Reinterpretation

I was listening yesterday to a podcast of a sermon from Rob Bell's church, Mars Hill in Michigan. I used to listen to these podcasts regularly but stopped after I made a conscious effort to move away from the emergent church movement, which I feel often misrepresents the Gospel.

However, after talking to one of the teens I work with and explaining that I didn't listen to them anymore (he does), he asked why. I honestly didn't have a good answer and so I decided to give them another chance.

The first podcast that  came to wasn't by Rob Bell himself, which was refreshing. The sermon by Kent Dobson ,was on the "Naked Bloody Guy" of Mark 5:1-20. This is a familiar story of a man who had been possessed by a multitude of demons, the encounter he has with Jesus and his freedom from that.

What frustrated me constantly in the course of this sermon was that Dobson seemed to be overly concerned with suggesting new interpretations for every aspect of the story. Many of these were a stretch and seemed to be based on massive assumptions.


In a story of demon possession, Dobson completely underplays the supernatural aspect and tries to reinterpret the story as a statement about the colonial oppresion of Rome. Thus when the demon replies to the question, "what is your name?" with the phrase "My name is Legion for we are many", the man is making a political statement about the military might of Rome and his forced isolation.


Eventually, the application of the sermon, based on Jesus' command to this man, was that it is our responsibility to share the story of what Jesus has done for us and the mercy he has shown us. Good application. Good point. Why though, was it necessary to focus on the military oppression of Rome which you have to dig and and add to the story to even find there?

This reinterpretation seems to a common feature in the teaching of emergent preaching, particularly in my experience in the teaching of Rob Bell. Almost every sermon I hear from him has a moment of 'you may think it means this, but I know it really means this'. In fact, at least in my group, I think this added a lot to his appeal. However, I think this obsession with new understandings moves the sermon away from the truth of scripture. If someone interprets scripture based on whatever new information he chooses, he can make it say almost anything. I believe for the most part, the best guide for reading scripture is itself.

Definitely, it's more then beneficial to be culturally aware of the original setting but come on; first look at what the passage itself says.

Jazz

I was working on my Martin Luther essay and got distracted by a book on my table. It was Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller. I haven't read it yet but I just read the introduction and thought it was worth sharing. Here it goes:

"I never liked jazz music because jazz music didn't resolve. But I was outside the Bagdad Theatre in Portland one night when I saw a man playing the saxophone. I stood there for fifteen minutes, and he never opened his eyes. 

After that I liked jazz music.

Sometimes you have to watch somebody love something before you can love it yourself. It is as if they are showing you the way.

I used to not like God because God didn't resolve. But that was before any of this happens."

In researching Martin Luther, I found that he once said, "I do not love God! I hate him." This was the same Luther who revolutionised Christianity, who brought the world away from the church as an institution and into Christianity as a personal, living faith.

Yet, he hated God.

He hated God because of his guilt... because he was a sinful, messed up wretch who God had every right to squash if He so chose.

One verse made a difference to Martin:     Romans 1:17

This Gospel tells us how God makes us right in his sight. This is accomplished from start to finish by faith. As the scriptures say, "It is through faith that a righteous person has life."

The reason Martin's hate was turned to love was the realisation that God isn't waiting to squash us, who have faith in his Son. He's saving them and changing them and that is something worth enjoying.

Close your eyes, enjoy the jazz.

John Piper and the Prosperity Gospel

This is a video that I found on Benjamin Euler's blog. John Piper is talking about the Prosperity Gospel.
I have to say I can understand why he is so angry about this. I come from a background in a prosperity Gospel church and I've seen first-hand the damage that this false teaching does.

It raises expectations for God to deliver and when God doesn't give wealth, health and joy, people question  their faith, their righteousness and eventually leave the faith. Prosperity Gospel IS NOT a good thing.

I think my experience with the prosperity gospel is what gave me the passion I have for confronting false teaching. That's about the only benefit that my dealing with it have had.

I'm a Ex-Rob Bell fanatic.

I've had a change of heart about Rob Bell in the last week or so.
I still think he's a great communicator and presents some Biblical truths and insights in his videos and sermons.

The problem thought isn't the transmission, it's the message. I wonder how many people are actually aware how controversal and shocking his messages are.

Firstly, he approaches Christianity from a post-modern view. Post-modernity is the idea that it's impossible for to know absolute truth. In the first chapter of Velvet Elvis, he essentially writes that Christian doctrine is not important, that if elements of the Gospel are false, it doesn't matter.
The fact is however: that it does.
Without the foundation of historical fact, we may as well believe a fairy tale. Without the coherent system of theology, Christianity becomes a sentimental, mish-mash of well-meaning but non-sensical ideas.

I'd encourage everyone to read up a bit about Rob Bell and the emerging/emergent church.

Back to Basics has an excellent sermon called "Emerging or Submerging" on mp3 that I recommend listening to.

Here, you can find a good, even-handed analysis of the Nooma DVDs by Greg Gilbert.
It's got three parts including a individual rundown of each of the Noomas.

Please check the background for yourself and don't get up in the fancy packaging. I know Rob has some good ideas but be discerning in what you absorb.