a vital part in sin having ‘its way’ so to speak. When we come to faith we need to retrain the body, and we need to retrain it in righteousness. The spiritual practices bend the body in a new way. These practices break the muscle memory capacity of sin in our bodies, what they do is to break down or at least slow down the rapid sin reflex action in our bodies, the longer we carry out these practices, the more time we have to think about the things our bodies are telling us to do, these practices give us a ‘neutral’ zone where, free from the passions and the overwhelming sense of urgency that our bodies tell us, we can make new decisions and take new directions, this is the meaning of training the body in righteousness, this is (primarily) what Paul had in mind when he says in Romans 12: 1; … “offer your bodies to God as a living sacrifice…which is your reasonable service”

To be continued…. what are these practises?

I’ve Sacked…God! Part 2

 

…I then took out a fresh A4 sheet of paper, preceded to write out a detailed description of the God that I needed. This was a very personal exercise for me, it was not based on what someone else had told me, it was not proof texted with scripture but suprisingly,  it complimented and supported the Biblical view of God. Some would argue that this encourages a sort of consumerist  ‘do-it-yourself-God’  this is not true at all. When you think about it, as Christians we all have a view of God that is ‘custom-designed’ a God of ‘our understanding’ unfortunately for many it is a very negative image. We will never grow bigger than our vision and understanding of whom God is; the way we live, think, act and behave, always reflect exactly our perception of God.

 

I wont go into the details here regarding my own desciption of God, but I will say this, I didn’t do this haphazardly, it was done with thought and some quiet consideration and deliberation. Some nine years later, this list reflects the God of my (present) understanding. We are either liberated or crippled by our view of God. Paul says this “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ…may give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him” (Ephesians 1:16 RSV) My suggestion may seem a little heretical in its scope, but in going through this exercise, we are giving God ‘fresh’ space and a place to bring about transformation. When I had finished with the ‘old list’ I surrendered the description to God, I prayed over it then destroyed it. With the new list, I spent a number of days, and even weeks looking at it and even praying through it. The question is this, what does your view of God look like? Does it need an overhaul? And more importantly is it truly Biblical?

Next;   The Spirit is Willing, But… The Body as a Tool for Spiritual Growth!

I’ve Sacked…God!!

 

Throughout the course of my working life I’ve had more than fifty jobs, what a contrast to that of good friend of mine who has been with TELSTRA for almost thirty years, it’s the only job he’s ever had. I need to make a confession… to my embarrasment, I’ve been sacked from more than a third of these jobs, now in a few instances this was not necessarily a reflection of my performance other factors were at play, but on the whole it was. Truth be told, I just didn’t live up to expectations. In many instances I had a number of employers who were willing to carry me, they were willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, but there comes a point where little doubt remains and in the cold light of day the only choice that remained, was to let me go or ‘sack me’. Apart from some embarrassment, I don’t look back with feelings of resentment or injustice, these decisions, were almost always fair and amicable, and the end of the day if you ‘don’t perform’ there really is no other choice.

 

In AA when they talk about God (which they do most of the time) they describe him as ‘ The God of my understanding’  When I first started attending a ‘twelve step’ fellowship almost ten years ago, I found this phrase a little strange, it was not a phrase I’d ever heard before, it seemed to encourage syncretism and or pluralism. After a few months I changed my opinion completely. Seems to me that we all have an image of God (or Jesus for that matter) and for many this image is nothing short of ‘infantile’ its one thing to believe in ‘Santa Claus’ when you are a child, but if at the age of 20 your still writing letters to Father Christmas something is seriously amiss.

 

I came back to faith almost 9yrs ago, at the time my concept of God was ‘horrible’ indeed, having grown up in a Church that was strongly fundamentalist, my image of God left much to be desired. Now I would say that this is the ‘norm’ for many Christians, if one continues to carry this image (and many do for a whole lifetime!) something is seriously ammis. At the same time that I attended AA I also started seeing a Christian Psychologist, about six months into this relationship she made a startling, yet brilliant suggestion, ‘your image of God sucks…why don’t you just sack God’?

 

And so this is what I did! My picture of God was completely dysfunctional. I took an A4 sheet of paper I wrote down in detail what this ‘god of my understanding’ looked like, nothing was spared… nothing! When I finished I looked at what I’d written…it was not a pretty picture, yet it was an accurate and also brutally honest description of the god that had been with me for most of my life. When I had finished writing this list, I took a black pen and across the page, in bold writing I wrote this word  ‘SACKED’

 

What happened next?

 

…To be continued

Oh Hell!

 

On Sunday, Rowland Croucher spoke at Ranges Community Church, one of the subjects he touched on, was the subject of ‘Hell’ . If nothing else he raised a number of issues that deserve to be seriouly considered by those who like me, struggle enormously with this subject. Having said that, I thought I would dust down this ‘old post’ . If you do happen to read this i would be delighted to hear your views, it matters not if they are orthodox, progressive or liberal.

 

I’ve just finished reading Brian McLaren’s book; The last Word and The Word After That this book is the third book in a trilogy called; A New Kind Of Christian.

 

Like many others, I’ve struggled with a number of theological teachings, these struggles go right back to my teenage years. The interesting thing is that I haven’t found a great deal of resolution, they still remain. By nature I tend to give a great deal of thought to this thing called faith, in many ways this is good but in others it lends itself to a sort of obsessional lunacy.

 

The concept of hell for me presents a rather scary contradiction; it represents one of my greatest theological struggles. I’ve looked at all the options; on a good day (depending on ones perspective) I fluctuate between open –theism, inclusivism and universalism, and on a bad day I start to drift towards a Calvinist outlook one that includes ‘predestination’ ‘the elect’ and its twin ‘exclusivism’ if Calvinism is correct we are all in deep trouble, this theology has borderline sociopathic elements built into it.

 

It would take too long for me to articulate my concerns, except to say that they are more than paradoxical, they are deeply problematic, our theology on this matter at best is pure lunacy at worst bordering on romantic rationalism, this unfortunately seems to lend itself to the following proposition; that the more irrational something appears, the more likely it is to be embraced as truth, the foundation for such a proposition is that we ‘can never understand the mind of God’ and that his ways ‘are not our ways’ the other disturbing heresy(one that exclusivists like) is the irrational view on ‘free will’ this ACE is usually kept till last..

 

This book by the way is about this very same subject; McLaren has shown a great deal of tact and wisdom in broaching the subject, he struggles even more than I do, his background is conservative evangelical, slowly but surely his faith is freeing itself from the shackles of modernity and he is cautiously and tentatively embracing a more comprehensive and much broader understanding that can only be described as post-modern.

 

Many Christian have a theological understanding of scripture that can only be described as ‘default theology’ its become this, due to the missing ingredient called intelligent orthodoxy.

 

When one shows more interest in ones hobbies, than the truths of a theology that is handed out much like a giant pill, the only thing that remains is to swallow it what else can one expect. Working out ones own salvation includes some thought at least about what constitutes an intelligent faith.

 

The danger in all this is my own motive, am I attempting to custom design a faith minus all the bad bits, I can’t honestly answer this, the one thing I can say is that I place a great deal of importance on what resonates as truth, my heart needs to have its say in what constitutes so called truth, in my own case when this is missing, it creates a deep sense of suspicion and doubt, my faith is then reduced to a purely academic exercise one where my own heart is essentially divorced from my faith, this for me will always create an unhealthy emotional and spiritual dichotomy, one where the twain shall never meet.

 

Finally I’ve included quotes from his book;

 

“To believe in God is to believe in the salvation of the world. The paradox of our time is that those who believe in God do not believe in the salvation of the world, and those who believe in the future of this world do not believe in God. Christians believe in “the end of the world” they expect the final catastrophe; the punishment of others…I often say that God must feel very alone, for is there any one besides God who believes in the salvation of the world?” (Louis Evely, In the Christian Image 1975)

 

“Universalism is not as bankrupt of biblical support as some suggest (John 12:32: Acts 3:19-21; Rom. 5: 12-21; I Cor. 15:20-26; 2 Cor.5: 19; Phil.2: 9-11; Eph.1: 10; Col.1: 16-23; I Tim.2: 4, 4:10; Titus 2:11; Heb.2: 9; 2 Pet, 3:9 1 John 2:2) any case for exclusivism must do justice to these and similar passages” (Berton and Chase, p.72)

 

“How can Christians possible project a deity of such cruelty and vindictiveness (as to inflict) everlasting torture upon his creatures, however sinful they have been? (Such a deity) is more nearly like Satan than God” (Clark Pinnock, in Criswell Theological Review)

Love to hear your thoughts…

Is Jeffrey Hunter…the real Jesus?

 

Dallas Willard in his book ‘The great Omission’ describes Jesus as the; ‘most intelligent person that ever lived’ I think for most Christians this statement would come as a complete shock. We have reduced him to a single facet saviour, completely and totally one dimensional, like a spiritual superman, only to be called on when the going gets tuff, or our worlds are falling apart, like the man with the starter pistol at the beginning of the race, a little like the suit that is reserved for ‘Sunday best’ only to be taken out on very special occasions, and then put back where it belongs in the wardrobe complete with mothballs where ‘moth and rust do not corrupt’

A little like a man with a kettle drum, in Beethoven’s fifth symphony, waiting for his moment of glory, for him his moment is over in a few seconds, the conductor than says ‘don’t call me I’ll call you’ his services are now not needed until the next symphony.

This Jesus is like a tramcar running on single track, its whole life reduced to the backward and forward motion only. Stands to reason that if you have someone who is the most intelligent person in the world, you would want to include him in everything, such as that difficult maths equation, or that complex IT problem that can’t be fixed, or that medical problem that has resisted all solutions. Seems to me that this sort of person would be a really great friend to have, unfortunately we have created a completely different Jesus, do you remember some of the opening lines in those woeful hymns; “standing somewhere in the shadows you’ll find Jesus” I think the reason he was standing in the shadows was that we were to embarrassed to bring him out into the light, afraid that he might become the laughing stock.

 Its hard to do this when you have a mechanical Jesus, this is the only conclusion for a literal super spiritual, superman Jesus, whose only role was to come and save a lost world and then like a goodie-two-shoes go back to heaven and get on with the real issues of running the universe, he becomes pretty much useless for anything else. The huge chunks missing in the New Testament have had a tendency to lend itself to this, if unchecked they create a stilted saviour, his words and actions don’t seem to be synchronised with real life, a little like inquiring about the health of ones husband or wife moments after death, there is a lot to be said for timing and a literal Jesus knows nothing about timing, you just wind him up like a play thing and let him do his John 3:16 impersonation, it’s a great party trick, but that’s all.

This literal detached Jesus at worst shows autistic tendencies and at best is a budding borderline asbergers.

 The gospels were never intended to paint a literal picture of Jesus, it is not some sort of biographical account; if they were they have failed miserable. Mark, John and Luke say the same thing; these things are written that you might believe, and in believing you might have life

My advise to anyone is to let this Jesus out of your box, and let him do what he does best, well! he is the son of God and son of man, think about this for to long and you might find yourself questioning you own version.

 He is the tin man in the wizard of Oz looking for a brain. Some of the most infamous psychopaths in history had brilliant minds, but like the Lion in the wizard of Oz had no heart.

 To say that someone is brilliant or highly intelligent, but has no heart, my advice is to treat this person with caution; to say that someone has a heart to match is to venture into the divine.

Lets look at one example of deep empathy and shear brilliance; what would you do if confronted with the brilliant keepers of the law, they stand before you with a women caught in the very act itself. Men could sit in conference over this and still not come up with a better solution, one that shows glimpses of pure brilliance and one that shows compassion on a scale never seen before; “ he that is without sin cast the first stone”

 None of this would be out of the ordinary with a god, but we need to remind ourselves again and again ‘lest we forget’ that this Jesus was first and foremost a human being just like you and me, his humanity wasn’t just ‘strapped on’ for show, to disagree with this is to suggest that he was an impostor, (a little like the wolf in little red riding hood) masquerading as a human being.

To overlook his humanity is to miss any real opportunity of connecting with him, I can’t connect or identify with ‘superstars’ and Jesus Christ was no ‘superstar’

 To suggest otherwise is to give respect (respect based on size not relevance) and treat with caution as one would with an elephant let loose in a world of ants.

Tickle, Borg & The New Paridigm

 

…We are now faced with the very real prospect of being lost in an, unexplored, unexamined, and unknown territory called ‘post-modernism’ the old worldview will no longer do, make no mistake this is not just another fad to scare the Church and then conveniently leave ‘in Jesus name’ and allow us to embrace once again our outdated and sometime infantile understanding, we cant hide under our old ‘comfort’ blankets (like that character in ‘Peanuts’) and pray or plead for a sudden irruption by our supernatural interventionist god. The pride-child of the enlightenment ‘modernity’ and its obsession for anything absolute are now obsolete. Within the new paradigm they are recognized for what they were ‘a romantic view that biblical words were absolute, untouchable

 sealed and complete, yet laying dormant, were magically brought to life through propositionalism’. The birthing of this new paradigm has been long and slow and has come about primarily through open dialogue, not a discussion weighed in one direction, not meetings seeking inevitable conclusions, this is ‘an ongoing conversation’ one that is open, not in the sense that anything goes but more a search for authenticity through new symbols, meanings, trusting at the same time that Gods spirit has the capacity to lead us into truth, knowing also that this fourth reformation could very well be a new move of the spirit. At the same time we tread with caution. This conversation has endeavored to reach a consensus on the shape and form and indeed the need for boundary keepers; to remove these is to challenge our whole theological understanding of safety, security our manic need to be right and our subtle yet desperate need for control

 

The meaning of ‘paradigm’ is to embrace a more comprehensive picture one that is large in the middle yet with soft tapered edges, and dare I say the word! …One that is embracive and inclusive, this word by the way is one of the most misunderstood and feared in the Christian vocabulary (liberals love it fundies hate it and progressives understand it!) even though we deny this strenuously (could it be that we are closet Universalists and are terrified that someone might find out?). I was reminded just two days ago that it is still alive and well; a new student at Tabor asked me the question; ‘do they teach and believe in hell’ this question was a single litmus test on orthodoxy, with the hope that it would bring comfort and assurance to his one dimensional view of scripture, underlying all of this was a fear that our theology would be anything but exclusivist. In 1997 there were reported to be over 20,000 denominations worldwide, many of these denominations remain, due to the hoarding of so-called theological absolutes, and indeed this has brought about the great divide, at all costs they have maintained a romantic yet dated idealism, one that is so aged, ridged and brittle that in due course it my qualify for carbon dating, the general consensus by many of these denominations would be that they had one or a few truths that made them just a little different (read superior!)… But most of us suspect that the language of certainty will always create a divide and bring with it at the same time this manic need to also defend it with the entire theological arsenal, this is modernity exposed. Salvation may be free, but for many, theological certainty will always apply! 

 

To be continued…

 

Next: What lies at the Heart of this New Paradigm?       

 

*References

 

 

Marcus, J. Borg: (2003)‘The Heart of Christianity’ Rediscovering A Life of Faith: HarperOne (Borders Books) www.HarperOne.com

 

Phyllis, Tickle: (2008)‘The Great Emergence’ How Christianity Is Changing and Why: Baker Books. (Internet only)

www.bakerbooks.com

 

 

 

 

 

                       

The letter kills!

                                       

Revelation is not given to the idle, the curious the spiritual sightseers those looking for a quick fix, the clinicians of all things physical and concrete.

 

Look at the gospels read the stories the world of the spirit is so very different so foreign so removed from the world of the empirical.

 

In the world of the spirit there is no ‘left over evidence’ no physical proof, the experience of the spirit cannot be reduced to the letter, sight and sound are not needed here, they are of little value.

 

When we bring sight and sound, touch and feel into the picture they are the equivalent of ‘not seeing the wood for the trees’

 

In the opening words of the book of John it says this; “we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten son” this was not a description of the physical flesh and blood Jesus this was revelation, Paul would describe this in Ephesians as the ‘eyes of your heart be enlightened’

 

Now it is clear in scripture that this was not by the common experience, this revelation and conviction was hidden from the masses.

 

Some people can read the gospels even the whole New Testament then put it aside and declare the Christian faith a fraud, they ‘cant see the wood for the trees’ human comprehension or understanding is woefully inadequate and ill-equipped for the things of the spirit.

 

Like walking through the dark in unknown terrain, the mind constantly checking its ‘footing’ it will by its very nature look for what is known for what can be determined as certain or true, this is akin to shining the torch on your own two feet as you walk, the only thing that can be declared with any certainty, is where you feet are, this will never do.

 

In the gospels you will read this it is quite profound; “ we would see Jesus”

Now it could quite easily have said ‘we would meet Jesus” or ‘we would find Jesus’ no! We would see Jesus.

 

There are a number of occasions in the gospels where people even the disciples had the experience of ‘seeing’ Jesus.

 

The story of blind Bartimaeus in the gospels is a beautiful paradox, Jesus leaves Jericho followed by a vast crowd, I think it would be safe to say that most of them had no idea who he really was, if one reads the text this is apparent in one small detail; e.g.: the crowd walked before him not behind!

 

He calls out to Jesus, for healing, he then stands before Jesus, and the very fist thing he sees when his eyes are open is Jesus 

 

Thomas, days after the resurrection of Christ saw through his humanity and like a lifted veil had a brief glimpse of his divinity, he reaction was one of stunned amazement, listen to his words; “My lord and My God” physical evidence, words, rationalism were now of no value, as Paul says in Ephesians “that the eyes of your heart may be opened”

 

A lifetime of study, seeking, reading, searching, and the obsessional gatherer of facts can be brought undone in a split second. In scripture it says this “the letter kills but the spirit gives life”

 

 

I’m reading a book at the moment; ‘Four views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World’

I find each case equally compelling, it’s possible within scripture to find enough text to support most opinions, my argument is not based on theological argument, my own understanding of scripture is at best rather limited, its based on another premise, one that’s not very often taken in to consideration, I would call this ‘relational or experiential  theology’

 

Many people have been wrongly convicted in our court system, even though the evidence may support the innocence or guilt of a person, different outcomes prevails.

 

Our legal system is such that the jury can’t know from any personal frame of reference the character of the person on trial; this is the ‘unknown’ relational element. Of course they attempt through the collection of data, to establish the truth or untruth of the claimant, but at the end of the day the verdict is based on an objective consideration of all the evidence, but having said that there is always an element of risk. If the character of the person on trial were known before any so called convictions, this would bring a strong relational element into proceedings, now this may or may not change the outcome, but one thing can be said with some conviction; this so called evidence might be a secondary consideration.

 

My point in using this example is that theological arguments never take this relational element into consideration; this is especially true on the subject of inclusivism

 

To be continued…

 

We have had a tendency as Christians to throw in such scriptures as “ who can know the mind of the almighty” or “ as far as the heavens are above the earth, so are my ways above yours” these scriptures are used as a way of ‘ending any further discussion’ they are used as a way to end any further dialogue.

 

When we don’t understand things or more to the point are not happy with a particular view and prefer our own to be the bench mark, we pull out these verses, and throw it out there like a big wet blanket, the consequences of this, is we end up with really ‘dumb’ irrational views on things, to be fair it makes sense that we might do this, where else can one go with a view that has a natural leaning to mystery and romantic irrationality.

 

I find some aspects of Christian theology truly mind bending and mind-boggling, we are called to be contortionists of the most agile order.

 

On one hand we preach that Gods love is unconditional, knows no boundaries, knows no limits, no heights, has no earthly way of being measured in its scope because it is so profound. In the Old Testament time and time again the theme of ‘enduring love’ comes through, and further to this the children of Israel of given more chances to ‘come back’ to ‘repent’ In all the books of the Old Testament we read this of God, that his ‘anger lasts only for a moment’ and that his love ‘covers all’ that his love ‘forgives all’ we are taken on a very special very intimate expression of Gods love for humanity in the song of Solomon.

 

We skip over into the New Testament and find a love that defies any rational understanding it is so encompassing, we further read the account of the prodigal son, this demonstration of love is almost shocking, it grabs you by the shirt and says sit up and look, pay attention, to further cap this of we read of love In the famous chapter 1 Corinthians 13 this chapter is a description of who God is! He forgives all, he bears all, and he loves all. One is left in no doubt whatsoever about the breadth and depth of his amazing love.

 

Having said that, this is what we preach, Christ love is so small, so limited, and so finite so conditional that if you don’t understand it, if you don’t even hear it, if you have good reason for rejecting it you will still spend eternity as the condemned under the wrath of God, and some Christians even go as far as to say, that you will spend eternity in a lake of fire for ever and ever. To complicate matters even more, we are told that people are lost, that people have there minds ‘blinded’ but none of this makes any difference they are still guilty before a wrathful agro, hateful God.

 

I find this stuff deeply disturbing, I can only come to one conclusion there must be two gods, or we have gotten this stuff wrong and if not, I’m not sure I want to be a Christian anymore.

 

We go about our days happy in the knowledge that our very children might end up in this place because of exclusivism, how would you feel having a ball in heaven knowing that your children are ‘writhing’ in some god forsaken place.

 

But all this is OK because we can’t understand the ways of God

 

    

 

.

                                                                                                      

 

End or a New Beginning?

 

³So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. ⁴Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. ⁵He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. ⁶Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, ⁷as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. ⁸Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. ⁹(They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)

In my short blog two weeks ago, I spoke briefly about the ‘Emmaus road’ experience and how the two disciples (almost) failed to recognize Jesus, but in a moment in time ‘there eyes were opened’ and they recognized him. It’s rather interesting how we can be faced with similar circumstances in our lives and yet like Peter, Mary and John we see very different realities. Mary’s reaction was that of ‘loss’ she was convinced his body had been stolen. Peter saw the ‘strips of linen’ he too must have felt a sense of ‘loss’ maybe like Mary he might have also thought that the body of Jesus was stolen. Now John ‘saw’ something very different ^“He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in” John had a moment of revelation, he paused to consider, then took in the stunning implications.

Mary, Peter and John were all confronted with the same evidence…an empty Tomb! Now read the response of John “Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb, first, also went inside HE SAW AND BELIEVED.

The empty tomb spoke of; losses, emptiness, grief, despair and utter devastation, yet, within this same scenario a very different picture unfolded; joy unspeakable, life, new hope, a new beginning. Our moments of complete and utter loss have within them the very seeds of new life. Now its to easy to speak in a patronizing manner, making comparison between this event and our own private grief and pain, is a little ‘tacky’ I’m not seeking to do this.

 

My point is this, always a greater much more significant dynamic is at work…wherever you are right now! What is Gods perspective within your story?

Extravagant Weakness!

 

His love is not over and above us, this servant king seeks but through coercion, a gentle loving, a prompting and longing from below. This opportunist seeks a voice through our vulnerability and weakness. Weakness, humiliation, vulnerability and brokenness; Ah! The currency of God, this will lead to a small window of opportunity. To not see Gods love in this, is to face the prospect of not seeing it again. To see his love here is at the same time to be completely and utterly floored by its shocking implications. This window calls us look! The cross destroys all notions of conditionality, destroys all notions of the ‘fine print’ or the ‘hidden clauses’ that some evangelicals have used as a final trump card, this is the love of a brooding contract god. The shocking implication is this; the strings of conditionality are ours alone, we can choose to hold, to release.

To relinquish, is to feel the full force of his weight as a gentle tug. This puts to death the gospel of triumphant domination, of judgment now, with even worse to come, where God loves me so much, that I had better do something…. or else!! When we catch a glimpse of this reckless abandon, of waste extravagant, we will hold as if our very lives depend on it. To not have done this is to not have seen. Father! Forgive them for they no not what they do! Is a plea, one of complete and utter truth. Will we? Can we? Be held for what we have never seen. Maybe those of us who hold another view should at least be honest; a love that fails to win us, to hold us, may as well have never been love at all.

Lost Emmaus…moments!

 

 

 

I posted a short observation this week about me ‘missing the point’…

 

I read the account in Luke 24: 3…35 this morning, and I noticed something in the story I’d never seen before, and I’ve read this story many, many times.

 

This morning, I read through the story several times…then this occurred to me;

 

It would have been so very easy for these followers to have ‘missed the moment’…so to speak’ at no time during this discourse did they have any idea as to his identity, so caught up in there own story they were not open to recognize who he was (although its hard not to feel that they may have had suspicions) this may have been another golden opportunity that never eventuated. Jesus made no suggestion that he was keen to continue the dialogue, this is not a codependent Jesus who ‘needs’ anything from us, and this point needs to be emphasized. Later they may have talked about it, wondering… ‘Who was that man’? Even with the benefit of hindsight these opportunities can’t always be recognized or even relived.

 

It needs to stated clearly, Jesus protects his identity with very good reason, he reveals himself when the time is right, regrettable for many these opportunities are never realized, in a very real sense we have to ‘earn the right to see him’ “they were kept from seeing him” when our very beings are open and responsive when the closed’ windows’ of doubt and uncertainty are opened we see as if for the very first time. Its my suspicion that for most! Jesus is never recognized and he continues on his way alone, and maybe he at the same time feels the regret of another ‘lost’ moment’ one where he should and so easily could have been ‘seen’ . looking back over my own life, I think I have failed to recognize him more times than I care to remember.

 

Could it be that for all of us, yes! The whole human race, are given Emmaus road opportunities throughout our lives, this can come in many different ways, we simple fail to see him. I now begin to understand the meaning of the man of sorrows; this is a perpetual experience for Jesus…for most he is simple never recognized. He feels the great disappointment for our moments lost. For him to ‘show himself’ without our consent would be the greatest disservice and the greatest danger, it would forever immunize us against any further possibility. This alone is the great paradox…‘so close yet so far’ the moment finally came through a simple everyday event…. there eyes were opened and they recognized him’ because I’ve failed to ‘see him’ I’ve wrongly concluded that he was never there to start with.

 

…In my own case, not only have I failed to recognize him, but also regrettable I’ve not even wanted him…maybe sometimes the two are the same!