i have one blog newer than this one at thewholeworldround.com
A great friend from college, Scott Kabel, flew in from Taiwan and spent Christmas with us in Thailand (it is my hope that those who don‘t know the difference between Taiwan and Thailand are forced to realize the distinction by the fact that they have now appeared in the same sentence). We made our way North to Chiang Mai and had a good ‘ole time reminiscing about college and Zambia (although none of us were in Zambia at the same time Jeremy, Scott, and I were all student missionaries there so we hold a lot of memories in common). Another thing we have in common is that we’re all single, and for a moment I thought this was a great coincidence, but then I realized, duh, of course we’re single. No one with a wife or girlfriend would be spending Christmas with two other bachelors in Thailand.
It turns out we‘re just “birds of a feather,” but I will say flocking, especially at Christmastime, is really fun. I’m super happy Jeremy and Scott were with me for Christmas because I identify with them easily. We share traditions, dietary preferences, humor, and language (not just English in a broad sense but the same Adventist University dialect). We’re the same in a lot of ways and it’s great.
I love being an SDA Christian. I love my SDA friends. I really love the Sabbath. It’s been really fun and uplifting for me this Christmas season to think about my roots and to bask in the joy and warm, yummy nostalgia that I get from singing carols, and reading stories about the traditions that I know and love. I identify with Adventists largely because (specific doctrines aside, that‘s for another discussion) I am Adventist. It’s what I know, it’s what I’ve enjoyed growing up in, Adventism is my culture and the lens through which I see the world.
All that being said, as a traveler, I have to stare down the obvious fact that I’m a product of my environment. I’m Christian, not Buddhist, because I was born to Sam and Susan Harboldt, not Chinh and Tranh Li. When I ask myself if I really believe, or if I’m really a follower of Christ, this keeps popping into my head. How authentic is my religion? I understand that there are elements of my beliefs that I should be willing to die for. I reckon when that time comes I better be pretty dang convinced of my authenticity and the rightness (and righteousness) of the cause for which I’m giving my life.
When I was seven or so I remember a church elder, one who I still hold a lot of respect for, told me this: “If Christianity is mistaken, and we’ve misunderstood the nature of Jesus and misinterpreted parts of the scriptures, we will still live happier, fuller, richer lives by following the moral law that Christ taught.” At the time I pretty much rejected this thinking right out. If Christ is someone for whom I may be giving my life at some point I’m gonna have to operate with a bit more certainty than that. Now that I’m traveling the words of my mentor don’t seem as far off. I think I’m seeing what he suggested manifested in the lives of many people I meet. The teachings that seem to bless these people, give them purpose, and cultivate a happy life, lived for the benefit of others, didn’t come from Jesus in the sense that ours did, but I think they may have come from God by other means.
I’m meeting people who don’t believe in Jesus, and some who don’t believe in God, who are better people than me. There are people who‘ve broken the habit of trying to prove their right all the time, people who’s brand of selflessness appears to consist of actually putting the interests of others ahead of their own, not just doing token acts of kindness (all the better if performed on the fringe of one’s comfort zone) to soothe the conscience. It seems that we Christians do not have the corner market on what we call sanctification (Romans 2:12 is a good place to start reading if you‘re curious).
The Bible talks about “losing your life to find it” and I think I see a lot of people from vastly different belief systems figuring out how to do that. I intuit that, for the moment anyway, this is the sort of “life losing” that deserves my focus. Not the martyr’s loss of the flesh life, but the giving up of my spirit to a better one. Dying to self.
Here’s the tricky business for me. The sort of spirit that attaches itself to being right (let’s say about Sabbath being the true indication of a remnant for a challenging example) is a spirit that likes to vindicate itself. It finds itself at odds (at least inside Bjorn) with the meek spirit, the one that willingly admits mistakes and doesn’t try to prove it knows better (tree of knowledge of good and evil should be ringing a bell) than God. I find the “old man” (the argumentative one) inside me isn’t quite as dead as I had hoped, and the “new man” not quite as alive when it comes to convincing others that they should switch to my belief system because it‘s “better“ than theirs.
So I’m trying to figure out what discipleship is. What does Jesus‘ commission mean for Adventists today? Should we be trying to get happy, well-adjusted, partially sanctified Baptists, Muslims, and Catholics to switch to our religion? Would we be doing them a favor by suggesting they leave the richness of their heritage, the things to which they have attached so much meaning, and enter ours?
One thing is for sure. There are plenty of people who definitely need more God in their lives. There’s still obvious discipling to be done. There are poor, widows, and orphans who are living without hope, and if we can jump start them by sharing with them a healthy way to relate to God (Christianity) it seems that must definitely be a good thing. I’m just curious about these folks who seem to relate to God well without Christ. I’m interested in your thoughts if you’d like to email me or leave comments on this website.
Hey Bjorn,
ReplyDeleteYou bring up some questions that I've been really pondering myself. Here are a few of my thoughts:
Ultimately, the reason to share Christianity, or more specifically, the Adventist message, is to bring people into a relationship with Jesus. It's not about converting people to the teachings of Jesus; it's about introducing people to the person, Jesus.
Now the teachings of Jesus, (as in the Sermon on the Mount, for instance) are not substantially different from the teachings of many other religions. This is why many religious persuasions "bless people, give them purpose, and cultivate a happy life, lived for the benefit of others". God's moral law is like gravity. To the extent that we obey the law, we reap the benefits.
But the whole point of Christianity is to take people beyond this point into a supernaturally amazing relationship with God himself.
However, as you pointed out, there are many non-Adventists and non-Christians who live a more holy and moral--more sanctified--life than most Adventists or Christians. Their goodness goes beyond mere morality, and strikes at something deeper, more authentic.
John 1 says that Christ is the light that lights everyone who comes into the world. EGW says that there will be people in Heaven who have never heard the name of Jesus. Jesus himself said something similar when he told the Jews that many would come from the East and the West to sit down with Abraham and Isaac. We can only assume, therefore, that these people with an obvious light in their lives are living in Christ.
In other words, there are people out there who are not only following the teachings of Jesus but also clearly in touch with the person of Jesus. These folk may not have all their theology down pat, but they are living up to the knowledge they have.
Now to me, Christian theology is more about the claims of Jesus than his teachings. Maybe this distinction sounds too philosophical, but remember my original assertion: Christianity is more about the person, Jesus, than the teachings of Jesus. If we care about the person, Jesus, then we will care about his claims. His teachings--turn the other cheek, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, etc--are certainly important, but the claims are absolutely critical.
As we've seen, the teachings aren't particularly unique. However, the claims are definitely unique and therefore very important. If Jesus was wrong in his claims--of being the way the truth and the life--then he was either a colossal sickening liar or a pathetic delusional and his teachings rapidly lose luster.
All of that just to say that theology--at least as I've defined it--will tell us more about the person of Jesus. Only in this sense does "converting" someone to Adventist theology have any value. You can go through all of our theological fundamentals--including and perhaps especially the eschatology--and bring out a more complete and compelling view of Jesus.
For those who are currently only following the teachings of Jesus (or Buddha, Mohammed, etc) sharing our Adventist faith will open a new window into the glories of a Relationship behind the rules. For those who somehow already have an implicit relationship with Jesus, sharing the Adventist message will more fully uncover and broaden this relationship.
Naturally, this task requires a good deal of cultural sensitivity and tact, and should in no way require people to "leave the richness of their heritage".
Wow, I didn't plan to write a treatise on this subject. I guess I've just been mulling it over for a while and this is the first time I've had the time or opportunity to write everything out. Hope some of it makes sense
Hey man thanks for the angle. I'm guessing from your basic theme and particularly paragraph #8 (nice treatise, btw) that you've probably read, and if not would identify with Lewis' Mere Christianity.
ReplyDeleteI'm finding a lot of encouragement in the "Mere" part lately. And I think that comes, in a big way, from recognizing that I never would have arrived at conclusions like the "Investigative Judgement" if they hadn't been handed to me by the fore-fathers (or fore-farmers as a friend recently called them).
I want my faith to be in the right place (sometimes I wonder which doctrinal intricacies are worth spending energy on). I think maybe that my faith (personally) needs to be less in a "denomination" than it has been, and more in God.
I like the idea you've got about a "more complete and compelling view of Jesus."
Thanks for the input.