Wandering the savage garden…

LifestyleCategory Archives

This is content that focuses on lifestyle issues.

The Challenge of the Pardes

There are reactions we’re all called to make, in every occurrence in our lives. Those reactions determine, and are determined by, who we are, and tell us much of what we are – and, thankfully, we have some measure of control and determination.

The Talmud, in the Mishnah, refers to the legend of the Pardes. In this, four eminent rabbis traveled to Paradise, and encountered Holiness there.

They had four different reactions: one went insane, one lost his faith, one died, and one came and went in peace.

These reactions mirror ours. When we are presented with… anything, a situation, a question, an experience, we reflect that experience and channel it in some variations of these.

Insanity

When we integrate the experience without context or understanding, we are “mad,” in a way. Imagine those who think the Easter Bunny is somehow a canonical Christian image, or that Santa Claus hung around with Jesus. Imagine those who can’t tolerate that Jesus is the Way and the Life, and think that a good Buddhist is as deserving of Heaven as a good Christian.

(Meanwhile, orthodox theology says that none of us deserve Heaven, period, but are considered co-heirs with Christ through acceptance of His death on the Cross in our stead [Romans 8:12-17]. Anyone who refuses that sacrifice, no matter how wonderful a person they are, is unsaved.)

Death

We might also endure an experience, neither adding to it nor subtracting from it. We become static, unchanging, fixed in position. This lack of growth is “dying,” in a sense.

Loss of Faith

When we reject an experience and its implications of the glory of God, we lose our faith… maybe not literally or wholly, but we might simply become jaded, or refuse to acknowledge God’s role in that experience. (Or, of course, we might literally lose faith entirely.)

The rabbi who lost faith was Elisha ben Abuyah, and he’s referred to as Acher, אחר, “the other.”

While accounts are not mechanically literal (and therefore we don’t know for sure), it seems he rejected the idea of the afterlife; one story has it that he saw a child do a good deed, and lose his life, while a man who sinned suffered no consequences.

He then became a self-declared outsider, one who rejected the teachings that he himself possessed.

It’s tragic, really, to think about.

Peace

The rabbi who “survived,” Rabbi Akiva, “came in peace and went in peace.” This suggests that he was the only one who went to the Orchard knowing who and what he was, and let that inform his actions and reactions. He preserved his faith, he extended his experience of the Holy, he grew.

The Holocaust – referring to the Nazi extermination of groups such as Jews, Gypsies, and other such ethnicities and subcultures – stands alongside the Exodus and the destruction of the Second Temple in Jewish life as hallmark events. (There are more, but for me, these are the three most impactful.)

Jews had a chance to react to the Holocaust, after its ending — and those reactions mirrored the reactions of the rabbis to the Pardes. Some Jews lost faith, rejecting God; some Jews went mad, embracing hatred. Many, many, many Jews obviously died. Some endured, retaining their faith and their essential character despite the horror.

This is me. This is us. This is everyone, to every experience.

Through Christ, we are able to achieve peace, and with His grace and mercy, we are able to go in peace, if we listen to Him and not to the chaos of our own hearts in our agonies and ecstasies.

And our reactions can tell us who we are in Him, too; if we have not His peace, then we know what we lack. We know then that we must attempt to invite Him to be nearer to us, to reach out for His Hand in our lives.

Have peace.

savage
July 24, 2013
Bible Study, Lifestyle
0 comments
, ,

Ricky Gervais on the nature of God

Not long ago, I read a tweet by Ricky Gervais, asking why God let terrible things happen. It was framed as a multiple choice question, with the answers stacking the deck, naturally: God must not exist, or God is allowing terrible things as punishment, or God doesn’t care, for example.

All of the choices reflected negatively on God. The answers presupposed that “terrible things” were of primal importance, as if the comfort of this very moment were the only thing about which we or God should care.

I don’t mind the sentiment, honestly. In the 1940s, most of my family disappeared in the Holocaust; I can fully sympathize with the anguish associated with terrible things.

Yet… God is responsible, but not to blame for these terrible things. He’s responsible in the sense that in the end He will create a new Heaven and a new Earth, using the construct we have at our feet.. but not to blame, in that we choose.

And blame presumes that the “terrible thing” is evil, when it may or may not be. Perhaps it was caused by evil; maybe it is evil indeed. (Or perhaps it’s a natural event which causes harm, like a tsunami or tornado.)

Regardless, the event is not normally the result of God hitting the “smite” key.

What it comes down to is this: God allows events to happen in accordance with His plan, such that an event chosen by Him will occur in His time and in His way.

That event is His reforging the earth, the “Day of the Lord,” when He returns.

Everything that has happened or will happen on earth is designed to advance His inestimable will. Every event causes a ripple in a sea that flows to His desire.

A terrible event – let’s say a tornado – happens, killing a family of five Christians. Are they being punished for their sin? The Bible says “probably not.” (It’s possible, but not very likely; “natural consequences” are by far more likely to be chosen as “punishment” rather than a tornado. If there’s abuse going on, then the consequence is normally going to be family ruin, not a natural disaster.)

Yet with this “terrible event…” what is God doing?

Honestly, I don’t know, and can’t presume to know. Yet I think God can use that terrible event – not just to usher that family into His arms, but possibly as something that leads others to Him as well. Perhaps the grief of the community leads someone to search for Him, for example.

Of course it’s possible that the event could turn some away. But someone who’s turned away by such things… their faith is in desperate need of shoring up, because they’re seeing God as some kind of magic vending machine, that disposes candy when we dance in a certain way.

God is not a vending machine. God is greater than our ability to describe; expecting Him to dance to our tune, and turning away when He does not, is more of an indictment of us than of Him.

Terrible things, indeed. Perhaps the focus shouldn’t be on the terrible events that catch our eyes, but on the terrible things that those flashes of despair illuminate through our responses.

savage
May 24, 2013
Bible Study, Lifestyle
0 comments
, , , , ,

Cheese-eating!

A few days ago, I made a reference to how eating a cheeseburger is wrong, and my conscience has been pricking me about it ever since. I decided I’d better offer an explanation and a retraction before too much more time elapses and I look like one of the legalistic dorks I tend to dislike.

First off, the Bible says:

19 “The best of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of the Lord your God.
“You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk. (Exodus 23:19, ESV)

The latter part is the bit I’m focusing on. The rendering thus becomes: you don’t mix milk and meat from the same kind of animal. Boiling an animal in its own kind’s milk…

But wait, there’s more. The prohibition ended up being applied to milk and meat, period. The rabbinical reason stretches to Leviticus 22:27:

27 “When an ox or sheep or goat is born, it shall remain seven days with its mother, and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable as a food offering to the Lord. (Leviticus 22:27, ESV)

In the end, what you have is a reflection of the ban against the hybrid in Judaism, something beyond the whole. It works itself out to varying degrees based on your level of orthodoxy and conservatism. Some Jews won’t use milk for six hours after eating meat; others (including me) tend to reject milk of a specific kind mixed with the meat of that same kind.

For me, it works out from a humanitarian view. The animal – let’s say a cow, since I can’t stand goats – gives us the fruit of its body in two forms: milk and meat. It seems wrong to abuse the gift of milk by using that milk to prepare the meat.

And with that, let’s cross the theological divide and cross over to Christianity.

From a Christian perspective, meat and milk are not prohibited. Paul says it over and over again, and you find it in Acts as well: food is considered clean to the point where he who eats it considers it clean. (There is no unclean food beyond the Noachide laws, in other words. I suppose you could make a case even there, but… no. Just no. Be warned. That site may present language and maturity issues for the reader.)

For me, well, I generally try to obey the level of the prohibition as I have from my youth. It’s not a “hard prohibition” – I’m not going to go weep in a corner if I eat mixed foods that go against the mixture of meat and cheese. (Proof: my wife made a taco casserole the day before yesterday, with beef and cheese. I ate it then, and polished off the leftovers this morning.)

What’s more, I would never use this prohibition to deny the offerings of someone else. My wife’s food – goes without saying, I’m eating it. (She’s fantastic in the kitchen. Meanwhile, I can burn water.) If I’m a guest at someone else’s house and they prepare a pork sandwich with goat cheese – well, I’m going to struggle with my anti-goat bias, but it’d be an affront to the offering for me to reject it.

So I wouldn’t.

savage
May 8, 2013
Lifestyle
0 comments
, , , , , ,

A personal position statement on homosexuality that matters

There’s a lot of discussion going on that talks about Christianity and homosexuality, with a lot of emotion. One thing that’s rarely stated, as far as I can tell, is the position of the Christian and homosexuality.

I’ve already discussed the biblical stance regarding homosexuality (very much against, incontrovertibly).

Many Christians – not all, but many – use that to establish a pecking order among people with respect to God, with homosexuals at the bottom. They seem to think homosexuals are redeemable through the mercy of Christ, but only if they repent and abandon their sin.

In a way, they’re right – they’re redeemable through the mercy of Christ. But the abandoning of sin, well… you know, I repent of sin daily, to be sure, but I don’t think there’s ever been a follower of Christ who’s actually managed to abandon all sin.

That’s a very broad brush to use – and for God, sin places everyone at the bottom of the pecking order. Those who are redeemed are at the top.

It’s a two-position ladder, not a ladder with a rung at the top for good Christians, then one rung down go the Christians who smoke, then another rung down for the adulterous Christians, then a few rungs down you find the sinners, with another four rungs down you find them hommasexshuls.

Other Christians seem to think that redemption is everything, that everything ends there – and further sin is okay. (Or, at least, maybe some sin. “But that other woman’s my soul mate, not my wife!,” or “I, Adam, take thee, Steve…”)

Um, no.

This is part of why “Once Saved, Always Saved” is valid. If sin separated us from God, the saved would be cut off almost immediately, every time.

God reforms the saved. We’re remade in Christ, refined and purified in His love and power. We’re still sinners even as we’re redeemed, but through the guidance of the Holy Spirit we sin less as we grow in Christ.

What you see here is a battle between mercy and justice. Tim Keller put it very well, in “The Meaning of Marriage,” and I can’t find the actual quote, so I’ll paraphrase:

Truth without grace is legalism, and grace without truth is sentiment.

Grace says “Oh, so they sin, it’s okay!” Truth says “Sin is never okay!” … and God represents both.

It’s not “okay” to sin, but we’re redeemed through faith in Christ.

The Actual Position Statement

So here’s what I think my view of the homosexual is:

I don’t care. I don’t care who someone sleeps with, or when they sleep with them. It’s not my business. It’s God’s. Someone who sins (via homosexuality, or adultery, or theft, or what-have-you) merely sins – sometimes grievously, sometimes not so much, but in the end it’s all sin, and God can redeem anyone from anywhere.

What the redeemed do is between them and God; the Holy Spirit instructs and remonstrates.

All I can do – and all I’m called to do – is point to Christ.

Do I tell a sinner what their sin is, if prompted to do so? (“Is homosexuality wrong?”) … yes. By pointing to Christ.

Not by using my relationship or position. After all, I sin too! I required salvation just as much as any other sinner. I was in the position of the sinner before redemption; I’m in the position of the sinning Christian after redemption.

It cannot be me who judges them, because of my own sin. They would be able to accuse me, and we’d be penalized together.

But if I witness to them the love of Christ, in His strength He will convict them and lift them. It’s not me, or my responsibility; my responsibility ends when I point to Christ.

So I have no objection to the homosexual as a person – none. I have homosexual friends. They know what I believe, and why I believe it, and they know I consider them my friends, and that I always will. And yes, they know what I think about the practice of homosexuality.

And they don’t expect me to attempt to beat them down with the Bible. They see themselves protected by Christ, even as they’re not Christians – and that’s one very small view of the love of Christ.

savage
May 7, 2013
Lifestyle
2 comments
, , ,