The Emergent Christmas Story

I heard this first on Wretched Radio and copy and pasted it from here:

Now the birth of Jesus was on this wise: When his white racist mother Mary was engaged to noted white racist Joseph before they came together (though if they loved each other a lot it would have been ok to come together, or if they truly embraced their innate and latent bisexuality, they would have raised a more open minded child ), she was found with child.


Then Joseph her husband (well, technically they weren’t married yet but that’s ok), being a closed-minded traditionalist, white racist & not willing to let go of his fundamentalistic ideas about marriage was minded to put her away privately, which would have been mean & judgmental of him.


But while he thought on these things, behold an angel came or he entered a Buddha-like dream state. At any rate Joseph came to his loving & compassionate senses & decided to not put Mary away.


While in the dream, Joseph heard a voice which who are we to judge which god it might have been if any at all, saying to Joseph: “Mary will bring forth a son & you shall call his name Jesus (or Yeshua if you want to sound more Hebrewish, although in fact, Jesus was a Palestinian) for he shall help a lot of people feel better about themselves & their life experiences.”


Now all this was done, that the text would look more consistent but of course we all know the Gospels were written a long time after Jesus had actually died. Further, Islamic scholars noted that the New Testament was changed so as to exclude the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) from being recognized as the true and most peaceful messiah) so it is possible the whole story is just embellishment by his followers – anyhow…


Then white racist Joseph came out of the dream state & took white racist Mary to be his co-partner in life. But he didn’t try to consummate the marriage like many brutish men would, as if the woman is just their property or something. White racist Joseph attempted to find his feminine side and majored in Women’s Studies at the white racist Jewish yeshiva, located in Palestine. For a while, he dabbled in Wicca until he became a Presbyterian.


Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem (which in modern times is rightfully controlled by the Palestinians since that land has been otherwise wrongfully occupied by Israeli Zionists and Jews since Abrahamic times) in the days of Herod (which could actually have been 4 B.C.E.), behold there came really cool and alternative music bi dudes from the east.


When Herod heard these things, just like any other cruel authoritarian he became jealous. And when he had gathered all the really mean white racist religious people together, he demanded of them where Jesus would be born.


And they said to him, “In Bethlehem” (which in modern times is rightfully controlled by the Palestinians…oh yeah, I already said that).


And you Bethlehem are a small place but out of you will come a great healer & a guy that teaches people to be real loving & peaceful, just like Buddha did & Gandhi would later. Your legacy would be one of imperialism, colonialism and white racism.


Then Herod, when he had privately called the wise guys, he asked them a lot of questions about astronomy & astrology since Herod had been influenced by the western culture of Rome he didn’t know about the cool metaphysical stuff like they do in the east. In his Jewish and white racist ignorance he knew nothing of the nude Celtic Dance at Stonehenge or the High Priestess of Wicca embracing Mother Earth. He knew nothing of the gentle Native American faith or of the magnificent Maya.


And so he told them to go look for Jesus. Probably using some sort of astronomical technology that the western people were too dumb to invent, with the help of the Atlantian technology the cool dudes found Jesus in a stable or it could have been a cave, we aren’t really sure about anything, not even our theology. At any rate, even then selfish, white racist capitalistic Jew pigs wouldn’t give other white racist Jew pigs, Joseph & Mary a room so they like many people today were homeless & out in the street (It is a little know fact that Herod’s last name was Bush).


The wise guys went into where the father of all white racism and cause of teh mass killings in the name of God Jesus was born & gave him gifts which was their way of showing they understood that it was God’s Dream for humanity that Jesus came to help poor people get back at mean rich people, a dream sadly never realize because Jesus cultural anchors of white Jewish racism was to take hold in the Christian world. Only peaceful and gentle Islam was to break free of the tyrannical Jews and their racism and have been persecuted for that ever since.


The rest of the story gets too mean but you know what happens – Jesus grows up & goes around the countryside preaching a socialistic Gospel of peace, sort of like a first-century version of conflict resolution & anger management but just like today there were mean people then who didn’t want to see poor people actually get anywhere so they killed Jesus, or he could have got married & lived in France & died of old age, we aren’t sure of that either, but it’s ok to be doubtful of everything you believe (it’s the postmodern way). The legacy of white racism and white priviledge has authored much hate and misinterpretation of Jesus message. The Pope is representative of evil racist, homophobic and all that is wrong with organized religion. The Presbyterians who want to embrace the Palestinians and boycott Caterpillar, Israel, Jews, capitalism and those who embrace the ELF (Earth Libertaion Movement) are making amends for centuries of white privilege.


Fortunately, lots of smart, trendy preachers today are getting back to Jesus’ simple message of love & world peace. They are trying to help people with all sorts of benefit concerts, ipod incentives & book sales. They see in Hugo Chavez a brown messiah who hates George Bush and what more worthy cause can there be?


Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays or whatever you want to celebrate – don’t worry, we won’t judge you.

Scripture Twisters - John 14:6

Believe it or not, I've actually purchased the book written by he whose name I can not speak, and I have every intention of reading it, but a friend of mine pointed me towards this passage of the book:

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. --John 14:6

What does he whose name I can not speak think?

"Jesus at one point claimed to be ‘the way, the truth, and the life.’ Jesus was not making claims about one religion being better than all other religions. That completely misses the point, the depth, and the truth. Rather, he was telling those who were following him that his way is the way to the depth of reality. This kind of life Jesus was living, perfectly and completely in connection and cooperation with God, is the best possible way for a person to live. It is how things are."

This is my problem with He whose name I can not speak. *Deconstruction* He has taken a relatively simple concept and deconstructed it to the point where I'm not even sure what he is trying to say. I will not argue that the way Jesus lived is the best way to live, but is that the direct application of this verse? Let's examine:

1.) We must interpret the verse in context with the surrounding verses.
In John 14:1-5, we find Jesus telling his disciples about his Fathers house. This is Heaven. Then we find Thomas asking, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"

Jesus proceeds to tell them the way. He is the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the father except through Him. Does he seem to you like he is speaking of his lifestyle? He says "I," not "my lifestyle." So I would be lead to believe that we get to Heaven through Jesus, not his lifestyle.

2.) We must interpret the unclear with the clear.
A clear teaching of the Bible is that the only way to Heaven is through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. It is also clear that we can not get to Heaven through our works. So when we see Jesus proclaiming "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." What assumptions can we make about that statement? We can assume that he is not talking about his lifestyle, because we know that our lifestyle can not save us. We can assume that he is talking about faith in him, because that is a clear biblical teaching.

People tell me that he whose name I can not speak's purpose is to make people question their beliefs, with the intent of having them come out stronger in their faith. I wonder, however, how helpful it is for him to cause someone to question a well known and widely accepted teaching that stands up, even to the toughest of testing. I wonder if he intends to teach/give the idea that the way to Heaven is through living like Jesus did. (A task that is impossible from the start.) Perhaps I will go easier on him after I actually read the book, but for now, I remain sceptical at best.

Rational Evangelism

The first line of the article reads, "I first started to understand 'rational evangelism' the night that a woman in a bar told me that she had seen Jesus dressed as a homeless cross dressing man in an elf costume." Heather Kirk-Davidoff then goes on to to tell the story of an encounter she had with a woman in a bar that eventually lead to her favorite character in the musical, "Rent." Angel was "a homeless, drum playing gay man, who spends most of the show dressed as a drag queen Santa Claus." The woman goes on to tell Heather, "what's amazing to me, is how much power Angel's love has in the lives of the other characters in the play. And his love doesn't stop affecting them even after he dies. It's like,... It's like it's made more perfect in his death." It's at this point in the conversation that Heather suggested that Angel was like Jesus Christ. (article)

My biggest problem is not that she had the audacity to make the comparison, (although that is a problem for me.) My biggest problem is that in this article about EVANGELISM, she never explains that she then went on to EVANGELIZE this woman. She would have you believe that she allowed this woman to continue thinking of Jesus as Angel from Rent. Now I don't really know if she went on to explain sin, punishment for sin, the life of the REAL CHRIST, the death of Christ as payment for sin, and the imputed righteousness of Christ so that we might be found holy before a holy and just God. But the general tone of the article would leave me to believe she did not.

Heather goes on to say, "What would evangelism look like if we... counted conversations instead of conversions?" Well Heather, it would look like we had a lot of conversations and no conversions. It would look like we spread a lot of seeds amongst the thorns and on the shallow ground. We would see many plants sprout up and die very quickly.

If someone does not know WHY they are fleeing to God for salvation, then salvation can not be obtained. If we do not inform them of the true gospel message, who Christ TRULY IS, and why he died on that cross, then they have nothing to believe in. Talking to someone about Christ is not evangelism. TELLING them about Christ, and God's only plan of salvation is. So counting conversations is fine, as long as you count the right ones.

Questions? Comments?
timmrees@yahoo.com

The "Emergent" Church

The "emergent" movement is sweeping the nation and Evangelical churches everywhere. What is it? Wikipedia desribes it as follows: "The emerging church movement is a controversial[1] 21st-century Christian movement whose participants seek to engage postmodern people, especially the unchurched and post-churched. To accomplish this, "emerging Christians" or "emergents" seek to deconstruct and reconstruct Christian beliefs, standards, and methods to fit in the postmodern mold. Proponents of this movement call it a "conversation" to emphasize its developing and decentralized nature. The predominantly young participants in this movement prefer narrative presentations drawn from their own experiences and biblical narratives over propositional, Bible exposition. Emergent methodology includes frequent use of new technologies such as multimedia and the Internet. Their acceptance of diversity and reliance on open dialogue rather than the dogmatic proclamation found in historic Christianity leads emergents to diverse beliefs and morality."

I would describe it as an attempt to reach out to post modern thinkers. An on going effort to make church more fun, thus becoming more appealing to people who think the church is just fulll of a bunch of "old fuddy duddies." The question that I would ask, is are we supposed to conform to the culture? It is my personal belief that the church should pluck people out of "culture," so that they may conform to Christ. The following is a list of flaws commonly found in the "Emergent" movement. (As found in the article, My Jorney In and Out of the Emergent Church, by Jason Carlson.) As you read, ask yourself if you can see any of these aspects in your church, or more importantly, in your own belief system.

- A highly ambiguous handling of truth.
- A desire to be so inclusive and tolerant that there is virtually no sense of biblical discernment in terms of recognizing and labeling false beliefs, practices, or lifestyles.
- A quasi-universalistic view of salvation.
- A lack of a proper appreciation for biblical authority over and against personal experience or revelation.
- Openness to pagan religious practices like Hindu Yoga and incorporating them into the Christian life and Christian worship.
- Openly questioning the relevance of key historical biblical doctrines such as the Trinity.
- An uncritically open embrace of the Catholic and Orthodox churches.
- An unbridled cynicism towards conservative evangelicalism and fundamentalism.
- A reading of scripture that is heavily prejudiced towards a social gospel understanding.
- Little or no talk of evangelism or saving lost souls.
- A salvation by osmosis mentality, where if you hangout with us long enough you’re in.

Questions? Comments?
timmrees@yahoo.com

God's Word is Enough for Me

When did the word of God stop being enough? Why do we insist on minimizing the sovereignty and holiness of God? The following is an excerpt from echozoe.com.

“I only recently heard this story, and I find it utterly disgusting. This church in Melbourne , Florida , in an attempt to attract “seekers” resorted to give communion dressed as clowns. A world full of people that want nothing to do with the blood that was shed on a wooden cross to pay the price for their sins and save them from the judgment to come will only come to church if the service is being conducted by clowns. This is what the body of Christ has come to? I am sorry, but if people don’t want to come to church to worship the Lord, I don’t want them there. “

The church has been on a steady track towards being “seeker sensitive” for some time now. That is, doing more and more to attract unsaved people to the church. For some churches it is the “Best Sex Ever” series. For other churches it is the Harley Davidson themed bathroom. I personally have always been under the impression that church service was a place for believers to gather together in Christian fellowship, worship the Lord our God and be edified through solid teaching by a solid student of the bible. Is that wrong?

There always has been and always will be a place for outreach and evangelism in the church, but it is not the church service itself. We wonder why Christians are becoming weaker in their faith. We wonder why our country’s moral values are going down the tubes. Maybe part of it is the fact that so many churches have abandoned the teaching of the word of God for the sake of entertaining “seekers.”

Questions? Comments?
timmrees@yahoo.com