Sunday night. Humboldt Brews. Chairs, each adorned with a pen, comment card and a small polished stone, obscure a floor where the prior evening’s habitués swayed, with hops-filled bellies, against a layer of beer splatter and body odor-induced humidity to the music du jour. Where concertgoers customarily attempt to flag down the bartender with failed sultry gazes and a wave of their crispest twenty, now coffee and water dispensers rest beside cookies and paper cups. “What has descended upon the performance hall where we downed those pitchers of hemp ale and marveled at the pure beauty of the Guac-zilla burger?” you may ask. The answer: Jesus.
Catalyst, a local non-denominational Christian organization that meets Sunday mornings at Eureka’s Accident Gallery, has begun meeting Sunday evenings at HumBrews, in Arcata. Each week they transform both spaces into a hybrid of youth culture and a house of worship. HumBrews, dimly lit apart from multihued stage lights reflecting off of predominantly white faces, is perhaps the most radical location being utilized for church services on the North Coast.
As associate pastor Dan Davis begins his sermon he points to five stands, each containing a visual prop — a clock, video game system, a representation of a white picket fence, an “As Seen on TV” ab roller and a book, Unchristian — lining the front of the stage. Davis delivers a five-minute “mini-message” inspired by each item. (“Perfect for us, the YouTube generation,” Davis playfully announces.) Each of the five items inspired questions about how one lives their life, whether for personal gain or with social conscience, and which types of goals might suck an unhealthy amount of time and energy that might be used more wisely.
Davis, a college-educated and married man, confesses to struggling with finding his place in social justice work, due to the privileged life he’s been fortunate enough to lead. He emphasizes how this generation is going to be the first since the Depression to have materially less as they age than they did when they were kids. He talks about how the American dream — especially in regards to homeownership — is a delusion, and why Christian judgment needs to be replaced with acts of social justice.
Each person is asked to place the stone found on their seat on top of the table containing the issue they feel they need to work on the most. A discreet Eucharist is passed around, of which Davis later comments, “I tell the Catholics who come to our services not to worry; three of ours equals one of yours.” The crowd then culminates with a sing along to “We Shall Overcome.” This was not for the traditional sake of civil rights; instead, the struggle they hope to overcome is consumerism.
The service, with its postmodern bent, stands in stark contrast to what one would expect from religious hucksters like Pat Robertson or Rick Warren. The most apparent distinction between Catalyst attendees and those of other churches is age. Despite their affection for pastel attire, nearly all are under 30. The youthfulness of the approximately 150 followers is enhanced by a projection of Catalyst’s Twitter and Facebook addresses on the stage prior to the service.
Instead of pressing the retrograde agendas that have dominated the evangelical movement for most of the last 30 years, Catalyst focuses on acceptance of other lifestyles — and, more generally, of the modern world. The congregation is assembled from youth from many different denominational backgrounds, and many of them found their place here because they no longer have need of pastors who preach damnation, fear and hellfire.
After the equipment is loaded into Catalyst’s travel trailer, where it will be stored until next Sunday, pastor Davis and this reporter (an atheist) sit down with nothing but an iPhone set to record and a couple pints between them.
Davis, 29, is one of four associate pastors of the committee-run church. He says that he co-founded Catalyst because he wanted to start a movement within the Christian movement — a place for “recovering evangelicals.” Bright-eyed, Davis chooses his words cautiously yet without a need to be defensive. As the conversation ebbs and flows, he taps his pen along to the rhythm of the discourse occasionally jotting down illustrations of his ideas onto a napkin; he does this several times while nervously emphasizing that his views are not the overriding views of the church.
There’s no single leader or head pastor at Catalyst. The church service itself is designed to generate weekly discussions for more intimate gatherings held in homes called “life groups.” Catalyst has no permanent building and doesn’t desire one.
“Not only do church structures often lead to pastors compromising their message due to finances,” states Davis, “church buildings are, in a lot of cases, not paying property tax and can actually hurt the community.”
In place of a permanent church, Catalyst has joined forces with Big Brothers Big Sisters, CASA, Northcoast Mentoring, the Raven project and Betty Chin to help people. The church has also started several community gardens and maintains a bulletin board, thecommon.org, where members can post and respond to community needs. Catalyst has even gone to evangelical megachurches under the guise of being “moderates” to raise awareness on environmental issues.
Social justice is integral to Catalyst’s constitution — so much so that each life group must spearhead at least three acts of social justice each year. Catalyst wants to address issues such as poverty and the environment — whether local or global, and through whatever nonviolent means are accessible. This is done without any aim to convert.
Davis derives his worldview from Aristotle’s philosophy of logic, compassion and ethics — something that despite the unarguably brutish history of Christianity, he feels Christianity best represents. In regards to what he holds as truth in the Bible, he professes that there’s a hierarchy to scripture, starting with what Jesus is believed to have said. Davis, who accepts evolution as fact, is skeptical of miracles, Heaven and Hell, and even atonement.
“I’m an agnostic every other day,” he proclaims. “As for the Bible, I don’t hold to inerrancy in the text. It’s not meant to be taken literally; I don’t think that the authors even meant it to be taken literally. That’s why I have a problem with Christians who say. ‘This is how atonement works: Pray this prayer, do this act …'”
Christianity is founded on one particular credo: that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, he died and was resurrected, and by his sacrifice one’s sins are forgiven. Imbibing the Eucharist is an act that symbolizes one’s belief in the salvation of Jesus. This belief in the divinity of Jesus is what separated the early Christian sect from Judaism. Although many Christians fluctuate in how literally they take scripture, without believing in the salvation of Jesus one can hardly claim to be Christian, at least not in any meaningful sense of the word.
Davis, and much of the Catalyst congregation, however, approach Christianity as post-structuralist philosophers, deconstructing the Bible as a work of literature rather than an absolute truth. It’s as if they’re miners who extract precious gems by exploding the shafts that support the quarry. For Catalyst the resurrection could be a personal one, a rebirth from the consumerist lifestyle to living for others. It raises the questions: Is invoking Jesus metaphorically better for social justice than a literal invocation? Is it even necessary for the cause — or for Catalyst — to invoke Jesus at all?
“I think America is going to get more religious. More Christian,” states Davis. “I think what we’re doing is not the future. People want more truth than we have to offer.”
Two weeks ago, with Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 about to be announced, the topic of Christianity’s relationship to homosexuality arose. Davis doesn’t think being gay is a choice, though he still wrestles with the biblical implications. Would he marry a gay couple within his congregation if Prop. 8 were ruled unconstitutional?
“I’ve thought about this a lot,” he said. “Once I do, it becomes my issue. I don’t want it to be.”
After taking an extended sip of his beer he asked, “Do you have to publish anything on the gay issue? I know it, along with abortion, are the litmus test questions, but I fear answering because we work so hard to not run anyone out of the room by embracing one side or another.”
A comparison of the civil rights movement as the litmus test of a prior generation is offered.
“I know that my position is completely unjust and goes against everything I’ve said earlier, but I’m still wrestling with it,” he answered, staring pensively at the remaining drops of his second pint. “I know that if my daughter grows up to be a lesbian and asks me to marry her — I will do it.”
Religious institutions are often the last to change in response to evolving social and cultural perspectives. Eventually, however, they must. If, in due course, a religion doesn’t follow society’s lead it can suffer a loss of followers. Declining religions are then either forced to look for a new populace or face extinction. (Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life, says the future of the evangelical movement is not in America but the Third World.)
When looking at statistics regarding church affiliation, the moral adaptation of Christianity becomes apparent. According to a survey of the U.S. religious landscape conducted by the Pew Forum, 84 percent of Americans identify as religious. Seventy-eight percent of Americans identify as Christians. Forty-four percent of those devotees have left the denomination in which they were raised. Catholicism, which makes up 24 percent of Christianity, is facing the most significant decline of all religious institutions. Protestants and their denominational affiliates are also in decline in America, however their numbers are rising across Asia, Africa and Latin America. One of the largest of such groups is the Baptists, who make up almost a fifth of the American population.
The smallest minority in our country is the non-religious, making up about 10 percent of the population. However, they’ve more than doubled in number over the past decade. Interestingly, one in four Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 say they’re not currently affiliated with any particular religion.
After a couple hours of conversation and several pints, Davis had a change of heart. Reaching across the table he declared, “If you are going to publish on the gay issue … I’m for them. If anyone in our society has gotten the bum end of the stick it’s that community.”
So where are the Christians that prefer a more literal Christ? In his office across town sits 75-year-old Larry McCain, head pastor of Arcata’s Trinity Baptist church. A year after marrying his wife Betty they moved from Texas to Humboldt County in hopes of starting a ministry. After two decades running Myrtle Avenue Baptist, now Harvest Church, McCain became the pastor of Trinity. Holding up a placard from when the church was founded, McCain proudly points to the date February 14th, 1954, exclaiming that he was ordained on the same date three years later — a sure sign that his pastorship is God’s will being done.
McCain makes no hesitation speaking for God. If you’re an unbeliever he will tell you, completely unaware of how patronizing he’s being, that you’re in a dangerous place. You face God’s wrath. You are, in fact — going to hell. But not to worry: “God is a gentleman. He loves you.”
Before any questions could be asked McCain launches into statistics regarding the Baptist Empire. According to McCain the Baptist movement is strong and getting stronger. Trinity is one of more than 46,000 Baptist churches nationwide. In California alone, 100 Baptist churches are started annually with a success rate of 85 percent after a five-year period. For McCain, this growth is due to God’s involvement. McCain knows that God’s involvement is also exemplified when one understands that no education is needed to be a Baptist minister.
“It’s not a matter of intellect,” he says. “Education, more often than not, gets in the way of religion. We then depend on that strength rather than God.”
The Baptist faith has many different factions and beliefs within its brand. These beliefs vary from the less literal to New Earth Creationism: They believe that the Earth is less than 6,000 years old and that man walked the earth with dinosaurs — something Trinity offers “classes” in.
Trinity Baptist also believes that while women can teach Sunday school and hold women’s bible studies, they should not become leaders in the church; this applies even to leading the Sunday morning greetings. Not surprisingly, considering this enforcement of traditional gender roles, Trinity was one of the local advocates for the Yes on Prop. 8 campaign. On the subject of homosexuality, McCain remarked that he knows for a fact that society works better when people adhere to the ideals of Christianity as he defines it. He’s seen people change from being gay. Traditional marriage is healthier, he says: “It’s better for children.”
A 20-year study in the journal Pediatrics found that in terms of social abilities, children with homosexual parents perform no differently than children raised by straight parents. To the researchers’ surprise, they discovered that children of lesbian parents actually have higher self-esteem and perform better both academically and behaviorally.
“Yeah, some studies indicate that,” McCain says when confronted. “But you know, you grow up a lot of sissy boys that way.”
When asked if by that standard single mothers raise boys half as sissy as those raised by lesbian parents, McCain’s chuckles subsided. As the corners of his white goatee settled, forming a parallel line with the light reflecting of off his head, a deafening silence stretched across the room.
Trinity Baptist is aware of the work being done by Catalyst and joined forces with them last year for a community cleanup day. Since then, several members of Trinity have become members of Catalyst. McCain respects the social justice advocacy of Catalyst despite their theological differences.
“If it’s helping people, it’s God’s work,” explains McCain. “But discrepancies in theology can be dangerous.”
As for social justice initiated by Trinity, McCain mentioned the 1967 Baptist involvement in founding the Eureka Rescue Mission — a place where, depending on the limited space and whether one is willing to sit through an attempted conversion, a hot meal, shower and bed to sleep in will be provided. Many Baptists often perform their own acts of charity and community giving separate from their church. For those working through the church however, the best way to help people is by converting them to their brand of Christianity.
On Wednesday nights Catalyst associate pastor Valerie Startare and her husband Will Startare hold a life group in their home. (Full disclosure: Will Startare is the costar of the Journal‘s “Seven-O-Heaven” comic strip, along with Journal calendar editor Andrew Goff, also a Catalyst member.)
As their fellow life group members arrive for the meeting, they’re greeted with warm and familiar embraces. Valerie offers everyone coffee and white wine. She then returns to caramelizing peaches, later to be topped with ice cream.
“We don’t always agree,” Will Startare says, speaking of the church and its parishioners. “A lot of the time Dan and I don’t agree, either. In fact, most of the time everyone has their own ideas of what Christianity is and how it works. It’s kind of what Catalyst is all about.”
Everyone gathers in the front room and Will opens his laptop. He scrolls down the church’s website, provokechange.org, to retrieve talking points provided by one of the other pastors in attendance Sunday evening. No Bibles are present; no prayer is conducted.
“So because the service contained five shorter messages, Dan referred to us as the YouTube generation,” Will says. “Do you agree? Do you think it was an effective method?”
Patrick and Kevin Hawkins, twin brothers about to depart to Haiti to participate in the relief effort, agree that the format was helpful. Others in the room discuss whether or not “The YouTube Generation” was a positive title.
The group, swaying between thoughts on the sermon and humorous pop culture anecdotes, eventually center on the American dream. Valerie comments on how consumerism is encouraged by “the American dream,” leading Will to Google for more information regarding the FDR-coined term.
From there the group discusses which table each member placed their stone on during the service, discovering that most of them want to improve their social justice activism. More importantly, they all want to find causes that their skills and talents will be most effectively applied to.
Peering over the laptop screen, Will says “I feel that if I can just give what I can towards helping Betty Chin, I will be more effective than doing anything else I can think of.”
He then hooks up his laptop to the TV and plays a video of activist Shane Clayborn demonstrating against greed on Wall Street. Conversations and ideas float around the room, and the meeting turns into a room of friends discussing their lives.
“I really want to do more activism,” Valerie says. “Not that we should do it in place of charity, but I want to do more. And when charity is done for conversion, well, it’s against the point. Isn’t it?”
This article appears in Beer Me, Jesus.
This page will be a work in progress over the next couple weeks, as we respond to portions of the article. Please take a moment to enter into a conversation with us.
check Rants and Raves, boycott catalyst church…….http://humboldt.craigslist.org/rnr/1908264076.html
I want to say, “Thank you Deric Mendes for taking the time and interest in Catalyst and the other local churches mentioned in the article.” For an admitted atheiest I found your article to be not nearly as biased as one might have expected. Congratulations on an intersting and thought provoking piece of writing. Also thank you to Dan Davis for being open and willing to express his views honestly. One of the things I respect most about Dan is that he struggles openly to work out his faith in God. And that he challenges us all to do the same. I don’t always agree with Dan but he has always been open and willing to listen if I have challeneged him on something he may have said. He has responded with humility even to the point of changing his message after rethinking things. I hope from all of this more people who are seeking a faith in God will find a place (maybe Catalyst) where they can find God and others who seek to serve him.
To those calling for a boycott on Catalyst Church because of their neutrality, may I remind you there are many churches that are adamantly opposed to gay rights. There’s one mentioned in the article…
Like I stated in the piece, religious institutions derive their morality from humans. Some institutions take longer to morally evolve than others. The institutions that are free to reason and have yet to decide their position, are not nearly as unjust as those clinging to hard dogmas. More often than not those people find themselves on the wrong side of history.
This page will be a work in progress over the next couple weeks, as we respond to portions of the article. Please take a moment to enter into a conversation with us.
http://provokechange.org/Response_to_Article
You already said that, Jason!
First off, Deric did a wonderful job capturing the nuances that make Catalyst so unique of a church, compared the predominantly conservative response to Jesus.
What I believe makes Catalyst significantly different from much of the Western tradition of Christianity is the emphasis on the teachings of Jesus, rather than the teachings of Paul. Since I don’t want to make this a lengthy post, read “The First Paul” by Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan. Both authors do a great job deconstructing misconceptions of Paul and his epistles.
From my understanding of Dan’s points, when discussing issues of the inerrancy of scripture, a biblical stance of homosexual marriage, or a “correct” orthodoxy, he looks to the words of Jesus for answers. If Jesus does not mention the topic, one can conclude it was not the most important, at least not to God. I think Dan made this point very clear. Since Jesus came to bring peace, love, and reconciliation, it seems Christians should follow in those footsteps. Catalyst is created to do just that.
Final Thought: Should all Christians commit to fully embrace homosexuals into a Christianity that requires human beings to love and the Holy Spirit to convict, not the other-way around? Wasn’t this Jesus’ message?
I am one of those said “recovering evangelicals”, i am so tired of the hate and condemnation that spews out of so many Christian’s, one good thing that i was taught and has stuck with me is that the entire New Testament can be summed up as Love God, Love People. Simple, but so hard for churches to grasp……..Catalyst seems to be on the right track! Thank you for such a well written and insightful article.
A distinction without a difference. Full of “seminary jargon” as you qualified on your church’s website. The obvious oversight, you were talking to the NCJ.
If everything written in this article is accurate, my heart is grieved.
Get your heart checked, Cindy.
It’s hard for me, a committed atheist, to find much wrong with what Catalyst Church is doing. They seem to have boiled down Christianity to it’s most useful practices, promoting Jesus as philosopher and preaching social work and charity. This is the form organized religion is going to have to take if it’s going to survive long into the 21st century.
@ J. Alora
If you read the response to the article:
http://provokechange.org/Response_to_Article
you will find that Catalyst, although open to debate and conversation, has a set of beliefs about Jesus that align them with the Christian faith (i.e. resurrection, atonement, trustworthiness of scripture).
I had been wondering for quite some time what the Catalyst Church was up to. I come from a southern pentecostal tradition but became turned off after going through college and getting my Religious Studies Degree. It is wonderful to read such a shining example of the inherent integration of Jesus’s messages and acts. Christianity is nothing without social justice, far too many people call themselves born again Christians but never actually act on Jesus’s message: LOVE, FORGIVENESS & PEACE.
Big ups to Catalyst- I might have to drop by sometime and sit in on your meeting- it reminds me of my Religious Studies classes!! =)
Very interesting article and I for one and thankful you wrote it and glad to be involved at Catalyst.
Dan struggles with the questioning on gay rights, or lack thereof, in the church. What I love about that isn’t his answer or church positioning, but simply that he is thinking. Actually thinking. Feeling emotion. Grappling with what is written in the bible about homosexuality and what is written about love.
That is why I am at Catalyst. Not because of a specific issue or because it’s young. But because it’s a discussion.
I’d rather be a part of a dialogue rather than a narrative.
“….. there are many churches that are adamantly opposed to gay rights………….” So why should your church be any different on the issue? Don’t blame institutionalism. Own the fact that your church chooses to skirt the issue, some say the civil rights issue of our time. Catalyst church sees the issue of gay rights as someone else’s problem, pass the buck, its cleaner and safer that way. You do not pass the litmus test, gay rights cannot be treated as if they are political wedge issues, real loving people are being discriminated while your church passes on the issue. I wonder if you would have taken a stance on whether or not blacks and whites could marry? Or would you have said the scripture is confusing? So sit back and think about it, grapple with it, dialogue yourselves silly. Churches should be beacons of light in the community, not shadow casters. You choose.
See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary priciples of the world, rather than according to Christ. For in Him all fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form…
Thank you for writing this article Deric. It is clearly bringing to the forefront some important questions about the church and religion. As a supplement to Dan’s responses, here is a list of resources that some might find helpful.
http://austinroberts13.wordpress.com/2010/08/20/resources-for-catalyst-church/
@Activison, I suggest rereading the article. I’m not a member of Catalyst or any church. I’m an atheist. In fact, I consider myself an anti-theist, meaning that I feel religion is most often destructive and dangerous.
As for homosexuality, many of my closest friends are gay. I’ve been involved with gay rights activism; I even played Hedwig, in Hedwig and the Angry Inch.
All of the points you raise are valid. I raised all of them and more when I conversed with Dan. I critisized his neutrality. I asked him if he would have sat on the fence during the civil rights movement. If you reread you’ll notice that I mention this in the article.
What impresses me the most about Dan is that he’s willing to sit down with someone of my perspective, consider what I’m saying, and change his mind –regardless of what the Bible says. He’s working it out. His neutrality is unjust and he admits it. It will be interesting to see if he applies these changes to his teachings. Attacking him while he’s changing his mind is not effective. We need to have conversations that open channels of compassion. The people who you should be worried about are those who refuse to critically think about the issue at all.
@Deric, My goal is not to attack Dan. I have reread the article and do see that he is in process. I myself was raised in the evangelical tradition, I left the church because of their stance toward GLBTQ community. I DO NOT accept the slowness of deliberation on the issue of civil rights for homosexuals by church leaders. Are they also trying to form opinions on whether or not women should be owned, whether slavery is just, or whether or not it is a sin to wear more than two types of clothing fiber. A biblically based argument could be made for all in that list, but homosexuality is the issue that churches cherry pick. As for owning women, slaves and wearing two fibers, I am sure that to all those issues Dan would have no problem, swiftly and confidently, disagreeing with their validity. Why then is their hesitation with the “gay issue”? I see no community that needs channels of compassion opened to them more the LGBTQ community. Dan has an opportunity to lead on this issue, my goal is to encourage him.
Hi Activision,
I want to clarify a couple things about our ‘neutrality,’ just incase it changes the discussion for you. Our neutrality is not in regard to the legal rights of homosexuals to marry and have equality. Each of our elders would vote ‘no’ on 8 today if it were on the ballot. Nor is it neutrality about accepting homosexuals into our community of friends, worship, and service. We already have. And it certainly is not about us trying to decide if we should ‘condemn’ them or say they are going to ‘hell’ or not. We have a strong reaction against that kind of thinking.
The only thing that we have have not come to a conclusion on is whether or not as an organization we feel that it is in the model of Jesus’ teachings to have gay leadership (i.e. pastors/elders) and whether to officiate gay marriages. We are still wrestling with the theological side, not the legal or compassion side. In the interview he did not ask how I would vote as a citizen, he asked if I as a pastor would officiate a wedding. That’s a theological question.
We are not trying to dodge the issue forever, we simply haven’t felt qualified to be spokespersons on the theological side of this issue thus far. We know that the time to speak up is getting closer. Our Elder Team had it’s regular meeting last night. We discussed the issue at length. We do not want to be simply reactionary, we want to be intentional, and are choosing to reflect, pray, and study the topic deeply over the next few months. At which time we will make a decision.
So, I don’t know if that makes you feel better or not. But I do hear the heart behind your concerns, and sympathize with them. Being a place that embraces and attempts to integrate belief and critical-thinking has it’s challenges, and often puts us in places harder to navigate than simply ‘picking-a-side’ would be.
Thanks for your push-back.
I found this to be a well written article that reminds us all of the power the pulpit holds. Too many follow blindly along without questioning even the most irrational, hateful and sometimes dangerous messages that are set forth from that platform. I admire the path that the Catalyst Church has chosen to practice their faith through “no strings attached” social justice issues. I personally don’t participate in organized religion but until God looks me in the eye and tells me I have it all wrong, I’m going to try to continue to live my life with love and compassion for my fellow man… no strings attached.
Seems like an atheist spin, making the intellectual christians seem cool while demonizing the uneducated religious. I don’t know if this is an accurate portrayal of Catalyst. Do they need to be reminded that Jesus spoke more about hell than heaven? He said, “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword”. Jesus said, “Do not marvel if they hate you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as their own. But because I called you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.”
We are not here to make the world a better place. We are here to prepare for the Kingdom of God. Social justice for Christ’s sake, not the world’s sake. I hope Davis stays in the Word and leans not on his own understanding.
Most interesting – so now John sees the New Jerusalem, the WOMAN, the Lamb’s Wife – yes, the Bride of Christ is referred to as the WOMAN, the Lamb’s Wife in their eternal state (Christ the Groom and the Church the Bride), so vividly described. The opposite of the Bride of Christ is the “Mother of Harlots” – indeed, the Bible presents a “tale of TWO WOMEN” –
So, tell me, the State (at least California’s courts) appears headed to a NO on Prop. 8 – just as Pastor Dan. Sad, but it appears brother Dan was cowered into his declaration by the persistence of a died-in-the-wool evangelical (so-called) turned gay who apparently supported a “sit-in” at the Catalyst “shadow” Church but who mercifully was “pushed back” by Dan who came out of the shadows (note: not the closet); hence, the “sit-in” appears to have fizzled–all this within days over two pints of beer?
Now cometh the reckoning – will the Prop. 8 elders, et al (they’ve got two months to decide) whether it will be Adam and Steve or Adam and Eve – “to be or not to be – that is the question!” Will Pastor Dan and the pro-Prop. 8 (i.e., vote NO on Prop. 8 – same sex marriage is O.K. around these parts) elders (1) elect to bring in gays/lesbians into their leadership; and (2) will the Catalyst pastorate/leadership bequeath and sanctify same sex marriage?
Tough one, isn’t it church folks – especially, Catalyst church folks? Talk about a “coming out party!” Sounds like you’ve been “Bushwacked” – “You’re either for us or against us” – having been forced by the gay community “to be or not to be” isn’t a lot of fun and games – but if theological Dan decides to become a man and face the WOMAN, the Lamb’s Wife, he’ll have h-e-double-toothpicks to pay for it from the gay community and if he throws the fightin’ fundies off the Catalyst Craft, he’ll have the same – amazing – damned if you do and damned if you don’t – so much for neutrality!
If you google “Beer Me Jesus” you’ll get to see the current feeding frenzy taking place on the net. “Wifey” isn’t happy…it appears the above writer had it pegged. And now this thing is going way beyond Humboldt County.
I’m wondering, just wondering, if perhaps, Mendes, who is a self-declared gay-atheist-anti-theist-activist who wrote the Beer Me Jesus piece, and Activision, who at least directed people to the Craigs List boycott/sit-in of Catalyst, are in cahoots?
Looks like you might have gotten framed Dan. Like backed into a corner big time. Maybe you should have taken a class on how to deal with the media; especially, the gay media types? Don’t you know that the gays know how to play the “media agenda card” way better than, let’s say, an Emergent Church Pastor?
Shall we pray…?
Dear Catalyst Leadership,
You’ve got some awesome guts! It’s so refreshing to see people stepping out and challenging the body here in Humboldt. Let’s all be honest with each other and honest with God and continue to ask question’s that few dare to ask and grapple these thoughts, feelings, and human emotions. God gave us these senses for a reason. We’re all on this journey together! Keep up the good works in Him and through Him!
@ J. Smith, not in cahoots, just concerned.
J Smith,
Apparently if someone supports gay rights — they’re gay? As my GIRLFRIEND and I read your comment we found your speculation of a gay “media agenda” rather humorous.
The Craig’s List boycott was created by whoever, or whatever, Activison is. I was slow to find out about it. (I was informed of the boycott’s existence by a Catalyst member, a coworker, and then the editor of the NCJ) Once I had a chance, I did however speak out against the foolishness of such a boycott. (carefully read the pertaining comments above) After doing so Activision mistook me for an anti-gay Christian. It seems then that you mistook me for an anti-Christian gay. Neither of you have it quite right.
Although I’m honored that you think I’m capable of masterminding the grandiose conspiracy that you’re “just wondering” about, I must admit that I’m not that clever. I’m also confused as how disagreeing with Activision would be of any tactical use if that was part of my “agenda.”
Dan and I had a conversation. The point of the article was to spark more conversations, which it most certainly has, not to “frame” Dan. (The words that came out of Dan’s mouth were his. Verbatim.)
It seems a lot of the conversations sparked by the article thus far have been about homosexuality and its compatibility with the church. The topic is very contextual within the country’s current political and theological discourse, so this shouldn’t be too much of a surprise. May I remind you, that as topical as the “gay” issue is, it’s only a part of the article. There were many other issues raised. If you’re still in doubt, I will be at the Catalyst church this Sunday night to answer any questions you may have.
As a bible believing Christian I’m both encouraged by this progressive community of believers and frustrated with them. Why can’t they stand on the Word without shame? ALL lust is sin, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual. ALL is forgiven, but not so that we can continue in sin but that we can be forgiven and transformed. Everyone is bisexual, born to sin. All sexuality is choice, whether hetero or homo. No one who continues in sin is fit for church leadership, whether homosexual sin, polygamous sin, heterosexual sin by lust. Yes, many great men of faith were polygamous, but read the word: They went through times of sinful living that brought them great trouble. May the real christians STAND UP. Stand on the Word of God without shame.
Hey, ease up Mendes. Seems obvious, doesn’t it, a person must be black if they support civil rights? So, since you’re a self-proclaimed gay-agenda supporter, you must be gay? Go figure, interviewing Pastor Dan and not having an agenda like a good objective pundit. Sure, “verbatim” like pieces of a puzzle…it’s how you put them together, isn’t it? Now, what’s this business about saying Activision “created the boycott of Catalyst?” Activision simply posted a link to Craigs List? Be real here – it’s obvious to all that your article “sparked” discussion about the hot topic of the day–prop. 8. Duh, everybody knows that the “gay agenda” is huge – and especially you should know since you’re into taking a big position on the issue – for “so-called gay rights.” No, you backed Dan into a corner and you know it – certainly on this issue. It wasn’t until Activision threatened the boycott that Pastor Dan “backed off” and said he’d vote NO on 8. We still don’t know if Activision will call off the sit-in/boycott, notwithstanding your injunction to do so…hard to believe you and Activision aren’t doing a two-step here.
“I’m both encouraged … and frustrated with them.”
I too find that other people are imperfect, but as a self-professed “bible believing Christian,” Albee should have an advantage in the matter.
thank you for the article, deric. very well done. so i wonder, why does catalyst even associate themselves with christianity then? why aren’t they just the Gathering of Change Makers?
The reason catalyst associates itself with Christianity is because the reason for making change is Jesus Christ and God as revealed through Him. I don’t speak for the rest of Catalyst, but the reason I am attracted to change is because Jesus Christ died for me and rose again. I can abandon my own selfishness because I have in Him the hope of eternal life. The point of Catalyst, as I have understood it while going there, is that we allow Jesus Christ to use us as agents of change. That we allow our faith to change and transform us, and become reflections, so to speak, of God’s love. Living beacons on Earth.
Catalyst is hereby charged with lack of dogma.
@ Albee, when was it that you decided to be straight? I find it interesting that whether or not homosexuality is right or wrong often comes down to whether or not it is a “choice”. Isn’t it always a choice to truly love someone? Should then love itself be invalidated, because it is a choice? The bible has very little to say about homosexuality, and where it is addressed, the regional and cultural context of that time must be the backdrop in which the scripture is interpreted. Like Dan says, Jesus never mentions homosexuality, I do disagree with his statement that it ads “unclarity”.
To “quote” scripture: Mark 12:28-31 (NRSV)
One of the scribes came near and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, he asked him, “Which commandment is the first of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; 30you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ 31The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”
@ Dan, perhaps this passage will aid you and your “elders” in deciding whether or not you can include homosexuals in your church leadership? I applaud your discussion, while I also find it disgusting. Did you have this much deliberation when deciding whether or not women should be able to hold the title of pastor? According to the bible the male is a naturally superior leader. The sit-in that was suggested is a referendum on your use of sacred community space that does not discriminate, HumBrews, to conduct meetings in which gay leaders are not welcome. The question is, would HumBrews allow a church to congregate on their premises that does not allow minority groups to hold leadership? By the way, are any people of color represented in your leadership? Or am I asking another litmus test question?
@activision. I find that the way you are trying to badger Dan and force him to a decision is unfair, and it lowers you to the level of those who try to badger gays and lesbians to conforming to how they see the world. You can’t expect everybody to agree with you and you won’t change anyone’s mind by attacking them. We need to be patient and understanding if we wish to bring people over to our point of view. Forcing people has never and will never work. If you don’t allow people the time to process and come to their own decisions, how can you take the higher ground.
I also suggest you go to this website:http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
You will find much better biblical support for what you believe there. I don’t think that the Mark scripture is enough to sway the theological debate. This website will inform you on what the debate is within the church, but beware, it is very general.
Force? I consider my comments to be encouraging. Is Dan so flimsy that he needs your defense? I have offered nothing to this discussion that I consider an attack. I have also addressed that accusation and made it clear that is not my intent. If a car is heading off of a cliff, how long do you have to think about what to do? This article is Dan’s cliff, how long will he wait to course correct?
I LOVE that this is called “Beer Me, Jesus”
@Activision – As a Christian in this community I want you to know that there are some of us out here who really do love the gay community. Please don’t lump us all into one solitary category of gay haters. Yes, gays have been and continue to be judged, hated, ridiculed, etc. for years by the church. It’s despicable, and we need to take responsibility for our part in the matter. I can count on two hands the number of GLBTQ friends I have here locally. Believe me, I know very few people in the Christian community who have this many friends in that community. I have remained friends with these people for years because I don’t judge them, I love them the way they are, and I don’t try to change them. I don’t push my beliefs and agendas on them, but I love them with Jesus’ love.
I’m sorry for the hurt you obviously endured in the church under “Christians.”
Will you forgive us?
There are only four gospels in the Bible, so it’s not all that much to read. What fuels this dogmatic atheist proclamation that “Jesus was all about love and peace” is beyond me. It’s not in the Bible. Jesus was radical, demanding, unbending, impossible, and accepted everyone as they were. Both the fundamentalists and the liberals miss the point. Jesus did not say, as the fundamentalists assert, “get your act together and I’ll let you in”. Nor did he say, as the liberals assert, “anything goes”. He preached rigid, impossible-to-follow doctrine, and he accepted and loved without condition everyone.This notion that the Church is an institution of the world, that it has to change however the world tells it to change is baseless atheist dogma. The atheist presumption to dictate what the Church should do and be is every bit as arrogant and unreasoning as Pat Robertson. The atheist proclamation of which lines of reason are acceptable and which are not, is as unreasonable and intolerant as the most fundamentalist congregation. Atheists tolerate any religion, so long as it is atheist and secular. It’s insane how atheists who fancy themselves open-minded and tolerant are in fact close-minded and intolerant. If somebody wants to believe in God, let them. Don’t try to jam them into your atheist mold. You want a nice blend of sound Christian teaching, sound reason and unconditional love, go to a mainline, traditional church, not a fundamentalist Baptist or Glide Memorial.This Catalyst sounds like a pretty nice church, but it’s hard to tell through the atheist dogmatic filter of the author.
@Diane: Do you have any idea how condescending you sound??? ” These People?”, and what, you want a brownie button for how many of “them” are your friends?! The whole point is that there should be no distinction between any one at all, people are people, period. you sound like someone in the 60’s proclaiming how many black friends they have, do you see the correlation?
Ray,
It’s impossible to be a “dogmatic atheist.” Atheism cannot be defined as a religion. Atheism simply means absence of belief due to insufficient evidence. Calling it dogmatic is like saying nonsmoking is a habit. “Atheist” is a title created by the religious as a way to describe nonbelievers. Being called an atheist is like being called a non-astronaut. It awkward, however, it’s the accepted norm for describing the position of someone who doesn’t believe in God.
Seems you have drastically miscalculated my view of Christianity.The bias of believing Jesus was about peace and love that you conjured from my article, is not how I view Jesus. I personally feel that Christianity is based on immoral principles, the highest of which is vicarious redemption. Literal Christianity is totalitarian. Since there are varying levels of literal and metaphorical interpretation of the Bible, Christianity has split into thousands of denominations. Like most things in life, it’s a spectrum.
All I did was put two different views of Christianity next to each other and let the reader decide what resonates with them. From the contrasts between all of the above comments it appears that everyone, from the extreme liberal to the most rigid conservative, has taken something different away from the article.
@Lynn – Most Christians I know don’t even have one gay friend, and they refuse to make an effort to reach out to or connect with the gay community. In fact, some shun it altogether. At least I’m trying! – at least I don’t judge and hate. Jeez, so sorry if I offended your liberal sensitivities. You create a “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t” scenario for Christians. It seems like it’s just never going to be good enough for some of you.
I was raised in the church to believe that gays were all sinners going to hell, untouchables, etc. My parents are also very prejudice, but I don’t adhere to their beliefs. I do feel I’ve come a LONG way in putting these stereotypes aside and loving everyone. I don’t take credit for that however. Any good in my life I credit to Jesus. I don’t feel I’m better than anyone else, and I’m not certainly not trying to rack up “brownie points.” I was simply making the statement that I have friends in the gay community – and I love all of those friends and would protect them fiercely if any Christian came against them in any way. Honestly, I find some in the gay community far more accepting than many of my Christian friends.
Here is Wikipedia’s social definition of distinction:”(social) is a social force that places different values on different individuals. (social, class, and style)” Isn’t the fact that I befriend the gay community obvious that I DON’T make a distinction between them and others?
I knew I was taking a risk posting on this forum. It seems like there’s a huge double standard when it comes to tolerance. Those outside of the Christian community expect us to be tolerant of everyone else, but when it comes to you being tolerant of us we’re out of luck.
Diane: I thought your comment was big-hearted. Thanks for writing.
@activision, good question. The “when” is not a single moment but an evolution of many choices leading to habits that become lifestyle which becomes personality. I became hetero through social repression. I learned to fetishize the image of the female in this consumer society. Just as any homosexual, I lived in sin, selfishly believing the other was out there to complete me. “When” I came to Jesus I humbled myself and stopped the repression. Rather than continuing in repression (I can stop doing bad and do good) I repented (I can’t stop sinning and do good because I alone don’t have the strength).
Jesus isn’t interested in right and wrong, but pride and humility. He isn’t looking for dogooders vs. sucky people. He is looking for people with humility.
“Should then love itself be invalidated, because it is a choice?”
Choice is what makes love possible. God is not a rapist. He can’t force you to love him. If love were not a choice, it would be invalidated. That is why God allows us to reject him, so that love can be possible.
“The bible has very little to say about homosexuality,”
To look at a person with lust is sin. I’d say Jesus spoke volumes about homosexuality in his sermon on the mount.
Lucky for Jesus, he’s got Albee speaking for him.
@Deric, You’ve put two extremes of Christianity next to each other. An interesting exercise, but it reveals little about central Christianity, since neither extreme embraces much of the central mass. Don’t confuse the center of Christianity with the loudest faction. The neo-fundamentalist extreme is very loud, but most Christians find them an embarrassment. Most Christians find the liberal extreme lacking in Christian substance. You’ve put Red next to Blue and asked us which shade of Green we prefer.
Levi – so basically you’re saying that because Jesus didn’t say that “molesting children is wrong,” it’s not that important to God?
J. Alora – Jesus never claimed to be a philosopher, He claimed to be God. The fact that a “committed atheist” doesn’t find much wrong with Catalyst speaks volumes.
@Diane: i AM a Christian, who was raised pretty much as you were, prejudice parents and all. So please don’t lump me into some neat little “liberal box”, in order to make yourself feel better. My point is that ALL human beings have the same desires and dreams, and ALL should have equal rights, period. Why is it the churches business at all?!
“After a couple hours of conversation and several pints, Davis had a change of heart.”
Dan, put down the beer! Seriously, man, act like a pastor! The scriptures encourage us to be alert, sober-minded, to keep our head in all situations, and to always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks us to give the reason for the hope that we have.
Can you honestly say you did that?
@Lynn – I have no need to make myself feel better. Your initial point was in error because I was using “these people” and “them” to refer to the subject of the sentence, (GLBTQ community.) Check out a basic grammar book – this is proper usage of the English language.
I actually agree with you in regards to the church being involved with the state! Surprised? I think that the church needs to get out of the state’s business and should have done so long ago. Jesus made it quite clear that it wasn’t his mission to be a political king much to the chagrin of his followers. They were looking for a political leader/king to get them out of the mess they were in with the Romans. This article makes it quite evident that the church messing with the state’s business has gotten the church into a huge quagmire. Many Christians believe in God’s kingdom coming here on earth through the government – called kingdom now theology. It doesn’t take much scriptural education to realize that this kind of thinking is completely off base and doesn’t line up with Jesus’ message in any way.
@Diane: It may be proper English but it comes off sounding a bit arrogant, do you refer to your other groups of friends in these terms? are your church friends also those people to you? are your girl friends them? Just check your heart, none of us are perfect and when toads fly from our mouths it is a good time for self reflection not retaliation. I am not sure why your words struck me so deeply and caused me to react the way i did, trust me I have been soul searching my own heart……and spewing hate does not solve anything or move people forward. I am sorry for being overly passionate. I am finished here…….
@Lynn – I don’t go to church anymore, so I have no church friends – can’t put me in that box. Actually, I tried to stay friends with church people, but most of them wanted nothing to do with me after I left even though I’m still a Christian. As for your questions – I would refer to friends who were in a specific kind of community or group in the exact same way because it’s normal and accurate to use the English language in this manner, and it does not denote prejudice for most.
I never said I was perfect – I apologized to Activision because of what the church has done – that includes ME Why you tried to nullify this in such a volatile way is beyond me…
I am glad we did find some common ground. I’m choosing to end this conversation in a positive light and focus on the good that came out of it rather than the bad.
Peace
“Will you forgive us?”
Sorry Diane, looks like a thumbs down. The good news is that you don’t have to spend time amongst the saintly anymore.
Joel – Yeah, I figured it was a no, but I did my part, (on this topic anyway.) Thanks for the chuckle.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Jesus said what he meant and meant what He said. Unless people open thier Bibles and read them in context, they will continue to be decieved. JESUS is the ONLY WAY..
Book of John Chapter 3:16-20
We should all know what to believe, why we believe and be able to defend what we believe. And if you truly believe it, stand firm and not be wishywashy.
Pastor Mike, I truly believe that i would never goeth to your church……
Matthew 10:32″Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.
34″Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn
” ‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
Dan, talking about hell isn’t boring, it’s what Jesus did. Should your church simply do social justice work and keep their faith a secret? We don’t work to convert. God does the conversion. We work because of Jesus and for his glory, looking for an opportunity to share our faith. “How will they believe unless they hear the word?”
“…talking about hell isn’t boring…”
For you maybe.
No Joel, arguing on the internet and petty insults in the name of social justice is your idea of a good time. That is what I call boring. To each his own.
Amen.
I found this piece to be odd for the NCJ, which usually prides itself on good journalism. This piece, however, struck me as flawed. 1) The author is an atheist–and that becomes a focus of the piece. Why? Why not just write a piece on a local church and the work its doing, the people its serving, and its beliefs. Instead, it seems like it borders on satire about Catalyst, particularly the “Beer Me, Jesus” title. 2) The piece gets sidetracked in the section on the conservative church, which seems utterly unrelated to Catalyst. 3) The piece winds up being a larger social discussion about gays, which although interesting, winds up diverting from the topic at hand. Overall, it seemed to be one of the weakest NCJ pieces I’ve read.
ALBEE— a little yin for your yang.
Mathew 15:8: These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain: their teachings are but rules taught by men.
26:52: Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
John 13:34: A new command I give you: Love one another as I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.
They will believe by the love you show not by uselessly chatting them up……
@Catalyst – Where did you go? I thought you were going to be “entering into conversation.” The last time we heard from one of you was a few days ago, and many conversations have transpired since then. Did the push back get a bit too toasty for you? It’s really not a great time for inconsistency. Maybe the “Elder Team” is off pontificating about the issues at hand while downing a few pints…
All have fallen short of the glory of God. We, as sinners, cannot cast stones, as we live in glass bubbles. We live in these bubbles and tend to believe that makes us safe. In our bubbles, we find is easy to point fingers. “Look at THOSE people and THEIR dirty bubbles.” It is silly to quarrel over petty things. The bigger issues are underneath the surface.
God, the Creator of all things, walked amongst us as a human being. His name was Jesus. He lived a relatively short life, and He died. He rose again from the dead. What is your view of these things? What do you believe?
Jesus taught some radical ideas. Sexuality is an issue that He talked of with absolutely no preference of gender. Lust is sin, regardless of the object. You can lust after a guy, girl, food, drugs, or any other object that bring you pleasure. Why is lust against the law of God? Why is covetousness against God’s law? Do you have an answer? What do you believe?
The church of Christ is a body of people, not an organization. When Jesus began His church, He stated, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,” (Matt 28:19) He gave no discriminatory measures. Holiness, however, is a core principle for Christian leadership. It is what separates one from hypocrisy, the weakest point of any church. What do you believe?
How can you represent the beliefs of a body of people if you cannot uphold those beliefs? If you openly live a sinful lifestyle, church leadership is not a good place for you. Is this wrong? Should the church be more tolerant? Should we allow our leaders to present themselves as hypocrites?
Some argue we must “love” those who live in sin, show them compassion, accept them as they are. Certainly we shouldn’t condone their behavior, nor sanction it. Shall we then use our offerings to purchase cigarettes and alcoholic beverages for our patrons? We could profit with sales of such. This could make such a sinful practice quite justified, right?
Your are not a bad person. You do bad things. We all do. Only God can judge you. Your actions, however, will determine your place. Some of you will not be chosen to watch children, with good reason. Some of you will not be given control of large sums of money, as you’d not do well with that responsibility. If you are going to be in leadership of the church, you must show others the path of a strongly devout Christian (meaning “Christ-like”).
And you, what is you view of this?
@flying squirrel, love it. Let’s keep our ministries balanced. Which is what I am confident the Catalyst leadership will find. If they don’t stand on the Word, they will fall.
It’s nice to see all the other churches rushing to the defense of their Christian brethren at Catalyst against the negative thoughts in this blog. Oh that hasn’t happened? So that must be why the rest of us want nothing to do with church and religion. With every scripture quoted in this thread trying to debunk Catalyst heretics, ears and hearts close. Keep tearing each other apart, Christians. One of you is bound to be right.
woah Doug, that has happened. It is wonderful that Christians are both defending and encouraging Catalyst to seek the Word. I thought the comments here had been positive for the most part, although I wasn’t pleased that FlyingSquirrel mocked a respected local pastor. But that occasionally happens. The church is often just like the world although this forum is nowhere near what you might find on any rantorraves. Are you looking for an excuse not to go to church. I’m sure you can find other reasons, but this one doesn’t hold much weight.
Actually Doug, what we see here is a mini-history of Christianity. Our scriptures and our pastors often say different things, and people respond to this affront by starting their own churches. This may shame existing churches into doing more and judging less for a while. Or not. That’s history.
The questionable foundation of the article to me was an atheist declaring his personal theistic definition of what a Christian must be, like the Pope does. Dude, that’s why there’s a million flavors, because we don’t agree! Your ideology is as invalid as every other one I reject.
Incidentally, this is why Christianity doesn’t go extinct. It’s all kinds of things, from Saint Francis to Dr Strangelove, The best bedfellows are strange ones, which spawn genetic vigor. Christianity is vastly bigger than anyone’s ideas about it.
There are no arguments. There is only what we say and what the bible says. Denominations fall by over-emphasizing one scripture over others. The bible is well balanced and we must stay in the Word to remain balanced. If I detect Catalyst is overemphasizing love while forgetting Jesus’ boldness and rebuke, I might offer a verse to shed a new light on the issue.
Our scriptures do not say contradictory things. They have many paradoxes that cause us to dig deeper to discern the truth, but they do not contradict each other.
We need to all focus on the MAIN THING..Jesus died for each and everyone of us so that we would all have an oppertunity to spend eternity with Him. Jesus did not come to condemn but to teach us unconditional love. We are to love one another and share about the life saving blood that was spilled for us.The ground is level at the foot of the cross and we are all equally guilty of sin. That is what makes grace and mercy so fantastic. I love each and everyone of you because you are all loved by God our creator.. Belief in Jesus is a relationship with Him, not what club we belong to.
Why does everyone have a problem with the author of the article being transparent about being a nonbeliever?
Would it have been better if a Christian had written it? Then it would have been like, “is Jesus great, or is he the greatest?”
Yeah, that’s good journalism.
The articles statement declaring that one must believe in Jesus to be Christian is not an atheist being like the pope. Nonbeleviers and believers alike know that that’s a historical claim of Christianity. From there Christianity runs the full spectrum of being good and bad.
That’s why few of you agree in these comments.
Are there any nonjudgmental Christians out there? Anyone wanting to show love for everyone on this page? At least the Dude abides.
@Sarah – Can you clarify which statements you see as being judgmental between the Christian posters? I see a lot of debating going on, which is a good thing because it shows we’re open to discussion finally, (although some have a difficult time being open to new perspectives and ideas.) Jesus himself was an excellent debater, (especially with religious Pharisaical folks), and had a masterful way of using parables and allegories to get his message across in a non judgmental loving way. He didn’t call us to sit off on the side lines and avoid heated conversations. (I don’t see you saying this, but just clarifying my point.) He called us to love one another unconditionally. There is a fine line between disagreeing with someone and playing holy spirit in their lives and judging them.
I feel like a lot of Christians confuse the commandment of loving one another to mean we shouldn’t speak up when we disagree on an issue and will even take it so far as to insinuate that we’re supposed to be door mats. Then when we do disagree with someone on an issue we’re accused of having a “bad attitude”, being “bitter” (oooh, better not go there folks!), etc. which is then extrapolated to be sinful behavior. We’re allowed to be angry or passionate about a topic and “sin not”; even Jesus did that! (Just look up what he did in the temple.)
I think the main reason people don’t want to be Christians is because of our self righteous and hypocritical ways. I’ve seen few on this page admit a wrong, or take responsibility – but I can’t judge their hearts, only God is the true judge. If you’re going to call someone into account Jesus said you better take the log out of your eye first.
@Pastor Mike – Excellent word. It comes down to loving without judgment which can be difficult to do when you’re under attack.
@Doug – Your comment about Christians tearing one another apart is the key reason I left church. The church has become an institution over the centuries, and man made institutions will fail every time. At their core they have nothing to do with who Jesus is, but are chalked full of religion, hypocrisy and rules. Many believe a reformation is occurring in the church right now that will change the face of Christianity forever. Let’s face it – the way we’ve been doing church for centuries is NOT working, (obviously), and it’s the reason Catalyst is grappling with these issues. I think it’s honorable that they’re trying to change the way it’s been done, however, they’re still an institution at their core and no matter how many outward changes they make they can’t change their true identity.
Please don’t write us all off completely yet; we’re imperfect and are slow to turn. We’ve let a lot of people down but I think the time is coming when we’re going to be free from religion and able to show Jesus’ true message to the world…at least that is my hope.
“By the way, are any people of color represented in your leadership? Or am I asking another litmus test question?”
Hi Activision.
To answer your question. There are actually about 5 of us. 🙂
This post is intended for Christian believers at Catalyst
When Catalyst first came into the community, I was excited. I had hopes that this cutting edge church, with its youthful pastors, could really have an impact on their community for Christ. I read through their Statement of Beliefs, which mirrored Rock Harbor’s (the church they came from – see link below) and wholeheartedly agreed. I referred many young people there, who lived in Arcata and were looking for a good church. Several of my good friends went there and were excited about the ministry and how they were reaching out.
Over time, the focus changed and it became more about Social Justice than making disciples for Christ and their stated beliefs changed. On their web page, about what they believe (see link below), there is only a list of questions and no mention of what they really believe, as a church. On that page, there is no reference to Scripture. So where does their authority come from? If the Life Groups don’t include prayer or the Bible, they are just another social gathering of friends.
As Christians, we are called to grow in our personal relationship to Christ so we can better understand His Word and have a sensitivity to the Holy Spirit that will move us to make a change in our world. We are to love all people regardless of where they come from. The hope is that they will see something different in us and want to know what that is. Embracing sin is something Jesus never instructed us to do. He loved people but expected them to leave their sin to walk with Him; if, in fact, they wanted to be His disciples. He offered them a life of peace, hope and promise. Some accepted it, others did not. It is still our choice.
Dan Davis is a young, charismatic, visionary whom people find easy to follow, but he is off track. There have been many such leaders who have led people astray, even resulting in death in extreme cases. Pastors aren’t perfect, they are men. My pastor encourages us to read the Word daily, so we can know what it says. And then he encourages us to make sure his messages are in line with God’s Word, and challenge him if they aren’t. I know solid Christians who attended Catalyst and attempted to do this with Dan, but he resisted correction. They are no longer there. If the message is not based on the Word of God, then it becomes the message of an imperfect man.
As a Christian church, I still believe there is great potential for Catalyst, but not under the leadership of Dan Davis. He should gracefully step down and spend some time in the dessert, seeking God. The leadership at Catalyst would be prudent in seeking outside counsel from wise, godly leaders they respect; either locally or elsewhere. Perhaps Rock Harbor would be a great place to start.
Rock Harbor Beliefs: http://www.rockharbor.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=50&Itemid=80
Catalyst Beliefs:
http://provokechange.org/what-we-believe
Let’s all go to Cindy’s church!!!
Uh oh, you didn’t tell us where it is. Darn.
@Goff, Cindy obviously doesn’t care which Church you go to, just that whatever Church you’re going to focuses on the Word above works, not the other way around.
@ Albee and Cindy…Right on! Thats it, its not about the church, its about the truth of the Word of God…Proverbs says its a fool who rejects correction. Its not about the Pastor, were all imperfect, its about the body of believers on the same journey headed to the Kingdom of God. If someone had a life saving cure I would certainly want to know about it or to be told I’m going the wrong way to get it. Out of love for my fellowman, I would love for them to know the God who loves us and want to save us. Most of all, as a Christian, I would never want to block anyone from seeing the True and Loving God<>
@Cindy – You said this post is for Christian believers at Catalyst. Um, you’re on a public forum, so you probably should have e-mailed them privately. Respectfully, I’m going to speak my mind. Although I agree with you on some points it’s not your job, (or the job of anyone else), to decide whether or not Dan should step down from leadership. This is simply your opinion, but how do you really know what God is leading him or the other leaders in the church to do? If the holy spirit indwells Dan, (which I believe to be the case because he has a confession of faith), then the holy spirit is fully capable of showing him to step down from leadership – or do you not trust the holy spirit in him? Who made you the spokes’ person for God?? (What does “spend time in the desert” mean, by the way – I’m curious. Is he supposed to head off to the Mojave for a month?? That really sounds like it would give him some great down time where God could speak to him!) Then you make the herculean leap from what’s going on now with Catalyst to a Jim Jones’ type scenario, wow. We’re getting into Christian cult territory here which is leaps and bounds from where Catalyst is in my opinion. Having been in a Christian cult at one time I can safely say they are no where even close! Also, how do you know the Catalyst leadership isn’t seeking outside Godly council? They might be, who knows? I see a lot of judging going on here as someone else mentioned. When all else fails start crucifying the pastor – that will do a lot of good!
Pastor Mike/ ALBEE: Please except my sincere apology…… i had no intention to mock, but just wanted to bring to light that we don’t live in the Elizabethan era any longer and most of us don’t speak Shakespearean language…….:) your heart is in the right place, even if your words are antiquated!
flying squirrel, I accept your apology though none is necessary, I had just happend to have a King James Bible in front of me at the time. I don’t even think I could consistantly speak that way :), I usually use a New Living Translation.
I pesonally think this has been a great dialogue between people, we should all be able to discuss these things. Jesus said if you seek Me you will find Me. My prayer is that someone will see the Heart of God in all this and desire to read the Bible for themselves to see what it does say…Jesus Loves All of You!!
Cindy thankyou for your boldness in directing your comments to those who profess to be Christians at Catalyst.
Galatians 1:6-10 The New King James Version.
?I marvel that you are turning away so soon ??from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, ??which is not another; but there are some ??who trouble you and want to ??pervert ??the gospel of Christ. ?But even if ?we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be ?accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you ?than what you have received, let him be accursed.
Cindy is incouraging you to read your bible, whatever version. Check was is being said to you against the scriptures.
Jesus also said that once has to be Born Again to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Dan what we as Followers of Jesus Christ of Nazareth are asking you is to preach and teach the whole gospel, not just those verses that you like. Line upon line precept upon precept. Then let the people decided.
@Bob – The first response to this article points you to the Catalyst website, where Dan responds to most of the issues raised here. The media has a way of putting words in your mouth, so to speak, and projecting the message they want the world to see, i.e. their agenda. If you’re not skilled in dealing with this, your intent doesn’t come through and your message becomes twisted. Go to the website first, then start firing out verses.
Correction: The link is posted further down the page and is: http://provokechange.org/Response_to_Article
Diane, I took the time to read the article and to listen to several of his teachings. He’s talking about a different Jesus than Jesus of Nazareth! You just can’t get around that.
@Bob – If you’re going to say that it would be prudent to list the points you’re in disagreement with…you’re basically calling him a heretic. That’s a pretty big claim, back it up – where is your evidence??
I wish that this article had at least shed some light on what Catalyst is and what Catalyst isn’t. I would love to be sitting here defending myself or Catalyst but instead I am waiting for an accusation of something that we actually believe. I can assure you that the description of my church and my life group is nothing like my experience in either. So if you want to know, drop by sometime see it for yourself and then make up your mind.
P.S.- there were literally thousands of Bibles at that life group about ten paper versions, logos bible software and biblegateway.com.
Dianne, not to make to personal between you and I, but I don’t find in any of Dan’s teaching that he even attempts to teach
2Timothy 2-8 The New King James Version.
which reads:
But know this, that ??in the last days ??perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, ??unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, ??traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, ??c?having a form of godliness but ??denying its power. And ??from such people turn away! ?For ?of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, always learning and never able ??to come to the knowledge of the truth
Did you see (various lusts) no one gets off. Jesus is talking to those who are His disciples (Born Again). If you are not Born Again, He was not talking to you!
1 John 2:15-19
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Each additional post confirms way I left religion and am now a nonbeliever. All Christians cherry pick the Bible to mean what they want. They’ll deny it. They’ll tell you that it’s Gods word. They’ll tell you that they know what God’s will is. Interestingly, NO ONE interprets the Bible literally. If you do, then explain how you justify believing a way to solve rape is to force marriage, or that adulterers should be stoned to death.
Many of you are Christians. Anyone Christian who claims to know that Catalyst is not doing God’s work is playing God by choosing to speak for him. Those people are liars and a heretics.
Catalyst whether or not considered Christian, is acting morally when they give to their community. I hope for the sake of humanity that more churches follow their lead.
I can’t say whether or not their is a God, but I can usually tell who’s honest and who’s bullshtiting. If heaven and hell exist, and Catalyst is going to hell, I would rather be their with them than in heaven with those who don’t see God in helping their community.
For the record: Bibles could have been present, as in that I have a Bible on my bookshelf directly behind me right now. The Bible however was never quoted, referenced, or brought into the discussion during the life group. Not once.
I’ve seen Catalyst members break a sweat in service of the community, and I’m glad that they’re there.
@Bob – Ok, have it your way. Seems you are more interested in throwing out the heretic label than anything else. I was looking for a discussion with you, but it seems you are only able to conduct a monologue. I spent many a year under this “one way dialogue” and simply don’t have time for it anymore. I tried…peace out
@Goff, I do believe you and the leaders at Catalyst are true Christians, perhaps a little immature but nonetheless sincere in your desire to serve God for His kingdom.
I do think you are treading into denominational and even cult territory by believing that only Jesus quotes have authority while the rest of the bible is just a good read with some useful insights. I’ve heard the word preached at Catalyst. I’ve been led in worship by you and was with you all. I did however get a personal word from God about Dan at a time I didn’t even know him that I believe was confirmed by this article and his response to it.
@Albee – You say – “I do think you are treading into denominational and even cult territory by believing that only Jesus quotes have authority while the rest of the bible is just a good read with some useful insights.”
Please provide quotes/evidence for this. I read the rebuttal on the Catalyst website and didn’t come away with this. Proof first, accusations later please. Also, the cult label isn’t going to hold water unless they are telling their people not to associate with others and becoming isolated, which I definitely don’t see happening…there are also other qualifiers as well…check out the Kingdom of Cults book.
All: Due to an innocent computer snafu too boring and technical to explain, Will Startare’s comment at 7:12 p.m. was originally, and accidentally, attributed to Andrew Goff.
Humbo, the NCJ Web robot, regrets the error.
Hi Diane,
Levi Mogg had an interesting post, “What I believe makes Catalyst significantly different from much of the Western tradition of Christianity is the emphasis on the teachings of Jesus, rather than the teachings of Paul.”
I have no problem with the many denominations of Christianity today, only the divisions caused by over emphasis of one part of the bible above another. You don’t get to pick and choose what part of the bible has authority. It has to be read in the context of itself and the culture of the time. So this is how Catalyst sets itself apart as a denomination of Christianity.
What we see however in the cults of Christianity such as Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Catholicism is putting man made text above the Holy inspired Word of God. So when Dan says that Jesus Words have more authority. What happens when Dan mistakenly draws a false conclusion from Jesus words that contradicts the rest of the bible. If that were to happen, then Catalyst would be going into cult status in my opinion by what I qualify a cult of christianity as. I don’t mean to throw accusations, just saying that it could happen.
Goff, really not cool to go make fun of a sincere person trying to help your church. FlyingSquirrel had the decency to apologize to the pastor. I suggest you do the same to Cindy. They don’t need it but perhaps you do. Freud used to teach his early patients to laugh at the people that disgust them, but later repented of this in his later work. I trust you are on a path to maturity as well.
Diane
I looked back through my postings and I never once called anyone a heretic or used the term to refer to anyone. I have simply quoted the bible. Your argument or disagreement is with God.
Deric by your own words, “The Bible however was never quoted, referenced, or brought into the discussion during the life group. Not once”
Do you understand what you just admitted to. Christianity if founded on What? And for the record, denomination were invented by man. I don’t have religion with Jesus, I have a relationship with my Lord and Savior. Any Born Again Christian would tell you the same thing. It’s not about religion.
And as for having a discussion, the bible clearly warns followers of Jesus Christ of Nazareth to not wrangle about words with the “world”. Those who are not Born Again.
The New King James Version.
1 Corinthians Chapter 2: 6-16
However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. ? But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ??ordained before the ages for our glory, which none of the rulers of this age knew; for ?g?had they known, they would not have ?h?crucified the Lord of glory. But as it is written:
?“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
But ?j?God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the ?k?spirit of the man which is in him? ?Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. ?Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but ?m?the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
?These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the ?Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. ??But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. ?But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. For ?o?“who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” ??But we have the mind of Christ.
Oh, and Peace out back to you. I got noth’n but love for ya!
@Albee – Thanks for clarifying and re-sending your prior statement of: Catalyst “treading into denominational and even cult territory”, by saying that “it could happen.” They’re not there yet, let’s not go there…
You quote what Dan says about Jesus’ words having more authority, and say, “What happens when he mistakenly draws a false conclusion from Jesus words that contradicts the rest of the bible” Anyone can draw a false conclusion from any part of the Bible that would contradict the rest of the Bible, (not taking the entire Bible into account), right? How does this make Dan/Catalyst any different? You can fall into false doctrine over a multitude of issues, not simply Jesus’ teachings. I just don’t see how Catalyst is in isolation on this “what if” scenario…also, from their website I can see several teachings on the over arching themes and threads throughout the entire old and new testaments, so it seems like they’re not in “cherry picking” mode. Regarding Levi’s comment – emphasis does not equal exclusion, i.e. exclusion of the rest of the books of the bible. So yeah, a lot of things “could happen”, doesn’t mean they will…
@Bob – Thanks for entering into a discussion, much appreciated. You basically said that Dan was preaching another Jesus – some would call this heresy, others a “wolf in sheep’s” clothing…I’ll back down on that one…it’s a matter of perspective.
@Bob – Forgot to mention, as to your comment: “And as for having a discussion, the bible clearly warns followers of Jesus Christ of Nazareth to not wrangle about words with the “world”. Those who are not Born Again.” Are you referring to what I said to you regarding discussion? If so, I’ve been talking with Christians on this forum….and I’m a Christian, so I’m confused…
There are those who claim the faith according to Jesus, but are not Born Again. You do recall the Pharasees. The Question is are you born again. And I would also like to know what Catalyst’s stance is on abortion. I’m just saying!
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon ??from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, ??which is not another; but there are some ??who trouble you and want to ??pervert ??the gospel of Christ.”
I hope that “some” don’t pervert the gospel as much as Bob perverts English grammar.
What? I can’t ask that question. Why the diversion tactics? It’s just a question!
If you checked “your bible” you will see that I cut/pasted the quote from the New King James Bible. You do have a bible?
Good questions, Bob. What do we believe? That is the debate behind this all, is it not? What do we believe and why?
I’ve read many a slander and quotations here, though very little about personal beliefs. I think Deric has been more open than most, while he openly does not believe in God. What does that say about us as Christians?
I believe in God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I believe these three are one in the same. I believe God loves me and gives me grace, enough to have lived and died for the forgiveness of my sins. That is why I’m alive today, typing these words, praying for His will to empower them.
I trust in God’s will. I don’t believe in coincidence. I don’t believe in luck. I believe God plays a big role in my life and the accomplishments I make daily. And miracles? Define one as of being an impossible feat. Possibility is relative, is it not?
I once thought I was going to die. Being here now presents me with the inclination that divine intervention is the only reason I’m alive today. So I trust God with more things. And He rewards trust.
I’m not going to quote scriptures this time. I’m just telling truths from my own experiences. I have a power greater than I could ever have imagined. Baptized in the Holy Spirit, I am a walking talking glass of spiritual fire. I can speak and people will listen, fully engaged, aware that the truth is within me. The Spirit of truth is what guides me, fills me with joy, peace, and serenity.
I am nothing more than a child of God. He loves you no less, nor more. His love is available to you right now. All you need to do is call His name. His name is Jesus. He’s real. He hears you and wants to have a close, personal relationship with you. He will guide you, comfort you, and heal you. If you believe Jesus died for the forgiveness of your sins, you can pray to Him and ask him to come into your life right now.
Remember, condemnation only happens once. If you can feel condemnation in your heart, then you have a chance to separate from the pain, the hurt, and the sorrow. Jesus said you must be born again. It’s never too late to live a life for God. There is no late entry fee.
Ever wonder how someone could try desperately to live a sinless life, struggling to escape from all worldly things, and yet be happy? Jesus is the answer, and his answers are key to understanding. Read the Word yourself and learn more about Jesus of Nazareth.
@Bob – Was your last comment for me? If so, it seems you have pegged me for an unbeliever, one with whom, (according to you), you shouldn’t discuss these spiritual issues…yet you entered into a discussion with me anyway. Just because I’m challenging you on your statements doesn’t mean I’m not born again. Besides, I could tell you I’m born again until the cows come home and not be truly born again. Only God knows the true motives of the heart.
The pharisees didn’t claim the faith according to Jesus by the way. They clung to the Old Testament law and tried to discount Jesus at every turn….time to do some New Testament study my friend.
I don’t see anywhere in I Cor. 2: 6-16 a warning to people not to wrangle about words with “the world.” How can people know the truth unless people show it to them? Didn’t Jesus go around teaching and preaching to the masses? Would he want people staying in their little Christian bubbles and not discussing any spiritual matters with those outside of it?
LOL. Joel, “perverting the English language” is a contradictory phrase, my friend. That quote came from a very distinguished literal translation. If you can use around 6,000 English words, each having multitudes of definition, to accurately translate over 12,000 Greek and Aramaic words, each have more precise definition, please help the world and give us another version of the New Testament.
The New King James Bible: Commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers, 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James. With unyielding faithfulness to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts, the translators applied the most recent research in archaelology, linguistics, and textual studies.
@Dude – Would love to see some references for the info. on how the NKJ Bible was created – if you have some. I’ve been interested in this subject for a while…
Regarding translation, I recently spoke to a family member who is a Wycliffe translator and is translating the Bible into a native language in Vanuatu. I asked him about the accuracy of our current translations, since he studied the history of translation as well as linguistics. He said that although the words in the Bible are translated accurately some of the tone of the language gets lost when it is translated from one language to another. For example, he said if you read the text about the transfiguration in the original Greek it is a very dramatic scene and it comes alive in the Greek language. But when it was translated into English the tone of the language was lost, and the words don’t carry the same feeling. The passage doesn’t communicate the same excitement, drama, etc. as the original Greek did. He said that passage becomes almost boring when you read it in English. My cousin said that he believes that over time, and in different cultures, the Bible needs to be re-translated to communicate most effectively to the current culture. Just some thoughts on the topic…
@Diane, maybe you misunderstood me, or I failed to communicate my thought clearly. Jesus sought and hung out with the sinners and preached and taught them to “REPENT”.
Jesus refering to the scribes and Pharisees said in NKJ Version
Matthew 15:8
These ?people ?draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, ?Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ”
Is is safe He was saying, they were rebuked?
Again Paul writes in 2 Timothy 2:14-19
Remind them of these things, ??charging them before the Lord not to ??strive about words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearers. ??Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and ?idle babblings, for they will ??increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer. ?Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, ?who have strayed concerning the truth, ?saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless ?the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord ??knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of ??Christ depart from iniquity.”
God Bless
New King James Version
Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1982, S. Mt 15:8-9
I don’t want to keep harping on this point, but scripture was and always is read at my life group. Some relevent scriptures are included in each discussion guide and written in to some of the questions. From a limited perspective it might seem like scripture was absent, but like everything in this article you have to dig deeper to find the truth. When every point about Catalyst in this forum is based off the website or the article, it becomes clear that honest commentary can only come from actual attendance and human relationship with catalyst members.
@Star, I have observed that every time I heard the Word at Catalyst, it was used to make a leader’s point. I don’t mean to be nit picky because this actually happens in most churches, but when a teacher uses the bible to make their point rather than using their sermon to teach the bible, I get a little concerned that there is some work of the flesh going on.
If the writer observed that there was no reading the bible at the meeting, there is obviously something going on that you can’t defend by simply claiming that there were bibles present and bible software on the computer.
The real issues is whether or not Catalyst teaches the Word or if Catalyst uses the Word for their own agenda. That is a question I struggle with.
Sorry Dude, but the fact that Bob’s comment was copied and pasted from “a very distinguished literal translation” doesn’t mean that it makes any sense.
I’m happy that you find value in a document that was labored over by “130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians,” and that retains “the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James,” but I prefer content to style in comment threads.
I’ve been back for quite awhile now…hang out in old town mostly…nobody seems to believe me or care.
A man is standing in a building. He is blind. He is deaf. He accidently knocks over a kerosene lamp. Flames start to envelope the building. Smoke starts to build. The Blind Man begins to sense that something is amiss, but he does not know what it is. He does not know what to do. He does not know where to go.
Another man happens upon the blind as he departs the burning building, and begins to yell. He yells loudly. He yells adamantly. “Look at the fire, you fool! Don’t you know that you are damned to burn in this fire, unless you depart? You started the fire, blundering about as you are prone to do. A fireman named Jesus has made a way to safety, and anyone who doesn’t find that door is finished! Why aren’t you running? You fool! Do you want to perish in this flame of fire?”
The Blind Man never flinches; he never moves. In fact, feeling faint from the lack of oxygen he sits down. Soon he will be overwhelmed by the flame, and pain and death await him.
Though he genuinely wanted the Blind Man to be saved, the messenger of impending doom was lacking in some basic understanding. Though he was in truth demonstrating love to the Blind Man by telling him of the doom and the way of salvation, his means were ineffective because of the condition of the person to whom he was speaking.
A lot of people are tired. They are tired of seeing people scream their heads off and waving their arms around about hell and then failing to demonstrate the power of God really and practically to save them from the death to come. If God can save me from my sins, then why can’t He save you from yours? If marriage is sanctified between a man and a woman, then why do you pervert that sanctity by divorcing your wife?
It all sounds like a lot of hot air, doesn’t it? Credibility for anyone within a mile of a church has been shattered to say the least. Between the Crusades, the Inquisition, witch hunts, and televangelists who pick your pockets there are very few in history who have claimed the name of Christ and then actually demonstrated the character that made Jesus stand apart 2000 years ago from the rest of those who claimed to work on God’s behalf.
But do the failings of many to uphold the character of Jesus get me off the hook for doing the same? If a man stood before a judge in traffic court and said, “I was only speeding because everyone else was speeding too,” would he be let off of his charge? He would pay to the last penny!
We have a responsibility to do what is right, even if the whole of the rest of the world chooses not to.
If one honestly looks for themselves at the Scriptures (the Old Testament and the New Testament) and does the research and the homework, they will find some incredible things. They will find that the unchanging manuscripts, the accurate archaeological references, and the multitude of prophecies that have come to pass in the Bible give far more than sufficient evidence to prove that what the Bible has to say is true, and can be trusted.
And while the Bible says that men who do not repent of their sins will go to hell and be separated from God for eternity, it also says that those who are in Christ will have the power of God to turn away from sins and lead holy lives. While it says that those who put their trust in Jesus to be saved will go to heaven, it also says that God will work repentance through His grace in the lives of those who seek after God.
If we want to see God work and move in our generation we should not step away from the hard truths, but we should rather choose to believe in the full scope of the truth of God, and not settle for less. We shouldn’t be satisfied until we are found to be everything that the Bible tells us we can be in the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Most grieving to me in this article is the false dichotomy that is implied: either you must stand in unison with the Scriptures and be ignorant to reality, or you must compromise the values of the Scriptures to accommodate the morality of society.
I pick door number three, which is the manner of person that is described for us in the Scriptures. The man of God contends earnestly for the faith in Jesus that is required for salvation, but he does not say to the widow and the orphan “you’re on your own!” He spends time in prayer daily building up a spiritual life, but he does not neglect to care for the earth that God has given him stewardship over. He is concerned with holiness, but he does not neglect to comfort and pray for those with cancer or AIDS because he is too busy with “the things of God.”
In dealing with the Pharisees and the religious rulers of His time, Jesus made reference to the great pains that they went through to give 10 percent of all of their earnings to the temple, down to measuring out the herbs from their garden and giving even that. But they had neglected the weightier things of the law. Things like mercy, justice, equity, and the coming Messiah. Did Jesus say to stop tithing? No! He said that the tithing should continue, but that the other, much more important things should be done as well.
What Catalyst is seeking in doing good for the less fortunate is not bad, but they miss out the most important thing that God has delivered to the church: the good news of salvation through Christ Jesus our Lord. When anyone in the church brings charity without the message of salvation, it is like bringing the Blind Man a comfortable chair, a sack lunch, and some new clothes to enjoy while he perishes!
We are flawed. We are imperfect. Because we brought upon ourselves the dirt of sin, we cannot enter into perfect unity with God. Jesus came and took the place of sinners on the cross, bearing the guilt, shame, and separation from God that was deserved by us. Then Jesus rose from the dead so that we might again be brought into fellowship and unity with God. It is in this Gospel message that there is the power of God unto salvation, and men are brought into fellowship with God.
Without the Gospel message accompanying good works, we are simply making perishing people comfortable as they wait for eternal separation from God.
At the end of the article, the question was asked “And when charity is done for conversion, well, it’s against the point. Isn’t it?” My counter question is this: “What does it prophet a man to gain the whole world, and to lose his soul?”
If we say that we and God love our neighbor but we let then starve to death while we feast on the fatted calf, then we are liars of the worst sort. But if we do not bring more than charity to the needy, then when they pass into eternity it will all have been a waste.
@Albee I think you bring up a very important question and all I can give you is my own experience. After 22 years of going to a very conservative church multiple times per week including an internship a staff job and a leadership role, I can tell you that my two tears at Catalyst has opened my eyes to the richness and beauty of scripture like nothing before. I have learned how to dive into the original languages and strive to understand context in the hope of projecting as little of myself on the text as posible. I have never felt pushed at catalyst to believe a certain doctrine instead I have learned to enter into the conversation, questioning what I presuppose about scripture and diving in to find out what is in that book and what is not. On my phone there is a list of around ten verses that Have changed my life sometimes for their power to put me in my place and humble my understanding of who God is and sometimes for their sheer beauty and wisdom. The point is that every week new parts of the bible come alive to me when they are really shown in all their excellence. None of that would have happened if it wasn’t for The Catalyst leadership’s obsession with scripture, almost presenting both sides of an issue well and letting us really take ownership of our own faith.
@Star, I really appreciate your response. It means a lot to me. I had a very similar experience. I dropped out of youth group because of the cool club mentality of young Christians who chose to make fun of people that didn’t think like them, whether it was conservative or liberal. My eye opener was while I was studying in grad school and rediscovered the bible and Jesus in a new way and got involved in a great church. When I came back to Humboldt, I was disappointed that I couldn’t find a church that taught the Word with the depth and insight that I craved. When I heard of Catalyst, I got my hopes up. I do think that Catalyst the best the Church in Humboldt has to offer college students, but that isn’t saying much for the Church in Humboldt…
The writer of this article did an excellent job “outing” the church in Humboldt. On one extreme you have a church that over-emphasizes grace at the cost of truth. On the other extreme, you have a church that over-emphasized truth at the cost of grace.
Again, the Church finds the balance between truth and grace by putting the Word above the flesh.
“We do not practice compassion and social justice as bait for the hook of conversion. Such thinking reveals an anemic view of human personhood, emphasizing only their soul over a more Biblical view of a holistic gospel for holistic people. Rather than emphasize an escapist theology of ‘pie in the sky when we die’ thinking, we embrace a more robust ‘Heaven on Earth in this life’ theology as taught by Jesus.”
This is a kind of straw man theology. Dan sets up the reader with one wrong idea and then proposes them an idea that is supposedly correct by contrast. And while we’re at it, who is Dan talking to? College students, the wealthy and educated. Who else would understand this vocabulary. I thought Catalyst was about reaching out to the less fortunate, but this sort of message seems to only go out to people just like Dan.
“Grad students are the worst.” Liz Lemon and Jack Donaughy on 30 Rock.
“It all sounds like a lot of hot air, doesn’t it?”
Indeed it does, Daryl. And there are better parables in the Bible, so why do you bother creating new ones?
@Uben – You raise some excellent points here. Catalyst is mainly comprised of college students, so this is indeed the audience to which Dan speaks. However, they do engage in various social justice acts in the community – most of which seem to be isolated events, (correct me if I’m wrong.) I have to say I commend them for making an effort, although it seems to be a bit of a dichotomy to teach about reaching the less fortunate when you simply come and perform a random act of kindness for them and leave without forming lasting relationships. If they’re embracing their theology on what Jesus taught, i.e. “Heaven on Earth in this Life”, then it seems they would be hanging out with prostitutes, homeless, druggies, and the “dregs of society” on a regular basis – not simply for a once a year community event/isolated charity events! What they claim to be looks great on paper, but if you break it down what they’re actually doing is no different than most churches here locally. So fine, embrace your robust Jesus theology Catalyst – but don’t claim to be something you’re not.
Diane, you said it. You will never hear me claim that I or anyone has done enough for the least among us. I am a miserable example of what it means to be a Christian but I am trying everyday to be a little bit more like Jesus. All of us at Catalyst know that we are the worst kind of people but God is at work on us and we try to grow together like any good recovery group. There are overwhelming problems in this world, and I am one of them. Thank God for grace.
As I look at our posts, I’m reminded of a verse,
2 Timothy 2:23 But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. 24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, 25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth,
Perhaps some of our posts have crossed the line from “in humility correcting” over to God’s role of convicting/granting repentance. I think we’ve brought up some important points, brought the truth. But perhaps I got caught up in it and crossed the line. Not to invalidate my concerns, but I do apologize for losing it. I hope that hasn’t kept Catalyst from hearing my concerns. It’s difficult to maintain humility. We’re all works in progress.
@Startare, humility=Christianity! 🙂 If we were capable of doing it on our own, Jesus would never have needed to show up and teach us all the way! I commend your church for trying something new and for shaking things up a little, isn’t that what Jesus did to the Pharisee’s? and hey, the conversations here have done nothing but soften my heart and caused me to reevaluate my own belief’s again, I even pulled the old Bible off the shelf and revisited it, thinking that after a very bad last church experience, maybe I am still a believer after all…….:)
Dianne, I second Albee and I personally ask for your forgiveness and also ask that if the Lord bring me to your rememberance that you pray from me.
God Bless
@William – Thanks for your down to earth honest words. It’s good to know that someone at Catalyst feels this way, but this quote, “All of us at Catalyst know that we are the worst kind of people but God is at work on us and we try to grow together like any good recovery group” I find interesting. You can’t judge anyone’s heart, just like I can’t – that’s God’s job. Some of the words I see here, and things I’ve observed seem to contradict this statement.
People have been called out on things here, (especially Dan), and no responses, (save one), have been forth coming except for what was posted on your website. In fact, none of your elders have commented in depth here except for your pastor Dan’s response from what I can see. It looks like the same old monologue I’ve observed in the church for years. The pastor drops his theological bombs then walks away leaving people unable to have a voice and contend with/question/discuss his/her words in greater depth. I do appreciate your comment, as well as some of the other Catalyst leader’s comments though – thank you for having the balls to stand up and give an account for your faith. But honestly, the lack of elder/pastor communication here looks bad. I’m not judging the motive, just pointing out the fact that if you’re going to say you will enter into conversation, (via pastor Cseh), then follow through! The church has been breaking promises for years – how much longer does this need to continue?? I for one would love to see responses to some of these posts by the pastors/elders themselves, since they’re the one making the decisions in your church. I’m sure you didn’t expect this kind of a reaction to the article from the onset. That’s understandable, but don’t leave the scene of the crime without wading in and cleaning up the mess you left behind. It’s irresponsible, and it looks bad on the church. If from the onset you hadn’t made such a declaration and had decided to walk away from it and let the chips fall where they may, then fine, that’s your decision. But I feel that what you’ve done here is wishy washy and weak in some ways. I don’t speak for everyone, obviously, but since this is a forum it is my right to speak my mind. I hope what I have said here has been in love, that has been my intention. If we can’t be honest with one another and question why we believe what we believe then there is something seriously wrong. We shouldn’t argue for arguing sake, but should hope to have some resolution, and the ultimate goal should be unity.
(continued) We need to ALL take responsibility for our part in the mess the church has become. The process of working though this and becoming more like Jesus isn’t going to be pretty folks. I feel like some of you here are hoping we can do this with minimal trouble which will end in a glowing outcome – but Jesus never promised us this. We’re messed up, we’re lost, we’re hypocrites, we’re nothing – but we have hope in Jesus. The New Testament church was a mess, and so are we – sin isn’t going to just dry up and go away. Yes, we’re being transformed, (changed), – but this is a process that we all need to enter into with “grace and truth.” Some here lashed out at me for my apology and although initially I was angry I had to realize that I have no way of knowing what these people have suffered either. Oh, and by the way, don’t throw the “bitter” label on me, or the “hurt” one either – they won’t stick. I feel like these labels have been used and abused in order to excuse and exonerate pastors and leaders from any responsibility they have in mistreating their flocks. Meanwhile, they, (the pastors), have their spiritual immunity cards out within the Christian community, (especially the clergy) – covering their butts from any “mis-steps.” I’ve seen this first hand and yes, I’ve forgiven, although it has been a process.
Albee you say (via the Bible), that we shouldn’t enter into “foolish and ignorant disputes.” (2 Tim.) I feel that the issues we’ve covered here have merit and are worth discussing. Maybe some have crossed the line into judgment – don’t we have a God big enough to forgive? Isn’t the Holy Spirit capable of convicting and leading into truth? I have felt judged by some of you honestly. Let me just say that none of you have ANY idea what I’ve been through in the church and the way in which I’ve endured spiritual abuse for YEARS under pastors who now I realize were wolves in sheep’s clothing masquerading as shepherds. I’m not looking for pity here, I’m just being open and honest about my life. I feel that it is a true miracle that I am still a follower of Christ – yes, I believe in miracles.
Thank you. All of these posts have only secured an atheist in his convictions.
I hope someday people will be able to put God and their differences away and see the hope that is inside each and everyone of us. You may say that I”m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one…
Due to my oober long post I had to do some cutting and pasting – the last post ended up in the wrong order – here is how it was written:
Albee you say (via the Bible), that we shouldn’t enter into “foolish and ignorant disputes.” (2 Tim.) I feel that the issues we’ve covered here have merit and are worth discussing. Maybe some have crossed the line into judgment – don’t we have a God big enough to forgive? Isn’t the Holy Spirit capable of convicting and leading into truth?
I have felt judged by some of you honestly. Some here lashed out at me for my apology and although initially I was angry I had to realize that I have no way of knowing what these people have suffered either. Let me just say that none of you have ANY idea what I’ve been through in the church and the way in which I’ve endured spiritual abuse for YEARS under pastors who now I realize were wolves in sheep’s clothing masquerading as shepherds. I’m not looking for pity here, I’m just being open and honest about my life. I feel that it is a true miracle that I am still a follower of Christ – yes, I believe in miracles. Oh, and by the way, don’t throw the “bitter” label on me, or the “hurt” one either – they won’t stick. I feel like these labels have been used and abused in order to excuse and exonerate pastors and leaders from any responsibility they have in mistreating their flocks. Meanwhile, they, (the pastors), have their spiritual immunity cards out within the Christian community, (especially the clergy) – covering their butts from any “mis-steps.” I’ve seen this first hand and yes, I’ve forgiven, although it has been a process.
We need to ALL take responsibility for our part in the mess the church has become. The process of working though this and becoming more like Jesus isn’t going to be pretty folks. I feel like some of you here are hoping we can do this with minimal trouble which will end in a glowing outcome – but Jesus never promised us this. We’re messed up, we’re lost, we’re hypocrites, we’re nothing – but we have hope in Jesus. The New Testament church was a mess, and so are we – sin isn’t going to just dry up and go away. Yes, we’re being transformed, (changed), – but this is a process that we all need to enter into with “grace and truth.”
@Bob – I already forgave you, thanks for apologizing. Please do the same for me if I’ve offended you…
@Deric – I’m a dreamer too, or at least I like to think I am. You say, “I hope someday people will be able to put God and their differences away.” I completely agree with you. Our definition of God, (as Christians), has become so convoluted we don’t even know what we believe anymore. The differences we have are countless, but some of us are trying to find a middle ground – a place of unity. You can’t get from point A to point B in a few days or months when you have years of church corruption, disunity, and strife to sort through. Church history is ugly, we all know that. The only reason I still call myself a Christian is that I know Jesus is real. I tried to walk away from him when I left the church. I really hoped he would just go away and quit talking to me, but he didn’t. If he had it would have been so much easier honestly. So I got rid of as much religion in my life as possible, and stripped my faith down to the bare minimum. I walked away from my Christian community and never looked back. I don’t go to church – church isn’t a building to me; It’s people, not a place. I feel like I know God better than I ever did during the years I sat in the pew. I’m not saying I’ve “arrived” by any means. I know I still have a lot of religion in my cells, but over time I hope to be rid of it all – until all that’s left is the person of Jesus. I feel like I’ve been born again, even though I accepted Jesus into my life years ago. I feel a transformation happening in my life, and it’s good. That’s my story….
Diane, yes this is an open forum, but Oy Vey ……..put a sock in it dude.
Flying Squirrel – Dude, you don’t have to read what I have to say if you don’t want to! 🙂
One of the more interesting thoughts from this forum finally comes from Deric: “Thank you. All of these posts have only secured an atheist in his convictions. I hope someday people will be able to put God and their differences away…”
This isn’t the first time the world has looked at the church and found it wanting and irrelevant. There is a need for godly kingdom confrontation laced with honor for one another and those of us in the church should spend time on this forum to see all the errors that so “minister”(my words – my emphasis) to Deric.
I have been a Christian for many years and this only drives me, through the Holy Spirit, to see the church correct the way it honors those around us. I am not discouraged in my faith – not one bit. I feel spurred on to present a loving God and savior to a discouraged world because I have personally seen believers behave and give in thoroughly amazing ways.
It is very sad to me that Deric draws his spiritual conviction partly from his story experience about Catalyst and mostly (but not all I am sure) from this forum. It confirms his choice to be an atheist. If I made my decision for Christ in the same manner, I’m sure I would still be in his shoes, and a committed atheist myself. For thousands of years people have been trying to put God away but God will always be with us.
Ironic that Catalyst is so slow to consider correction, considering their church was born from the mutiny that happened at Arcata 1st Baptist. Many in the church began talking about the pastor and when he rejected their correction, they jumped ship. But ironically now they think that some skepticism doesn’t even deserve a response. “Join the conversation”? Did you mean by conversation “our social club”? Because not one leader has responded. “A fool despises correction.”
Humility is important, but also important to get past the woe is me, be bold and get real.
What you see in this movement of “seeker sensitive” churches that emphasize community social activism is an increase in numbers but no real spiritual growth and maturity. The leaders of many of these churches have openly admitted it when confronted with the issue. So you get guys like Goff and Startare that don’t like going to church but find one they can be comfortable in, don’t feel ashamed of the gospel because maybe it’s a watered down gospel, get to hang out with all their cool talented and educated friends and from time to time give a handout to a poor person so they can bury their guilt for being lukewarm. This movement is a sham. Dan isn’t some wolf in sheeps clothing. He’s just another sheep lost in another herdlike movement away from the good shepherd.
I hope somewhere in this reader dialog somebody’s joked on Davis comment about gays getting the “bum end of the stick”.
Deric Mendes,
“Thank you. All of these posts have only secured an atheist in his convictions.”
Killin’ em with kindness is a form of hatred. Imagine with your open mind for a sec: You’ve died and stand at judgment. God asks you, “Did you receive my forgiveness I communicated with Jesus?” and you respond “Maybe I would have but I saw Christians arguing and figured you weren’t real.” I imagine God might respond, “Those were the only ones you paid attention as you sought to justify your own rebellious heart. You didn’t regard the humble servants that quietly led lives of sacrifice in my name.”
Do you have any discernment when you regard the atheist world leaders that murdered millions of people? Atheists look for excuses but in the end there will be no excuses with God. Go ahead and look for fault in us, anything to project the fault away from yourself.
@Donald, and everyone else,
Don’t worry, my atheist convictions are not at all derived from these posts, or my time with Catalyst (If more churches were like them I wouldn’t have to speak up). I’ve been an open atheist for many years. My convictions are well studied from both an academic background and an experiential one. I grew up in the church, I know the Bible well. I’ve also studied church history.
My comment was more of a wake up call for all of you Christians who are fighting amongst yourselves. It’s not surprising to me that it has happened, however, Just like the history and immoral teachings of your faith — It has been appalling.
Donald’s call for a “godly kingdom confrontation” sounds a little dramatic, but in the kindest way, I say, “bring it on.” I am willing to sit down and talk with any and all Christians who want to discuss Christianity with me. I enjoy a little friendly debate and discussion. I’m a nice guy. You’re probably a nice guy too. A face to face exchange of ideas could turn this into a positive thing. Just keep in mind that you will not be able to convert me.
Your humble authors email: mr.dericm@gmail.com
We’re all nice guys, but God searches the depths of the heart beyond what the eyes see.
What do you use to determine what is immoral?
Who made you judge of morality?
When you read the bible as a whole, not just one part, there is a theme. In the old testament, God repeatedly says, “Sacrifice I do not desire, but a contrite heart.”
As Jesus said, the law of the old testament was given for the hardness of our hearts, to show us that we don’t have the strength of ourselves to keep the law and a physical understanding of the consequences of breaking the law.
For example, when a man uses another person as an object for his selfish pleasure, that person may feel heartbroken, abused. The law was given to show in an outward way, the inward pain. So people were stoned to death for adultery. All the while in the old testament, there were promises that God made to do away with this law, to fulfill it, to provide the sacrifice himself once and for all. Jesus who is the only One God in the flesh suffered more than anyone could suffer to show us the consequences of our sin and that he would pay it because we could not bear it. God did not want us to have the law, but we chose it. And for love to be possible, there had to be that freedom of choice. In whatever way you got off track, listening to the traditions of man instead of the Word of God, the door is always open. Look at Jesus. When Peter stepped out of the boat looking at Jesus he began to sink when he looked around. That is us. We sink when we take our eyes of Jesus and look around and see how fragile and imperfect we are.
@Deric: Sorry I didn’t make it clear but the kingdom confrontation observation is directed at Christians here, not you. It is more in line with the second paragraph of your last post.
Relax, you’ve done a pretty good job.
This will be my last post. It’s two comments long. I apologize. If anyone wants to follow up, email me.
@Oral Israel Faster SR,
I was trying to limit my posts on this site but your antiquated misconceptions have to be addressed.
First off, Hitler invoked Christ many times in his speeches and received support from the Catholic church. He considered himself a Christian. Stalin was not a believer.
So what were the psychological and social derivatives that led to people doing horrendous things in the name of their leader?
The problem with fascist and communist societies such as Mao’s China and Stalin’s Soviet Union was not that they were too critical of religion, but that they were too much like religions. All were extremely dogmatic. Whether it was a nationalist dogma or political dogma, their faith was strong and destructive. They were all also centered on the worship and obedience of their leader. North Korea today is an example of how much these societies reflect the totalitarian aspects of religion. When Kim Jong il receives aid shipments from the west he tells his citizens that they’re offerings to his greatness. The religious frame work is destructive.
(another historical reference point: study ancient China. Their initial moral code was far more sophisticated than Jesus’ hundreds of years before he was even born. We don’t here about it as much because the society was far more functional than the outskirts of the Roman empire. It’s a wonder why God chose to appear to the people less likely to create an accurate documentation of his time on earth. Why didn’t he appear in China? They were too educated perhaps?)
Most importantly, millions of people have been killed in the name of Christianity. It may not have happened over a decade or two, but that doesn’t make Christianity any more just than the ugliest societies seen throughout history.
5. Atheists don’t look for excuses, we look for answers. We don’t claim to know for a fact that God does or doesn’t exist, however there is no evidence to support his existence. Therefore atheists don’t believe in God. Atheists are free to find transcendence from admitting what we don’t know and the journey of education that follows. we can do so free from the binds of a highly discrepant man-made text.
there was an error here is the end
Note: proclaiming that Jesus lives is no different than proclaiming Elvis lives. If one makes the claim today that they have a relationship with Elvis, and builds arguments and a world view based on such a claim, their arguments will be questionable at best.
Secondly name an immoral act that takes religion to be perpetrated.”
Morals are derived from humans both biologically and through the passing of knowledge. religion, which is created by humans, gets it’s morals from the people who wrote it down at that time. It then evolves. There is evidence and scientific proofs of this. There is none for a religious moral authority.
Although I strive to live a moral life, I am not a moral authority. That doesn’t stop me from commenting on the totalitarian aspects of Christianity just as you rightfully comment on the moral failures of fascism. The big three christian immoralities of a fascist nature are: vicarious redemption, compulsory love, and punishment for thought crime (commandment 10).
Algebra was created by the Muslims, Physics by the Christians, yet we don’t refer to them by their religious origin. Morals grow out of society and should one day not be described by their geographical or religious origin.
If I failed to address any of your questions, contact me. Like I’ve said before, it’s much better to have these conversations face to face. Summing up these big ideas in a comment box is a little cumbersome.
Cheers to all,
Deric
Deric,
I of myself have no authority to tell another person what is right or wrong moral or immoral. I believe that only God, His Word has that authority. There’s humility in that.
But you’ve shown you’re the biggest hypocrite of all here, judging people who use the Word to correct Dan, calling the bible immoral as if you have the authority.
Christians may from time to time cross the line and sit in God’s seat of judgment, but you comfortably sit there.
There is scientific evidence that you have the authority to judge morality?
Deric, no one has accused others of arrogance more than you. And you thank them for it. You project your own anxiety on us.
Oral,
Calling me judgmental, a hypocrite, and a man of anxiety is judgment from you sir. We all make judgments such as that plate looks hot: that tastes bad and I don’t want to eat it. We both judge fascism as bad. Hopefully, we both vote. Discussions about religion should not be held above discussions about politics. Both are institutions that evolve due to human discourse.
Reread what I’ve written. I haven’t once accused any one of arrogance, nor have a claimed a personal moral authority. I haven’t once even addressed the personal character of anyone on this thread. Therefore I have not judged anyone on this thread. Please try to be truthful.
Stating that evils have been done in the name of Christianity is stating a fact. Stating that there is Biblical support for doing evil against others is a fact. Facts are not judgments.
Being a person who sees the Bible as fiction, evaluating the characters and stories of it is also not judgment. It’s a book. Written by men. No matter what you feel, this is the truth. it’s no different than Moby Dick. If that offends you, step back and consider other people’s perspectives to the best of your ability.
My posts are up for discourse. You are more than welcome to disagree with me. I’m open to have you try to persuade me otherwise. Please, however, consider meeting for coffee or a meal with me before judging my personal character. Spouting of slanderous responses on the internet is ridiculous and only escalates misconceptions.
@ Derec, please explain who you find Catalyst so attractive and the model church. Why would an atheist not condem Catalyst. Their stated claim is that they are a church, so why them?
Deric, everyone wants to know. This is not a confrontation. Why would and atheist, someone who doesn’t believe that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the Messiah, think so highly of dan and Catalyst?
Oh and by the way, do a search on Noah’s Ark. Tell me if you think the pics are fake. Would that be some proof for you. I went to Israel in 2005 and I can tell you the sites are there. Even the Garden Tomb. And guess what. It’s empty!
I wonder if Bob also bought a splinter from the cross from the vendors in Israel, since he seemed to buy everything else.
Bob,
As for Noah’s Ark, man, if you want me to explain the problems with that one we should definitely meet for a discussion (my email is listed in one of the posts above). In regards to the tomb being empty, it’s been two thousand years. An empty tomb doesn’t mean resurrection. If so, then what’s so special about resurrection?
If you reread the article you’ll understand why I think Catalyst is doing good work. Why as an atheist do I support a man like Dan? send me your email address and I’ll forward you a letter i sent to a Catalyst member who was questioning Dan’s eloquence in the article. (not enough room in this comment boxes) Perhaps it will help you understand where I’m coming from.
Deric,
You simply stated that the bible is immoral. I just wanted to know what you base that on. What gives you the authority to make that judgment?
“Christians who are fighting amongst yourselves. It’s not surprising to me that it has happened, however, Just like the history and immoral teachings of your faith — It has been appalling.”
“Thank you. All of these posts have only secured an atheist in his convictions.”
Sounds a bit condescending, no?
“I personally feel that Christianity is based on immoral principles, the highest of which is vicarious redemption.”
I think this is the answer here. You personally feel convictions. Where do they come from? Who decides what is moral and immoral. Is what is immoral to you, universally immoral?
We agree that child rape is immoral. But why do we believe that what is evil to us is evil for all other people regardless of their time in history, place in culture, etc.
As Paul said in the bible, there is an infinite one in whom we all live and move and have our being. We can explain how things evolve, but how did they come into being in the first place? We didn’t invent God for an easy answer. We have an innate awareness of this one whole infinite spirit (aka Holy Spirit)
continued…
This one in whom we live is infinite. But we are finite. We are limited in our understanding, words, time, perception, etc. So when we think we wholly know the Holy Spirit, we are furthest from it. But when we are honest, we admit that we only see one angle, we can never wrap our heads around the infinite. That is why there is only one way to be open minded to God: Humility, when we recognize how small we are in relation to the infinite.
But once we are open to the whole one, how do we live in relation to it? All of us at one time or another acted the opposite of humility. We have done things with pride in our hearts. We’ve said in our hearts that we can wrap our minds around the infinite, and in our prideful actions we’ve tried to make ourselves whole, convinced that we are infinite. We lust for objects, fetishizing them as if they could make us whole, but the moment we get them we realize they are just stuff. When we desire objects, we do not experience love. Desire says I love what you do for me. But love says, I care about you enough to lay down my desires for you. This is what sin is. There are many manifestations of pride in our heart. But it isn’t just the action that is the sin, it is the pride from where those actions come from that is sin. That is why Jesus said to call a person a fool is the same as murdering them, to lust after a woman is to already have committed adultery. The law is spiritual. And we’ve broken it. When we experience the conviction that our pride has separated us from the whole one, we experience humility, an openness to the whole one. But here’s the miracle, the mystery of grace, that although we can’t wrap our minds around the whole one, we can experience a personal relationship with it. The whole one has communicated to us in the only way we could possibly understand that we are forgiven for our crimes of the heart. The whole one showed us ultimate humility by becoming a man and enduring persecution from the very people that claimed to know him. Jesus proved who he was by rising from the dead. The disciples were not tortured to death for being liars or lunatics. They died for what they saw with their own eyes. It transformed them. Thomas said he would only believe if he felt the holes in his hands and side. Jesus let him handle his body and said, “blessed are you that believe, and even more those who believe without seeing.” The whole one communicated, not to the educated and wealthy, but to everyone, this is love. Deric, you can recognize evil, you can recognize love. We wretched people who call ourselves Christians invite you to examine Jesus and believe that he is the perfect express image of the infinite whole one in whom we live and move and have our being.
Nice to meet you Oral. I’m Andrew.
“So you get guys like Goff and Startare that don’t like going to church but find one they can be comfortable in, don’t feel ashamed of the gospel because maybe it’s a watered down gospel, get to hang out with all their cool talented and educated friends and from time to time give a handout to a poor person so they can bury their guilt for being lukewarm. This movement is a sham.”
Well, isn’t this an uplifting place?
Sorry, other Christians. You’re just not going to convince me that it’s possible to give a “loving rebuke” anonymously in a blog comment section. The way I’ve seen scripture thrown around recklessly in this forum by anonymous people to persecute Dan and those involved with Catalyst tempted me to drop a Matthew 5:10 bomb. But methinks this is not the place to show how badass and righteous I am. I’m often wrong about things, so that would be silly.
It saddens me what I’ve witnessed here. I’m not above any of it, but I understand what Deric means when he says the sentiments in this forum have “secured him in his convictions.” A good portion of what’s posted here is sillyness. Not because of the actual content but because of the forum and the form it was presented in. The rest of the world is watching (sort of). If you want “love” me, do it to my face. I’ll make you pay for my coffee, though.
But before you lambast me again for my arrogance, weak faith, heretical positions, hypocrisy, immorality, disrespect of God’s Word, hatred of truth, lack of discernment, judgmental nature, lukewarm-ness, slowness to accept correction, sheeplike herd mentality, foolishness, ignorance… eh… I forgot what I was gonna say… Guilty as charged.
Not Christ-like enough? Still tryin’.
Did he really? If so, I gotta say: Bad call, Jesus.
I’ll take the former over the latter any day. No question.
The silly names are just me poking fun at the need for naysayers to appear anonymous. I’ve seen how people who speak up are treated by church and ‘I don’t want it. If I were in support of Catalyst, I’d be proud to put my name here. But I’m not and I still want to keep my friends at Catalyst, even if they serve booze to minors. woops
I was obviously out of bounds with the quoted comment. I’m sure you can relate to getting annoyed with people who don’t heed the Word. It was infantile attempt to piss you off for your cheap shot at Cindy. And Startare for serving booze and not the Word of God. We’re all on a path. I’m no better than you.
@Oral Classy. Glad you’re keeping your friends.
It’s a good thing you all believe in the same god…otherwise the discussion would take a more typical turn…as is seen on forums acrost the wholes entire wide web world.
goff, good thing you didn’t drop a matt 5:10. This isn’t persecution and Catalyst isn’t righteous by another other means than Christ. They need to put down the booze and uphold the Word. Did you have anything uplifting to bring here?
From a complete outsider’s point of view…that being somebody wholey comfortable in their growing understanding of the universe unfolding around my individual…secular arguments are just that: secular. The alien sitting on the moon sees social clubs of like-minded individuals…not the rhetoric that is all this internet banter. Let’s see where this group of 20-somethings is in 10 years…20 years…have similar groups formed in the past? How’s their timeline look?
Goff, I suppose you could ask Humbo, “Who’s Peter Gazinia?” Robots haven’t developed morality with regard to privacy, unless it is a robot from the future when aliens give us that technology.
I’d rather share a beer with an imperfect Christian than share a banquet with the righteous prunes who have flocked here to scold.
I’d rather eat scraps from the table of someone who had the humility to listen to biblical correction. Just as Deric feels we’ve confirmed his atheist conviction, the comments from Catalyst have confirmed our concerns that something is amiss at Catalyst.
@Peter: You just blew my freakin’ mind.
Can anyone answer whether Jesus actually said that calling someone a fool is morally equal to murdering them? I’m sincerely curious about that.
In other news, it seems to me that this thread, which really did have a great run, is staring to generate more heat and less light. I’m starting to think about pulling the switch on it before it jumps yon shark. Input?
@Deric – Thanks for the dialogue. I really appreciate that you’re willing to jump in here – wish the Catalyst pastors would follow suit…not holding my breath on that one though!
You say that nobody here can convert you to Christianity – I would certainly hope they wouldn’t attempt that. The church seems to have come to the conclusion that it is our job to convince people that Jesus is the answer. If he truly is God’s son, and part of the trinity, then shouldn’t he be big enough to do the convincing for himself?? Shouldn’t God be able to prove that he is in existence as well as the Holy Spirit, and Jesus? It’s our job to live a Godly life, but it’s not our job to force the gospel down people’s throats – so sorry if this happened here. I admit I’ve gone down the road of trying to reason with people and show them why there is a God, why Jesus is truth, etc., etc. At the end of the day it comes down to the fact that no human is ever going to convince you of anything ultimately. You have to make the conscious decision on your own.
You talk a lot about evidence, and lack of evidence regarding Christianity. You’re right about this because Christianity is built on faith, not intellect. You know the verses I refer to, no need to be redundant here.
You talk about the dark history of Christianity, and yes, there have been some very dark times. But what about the good Christianity has done in the world?? Christianity has brought education and resources to many countries in the modern era. A recent example is Haiti. When the earthquake hit Haiti the churches were the ones, (and may still be), doing the brunt of the relief effort – both medical and otherwise. You have to admit we do some good in the world, right??
I do agree with you that parts of the bible contradict each other however. Many Christians claim that the bible is THE word of God – as if God can’t speak to people in any other way. If every bible were to be shredded and destroyed today I believe that the word of God would still exist. I believe that “the word” is God, as is stated in Genesis. Despite any errors the bible may hold, God’s word is perfect – he is bigger than mistranslations, errors, etc. Why do I believe this? I have faith in a God who is bigger than all of our mistakes, hypocrisy and sin.
Hank,
Matthew 5, the sermon on the mount, verse 20 something, well shoot I’ll just paste it from biblegateway….
21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause[b] shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.
Jesus words, highest in Dan’s hierarchy even though Paul says all scripture is divinely inspired and useful for correction (2 Timothy)
Goff, ask humbo
@Tamara
Remember the old saying ‘whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting’?
Well, by the sound of it you probably don’t. So let me share a little something with you.
I would love to duke it out with you (metaphorically speaking) about what exactly upholding the word is IS, but will do all of us a favor and stop it with the false piety.
@Dick: Hmmmm. Well, again — bad call, Big J.
I think it’s fair to blame this outburst on a case of the grumpies. Who ’round Galilee got called a fool earlier that morning, do you think?
@Dick – Ooooh, not a good idea about humbo…that could seriously ruin someone’s life for a while. They would be chewed up and spit out by the institution via the pastoral “leaders” i.e. those holding all of the power, control, etc. They like to say they aren’t in control, but believe me, when you get deep into what’s really going on you find out that they ARE. Been there, done that, barely lived to tell the tale…) Besides, that would not only be unethical, but also infringement on privacy.)
I repeat: Lotta heat, little light. If anyone has any pressing reason to keep this thread alive, please post it now.
With the jibes about the robot, are all y’all:
a). Goofing around,
b). Alleging nefarious doings,
c). Asking what happened, or,
d). Engaging in general trollery?
If the answer for you is (c), which I somehow doubt, here’s the short version. Andrew logged in on Will’s computer. At some later point, Will posted a comment not knowing that the site had him logged in as Andrew. C’est tout.
@Oral – Why are you afraid to be honest with the friends you still have at Catalyst? I get that you still want to be friends with people there, but come on, if they can’t accept you for who you are then they weren’t ever friends in the first place. Why are you letting religion and systems control you from a distance? You don’t have to live under that. If God is who he claims to be he has the ability to bring you friends who won’t judge you – they will love you for who you are, and what you believe. I finally had to accept that, although it took me a long time, and I haven’t arrived by any means. I lost 99% of my “church friends” when I quit going to church….and you know what, I’m doing just fine without them! You deserve better in my opinion. I just hate to see people being controlled by others, it’s wrong, and I know it’s not what Jesus wants for any of us. Jesus came to free us, not keep us encapsulated under control.
With all of the talk about judgment, hypocrisy, narrow mindedness, self righteousness, etc. just thought I’d mention the fact that there have been apologies made here, people who have admitted they lost it, people willing to be open minded and discuss subjects and stretch their thinking, etc. Things have gotten heated, but dialogue has continued and some are attempting to build bridges and find common ground. Come on people, it isn’t ALL bad!! You can chose take away the good or focus on the bad. I’m choosing the former – not saying I’m miss holiness – but trying to bring things into perspective here. There is no way we’re going to have unity unless we’re willing to get our hands dirty and work through the myriad of issues dividing us. You have to start somewhere…
Michael, if that is your real name and not just some ploy to make fun of how naysayers have to hide their identities from their friends out of fear of being handed a scarlet letter,
So you think my cattle russlin’ is to get access to some water. Just pull the Mark Twain into the station and we’ll have it out. But I think I already know where you’re going and I agree. Holding up the Word isn’t just about preaching it but living it and being a living example of it. God bless
Mendes, don’t hold your breath on Catalyst giving the green light to gays in leadership and the sanctioning of gay marriage. They have a good show, but won’t jump ship so quickly. Churches in this area thrive on transfer growth, (i.e. Arcata First Baptist), and they would be shooting themselves in the foot to abandon such a strong “core” belief. It all comes down to the bread and butter, which would be sincerely lacking were they to out themselves, (pun intended), completely. The back lash from this article is enough to get them scrambling, the writing is on the wall. I’m honestly getting bored with their predictability…I’d love to be proven wrong though, seriously.
Catalyst, don’t ever replace Tristin. You’d lose all that jitter bean money that keeps you afloat. But you already knew that. If you tried to replace the roberts boys, dad would jump ship in a sec just like Arcata first. The stus don’t give up their parents money, don’t like real jobs but love to pass the bucket to pay their way around the world as if it was a sacrifice, then complain about the people with real jobs and buying a home for their family. College student hippies are the worst, “You see, the consumers are all consumery and the corporations are corporationy and, its hard to explain, I’ve got some books you should read man, really open your mind up.”
Okay, that was a LOW blow “stinky”!! Not cool, NOT cool at all to name drop like this in such a heartless way. I really hope you don’t call yourself a Christian, and if so you’re in need of some serious heart searching. This makes me sick to my stomach…if any Roberts are reading this know that the community loves you.
I think this forum has hit an all-time low with people and church name-dropping…definitely NOT APPROPRIATE! Your bitterness needs to be dealt with on your own terms(preferably w/ God) and not hung out like dirty laundry.
Besides that, I just have one thing to say:
This forum has predominantly been a man vs. man debate over who thinks who is right or wrong.
Back and forth, forth and back…someone will present their side, the other will negate the other’s belief, with a few jabs thrown in for a feeling of superiority. And so we go, on and on, getting nowhere. Though, of course, I know this is what debate is all about, my point is this:
If you really want to know if God exists, if Christ is who He says He is, if the Bible is indeed God’s inherent word of truth, etc., then put Him to the test. Ask Him to prove Himself to you, whole-heartedly. Wise people challenge all realms of a debate to sift out the truth.
So, upon this, I lovingly ask each one in question of faith, to open your heart and see what comes of it. Thank you.
LOVE WINS.
@Hank, your question about Jesus statements in Matthew 5:22 (“But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.”) seems sincere, I appreciate your honesty in questioning this statement which does appear harsh and unrealistic. To fully understand this passage, we must take it in context. Look at what Jesus is saying, beginning in Matthew 5:18. “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.: Matthew 5:18-20
What I believe Jesus is showing us, is that He didn’t come to cancel the law of Moses, but to fulfill it. He came to show us that God the Father created us in His image, and as such, He made us to be perfect and holy. His expectation of us is absolute perfection. In Matthew 5:48 He declares “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Jesus is also opening our eyes to see things as He does- from the inside, or the heart of the matter, so to speak. He is revealing to us that our sin begins in the heart. James 1:14-15 expound upon this; “But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” Jesus is warning us that our hearts aren’t right, and that we desire to do evil, and that, in His eyes, that desire is just as bad as the action. However, the overarching theme of the verse you question, and indeed the whole of the Bible, is that we are a wicked people. We have the law, both written through Moses, and in our hearts, but we will always fall short of God’s expectation. No matter how good we are, or think we are, we cannot measure up to God’s expectation of perfection, we will always fall short. This is precisely why Jesus came! He came to show us that even the scribes and the pharisees, the religious rulers of the day, weren’t good enough. He came to show us that all of our outward actions weren’t enough. He came to show us that we could never hope to get to God on our own. He came to make the way that we couldn’t do ourselves. He lived the perfect life, He died on a cross in the most brutal fashion, taking our place and our punishment, and He rose again showing that He had conquered death and sin. He came so that we could receive even “the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe” Romans 3:22.
This is what sets Christianity apart from every other religion in the world. Every other religion seeks to please God through various works. In these religions, people must work to accomplish the requirements so that they will get to heaven, nirvana or whatever they promise. Jesus is different, it’s not about how I can earn my way into heaven, because I can’t. It’s not about what I can do to get to God, because I could never. It’s about what God did to get to me.
I am more than happy to answer questions about the historical, archeological or other documented facts that substantiate the authenticity of the Bible, to anyone who is sincere in their question. I agree with Hank, we need less heat and more light.
What “sets Christianity apart from every other religion in the world,” is profession of faith through bumper stickers.
Bumper stickers trump all religions. Whatever sect you think you belong to…if there’s a sticker about it on your car, you’re a practicing bumper stickan.
@ deric,
just a technicality, but it sounds like the position you claim, being an atheist, is actually agnosticism. this due to your “i don’t know-ness,” which you leads you not to believe in god. do you have a positive belief that there is no god? if yes, then i would say continue on with your atheism. if not, you should prob alter your profession of atheism. btw, i would argue that the only logical position is agnosticism in regard to belief in a deity. if you would like to hear that argument, i’d be glad to give it. i have a feeling you’re already aware of these issues, but maybe you’re not … peace.
James,
My writing on this thread has been frantic and not as clear as I would like. Thanks for your question.
Agnosticism is being skeptical about whether there is a god.
Atheism is not believing in God due to insufficient evidence.
Neither position takes a factual stance on the existence of God.
The terms are actually more subtle than many people suppose. I’m an atheist because I don’t believe God exists. I’m not in the process of coming to that conclusion. Although there is evidence against God’s existence, and none in favor of him, to claim God’s nonexistence as fact would be presumptuous. Hence why I refrain from stating “I know.”
I haven’t read any respectable atheist write that they know factually God doesn’t exist. They do however know that the have no reason to believe he does. If you read Carl Sagan or Richard Dawkins they breakdown the definition in accordance to scientific claims rather well.
Many people who claim to be agnostics because they’re apathetic towards the subject of God, or they feel the term atheist has a negative connotation. (They’re right, but it’s mostly because people don’t properly understand the term atheist.)
I often tell people I’m an anti-theist, which simply means I don’t believe God exists, and that religion, more often than not, is harmful to society. This is testified daily by suicide bombers.
Does that help?
Mr. Marvel got it right. Atheism comes from the Greek atheos,” from a, “without” and theos “god.”
Agnosticism is not believing in God due to insufficient evidence, according to American Heritage.
James, pardon me if I’m butting in.
Deric, I agree that religion, more often than not, is harmful to society. I just don’t believe true Jesus Christianity is a religion, but a relationship with a God that is Love.
Islam is a religion that seeks to enslave people to the law. Jesus, by contrast, frees them from the law through forgiveness.
We often hear about the terrible things done in Jesus name because that’s what we want to see, an excuse to dismiss Jesus. But we don’t see the quiet humble people who live their lives of service because of Jesus.
For example, while Darwin was publishing Origin of Species in 1859, Swiss humanitarian and Bible-believer Henri Dunant was planning the Red Cross and negotiating the Geneva convention for the care and treatment of wounded soldiers. Dunant was co-winner of the first Nobel Prize for Peace in 1901, and his inspiring Red Cross committee later won the award three times.
Today the Red Cross does more humanitarian work than any other organization. 2nd to the Red Cross is the Baptist church.
Deric, I don’t mean to criticize or rebuke your atheism, just want to encourage you to remain open minded. If there is no scientific evidence for God, there is none against him either. Science is always growing, but never explains everything such as the origin of the universe. There is always more than meets the eye. Thank you for your kindness, even as people do bad things in Jesus name here. God bless all.
“… 2nd to the Red Cross is the Baptist church.”
Unlikely. What are your sources?
@Mielke,
Your greek roots are correct, however buddy, you’re wrong. One can be “without god” and not claim it as a “fact.”
It’s the story of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. He could be controlling the universe, we can’t say he isn’t, but there is no reason to believe he is. That’s atheism.
Agnosticism doesn’t take a stance on belief. You’ve attributed atheism to agnosticism. It’s a common error.
@J
I am open minded. That’s why I’m not perscribing to a religous belief. Religions often claim to have the answers. That my friend, is close minded.
J said: “Christianity is a religion that seeks to enslave people to the law. Islam, by contrast, frees them from the law through forgiveness.
We often hear about the terrible things done in Allah’s name because that’s what we want to see, an excuse to dismiss Allah. But we don’t see the quiet humble people who live their lives of service because of Allah.”
…see how that works? drop the gang war…that’s not what “religion” is about.
Joel, perhaps that was irresponsible of me to say that without sources. It was something I read after hurricane Katrina that the Southern Baptist Convention was second to the red cross in number of meals served and people cared for. I’m not affiliated with that organization myself and don’t remember the source. I understand your skepticism. Peace
@Dogma, I was responding to Deric’s citing daily suicide bombers. Islam is the only religion I know that has daily suicide bombers. Yes, I see how that works. I’m not at war with Islam, just thinking of how they are so focused on the law and punishment while Jesus’ Christianity is about forgiveness and being free from the law. Dogma, what do you think religion is about?
Deric, are you open minded to the possibility that there is a God?
If it helps level the playing feild, Christians who have tried to stop stem cell research are inadvertently harming people as well. There are many examples of harm done by most faiths. I’m however at work and don’t have time to write an essay about it.
@John,
Are you open minded that I’m a Jedi?
J, it is with religion as it is with awareness of all things. You can’t lie to yourself about it. Whatever the arrangement of squiggles forming letters positioned into the word “religion” means to you…I believe it to be an individual’s core understanding of things…whatever those things are is only an individual’s business.
Dan, again you have to not just pick a verse in order to use it to support a point you are attempting to make. You have to use the scripture in context. Remember a good rule is to read 20 verse before and 20 verses after (ie, 20-20 vision). What Jesus was saying to them is that He was God manifested in the flesh. Realize that when He says, “I”.
Just a thought
And since you have decided to start posting, can you explain my a self proclaimed Atheist aboves of the gospel that you preach and teach?
Opps, kids hit the keyboard.
@ Dan can you explain why a self proclaimed Atheist approves of the gospel that you preach and teach?
@ Deric do you believe the Catalyst Church is the church described in Revelations Chapter 2:18-29. Just asking. Dan you can also answer why you believe Catalyst is not like the Church in Thyatira.
@Deric. I hate posting because you never get the tones and context, so let me say directly that I’m just being friendly and not looking for an argument on the internet. Perhaps from lack of judgment and too much time on my hands at the moment, I’ll take a moment to answer you. Everyone know the Jedi is a fictional idea, though it has a reality for some people. We know it’s a fiction because we know the author George Lucas. But the idea of God is obviously different. We don’t know who wrote the first narrative of God. We don’t know if they intended it to be a documentary or fiction. But we know that many people all over the world wrote about what we call God with very similar ideas and unaware of eachother. The bible writers all seem to have a common theme of humility, redemption and repentance, though they were from different cultures, times and parts of the world. In regard to the Jedi, there is only one author George Lucas who would tell you that it is fiction. But many of the writers of the bible died for claiming that God was real. Anyway, I’m not repeating the question, just want everyone to think and question what they believe. Thank you for challenging us to think about what we believe. I hope you’ve learned more than just that what you already believe is true. I hope maybe someone has stretched you. I know I’m stretched when I meet a couple who has adopted children. I’m inspired by them. Anyway, I’m going to get off the internet now and play with my 3 year old who teaches me more everyday than anyone I’ve ever met.
@Dan – You make an appearance yet again, woah! Glad you joined in the discussion again finally. You had me up until you said the definition of calling someone a fool was equivalent to being a “bitter cynic.” Why is bitterness always (italicized), seen as the black sheep of sins? (Besides homosexuality and abortion of course.) I still say that calling another Christian bitter is the excuse many use to bail themselves out of taking personal responsibility. If someone is bitter enough it seems it doesn’t matter what sins were done against them – their bitterness trumps all, right? You say the passage is clearer said, “You know to slander people could get you a fine, but to become a bitter cynic puts your own BEING in peril.” Wow, sounds like you’re even going so far as to say that being a bitter cynic may be an unforgivable sin, eh? Looks like there may be a LOT of people on this thread in that predicament, (according to you!) We’re all going to hell folks – yiiikes!
To be fair though, you did bring up some good points in your response. Thanks for wading into the shark tank again….
@Dan – You say, “One lesson we learn is that to be a student of Jesus, is to be inherently critical and willing to question and challenge all human institutions (and religious ones at the top of the list!)” Yeah, this statement looks real good on paper, but many I know who carried through on this got chewed up and vomited out by the religious, (Christian), institution. However, the good that came out of this was them leaving “Churchianity” and becoming free of the system finally. You can preach a message about questioning institutions until the cows come home, but the fact remains that the institution of mainstream Christianity has an identity that is entrenched and saturated in religiosity with all of the rules, (spoken and unspoken), that govern it from within. The institution simply will not allow people to change it – more likely, it will change them to fit its mold. Resistance is futile!
@John,
Relax. I was just joking with you. I get your context. I think the problem is that if anyone criticizes religion folks get unjustly offended. It’s up for critique, just like politics.
As for what I’ve learned, it hasn’t been anything the Christians would have wanted me to.
Tonight is my birthday party. Many of my friends are going to be at my house. We are going to eat lots of delicious food, drink some wine, talk to each other, and have a memorable evening. It will be removed from the ridiculousness of this thread and any arguments about a celestial dictator in the sky. No one at my home will be wondering if anyone is dishonoring God by trying to honor her incorrectly. Judgments that may be placed on you will go unmentioned and the judgments you’ve made will be forgotten.
It may be presumptuous to think you or anyone out there wants to give me a gift. But if do, please to take the evening, or perhaps a lifetime, and do the same.
Good night,
Deric
Mr. Mendes may believe, or not believe, in standard usage and definitions, but according to the American Heritage, an agnostic claims neither faith nor disbelief in God. The word was coined by T. H. Huxley in 1870, “an antithetic to the ‘Gnostic’ of Church history who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant.”
And, according to the same source, atheists believe that God does not exist.
@Deric – Happy Birthday! Hope you have a great night.
You say, “Judgments that may be placed on you will go unmentioned and the judgments you’ve made will be forgotten.” This is exactly the reason I left organized Christianity. People who didn’t know my motives, thoughts, or me for that matter judged me over and over again. I don’t blame you for not wanting to be part of that system. Now that I’m out of it I see things from a completely different perspective, and I can see why people view Christianity like they do. I think I have less of a “dictator in the sky” view of God now honestly now that I’m out from under all of the judgment.
I’ve actually enjoyed reading what you had to say here. I haven’t ever heard an atheist state the reasons they are an atheist. The church taught me that atheists hate Christians, but I certainly haven’t seen you acting this way. Anyway, happy birthday, cheers
Lubbock of Leave It…..
“People are disturbed and troubled by the real Gospel: under the false gospel they can sleep unto destruction. Bring out the Sword: it is meant to wound; let it exercise its salutary sharpness. The Gospel has two edges so that none may play with it.
When they think to run their fingers along the back of it, they will find themselves cut to the bone. Whether we regard its threats or promises it cuts at sin. Let us therefore know that the power of the Church does not lie anywhere but in the Word as Jesus Himself speaks it.”
Sounds like a really fun club you’ve got going there.
“Why as an atheist do I support a man like Dan?”
“If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.” Jesus
“It’s hard for me, a committed atheist, to find much wrong with what Catalyst Church is doing.”
1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.
Lubbock Or Leave It…….
Do any new believers go to Catalyst or just “recovering evangelicals”?
If people are hearing about Jesus and believing for the first time, they are bearing fruit. But if they are just converting people from other churches, perhaps this is the place fruit goes to waste.
Anne, God can use whoever he wants, whenever he wants……….oh, and I’ve heard it said that spoiled fruit makes the sweetest jam!:) Nothing is wasted in the hands of God.
Deric,
Do you know what the prisons were like, back in the day- in England, etc. Who began the prison reform? Did you know it was the Society of Friends.. the Christians?
Look at the majority of hospitals. They have names like Christ or Little company of Mary, St Jude, the list goes on. Christians founded the most hospitals long ago.
Christians found the Red Cross. Who founded Cambridge, Princeton, Harvard, etc? Christians.
Who runs the most homeless shelters?
While I may not be a Christian, I do not frown upon them or religion as a whole. To me, it sounds like you have had a personal or family-related conflict throughout your life, and you have attributed it to Christianity or religion. I could be wrong, but I even see your blog and it’s this consistent tone of disgust toward Christians.
Very, very, well written, though Deric. It was a pleasure to read.
Perhaps we can move on past the doom-and-gloom narrative of Christianity as people.
Cheers,
T
Anne, Wow, why didn’t God make YOU God? You seem to know it all. I’m pretty sure people like you keep many others from seeking and entering any church. I for one think a debate about theistic evolution would be a hoot………..NOT.
“And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze: “I know your works—your love, faith, service, and patient endurance. I know that your last works are greater than the first. But I have this against you: you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants?? to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her fornication. Beware, I am throwing her on a bed, and those who commit adultery with her I am throwing into great distress, unless they repent of her doings; and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve. But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call ‘the deep things of Satan,’ to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden; only hold fast to what you have until I come.
Is the Church at Thyatira interchangable with the Church of Catalyst? Just asking!
The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version. Nashville : Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989, S. Re 2:18-25
@flying squirrel, your lack of knowledge of the bible is so apparent by your comments. Take the time and be a “berean” you would check the scriptures. Know what Jesus says about fruit. Atleast know that Jesus spoke more about Hell than he tought about heaven. He being God manifested in the flesh said, there is a heaven and there is a hell.
Wow……the more i read this crap the more inclined i am to read The Tao Te Ching or Buddha or maybe even to join Deric.
Your mouth speaks,that which you have already determined in your heart. Wow, find that in psalms.
Bob, i know this much……..that good soil bears good fruit. Your soil seems a little rough from my standpoint, and what seems apparent to me is how much Jesus talked of LOVE more than of Heaven or Hell.
Stop repeating the false reports and read the bible yourself. Thats all I’m saying. Sowing and Reaping. There is much much more. He is the vine and we are the branches. Get into the word. Be a Berean. Know the whole gospel. Jesus came to fulfill the law. they vail was torn from top to bottom so that all can have access to God.
I an a sceptic about everything. I had to travel to Israel to see that the bible is true. I needed to see if Galgotha, the temple mount, capernaum temple, herodd’s temple, the gadarene caves, the east gates, mt. of olives, the upper room, qumran, bethany, the gate where stephen was stoned to death, and the garden tomb actually exists. There was much more. Check it out. If you cant go, then read the book, “The Case for Christ”, from an atheist’s view.
I have actually read that book Bob, and many more like it, I believe what I believe due to my own heart and mind, not due to any amount of words that condescending people like you can spew. I have no time to be a “Berean” what ever the hell that is……I am a squirrel, time to fly!
The Bereans, on the other hand, “were more fair-minded” in that they: (1) “received the word with all readiness,” (2) “searched the Scriptures daily,” (3) apparently had the true spirit of open-mindedness for religious thought, and (4) in the spirit of truth sought to understand “whether these things were so” which Paul had spoken.
Now you know what a Berean is. You search the scriptures to see for yourself what someone else says to you if actually found in scripture and not be a robot.
Believer’s Study Bible. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. Ac 17:11
Flying Squirrel, my comment was meant within the context of Dan’s response. I don’t think we need discussions about theistic evolution, just that we need to buy Jesus Christ above everything. It seems more and more apparent that we need to put him above the petty arguing going on here. Let’s put our swords away and try through Christ to bring productive words here. God bless you
Bob, as good as our intentions are, we can’t shove the word down a person’s throat and force them to digest it. We need to give to people according to what they can accept.
1 Corinthians 9:22
To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.
“…perhaps this is the place fruit goes to waste.”
Or perhaps this is where Christians who have suffered enough of the company of people like Anne and Bob go to think for themselves.
Anna, how does encouraging someone to read the bible for themselves and then come to a conclusion equate with shoving it down their throats?
You know as the bible discusses milk and solid food.
Joel………..Amen brother! 🙂
Exactly brother Bob, perhaps we are offering meat to a child that can only handle milk.
We’re all very fragile vessels, easily cracked and broken. We lash out at eachother or ignore eachother when we are confronted with our own iniquity, but there is wisdom in taking correction just as there is wisdom in knowing how to give it with peace and patience.
2 corinthians 6:3
Giving no offense in anything, that the ministry be not blamed. But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God in much paitence
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL………………………..OY VEY!
I have never given any alcohol to a minor nor will I ever. Name a minor, give an example, provide some proof and I will turn myself in the the proper authorities.
I do not hate church, I love church. Ask anyone who knows me, its annoying how much I love it all.
Anyone who wants to question me on any matter can email me and we will sit down and discuss it. Let’s get down to something real instead of anonymous cowardice. wstartare@gmail.com.
Not gonna do it. Of course you love church, it allows you to be a rock star. Don’t pretend you get caught up in it and take some of that praise for yourself. Catalyst didn’t accept correction when it was given in person, why would they do it in a face to face? So you could continue to placate the godly people who have expressed real concerns. You’d love to imagine this is persecution, but plenty of people have brought these issues up and they’ve done nothing, so now these issues are brought to light for everyone to see. Catalyst has compromised everything to be loved by the world. I don’t want to tear down Catalyst. I want to tear off their mask of hypocrisy. This is a social club masquerading as a church that masquerades as a social club. I can empathize. They’ve left churches that failed them. The pastors at Arcata 1st and Faith Center and others were falling down. What young college students want to hear a pastor that downloads his sermons off the internet? What college student wants to hear a sermon about how great the pastor is? I understand why you left your churches. But you left them for a false church. you left them to form a social club. no doubt there are some wonderful people at catalyst that hold it up. God honors them, but there is a stinking odor that smells so sweet to the atheists and those who hate God. They are pleased as can be with the compromised church. Repeatedly you see atheists who like Catalyst, because they are doing charity without glorifying God.
Praise The LORD! Tamara where have you been? Preach it sista!
why is it so easy for the evangelicals to sew such hate? have any of you actually been to a Catalyst service? or are you all just speaking hypothetically?
Matthew 23:37 “you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you…” you of little faith and hateful hearts, why should anyone listen to you?
Anyone who wants to question me on any matter can email me and we will sit down and discuss it. wstartare@gmail.com
I would respond more to Tamara, but I don’t truly understand any of the points made. Nor do I see any evidence to back up what I think youshe might mean. Honestly I only want to build bridges and discuss these issues. I don’t know who you are Tamara and why you have made up your mind about me without knowing anything about me or Catalyst or Faith Center apparently, but I want to know you and clear up the problems that I had no idea existed.
“…Repeatedly you see atheists who like Catalyst…”
So what? Non-believers loved Pope John XXIII, but that didn’t harm his credibility as a Catholic. Tamara is jealous. Isn’t there some Biblical verse that Bob can cite in order to dilute her bitterness?
@Joel there you go again depending on someone to interpret the bible verses for you. I support everything that Tamara said. How about that verse!
Yesterday a good friend of mine confronted me about my posts here. He told me that I had diminished any credibility by “saying crazy things” and being “contradictory.” I was fairly hurt over these comments, but have been thinking about them and took his words to heart. I wanted to apologize if anything I said was over the top, (which apparently it was.) Sometimes I find it difficult to put emotion aside, especially when discussing faith. I’ve been hurt in the church, I’ve seen both sides of the issue, and now find myself in an isolated place without a country. I don’t fit in with the church, and I don’t fit in with those outside of it. I try to build bridges and help others to see the issues from all sides. Sometimes I go over the top to try to make a point…maybe I go too far. So, my apologies if this is the case. I believe that if I don’t show love to those around me, then anything I have said is pointless. Hopefully that’s not the case here.
@Diane, your friend was correct in his observations and your apology is accepted.
God Bless
Thanks Bob. I have to admit I’m disappointed with the way this thread has gone. I really had hoped people in this community would be more open minded honestly. It seems like most perspectives are extremely black and white. I don’t really see people here encouraging others, trying to find common ground, loving one another, etc. I don’t see any point for me to be part of the discussion here anymore. Peace Out
To the audience:
Yea, I have seen Deric’s blog before. I think Tyrone was right on the money. Deric seems to have a chip on his shoulder and is bitter (or, for his family of humanity) about Christianity to me. Or else, what motive would he have to write this?
I’ve never met a bitter person who was thankful,
…or a thankful person who was bitter. Where does Deric fit in?
http://interrobangtribune.blogspot.com/
Deric:
What are you thankful for?
Todd M
To all who care,
I just got home from work and read the above message. Before spending the next couple hours with my sweetie I thought I would just say that I don’t know how one can judge my character based on a couple of ancient blog posts, but I’m honored that people want to know more about where I’m coming from. I have so much to be thankful for that I won’t be able to fit it all in this post. So, tomorrow after work in the morning and a lovely lunch with a pastor from Arcata Calvary, I’ll post a blog entry answering Todd’s questions.
Also,
if you can’t wait until then I did post a little about my birthday party somewhere in this incredibly long thread.
P.S. Diane,
Hang in there. We’re all on a journey tryin’ to live the best lives that we can. Your posts were no more “crazy” or “contradictory” than many others. You’ve been open and gracious. Don’t worry, no apologies are necessary.
I’ve offered this to everyone on this thread and I will again. If anyone wants to stop hiding behind anonymity and meet face to face I’m more than open to do so. I’m very tired of the negativity in this thread.
my email: mr.dericm@gmail.com
cheers and good night,
Deric
Deric – I know I said I was done here, but I just wanted to pop back on and say thanks for the kind words; it means a lot. Thanks also for the open invitation to the faith community, (and everyone else.) It’s more than I can offer, and I commend you. I hope your talks with people here go well…who knows what may come of all of this, only time will tell.
I think we falsely justify ourselves by judging others. Dan mentioned that pastors compromise their messages to get numbers as if by “not” doing that, he is right. Or as someone else brought up that Dan brings up ‘doing activist work to convert is wrong, we don’t do that therefore we are right.’ These issues aren’t so black and white. We all love to judge to ignore our own struggles.
Someone suggested rather abrasively that Catalyst should alternate worship leaders. Catalyst is good to alternate their speakers, perhaps they should apply the same logic to their worship leaders. Just a thought. I’m going to get a life now before someone tells me to.
one more thing and if my last post didn’t provoke wrath, this one is sure to.
Most of us understand that there are those who believe in God, those who are agnostic and refuse to choose, and those who simply are aware of God in their heart but hate Him and call themselves atheists. No one will deny the infinite when they die, but many will regret denying while they were alive.
wow I really feel this pit trying to suck me in
@Larry leave your cloak and RUN!
To my fellow followers of Jesus Christ of Nazarath.
But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. ?? And ??a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, ?able to each, ??patient, ??in humility correcting those who are in opposition, ??if God perhaps will grant them repentance, ??so that they may know the truth, ?and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.
The New King James Version. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1982, S. 2 Ti 2:23-26
Ia! Shub-Niggurath! Black goat of the woods with a thousand young!
To clear up a common misconception:
Atheists don’t, and can’t, hate God. We don’t believe in him. I know that it’s hard for believers to grasp, but for atheists the Christian God is no different than Zeus or the Tooth Fairy. All are fictional and don’t warrant hate.
NKJ Version Psalm 1:1
The ??fool has said in his heart,“There is no God.”
The New King James Version. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1982, S. Ps 14:1
Anybody listening to KSLG right now,
While Dan is making some great points, some of his statements are very revealing.
“We don’t deny heaven or hell because it seems to make people upset.” Dan Davis
Galatians 1:10
Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.
1 Thessalonians 2:4
On the contrary, we speak as men approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts.
Deric, it is more difficult that we think to simply clear up a misconception. What you claim to believe is a lot more simple than what may be in your subconscious. Are we so prideful to judge our own hearts? I believe you are aware at the core of your being that you are in relation to a higher power, but because of hurts you’ve received in life, you have projected your anger onto a cultural fabrication of “God”. This “fabric” becomes the fetishized object of your disavowal of the higher power. When challenged with this, you joke your way out. Yes, man made ideas of God are no different than Zeus, tooth fairy or Jedi. But the idea of God is beyond man made ideas. A chair is a man made object, a place of rest. But a place of rest exists without man’s inventions of it. With all humility remain open hearted. The idea of God may appear unkind to you, but there is One who is like a perfect father and loves you more than you could ever comprehend. Who are we to judge God according to man made ideas about this One?
It’s good to know that Larry can read minds. He should start a psychic hotline.
As for answers to his questions and those pertaining to what I’m thankful for, please tune into my blog http://interrobangtribune.blogspot.com/ later this evening.
yep, there it is, a joke to ventilate the disavowal, textbook repression Deric. Atheism is illogical as James offered. I suggest you take him up on his offer and read the reasoning. But is sounds like you yourself aren’t as reasonable as you wear on your sleeve. Reason alone wont reveal the truth to you anyway. It will only help remove the illusions you’ve put in the place of truth.
@Deric here is a challege like no other challenge based on your lack of belief system.
You go outside and you feel the effects of the wind, but you can’t see it. Do you believe that wind actually exist.
You go up to Humboldt State University and make your way to the roof. You stand there on the ledge and comtemplate. I can’t see gravity, I see it’s affect, but I still don’t believe in it.
THEN JUMP OFF THE BUILDING.
Somthing tells me that prior to hitting the ground you will quickly come to a conclusion that gravity does exist and you know believe in it.
@Deric, please don’t take my above post literally. But I hope that you get my point. God reveals Himself in creation. Many scientist have come to the conclusion simply based on the fact that they can not explain the law of theromdynamics and the law of deminished returns. Can you? How does all of this happen without a creator. I suppose that someone could put a block of steel in your driveway and come millions of years later and the block of steel will eventually turn itself into a car. Oh, forgot someone has to design it.
“…You stand there on the ledge and comtemplate. I can’t see gravity, I see it’s affect, but I still don’t believe in it…”
Bob’s goofy little reductio ad absurdum ignores the fact that fundamentalists are the ones who so often deny science.
@Joel, shut up. If I’m talking to you, I’ll pull your chain!
@Joel, please tell me your not that same Joel who used to kicked the inside of the drunk tank door until he was let out.
Fundamentalists do not deny science, only that science has not and will never catch up with the infinite wonder of creation. This is because we do not have an infinite amount of time, resources and words to understand and explain all things. As Dan himself said on the radio today, the supernatural is that which science has not yet explained. In this sense, the flight of a bee is supernatural. Science cannot “yet” explain how a big bee with tiny wings can stay off the ground. Bob, please keep it together for Christ’s sake.
Please see the Northcoast Journal “The Problem with Fundies” comment section. Albee took the writer to school.
William Startare, Andrew Goff, Dan Davis, all members of Catalyst:
John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
Was John wrong to point out that people stood condemned? Can you discern that telling a person they are going to hell is not condemning them but telling them that they are already condemned by their own sin? How can you share the gospel with anyone if they don’t know they need the gospel?
I am pleading with you as brothers and sisters in Christ, stop trashing the gospel! This is your pastor! This is your pastor! He has compromised the gospel, the power to be saved, and for what?!
Bethany and Jason Cseh, where is your discernment?!
Levi Mogg, where is your discernment?!
Dave Davison, where is your discernment?!
Marc Mcgowan, where is your discernment?!
1 Samuel 16:7
7 But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”
James 4:10-12
10 Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up in honor.
11 Don’t speak evil against each other, dear brothers and sisters. If you criticize and judge each other, then you are criticizing and judging God’s law. But your job is to obey the law, not to judge whether it applies to you. 12 God alone, who gave the law, is the Judge. He alone has the power to save or to destroy. So what right do you have to judge your neighbor?
Matthew 7:1-3
1″Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3″Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
Romans 12:19-21
19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay, says the Lord. 20On the contrary: “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Luke 23:34: Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
In our fallen state, we most naturally replicate the original sin that pervades the rebellious human race. We “eat of the knowledge of the tree of good and evil,” which is to say, we put ourselves in a position of judging people.-Greg Boyd
William, thank you for responding with the Word. Discern this is not a judgment of condemnation, but of refusing to condone what is being taught at Catalyst.
John 7:24 “Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment.”
Stop judging by smooth words and the appearance of wisdom and intellect. Judge according to the Word.
Okay, I’m not judging. I’m being a fruit inspector. Bad fruit is bad fruit. The backslider verses are popping up everywhere. We are to judge fruit, but we are not suppose to judge or make a determination on who is going to hell. Only God knows who will be saved. So keep on inspecting fruit my Christian brothers and sisters.
I am not sure if I am a believer in God. I am very much on the fence about it, but I can never discount it. It seems sad if there were no higher power. Really sad. But I respect those who do not believe. I respect those who believe. But I do not frown upon those that believe. I am just thankful I am allowed to believe whatever I want in this land.
I am a scientist. When trying to solve a problem I go about by business with respect to both science and belief in God, and not throw away the other.
JY
@Jingyun, as a scientist, do you have any opinion on the laws of theromdynamics and deminished returns. Could either happen without a creator?
I will ask again since I did not receive a comment when last I asked…….have any of you Catalyst critic’s actually ever been to a service there? really curious………..
I’ll be the first critic. No, I haven’t. But does listening to several of the sermons from begining to end count? We were asked to listen to several of the one on line. Would the same messages be any different if I had heard them in person. I mean, the content would still be the same wouldn’t it?
No…… I don’t think that listening to a tape is the same as being there, there are things that happen in between that would not be included. Why don’t you check a full, live service out before you continue to spout off about this church’s lack of faith Bob? methinks you do sound a bit defensive and you know it……..
Okya, now I be the first to say Yes, I have listended to them in person. Now what is your rebutal?
@Tamara
At last we agree.
“Stop judging by smooth words and the appearance of wisdom and intellect. Judge according to the Word.”
At Catalyst this is what we live by. Our focus on what the scriptures have to say about any topic is never ending and we strive to project our western-minded selves on the text as little as possible. At the end of sermons I am always challenged by what the word says and doesn’t say. Then, we have a time of worship and reflection allowing the spirit to work on our hearts and minds.
So now you are admitting to being a liar Bob? Why would you lie about such a silly thing? you have lost all credibility at this point…….
Come on stop the deflection. What’s the difference in the message.The teaching. The bible doesn’t change? Dimming the lights doesn’t make it more spiritual. The message, is the message, is the message. Isn’t it?
your true colors are showing Bob and they are not very pretty………where are all the other critics? not going to answer, eh? as I suspected, just a bunch of hollow cowards who want to hide out on the internet…..
Lilith, I’ve been to Catalyst. There are wonderful people there. I did notice however that the word was used to support someone’s message rather than vice versa which troubled me some. I’m neither an optimist nor a cynic but skeptic.
William, I was troubled by several things Dan said. I’m all for using startling lines to throw people off and make them think. But he believes the bible is errant. He believes there is a hierarchy. I wonder what is at the bottom. I wonder what he believes is an error. I wonder why he would bless a gay marriage in the name of God. I wonder why he would deny the existence of hell and say the only reason he doesn’t is because it upsets people. Like many in our community, I was excited about Catalyst. I wanted to see God do something radical for the young people here. But this is not of God. I do not judge the people or condemn them. I do judge as the Word instructs us to, as Jesus instructs us to. William, teach the word in your home and put away the alcohol. There are alcoholics among you, young people watching you. There are many things I love about Catalyst, but we cannot deny that the gospel is compromised.
Deflect, Deflect, Deflect, never answer the question. Never, never, never, never, get off point, make another point,
I realize many at Catalyst will scoff at that bold statement, “not of God”, so let me be clear. There is no doubt that God can use Catalyst, that God blesses people who worship him and gather in his name. But I do believe there is a lot of work going on in the flesh that is not of God. All things are permissible but not all things are beneficial.
sounds as if the word is being used in a way to be relevant in this century, I have indeed been to other churches that have done the same thing, New Heart, for example, I see nothing wrong with this…..
and correct me if wrong, but didn’t Jesus drink a little wine? I think the only problem that arises is if it is in excess…….
unfermented! Gee people, who’s teaching you the bible. Stop listening to the weak teaching. Search the scripture yourself.
Bob you have lost all credibility………really……
wouldn’t it be called juice then Bob? and not wine? and what would be the big deal about turning water into juice???
Check your own sources. then check your credibility. The bible is credible on its own. It doesn’t need your help! Maybe start reading about the Levites, the prophets and the Nazarites. What city was Jesus born in? .
To become a bible scholor, one was first study it. You may begin at study Jewish tradition. Not Catholosism. The chruch began way before constatine made it the worl religion. It was simply “The Way”!
@Lilith stop having knee jurk reactions. Find yourself a great bible commentary to read. Stop comparing yourself to others around you. When you get out into the vast world, you run into many people that have study the bible for as long as you have possibly been alive on this earth. I’m just say’n
Continue to study and show yourself approved of God.
@Lilly here is a start, you’ll have to do the rest of the work on your own.
2:10 Diluted wine (three parts water to one part wine) was a common beverage with meals in the culture of that day. Our Lord’s first miracle in John speaks of the new blessings which come as a result of His presence. Wine typically speaks of the joy of spiritual life. With the coming of Jesus, God’s best has arrived at last, and in contrast to Moses, who turned water into blood in judgment (cf. Ex. 7:14–24), Jesus turns water into wine in joyful celebration of a new age.
Believer’s Study Bible. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. Jn 2:10
Just in case you had additonal questions about Paul writing to Timothy.
5:23 Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.—it seems best to regard this verse as somewhat parenthetic. It certainly gives evidence of the tender consideration given by the senior missionary for his younger fellow worker’s physical welfare. The exacting character of Timothy’s labors and the heavy responsibilities devolving upon him, with all the anticedent trials and perils in his missionary activities, no doubt had a prejudicial effect upon his health (there is no evidence that Timothy was constitutionally a weakling previous to his call to such work). He had evidently confined himself to the use of water for drinking, perhaps with the godly desire to set an example against the evils of intoxication prevalent in Ephesus (a hint of which is given in 3:3 and 3:8). Obviously the apostle’s exhortation deals with the use of wine as a medicine and is not of wine as a beverage on the part of believers. The servant of God should, however, guard against the weakening of his bodily power through extreme asceticism. No miracle can be expected if the divinely provided use of means is neglected
Vine, W.E.: Collected Writings of W.E. Vine. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1996
@William Startare,
“You see Jesus inherently criticizing the socio-religious order of his day.” Dan Davis
Interesting that the moment someone criticizes the socio religious order of Catalyst, they cry “persecution!” and list off all the verses about persecution.
You should embrace real persecution. Instead of placating Activision. You should kindly say, “You know what, like everyone in the world, we are all condemned by our own selfish prideful sins of seeking fulfillment at the expense of other people. Yes, you, like everyone in the world is going to hell unless you receive the forgiveness of Jesus Christ which is freely offered to all people regardless of race religion gender or sexual preference.” Then welcome them to do a sit in. Welcome real persecution.
Have we met Tamara? I can’t seem to recall it happening. I don’t recognize the name.
Would you like to have coffee? I would. When are you available?
An impromptu rambling from yours truly.
http://interrobangtribune.blogspot.com/2010/09/beer-me-jesus-response.html
Tamara and Bob…….. life is not a competition, Christianity or the search for our own individual truth is not a competition. To bad there is not a reality show based on scripture, then the two of you could duke it out on national T.V. to see who would win the ultimate badass JC award………oh, and do the two of you have your own church? maybe you should try that and see how many people would attend……
Goff, we haven’t met. We’ve seen each other, but I don’t think we’ve made eye contact. Sorry, but I’m just not convinced a face to face meeting would be more productive and I am like others scared of being judged as a naysayer. Perhaps that is my own compromise and there is some hypocrisy going on on my part. None of us are innocent or perfect. I just want to make sure that Catalyst hears what many people think and say but none actually say to Catalyst as far as I know. What would you want to talk about anyway. I don’t think either of us would feel comfortable.
Lilith, do I detect some sass? 😉 New Heart is a great church as far as I know. It is good to speak in such a way that your audience understands. But there is a difference between changing your style and changing your message. In my opinion, Catalyst has clearly compromised the message. I want to know what part of the bible Dan believes is an error, what part of the bible is lowest on his hierarchy. It seems to me that he projects disenchantment onto Pat Robertsons in order to justify himself. Its as if he says, ‘I am this because I am not that’ when he should only compare himself to Jesus.
I would feel comfortable, Tamara. What would we talk about? Whatever you want. Or I’ll just sit and listen. It would be more productive than what you’re doing here. This is a sincere invitation.
Or send me an email. andrew_eli_goff@yahoo.com.
Lilith, I don’t understand the response that you have directedto Tamara and me. You took umbridge to our posts and specifically challenged my credibility. I don’t claim to have any credibility. My response was to give you a sourse to consider. You don’t have to accept it. If you don’t agree with it, then simply say so. Just tell me that “the bible or whatever source that I have quoted is incorrect”.
I had a conversation with a gentleman today who suggested that I should be more appealing with the masses in order to win them for Christ? Would you also like for me to have a softer tone and stance for Christ? Would you like for me give opinions so that we can dialogue. The harsh reality is that I believe the word of God and am looking for to hearing the words, “well done good and faithful servant…. “. I let the Holy Spirit do the job of conversion.
I only hope that all you folks behaving with passion about this stuff recognize the mutual insignificance it is to others, that is your indifference to that which they are passionate about. It’s hard to see any conversation as an argument if you keep that in mind.
@born naked thank you, but the love for my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ of Nazareth burns within me and I’m not leaving up to the rocks to cry out.
Will you also obey?
Jesus speaking: “Everyone who acknowledges me publicly here on earth, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven.
Is he addressing those who choose to remain silent to “keep the peace”?
Tyndale House Publishers: Holy Bible : New Living Translation. 2nd ed. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2004, S. Mt 10:32-33
you bet, I obey the rocks.
@Lilith – Yep, been there, done that..lived to tell the tale.
Goff, I don’t drink much coffee, it makes me spazzy. I don’t think there is anymore to say. I’ve probably already said too much, if I were to keep going, I might warrant a lawsuit for slander and harassment. I don’t think it would be productive to meet you because you haven’t shown one bit of humility that there is a kernel of truth to what I wrote. At least Startare recognized some valid points to a rebuke. If Catalyst wont respond with humility to some criticism, at least the community of believers would see it. That’s why I preferred a public forum instead of private as you prefer. Anyway, I’m done and I apologize to you for anything that I said that wasn’t of God, truly. God bless you.
I’m going to barf.
Bob, One last post as this is a useless waste of time and energy, you lost your own credibility when you lied, period.
Tamara, New Heart is not perfect as no church is perfect, when I was there the pastors wife had an affair with her best friend’s husband and the entire church almost fell apart, leaving me with a bad taste for organized religion.
Buzz, DITTO!!!
on that note, I’m outy……..
Waiting for some pizza, I flipped open a copy of the journal and read Dan’s letter to the editor. I’m all for Catalyst and trust the “discernment” of the believers there. If they like Dan, I’m all for it. This quote got a chuckle from me:
“I authentically (not ambiguously) see Jesus as offering radical teachings and modeling a way of life that really can transform individuals and societies.”
I think an authentic Christian believes not just that Jesus was a good teacher or model for a way of life, or a way of making the world a better place, but the one who saved the world from hell, not just to make the world better but to give eternal life. That’s why Dan seems ambiguous in my opinion. But it doesn’t really matter anyway. I don’t have to worry about it and I hope other people can chill out and let it be.
Goff, I’d talk to you about it, but I’m afraid I’d bore you or talk more about surfing. I hope these kooks haven’t gotten you down.
I thought I’d come back and critique my own words because I feel like I just got a little word from God. Instead of trusting their discernment, I trust Jesus. This is Jesus’ church, not Dan’s or anyone else’s. Everyone there is free to believe whatever they want. God uses many different people. He chose Dan for this place. We may not know why, but we need to trust God and not criticize eachother. If I came of overly critical, I apologize. I have no business criticizing another person’s words. I don’t know why I even came to this silly forum. I am outy.
Deric,
I sincerely appreciate the response. I respect that. And again, excellently written article too. It truly made me think a lot, and deeply.
Todd M
@Lillith, stop with the Ad hominem attacks. Take the high road and answer the question. You knew my response was a set up for question to be answered, but some people will do anything not to answer a direct question directly. Were the sources that I quoted wrong or was the bible wrong?
Lord I lift up Tamara in prayer to you right now. Lord, I pray You place your ministering angles about Tamara and comfort her. I pray that You give her a peace that passes all understanding. Lord give her favor in everything that she places her hands to. Guide her steps that she would not stumble. Protect her family Lord and place a hedge of protection around her household.
I thank You Lord in advance, because I know that You hear and answer the prayers of Your Child.
In Jesus’ name, I pray. And they all said.
Amen!
“Okay, I’m not judging. I’m being a fruit inspector.”
I’m relieved that Bob has found a vocation.
okay Batman quote, Alfred speaking to Bruce Wayne:
You crossed the line first, sir (Church). You squeezed them, you hammered them to the point of desperation. And in their desperation they turned to a man they didn’t fully understand (Dan). With respect, sir (Church), perhaps this is a man that ‘you’ don’t fully understand.
Dan is an ambiguous Christian. There are many paradoxes in the Word, perhaps this is just another paradox. Take for example free will and predestination. God knows who will receive salvation, but we still have free will. These two ideas seem to contradict each other. In the same way, Dan never clearly contradicts scripture, he just doesn’t clearly teach it, leaves it to a paradox for people to figure out for themselves. He says he believes Jesus is a radical teacher. A true Christian believes Jesus is more than that. Dan doesn’t contradict the idea, but he leaves us to wonder.
Thanks Hank & NCJ. Writing a piece that invokes spirited debate (no pun intended 🙂
Man, this thing goes on and on … but as I expressed at the outset of the Deric-Dan outburst upon the world scene (mostly around Humboldt Co.) – Dan the Man must grid up his loins, apparently along with his leadership at Catalyst, and determine two salient issues confronting their evangelical persuasion…
(1) elect to bring in gays/lesbians into their (Catalyst) leadership; and (2) will the Catalyst pastorate/leadership bequeath and sanctify same sex marriage? Dan gave himself 2 months (August 20 to approx. October 20, 2010 – not even close to Dec. 21, 2012).
So it goes in today’s laisse-faire evangelicalism. There’s a choice to be made here – not just a “style” of behavior. If you were to listen to the decisively “save the homosexual” – the LGBTQIA (leaving off bestiality for the time being – although “A” allies (straights, etc.) could expand to such and could be a real + for PETA) – coming from THE CALL held at the Sacramento State Capitol the last two days (and, I might add, a media-mesmerized pro-prop. 8 fest) … there’s little doubt where the over-the-hill Bethel Church of Bill Johnson in Redding and The Call folks stand juxtaposed to the Rick Coles and apparently the Emergent Church folks like Dan, who stand or want to somehow stand somewhere betwixt and between the two polarized groups.
The Call folks might not let that happen – I mean, they’re just down Hwy 299 and seem to be multiplying like rabbits – grief, everyone at the rally was young and every other person I saw was either pregnant or strolling/holding a newborn with kids dangling all over the place – occasionally I saw someone yelling and running through the crowd babbling something about “pray for equality” and then fading fast, as if a would-be Titanic had just hit an iceberg and ’twas time to abandon ship! They even had a “former gay” guy get up with wife and baby in hand declaring his deliverance from the gay lifestyle with the obviously multi-racial 10,000 participant crowd going berserk as he declared he was “free at last!”
Finally, that conservative rag sheet, The Bee, proclaimed with incredible insight – a sort of sop to the Emergent Church as it concluded its front-page/back-page piece with an exchange between an “event volunteer” and a gay-rights group known as “Equality Action Now” – with EAN saying: “We are much more alike than different…that makes me happy.”
Wonder if Dan and Crew dare say the same? Hey, it would be meeting the gay community half way…
“There’s a choice to be made here – not just a ‘style’ of behavior…”
I’d appreciate the choice to write in a style that’s clear and concise.
(Part 1)
So I’m coming to this conversation VERY late, it’s true. But I did want to say this, even if doesn’t have tons of theological mumbo-jumbo:
I went to Catalyst for almost three years before moving to Jackson Hole. I grew up in a “Baptist” church that was a part of the Baptist General Conference, or “Converge,” which means they associated with the name Baptist, but weren’t strictly denominationaly-driven. My dad is a pastor and has taught at both BGC and Christian & Missionary Alliance churches. I went to a Nazarene University. I have participated in youth groups associated with Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois, and Assemblies of God. I have a fairly ecumenical background because of this. My husband grew up Mormon and left the LDS church when he was 22. Catalyst was the first church we attended together after we got married.
Please realize my background in religious instruction, and the many places it comes from. My father’s favorite question for me when I was growing up was “is that good theology?” He had me actively question theology and compare it to the Bible. I’m not a pastor, I didn’t go to seminary, but I’ve taken many theology classes and growing up with my folks was, in its own way, a life-long seminary.
That said, Catalyst has been one of the best churches for my soul. Dan Davis is a close friend of mine (as are many of the people who were questioned in this commentary). We do not always agree, that is for sure. There have been many nights that I have stayed up late debating Dan Davis and Levi Mogg. But I consider them true friends, and they would be the first to admit when they need to reconsider their stands on certain subjects.
I love Catalyst. It made me truly analyze WHAT I believe; such analyzing can make a belief stronger, because it becomes your own. Do I agree with everything that I heard at Catalyst? No. Did my husband and I come away from some church services with rebuttals and questions? Yes. But I know that it is said with a heart full of love for God, and his son, Jesus. And more times than not, I have learned more about God’s love and his plan for our lives (much more than I learned at my university, or at most churches I have attended).
I have felt the Holy Spirit at this church. The Life Groups (which have quite a LOT of Scripture, in my experience) have been transformative for me. One group I was in discussed both the Bible and C.S. Lewis’s “Mere Christianity” which I believe many Christians would find to be theologically sound.
(Part 2)
I do think that Catalyst concentrates a lot on social justice. I have, at times, expressed concern to Dan (as my friend AND pastor) that it can appear that social justice is preached more than our dependence on Christ, and more than holy, sanctified living. Dan would probably argue that helping the down-trodden IS holy, sanctified living, which is true.
I think one of the reasons Catalyst cares SO MUCH about social justice is that many churches in Humboldt County seem like they DON’T CARE AT ALL. In a county where so many families are below poverty level, so many people are homeless, the leadership at Catalyst feels the broken-hearted NEEDS of their community and feels constantly compelled to respond in a way that is not only spiritual but TANGIBLE.
And yes, to some that may seem strange, like the emphasis is on “the wrong thing.” But let me tell you, Catalyst is reaching people in a way that no other church in the area has. They CARE about people, and they show it.
Are they in the post-modern strain? Yes. Do they have an air of trendy-emergent-church-chic? Yes. Do they like to push boundaries and make people think? Yes.
But when it comes down to it, people ARE thinking and people ARE being reached and people that would never want to learn about Christ’s love (because they’ve been burned by other churches, etc) are LISTENING, and that’s powerful.
God is so much stronger and bigger than all of this. I know some people look at Catalyst and they see the things that they do not agree with, and they shake their fingers and they quote the parts of Scripture that bet fit their claims. Rarely do these people or churches quote the following:
James 1:27
“Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you.”
Isaiah 1:17
“Learn to do good. Seek justice. Help the oppressed. Defend the cause of orphans. Fight for the rights of widows.”
People at Catalyst are trying to follow Jesus. They’re trying to care for the marginalized, the poor, the orphan, the widow. Heck, Jason and Bethany Cseh have adopted three young children, two right out of the foster system. These people want to follow God. Their hearts long to love those that Jesus loved. Jesus didn’t hang out with the other religious people, comfortable in their religious buildings. Jesus hung out with the disenfranchised, the marginalized, the people that religious types look down on. That’s where his ministry was; he didn’t win people over by constantly telling them “you’re going to Hell.” He told them they were forgiven, without going into what they were being saved FROM. He didn’t scare them into the Kingdom. He LOVED them into the Kingdom.
And in my experience, Catalyst both teaches and points to the Scriptures, and not just to support their views. In my life group we practiced Lectio Divina. There’s been sermon series on MANY MANY books of the Bible. Yes, some series are topical. This is true in most churches. But they are Biblical. Perhaps the Life Group the author attended SHOULD have been more aware that they were not using the Bible at that Life Group. Perhaps they should have been more intentional, knowing that every detail would be watched and noticed.
Those whose hearts are so hardened towards Catalyst need to search for God’s heart on the matter, because that’s really the only thing that matters. Perhaps they will still find that Catalyst is simply not the place for them. Perhaps they will see that they have had their hearts hardened to those who are simply different than then, or less lucky in life than them.
Finally, saying that Catalyst church is heretical is simply not true. If you are uncomfortable with their teachings, that’s fine. I know I wouldn’t be comfortable in a Pentecostal church, that’s for sure. But I’m not going to say that they are heretical simply because they emphasize spiritual gifts more than I’d like.
If you don’t want to attend Catalyst, fine. If you think the leadership at Catalyst needs to teach more on sanctification, holy living, and the entrapment sin can bring, good! Tell them! It’s possible that they do need to hear that, if so many people are concerned about it. But do not doubt their love for God, his son, his creation, and his people. Because, in my experience, that’s simply not true.
Sorry, the above was (Part 3).
I’ve never been blamed for being too concise. 🙂
Jessica, thank you for communicating. I’m not interested in arguing, but replying. I see a pattern in the people that go to Catalyst. It’s as if they are there out of seeking to get away from religious experiences, rather than seeking a personal relationship with Christ. Rather than simply seek Jesus alone, they are hyper aware of all the religiosity going on around them and feel this is the place to escape all that.
You say, “I think one of the reasons Catalyst cares SO MUCH about social justice is that many churches in Humboldt County seem like they DON’T CARE AT ALL.”
Are you aware of Faith Center’s missional work here and abroad? Right now they are in Haiti rebuilding an orphanage. Are you aware of Harvest Baptist’s support of the Pregnancy Care Center? Right now the PCC is offering much needed help to single mothers and widows. This isn’t a competition of who can be the closest to “true religion” but I want you to be aware that not all the churches around here are like the ones you’ve experienced or paid attention to.
You are correct that denominations turn into divisions by overemphasizing one part of scripture over another. Are you aware of how Dan does this? Why not find a balanced church. I’d recommend a Calvary Chapel. (That is not where I go, just a recommendation) Somewhere that teaches the gifts of the spirit without overemphasizing them or denying them. Dan says that the supernatural is simply what science has yet to explain as if man had the capacity to catch up with God.
I believe people are going to Catalyst not to seek Jesus, but to seek escape from the failures of the church. But Catalyst is only a more powerful illusion of the power of the Church. People are being mislead. The leadership of Catalyst has been told they need to teach the whole bible, not just the parts that fit their agenda, but no one is listening. Their ears are itching but they do not listen to the truth. I hope you receive this with the same loving spirit in Christ.
CJ,
That’s great to hear about the above two churches working in areas of social justice. An important point to be made in reply to Jessica. Still, the difference between evangelical churches like Faith Center or Harvest Baptist and Catalyst is important. Whereas Catalyst understands social justice as an end-in-itself that doesn’t require conversions to measure the success of their actions, the vast majority of evangelical churches are doing social justice work as a means to gain converts – which many find manipulative and shallow. While evangelicals understand the gospel to be about saving souls from hell, that is just not the case for churches like Catalyst who understand the gospel to be just as social as it is personal. In other words, acts of social justice actually have eternal merit regardless of whether any person converts to Christianity. They outright reject the modern individualistic interpretation of the gospel that cares so little for creation, material well being, and justice here-and-now. The apocalyptic focus on the afterlife is the cancer of modern evangelicalism that Catalyst has tried to leave behind for a more holistic, transformative gospel.
Furthermore, the idea that American evangelicals broadly care about social justice is really not supported by any data. Just this week, the Barna group released a disturbing report indicating the following:
“Evangelical Christians emerged as a segment that has a distinct set of issues on its mind…they were twice as likely as the nation at-large to list government corruption, national security and the reduction of taxes as significant issues….evangelical Christians seem less interested in matters of justice and service than might be expected. On matters such as global poverty, educational reform, environmental care, and health care, evangelicals’ concern about these issues is average or below average.”
(Source: http://www.barna.org/culture-articles/422-diverse-set-of-national-concerns-topped-by-widespread-economic-worries)
Clearly, the more other-worldly a religion is, the less it will care about life now, in this world. That’s just too bad, as it only emphasizes the impotence that much of modern American evangelicalism has come to be characterized by. Additionally, it also underscores the truth that evangelicals remain married to the social agenda of the Republican party.
Oh, and btw, not the best moment to recommend a Calvary Chapel as a substitute for Catalyst. Check out this week’s sad story in the Journal about Arcata Calvary.
Jill,
Interesting. Thanks for the link!
Jill,
First, I suggest Calvary Chapel because they believe the bible is innerant while not focusing on one part of scripture above another. Obviously you can see by the dates that I wasn’t aware of the allegations when I posted. It is still a good time to suggest Eureka Calvary Chapel. Suggesting that it isn’t a good time to suggest them based on what a pastor did at another church is irresponsible in my opinion.
I think you make an over simplified either or comparison with social work and evangelism. The bible teaches both, not either or. Justifying one extreme simply by comparing it to another extreme is intellectually irresponsible. This is what Dan does repeatedly. A proper understanding of the bible is to do good works and give God the credit, while also understanding that he does the conversion. Success is not measured by any means.
“Suggesting that it isn’t a good time … is irresponsible in my opinion.”
The folks who believe that Bible is “innerant” always manage to get a dig in, inerrant or not.
CJ,
I wasn’t making an either-or comparison in regards to social work/evangelism – it is conservative evangelicals who make the either-or comparison. More accurately, they subordinate social justice to conversion. That’s simply a fact of what it means to be a conservative evangelical, and most of them would proudly embrace that theological diagnosis.
For many non-evangelicals or liberal evangelicals, the gospel is not confined to people/God gaining converts for a religion, rather it is holistic – personal and social reconciliation. It is both/and. “Good works” or social justice is more than checking something off a list of moral requirements though. They are understood to be salvific acts in themselves that are equal to personal reconciliation. That’s where conservative evangelicals get off and scream heresy. But we can’t resolve such a long standing debate here. It is just unfortunate that so many evangelicals remain unaware of the varieties of Christianity, and when they do become aware of other varieties, they instinctively revert back to claiming they read the whole Bible and it’s all the liberals who pick and choose. They really need a dose of Derrida and hermeneutical humility. The heresy game is an ugly part of the faith.
Here’s what I originally said:
“[Catalyst] understand[s] the gospel to be just as social as it is personal”
The evangelical anxiety to gain converts as priority number one stems from a narrow, exclusivist theology of salvation. I have no intention of joining a bible verse war here, but many in the Christian tradition don’t buy that kind of theology on philosophical and biblical grounds.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I believe we are transformed by helping other people. We are first saved by God alone, but our works will be judged at the Bema seat.
Obviously many conservative evangelicals have become lukewarm, more concerned about their taxes and freedom than the suffering of others.
But what I think is important to bring to the Catalyst conversation is that the things we do for our own sake will burn. Those things may be doing work with our name on it or no name at all, just a personal satisfaction. But when we boldly, unashamed of the gospel, help a person out and say, “Don’t thank me. Just say ‘thanks for nothing’, because anything from me is worthless, but anything good that came from me is because of Jesus’ work in my life.” When people see good works, they want to know why and there is that opportunity, not to convert but to give glory to God. Thanks for your comments, I can see you are part of a productive conversation.
I think Catalyst (or a lot of people there) would agree with a quote that has been attributed to St. Francis of Assisi:
“Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words”
And honestly, I only believe the Bible to be inerrant in the things that relate to salvation (not just heaven/hell, but sanctification and regeneration… meaning, the things that bring about glory to god and that bring love and peace and hope to the world).
And I do realize that there are other churches in Humboldt who are ministering to the community, which is why I said it may SEEM like other churches do not care at all. I am happy to see that, however, I know a lot of them see conversion as their #1 reason for service. I worked at a crisis pregnancy clinic that was even less conservative than the one in HumCo and I felt like their emphasis on conversion at times hurt their ministry.
And where I live right now, there is no Catalyst or Calvary Chapel or a lot of choice either way, unfortunately. I wish there was, because it’s discouraging to find a lot of churches that are more interested in creationism vs. evolution and who are more interested in ‘tea-party politics’ than any real dialogue about Jesus and God’s love for a hurting world.
I miss Catalyst a lot. You may not think a lot of people go there to seek Jesus, but my husband and I certainly did, and we definitely found his church in their midst. And I miss that very, very much.
I hear a lot of Christians that are cheesy about their faith quoting St. Francis. Paul has an answer for you from Romans.
“How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?”
No doubt the church exists in the midst of Catalyst. The church exists in the midst of the Key Club and Kiwanis as well, where many Christians attend social clubs centered on social justice. The question you might ask is the difference between God’s idea of social justice and Catalyst’s. Use your bible.
Paul’s words appear to offer more opportunities to criticize others than the words of Jesus. Anyway, I’ll prefer the “cheesy” St. Francis to the pious CJ.
Ohhhh THAT’s what I’m supposed to use my Bible for… thanks CJ! I’ll work on that cheese problem riiiiight away.
Buzzinga.
If we’re throwing Bible verses back and forth instead of really trying to see where the other person is coming from, and respecting that we share the same faith even if we attend different churches, and that we are therefore brothers and sisters…
Luke 18:10-14 is a good one, too.
“The question you might ask is the difference between God’s idea of social justice and Catalyst’s. Use your bible.”
There you go again, claiming you read the bible while those who go to Catalyst don’t. I’m sorry CJ, but this just sounds arrogant. You may disagree with how others interpret the bible, but please stop acting like you and your faith community are the only ones who understand the bible correctly. The bible is the most misused, misunderstood, and controversial book in the world. Humility is in order for this complex book.
But if you want to talk about “God’s idea of social justice”…I’ll tell you what some of us think about it (my apologies to those who have no interest in these tedious discussions):
Start with Israel, a nation uniquely chosen in the bible to be a blessing to all nations in the here-and-now, not the next life. They fail at that a lot. After being liberated from imperial oppression in Egypt, they become imperial oppressors themselves. Their prophets continually call them back to remember and act on their original vocation to care for the poor, widows, orphans, and enact a just society as an example to other nations so that they might have reconciliation with God. In fact, Amos even says God rejects their praise/worship because they do not prioritize justice:
“I hate, I despise your festivals, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them…Take away from me your noise of your songs; I will not listen to the melody of your harps. But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.” (Amos 5:21-25)
Similar words from Isaiah:
“Doom to you who legislate evil, who make laws that make victims – laws that make misery for the poor, that rob my destitute people of dignity, exploiting defenseless widows, taking advantage of homeless children.” (Isaiah 10:1-2)
Now consider Jesus, who proclaims a Jewish message by standing in line with the Israelite prophetic tradition. Consider his provocative parable of judgment that echoes the prophets in Matthew 25:31-46, where the sheep are separated from the goats. It turns out that those who truly believed they were followers of Jesus but didn’t prioritize the poor and needy in society are forever condemned. These “righteous” ones don’t remember ever seeing Jesus hungry, thirsty, in prison, as a stranger, naked, or sick (“the least of these”). Jesus tells them that whatever you did for the poor and needy in society, it’s really like you’re doing it to him. Note also that the ones who did prioritize the poor did not even realize they were doing it in service of Jesus, yet they gain life. Correct beliefs plays no role in this scene of judgment.
(continued below)
For Jesus, Paul, and the early church, the kingdom of God is not just about life-after-death – it’s also here-and-now. The kingdom of God is consciously proclaimed in direct opposition to the kingdom of Rome and everything it stood for (violence, domination, elitism, marginalization of the poor, etc), with whom many of the religious leaders were in collaboration with (thus his indictment of them throughout the gospels). Caesar himself had long claimed the same titles of Jesus: Son of God, Lord, Savior, and Redeemer. He set up civil assemblies around his empire, called ecclesias, the same word the early Christians used for their assemblies or churches. But Caesar proclaimed his gospel, “good news” (yes, even those words) of Rome that Jesus and the kingdom he announced directly opposed. While Caesar’s gospel was that he was bringing peace on earth through military victory against the nations, the gospel of Jesus brings peace to the nations through nonviolent, reconciling love and justice (which he called on people to participate in). The Christians set up their communities with their own gospel and communities in service to their Lord, which directly opposed Rome’s Lord and communities that proclaimed Caesar’s gospel of domination – and this got them into trouble. In other words, the early Christian communities were political in nature, opposing the imperial gospel of Rome.
Finally, Christians see Jesus as not only calling Israel back to their original vocation of being a blessing to the nations through reconciliation, but Jesus literally does for Israel what it could not do for itself – Jesus fulfills the vocation of Israel by reconciling all nations to God through his life, death, and resurrection.
I could go on and on, but you get the picture. If you want to interpret the Bible in a way that prioritizes getting people to believe certain propositions to save them from the next life over working for the cause of justice and peace in this life, that’s your call. It just seems to other Christians that this misses the point of the gospel in its more holistic, prophetic form.
Jill and Jessica, if you want to judge, look in the mirror. I’m only proposing a question, not claiming some knowledge of the bible. Anyway, I’m not going to bother to read your rant, too much of you, not enough of the Word. I’ve made my point here. Catalyst is constantly comparing themselves to others to exalt their style. That’s cheesy christianity in my opinion. If that upsets you that much that you want to mock people and lecture them, perhaps there really is something going on in your lives that you need to let God in deeper to work in you.
CJ, you really don’t seem to be just “proposing a question.” You already implied that you don’t think Catalyst really does their best to be biblical, as you stated in the original post:
“The leadership of Catalyst has been told they need to teach the whole bible, not just the parts that fit their agenda.”
Additionally, are you not contradicting yourself when you say that you are not claiming certain knowledge of the bible, but in the very next sentence you refused to read my post because it wasn’t biblical enough? What am I missing here? I just gave you my understanding of a major narrative I see in the bible about justice and you essentially dismissed it as unbiblical.
CJ, I’m totally not judging you. In fact, I read all of your comments while you admit to not reading Jill’s. But you do appear to be judging me, and telling me to read my Bible and agree with you. I merely stated that verse to show you that I can throw out Bible verses too, ones that are just as damning to anyone and everyone.
I’m not mocking you, or lecturing you. I was standing up for the church I attended. I think that’s a positive thing.
But it’s sort of judgmental and mean of you to assume that you are completely right and I’m wrong. We probably all need to let God in deeper to work in us, yeah?
Please look at the way you are phrasing things – maybe you don’t realize it or mean it at all, but you do sound condescending and not very kind. I do appreciate where you are coming from and I have expressed my concerns about Catalyst to Catalyst leadership directly, not just on an open forum.
“…if you want to judge, look in the mirror.”
CJ could use his own advice.
Jill, again my point is that Catalyst compares one extreme to justify another:
“If you want to interpret the Bible in a way that prioritizes getting people to believe certain propositions to save them from the next life over working for the cause of justice and peace in this life, that’s your call. It just seems to other Christians that this misses the point of the gospel in its more holistic, prophetic form.”
I don’t want to interpret the bible to prioritize the next life over this life. I want what you want, the balance that the Word brings, that we could not find of ourselves. We are emotional beings prone to going to extremes rather than making the sacrifice of faith and finding the balance in the word.
My original point is that Catalyst says that doing works for conversion alone is wrong therefore they don’t do their works in Jesus’ name. That isn’t balanced. That is an emotional reaction to the failures of the evangelical/convservative/fundamentalist church.
So I’m saying, don’t run your church by dialectic of religious forms but a dialogue with the Word. We’re under the curse of using signs and cultural forms to narrate our way through life. But we will only find the straight and narrow by making the sacrifice to give up our authority for God’s. That is my point, rather than comparisons and figuring it out on our own with our ideas, we need to seek God’s Word. There are many testimonies of people who’ve gone to Catalyst and never heard one word from the bible, but simply man’s philosophical ideas of how God is. This is a dangerous, misleading practice. I can understand how it would seem like the answer to us who’ve been burned by religiosity, but this is not the answer. This is only another form of the problem with the church, works of the flesh.
CJ, That was a helpful response to clarify your position. Thank you. It is disappointing to hear that you retain the impression that people who go to Catalyst regularly report not hearing a word of the bible – it is admittedly a part of the NCJ article (which itself is based on very limited exposure to the church). However, a listen to a few of their podcasts and a look at their church blog do in fact show how integrated scripture is to their teaching. I’ve literally listened to dozens of their podcasts, and can honestly say that this impression that Catalyst does not use scripture is unfounded. The way they interpret scripture is one thing that can definitely be disputed – but whether they use it regularly to teach, instruct, discern, etc…that’s another. I have occasionally heard podcasts that had points that were clearly taught right out of the bible, but I absolutely disagreed with the teacher’s interpretation of the bible.
I agree that the church must remain in dialogue with the bible and avoid making projections onto the text. However, if I understand you correctly, I do not think it is possible to have a pure understanding of the bible to work with. The idea that the bible can be interpreted in any plain sense is an invention of modernity. That is, we always, inescapably read things into the text. Pure exegesis is literally impossible for it always involves creatures of context interpreting through a particular lens. I am not arguing for relativism. I am saying that while there is Truth, we can only proceed with caution when trying to discern it and that we should expect to find a surplus of interpretations arise from within the same religious tradition. The text does impose some limits on interpretation, but there is still a lot of ambiguity to go around. A look at 2,000 years of commentary and the contemporary trajectory of scholarship on the bible, and this truth comes into focus. This is a living tradition, just like us.
So I agree with you that it is important for Catalyst to use the bible in their teaching, and I maintain that they do. That’s an honest disagreement based on differing experiences. I also agree that excessive use of philosophical abstractions in relation to the text renders the text meaningless for the Christian faith, but I maintain that some use of philosophy to interpret the text is not only impossible, but necessary. If you have never had the chance to do so, read the church fathers and the creeds and see how Platonism is used to interpret the mix of Jewish and Greek ideas laced within the gospels. If we’re honest with this observation, it means that we are bound to wrestle with the bible in context, not necessarily bound to certain philosophical presuppositions, but open to their assistance in the process of interpretation and formulation of meaningful doctrine.
That’s right, I’m not talking about different interpretations but whether or not the bible is taught and also how it is taught. Does the teacher use his message to teach the bible or do they use the bible to teach their message? It isn’t always black and white.
When Peter called Jesus God, Jesus replied to him, “flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but the Holy Spirit.”
Paul also writes, “the letter kills, the Word is life”
If we are just reading the letter on the page and understanding it through all the narrative we give to it, we’re just stumbling in the dark, recognizing objects by their shadows. But if we have the right posture of our heart and God grants it to us to reveal the scripture, then his promise is fulfilled, “you will find me when you seek me with all your heart” Jeremiah 31
CJ, I think we are obviously in agreement on some things and still in disagreement on others. One thing you mentioned is that you are concerned about how the bible is taught. For me, how one teaches the bible is directly related to a mode of interpretation (hermeneutics)…or else intentional deception and sophistry. This reality does not make every interpretation valid of course, it just means that sometimes people interpret well, poorly, and most often just different. You said that using the bible in teaching contexts “isn’t always black and white”. I agree, but would say that it is almost never black or white.
The church emerges from eras only to evolve, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. Revolutions and reformations occur almost entirely because of social/cultural factors within a given context, and this influences (or gives birth to) different modes of biblical interpretation. Yes, the Spirit inspires, but only within a given context as history makes plain. Paul was absolutely right: we see only through a glass darkly.
I say all of this to get you to think about the possibility that Catalyst may be both teaching the bible and interpreting it in the best way they see fit. That interpretation may be poor, but it may also just be different (and existing in unresolved tension with other interpretations). Or perhaps your and my interpretations could be poor and in need of correction. The alternative that I see to these options is that Catalyst is guilty of intentionally deceiving people in their teachings, which I truly do not believe is the case. Perhaps you do?
No, of course I don’t believe Catalyst intentionally deceives people. But yes, I do believe they are misleading people.
Ever head the story of Jerome Moody? In New Orleans, the pool lifeguards were celebrating a year without a drowning. At the end of the party, the found Jerome at the bottom of the pool. He died while surrounded by over 100 lifeguards celebrating their success.
Everyday, people around us are dying and going to hell, eternal shame. What are we doing about that? On one extreme you have people talking so much about hell that people are turned off. On the other extreme you have people that never talk about hell, so people who get turned on, don’t know where the source is and they eventually fade out.
Catalyst is just one extreme reaction to another extreme. This is dialectic evolution, not dialogue with the bible.
And perhaps it is just my interpretation of the bible, but there is a talk about the great falling away in the end times after Israel becomes a nation and Jerusalem is returned to the Jews (1948 and 1968). Be very vigilant to not be deceived by the philosophies of men. We are great at identifying problems. Marx identified the problems of Capitalism. Freud identified the problems of the ego. We can see all the problems with the Church today. But none of it profits us anything, because we cannot figure out the solution ourselves. The dialectic continues on and on and never gets better. But we mistake change for progress.
CJ, that’s as honest a statement as I had hoped for. Thank you. I am actually comfortable with your position that you think Catalyst is unintentionally misleading people. We may just have to respectfully agree to disagree. I’ve heard others say they think Catalyst is intentionally deceiving people, and that position I believe is quite out of line. Christianity has always been filled with disagreements, and respectful dialogue continues to be important when we feel people are on the wrong side of an issue, and misleading others.
It’s clear to me that we do have some differing interpretations of scripture. I won’t go into those issues on this thread anymore, as I think that goes outside the purpose of things here. But for instance, you mentioned your understanding of the end-times and a great falling away. While I once held the same view, I don’t see that particular narrative in the bible anymore for a variety of reasons. Additionally, while I agree that our ultimate hope cannot be placed in human progress, I also think we are called to participate in bringing heaven to earth through the power of God. As Jesus taught us to pray, “Let your kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven.” I believe we are called to be a partial answer to that prayer, even while we recognize more is needed than human effort alone to solve every problem and bring about true justice. Christians don’t just proclaim social justice – they proclaim cosmic justice. We rejoice when there is personal and social justice because they are but small glimpses of a future, hopeful cosmic justice.
After Auschwitz, after Hiroshima, after the bloodiest century in history, after the scientific discovery that life in the universe will eventually die out in either a big breeze or heat death, the narrative of modernity that had us believe we could create a utopia on our own seems to be a myth. This is an important insight of the post-modern age. We do need a greater hope for the future, and some of us find that hope in the Christian faith. But I really think we must live in a certain tension, and continue to work with God for a better future here-and-now.
Typo correction: “big freeze” not “big breeze”. (:
As I pointed out before, there are some good churches in the area that are finding the balance between doing good works and preaching the gospel. Faith Center’s orphanage work in Haiti, Harvest Baptist’s work with single parent families are great examples. Then we have extremes in the community. Two of them were shown in the NCJ article and both are in my opinion misleading people. One has truth, but lacks grace. The other has grace, but lacks truth.
You say “Jesus taught us to pray, ‘Let your kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven.'”
You’ve rearranged the words significantly. This is the correct order and it has more meaning: “Your Kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”
This brings up a question in my mind. Is God’s idea of social justice different than our idea of social justice. Our will may not be His will for our lives, our ministry.
And also important about this verse, is that Jesus taught it to us how to pray. We are to pray first, get the posture of our heart right so that we can lay down our desire and let His will reign in us.
Also, Jesus healed people according to their faith. We want everyone healed. But Jesus often refused people until they showed faith. He even called a woman and her sick daughter dogs in comparison to the Jews until she humbled herself and asked for scraps. God looks at the needs of the heart, but all we see is the physical need. I do believe that Catalyst unconsciously puts their will above God’s. People there are seeing it and leaving. Others in my opinion are cheesy in their faith, bent on positive thinking rather than having faith. They want to feast and play rather than fast and pray. I absolutely believe that God is not only displeased with Catalyst but hurt by their vain sacrifices.
For the Record, Catalyst’s sermon mentioned in the article was from the book of James. each of the five items presented was attributed to a verse.
CJ,
Your last paragraph demonstrates a Jesus who was either a flawed and sinful deity, or merely a selfish ego driven man.
Also, If you deserve a shred of respect from the judgments you’re passing on others who interpret the novel differently, please prove how you know that God is hurt. If you can’t, you’re talking out of your ass.
Deric,
I can see how my words in the last paragraph would appear offensive. But I don’t judge to condemn as Jesus warned us against. I judge rightly to encourage them to get back to the Word. Just as sharing the gospel involves discussing sin first and identifying a need of a savior, I’m trying to point out a need for change at Catalyst.
Yes, I know Catalyst likes the book of James. It fits their agenda of works. I’m not saying that don’t use the bible. I’m saying they aren’t balanced. They are one extreme to another you showed in the article. Examples of more balanced churches are Faith Center and Harvest that care for the orphans and widows and give God the credit.
And yes, I believe God is displeased with Catalyst like the verse that Jill mentioned,
“I hate, I despise your festivals, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them.” (Amos 5)
This is the sense that I meant. God isn’t hurt by the stuff done by clubs like Kiwanis, but he is when we do it in His name. When we do our will in His name, we are hypocrites.
That is my judgment not for condemnation but for edification.
Atheists ask for proof, but I think that even if God appeared in the sky and offered proof, you would only hate him more. It isn’t about what is going on in your mind. It is about what is going on in hour heart. You had a religious experience and mistook the religiosity for the idea of the Holy Spirit.
We speak out of our ass when we speak on our own authority. But when we give up our authority, we offer a sweet fragrance to God. This is what I hope to encourage in Catalyst leadership and the cheesy christianity going on there. Why hide all Jesus’ talk about hell and only focus on his talk of love? Why have such an unbalanced ministry?
CJ, I’m really not sure what your issue is with my paraphrase of a portion of the Lord’s prayer. In fact, this is a very common paraphrase of the prayer, precisely because it communicates the essential truth: God’s kingdom is God’s will. If that’s not true, I’m not sure we follow the same Jesus (actually it’s becoming clear that we really don’t). That said, my will rarely lines up with the kingdom. Participating in the “kingdom vision” regularly makes me uncomfortable, but I know that’s part of the deal as a follower of Jesus. I’m sure many at catalyst would agree.
The kingdom is the center of Jesus’ life and message. For anyone who follows this first century Jewish Rabbi, at the center of their faith is the truth that Jesus embodies God’s will. That is, Jesus embodies the kingdom. The healing narratives are explicit in their meaning: they are small demonstrations of the kingdom on earth. Demonstrations of justice, that is.
Lastly, Deric is right. Your understanding of Jesus and the Syrophoenician is frankly disturbing – if that’s the truth, Jesus was a selfish racist. Fortunately, I think your interpretation really misses the mark. I don’t have the space to go into this at the moment, but I suggest Bailey’s “Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes” or Caird’s “New Testament Theology” for a better take on this passage.
Lastly, I am not going to critique either Harvest or Faith Center. I’m sure there is great stuff going on there. While I have serious problems with their theology, as I do with yours, I wish them well, as I do you.
Pardon me for offending you. I can see your last post was more emotional. I’m not here to push buttons but perhaps I got carried away 🙁
Yes, Jesus compared the woman and her daughter to dogs. If that’s true, it doesn’t make him a reverse anti semite. I might compare my daughters to puppies the way they are happy to see me when I get home, but that doesn’t mean I call them dogs. Again, sometimes I phrase things to get attention and perhaps that was wrong of me. But do I believe in another Jesus? I believe in the Jesus that is God and rose from the dead in the flesh. That is the most important thing. And yes resurrection is a reality in the way we live, but we often blow it.
I was simply pointing out your choice of words in the Lord’s prayer made less distinction between God’s will and man, but I can see you understand that distinction. It’s not so clear to me that we believe in a different Jesus. If you indeed believe that is true, I believe it is worth elaborating because if we believe in a different Jesus, one of us is in great peril. I hope not and I’m thankful for the grace and mercy of Christ.
Deric,
Many parts of the bible may at first seem very offensive, but with study are actually quite beautiful.
It may appear first that Jesus was a reverse anti semite calling a gentile woman and daughter dogs as the New York Times recently claimed. But Jesus is actually just being allegorical again. And when the woman responds humbly, “Truth Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” She’s saying, ‘I get it. Your the bread, the children are Israel and the Gentiles are the pets.” At first Jesus refers to with the greek word for a pet dog, but in response to her, he calls her “gune” translated woman. This is a term of respect. It is the same word he would use for his mother mary. Clearly, Jesus was not being a reverse anti semite, but allegorical and deeply respectful. Atheists who’ve already decided that God does not exist would jump at this misunderstanding, but honest skeptics open to the truth might recognize Jesus for who he was, speaking truth with the authority of God.
CJ,
This isn’t a contest to see who knows the Bible the best. Further, to dismiss me as a dishonest skeptic with little understanding of the Bible is rather presumptuous. My comment was directed at the context in which you used the parable — one in which you’re now trying to provide antithetical clarity. (While you’re attempting exactitude, could you please enlighten us “jumping atheists” how a true skeptic would recognize Jesus as “speaking truth with the authority of God.”)
If you must know, I’ve read the Bible and have studied, and continue to study, its history. I attended church from a young age and still continue to make appearances. As a child I learned how to read by having my teacher sit me in a hard cold pew and get me to read verses out loud. From there, I attended church and Bible studies weekly. I continued to do so even through my teenage years when I had embraced my disbelief. At the present, due to encouragement from people I’ve met through the expereince of writing this article, I’m going to local churches and writing about the expereince. What church do you go to?
“This isn’t a contest to see who knows the Bible the best…”
Oh, but obviously it is some sort of contest for CJ.
why don’t you all make it a contest to see who can get to heaven first! YAY!
Oops! Experience not Expereince. My work computer keeps auto-changing the first to the latter. Gotta love windows.
Deric, thanks for clarifying, that makes more sense. As I said, I did phrase it in such a way to bait you, my bad. I meant to comment that atheists often grab a hold of verses that appear damaging to God, yet ignore the bigger picture. For example, God calling the Jews to massacre an entire race of people in the old testament and then punishing the Jews for letting some of them live. This obviously looks very bad, but in the larger scope of history, the ancestors of those survivors caused a lot of trouble for Israel. Only God knew the bigger picture, but the Jews, me and even you often get caught up with what we can only see with our eyes and reason in our minds. This probably doesn’t help at all. I sympathize with you. Being exposed to such religiosity that you describe can really inhibit a person’s perception of God. If the only God you were taught was a cold, dead, unloving father, then it makes perfect sense to be an atheist. What I’m saying is be open minded. It’s just as possible that God exists that it is that he doesn’t. You can make jokes like God is just as real as the tooth fairy or spaghetti monster but that’s taking it out of context. Those are obviously fictional man made ideas. The idea of a mysterious personal creator beyond our imagination yet has manifested in such a way to communicate love and forgiveness is a different story, not one that can be so easily dismissed by a comparison to the tooth fairy. That in my opinion would be unreasonable. Agnosticism is reasonable in my opinion. Atheism is unreasonable. Anyway, I do appreciate you reading this. I do sympathize with people who’ve experienced church abuse.
I don’t go to a regular sunday church, but I do support Faith Center and Harvest for their work with orphans and single parents in Jesus’ name. I believe in Church as the early persecuted church practices, meeting in homes and sharing meals, helping each other out. I don’t give 10% to one organization but I try to give 10% of my income to organizations like the above mentioned. It’s hard to find a good church these days. I suppose if I were to choose just one, it would be faith center because of the new pastor and the work they’ve done in the community and internationally for a long time now.
CJ,
I appreciate the tone of your response. I’ve attended many varying churches and derived my disbelief from much more than those early experiences. Also, to clarify, I didn’t receive church abuse per se, though I would argue that teaching children to fear Hell accounts as abuse of an extreme measure.
On the often misconceived notion of agnosticism vs atheism:
I have admiration for Thomas Huxely (a.k.a. Darwin’s bulldog) who coined the term “agnostic” about 150 years ago. He fought for the natural sciences and intellect at a time when the position of disbelief was relatively unheard of. The problem is that he utilized the term agnostic as a compromise that discredits the position of disbelief and demonstrates lazy and irrational thinking. Essentially, he compromised something that needed not be compromised.
The main distinction between agnosticism and atheism is to some semantics, but should be presented: Agnosticism states that all the evidence is not in, so no decision can be made on the existence of God. No respected atheist states that they can prove whether God does or doesn’t exist. For atheists, however, considering that no person can provide sufficient evidence, we then say that we don’t believe in God’s existence. So once you’ve gotten to that point, for me the ethical position is to say, “I don’t believe” rather than, “I’m not sure.”
This brings us to Pascal’s Wager. If you’re not familiar, it’s simply the hucksterish statement that if you don’t believe in God you have everything to loose, so why not try or — at least pretend — to believe in him. To this foolery my response is that I don’t think much of your God. After dedicating my time and energy to understanding religion and advocating for disbelief, when I die, if I’m wrong and find myself confronted by God, I would hope he would at least commend my honesty.
Fascinatingly, Christians don’t give their God that much credit. This says something about Christianity’s moral fortitude and fear based position. Thus every time a Christian tells me they prefer “agnostic” over “atheist” I cringe at the insidious preference.
That’s interesting. I appreciate you helping me understand the atheist position. I think I will be more sensitive to them in the future because of it.
I went to Catholic school as a child. They told me to pray to Mary and confess to a priest. I was fortunate to have a father than encouraged me, “don’t be religious, be real”. So I never embraced Catholicism and believe it now to be a cult of Christianity. Later in school I experienced Pentecostalism where they told us to pray in tongues and emote our faith. Though my dad struggled in his own sins that hurt our family, I was aware that there was a Holy Spirit distinct from all the religiosity and excuse me but bullshit in the church. I’m very skeptical of the
church. Many don’t teach the word boldly and if they do, they are often lacking grace. Those that have much grace are often lacking the boldness and truth. It’s difficult to find a balanced church. I think that Catalyst should win your respect by righteousness, not by placating you as I believe they have done. Hell is indeed a real place that Jesus spoke much of in the gospels, even more than he spoke of the kingdom. Understand a distinction of fear. There is Godly fear and worldly fear. The fear of God is the fear of missing out on the party, aware that there is more to life than just selfish pursuits and fearing that you might miss out on it by being selfish with your life. But worldly fear is fearing that you never have enough to make yourself happy, so you pursue selfishly even more. The bible says that fear of God is the beginning of wisdom and I believe that to be very true. The church has failed to keep that distinction and has taught worldly fear and forced the church on people. But churches like Catalyst that socialize the gospel think the solution is to take the power out of the church and offer a soft gospel. They also fail in the distinction of what real Godly fear is and mistake it for worldly fear. That is a simple summary, I could say more but I’m not going to write a book here. Hope that is enough to think about. I’ve made mistakes everyday, but am glad God grants me moments of humility to recognize my prideful mistakes and draw closer to him. The more I see how sinful/prideful I can be, the more I love God and my family.
I realize hell is a very sensitive idea. It’s probably the most difficult idea for most christians. I’ve always thought of it as missing out on the party. The fire and torture is allegorical for the regret we experience that there is a great party going on that we’ve missed because we chose to do it our way instead of accepting a higher perfect authority. Jesus is the expression of that authority, one who humbled himself completely, the only one worthy to have supreme authority because his love was perfect and self sacrificing. I mentioned the difference between worldly fear and Godly fear. The difference between worldly love and Godly love is that worldly love says, “I love you because of what you do for me” but “God’s love says, I love you so much that I sacrifice myself for you.”
Jesus’ ministry was evangelistic.”The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15) The prophecy from Isaiah 61 concerned the spiritual ministry of the Messiah as well as the physical. Jesus quotes it in Luke 4:
18 “ The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
19 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD.”
You can’t socialize the gospel by saying that Christ came to introduce a “kingdom” of people doing good works. Jesus came to proclaim the good news of freedom to those who are captive in sin, sight to those who are spiritually blind. He came to free us from the wrath of God, from sin and death and Hell. That is the gospel. Men are dead in sin. They can be made alive through faith in Christ.
Doing good works can’t reconcile anyone. It certainly can’t reconcile men to God (Galatians). It is only the cross of Jesus Christ that can reconcile people — that can give freedom and strength and sight and life. Jesus speaks in Luke 4:18-19 of His cross, of the work of atonement He has come to accomplish and of the declaration of the reconciliation which comes through Him.
I have not seen this attitude of good works being used only for gaining converts. Perhaps you have. I’ve seen a balance at Faith Center between good works and evangelism. A good work is not an end in itself because those works which are pleasing to God are those which are done through faith in Christ. It is the fruit which testifies to the “goodness” of the tree.
Jesus came to proclaim the good news of salvation, the kingdom which is composed of those who savingly believe in His atoning death. Good works are a characteristic of Kingdom minded people, but they are not the mission or focus or end of Kingdom minded people.
As I’ve said several times. Catalyst is just another exclusive unbalanced extreme. They’ve reacted to the churches that do good works only for converts by doing only good works for good work’s sake. Both fall into an either/or mentality while the bible teaches both/and.
@CJ
We do “good works” because we are commanded to do it in scripture.
Leviticus 19:18
Matthew 5:43
Matthew 19:19
Matthew 22:36
Galatians 5:14
James 2:8
Matthew 25:31-46
Will, discern what works he speaks of,
John 6:28Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” 29Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
The law is to love your neighbor. But what is love? To give him a meal while he waits to go to hell? OR to not give him a meal but tell him about the bible? Neither? What if love is to give a starving man a meal for his physical need AND share the Word for his spiritual need. A holistic gospel is for people with a physical and mental need. A biblical gospel is for people with a spiritual need first and foremost, but not exclusive of the physical and mental needs. They recovering evangelicals have mental needs and some of them have physical needs (struggles with alcoholism? struggles with finances, etc) But Jesus’ mission statement he quoted from Isaiah was both spiritual and physical. If anything it was more spiritual than physical. But the point is that it was both/and, not either/or.
I am just replying to your statement that Catalyst does “…only good works for good work’s sake.” In Matthew 25, Jesus explains what it means to love him and to love your neighbor and according to Jesus it is physical(giving food, drink, clothing shelter and care).
“But what is love?”
I’m sure that we’re all surprised that this was only a rhetorical question. Who knew that CJ, in all of his pious humility, would go on to answer the question. Who needs Jesus, when you’ve all got CJ?
Joel, “What is love? Baby don’t hurt me, don’t hurt me, no more.”
Will,
Isaiah 64:6 “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthy rags.”
All our charitable giving, do-gooding, and volunteering are filthy rags because God sees not what we do, but the mixed motives behind our actions. Jesus sees right through the things that look so noble to others. If all a good work is meeting physical needs, then we could all fulfill the law and the world wouldn’t need Jesus. But Jesus said that there is not good works, but one good work, to believe in the Son of God and as James taught, that is a faith that works. It just seems to me that Catalyst doesn’t make this distinction between filthy rags and faith in Christ as good works. Perhaps I’m wrong.
The cheesy quote, “Preach the gospel, use words if necessary.” dilutes the importance Jesus puts on preaching and teaching the sinners he was hanging out with. We have a challenge: On one hand we need to be so graceful that sinners want to hang out with us. On the other hand, we need to preach the truth and not placate them. As I’ve said, Catalyst is a reaction to one extreme with another. I have friends that are homosexual, atheist, agnostic, drunkards, etc. I constantly pray and work to maintain a balance of grace and truth. Often like Catalyst I stay on the safe side of grace, but I do make efforts to make sure they aren’t mistaken, that as I love them, I also hope for them to have communion with God through Christ.
I love to tell about the signs and wonders that I’ve seen in my life. One particular, in short. I had a friend from elementary school. We stayed in contact from time to time, he knew I was a christian. I knew he wasn’t. I didn’t want my faith to come between us so I often left it out of conversations. Then the Holy Spirit began putting it on my heart to tell him the gospel to tell him why I’ve changed. Finally I gave in to this burden on my heart and shared my faith with him in words. Six weeks later he died in an accident. It wasn’t me. My flesh did not want to feel the discomfort of telling someone that they needed to accept Christ or be lost for eternity. I was afraid of losing a friend, but I responded to the conviction of my heart and spoke with words and he may be in heaven now because of it. Our words have an impact on lives. We may not see the immediate effect but those conversations we have with nonbelievers about God are never forgotten, while our conversations about beer and jokes about the world are forgotten in days at best. Saying, “preach the gospel, use words if necessary” is as ridiculous as saying, “give me your phone number, use digits if necessary.” In this postmodern sentimental age, we are told that words have no value, only sentiments, but the bible has a lot to say about the words that come from our heart.
What’s ironic about that quote is that St. Francis was known for speaking the gospel often with boldness and no one really knows if that quote is correctly attributed to him. Be vigilant and not be fooled by the cheesy christianity of this age in response to the harsh christianity of the past. Balance your ministry by the word, struggle to live in the paradox of grace and truth.
For Jill, Will and Catalyst,
Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
CJ,
I mean this in the nicest way possible:
Perhaps you should give, “Preach the gospel, use words if necessary” a shot.
It seems every time you try to explain yourself, or the Gospel, you’re less effective and sound more and more hypocritical and misinformed. Once you advocated genocide as a good thing you lost all credibility with me, but I still wanted to be respectful and clear with you. I did so because I think you’re so wrapped in your Godly delusion that you’re sincerely unaware of how rude you are. If you stop and count your score card amongst people on this thread you’ve been discrediting your faith rather than making it appealing. If the lord is working through you and not Catalyst he’s made a grave mistake.
CJ, I’m not going to go on anymore about what I think the gospel means, mostly because we’ve both expressed our understandings of it, and while we have some common ground, it’s clear to me that we see it differently. Our problem is that we have different presuppositions about the Bible. Throwing Bible verses back and forth will be a fruitless, circular activity it seems to me.
It’s true that resurrection faith is at the center for both of us, but what the resurrection means is different for each of us. I do emphasize the social justice implications of it. It’s true. So does Catalyst. We do think that we are reclaiming the gospel that was stripped of its social implications. There is no denying that. On the other hand, your evangelical gospel centers on this: “He came to free us from the wrath of God, from sin and death and Hell.” Although there was once a time when I would have agreed with this statement, I don’t anymore. This is worse than “cheesy Christianity” – this kind of Christianity is reduced to mere fire-insurance. That gospel just doesn’t make sense to many of us anymore.
Deric, your words make sense from your perspective and I do believe you mean it in the nicest way. It sounds like you are more open to God than I thought with your “if God, then…” statement though it was directed as a judgment on me. I’d encourage you to ask the hard questions. There’s a great book called “The Case for Faith”. The author interviews an old dying pastor who renounced his faith and became an atheist. The writer tries to answer all his difficult reasons for renouncing Christianity. Ask people why God demanded genocide, why Jesus said that at judgment he would cast people into the lake of fire. It has certainly been the most difficult question for me, but I have prayed and studied over it to find faith even in the face of such troubling issues because they aren’t what they seem to us.
Jill, I think it is wonderful that you are reclaiming the gospel that was stripped of its social implications. No doubt about that, its a good thing. The problem is that you’ve gone to the other extreme rather than balance the gospel. The gospel I believe in is not mere fire insurance. Because I believe it, it leads me to do what you might call social justice. Because I believe Jesus has saved me, I want to be a part of what he is doing in the real world. It may be that our perceived difference is just a misunderstanding on both of us.
Another quote from cheesy christians, “That’s just your interpretation.” They are often just making excuses to avoid having an uncomfortable encounter with the clear teachings of the Word of God.
The bible itself is its own interpreter. You take one thing Jesus said and instead of focusing on that and “interpreting” it to believe what you want, I suggest you look at the other things Jesus said because they will shed light on understanding the verse.
These cheesy Christians are ready to name drop philosophers, misquote Saint Francis, recommend books that fit their ideology, and maybe quote their favorite verse that supposedly justifies their unbalanced ministry. But they are very reluctant to get into an actual discussion about the Word because somewhere they are afraid that their inner contradictions would be exposed and they would be confronted with the uncomfortable truth.
Jesus loved hanging out with sinners, but he was upset by the religious hypocrites. My life of faith has reflected that. I’m put off by the people who claim their church to be the right one and criticize others while ignoring their own contradictions. I’d rather share a piece of bread with a sinner, than feast with a group of cheesy christians. Get as much enjoyment as you can from your group meetings and worship, because at the Bema seat of judgment, it will evaporate into nothing.
The idea that the bible is its own interpreter is truly naive, CJ. You keep telling yourself that. Interpretation is not just a way to avoid things we don’t like in the text. It’s what we do when we read any text. “There is nothing outside the text.” Oops…name-dropping philosophers again. How cheesy of me.
“Jesus … was upset by the religious hypocrites.”
Thanks for the irony, CJ.
Jill, I like your sassy style, no offense taken. How do you interpret the verse below?
Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
“The idea that the bible is its own interpreter is truly naive, CJ.”
You might want to rethink that. Jesus never contradicts himself, but he is often misunderstood when people take one of his statements to mean something that contradicts another statement. I’m sure you’d agree when it fits your own ideology. But my point is that you can look at one statement by Jesus or the prophets or other writers of the bible and look at it in the light of the rest of the bible to understand it. The bible does not have contradictions, many paradoxes yes, many appearances of contradiction, but the scriptures are as Paul said, divinely inspired, useful in correction and rebuke.
Jill, thank you for your time. I realize this exercise has been a bit of an emotional roller coaster for you. We often get upset about the things we don’t have that much confidence in. I hope that you truly live the social justice in your life that you emphasize so much in words. I challenge you to live up to your ideology if that is possible.
Nah, I stand by what I said. The bible has to be interpreted. Jesus has to be interpreted. We need hermeneutics and critical awareness of the bible (another name drop – try “To Each Its Own Meaning” by Mckenzie and Haynes). I’m frequently entertained by conservative biblical “scholars” attempting to harmonize various parts of the bible, but less than convinced the task is anything but vanity.
You remain stuck in a kind of precritical naivete about the bible, and I hope someday you find a way out. I’d rather embrace the contradictions as part of the story in the bible than explain them away. Once you become aware of modern biblical scholarship, you will either lose your faith – or better, realize that the bible is always interpreted. Historical critical scholarship being one way amongst many. Personally, I’ve learned more about the bible by listening to the interpretations of voices of the oppressed and marginalized in society than by higher biblical criticism anyways. That said, biblical scholarship should be in dialogue with other voices as well.
And thank YOU for your time. But seriously…why do you make the assumption that this has been an “emotional roller coaster for me”? Is it because I’m a female? Either way, that assumption is quite condescending.
On the contrary, I’ve quite enjoyed this conversation actually. You’ve reminded me why a new kind of christianity is needed today.
Give me an example of a contradiction in the bible. Give me one opportunity to try. We can talk all day from ideological ideas. Let’s put it into a real practice and see what happens. Considering all the talk, it seems like a fair challenge, no? And of course if I’m wrong, you get the enjoyment once again of realizing you are right all along. Sounds like fun. So please offer me a real stumper and see how I “explain it away.”
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees…”
are you woeing unto me? are YOU woeing unto ME? there’s nobody else here, so you must be woeing unto me…
If there are not contradictions, than there is another idea for you to consider.
Joshua 1:8 “This book of the law shall not depart from out of your mouth but you should meditate day and night.”
The word used for meditate here means to mutter. Most people seem to think the bible is a fax machine where they get messages from God but it is more like a cell phone, your ongoing communication with God. Rather than simply read it occasionally, we are to constantly mutter it. If we simply read, our minds wander to what we will make for dinner, do the next day, etc. But when we use our voices, repeating verses, talking about them with people, then our faith becomes active and we do as the Word instructs us.
Colossians 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. 17 And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.
Ephesians 5:18 And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, 19 speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, 20 giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another in the fear of God.
The result of being filled with the spirit is that we’ll speak to ourselves and each other with psalms and hymns. Spirit filled people are those who constantly meditate on the word, devote themselves to the study of it, and gain more understanding about the word. And as that happens, they are continually filled with the spirit in fresh ways. Sometimes we think believers are spirit filled or students of the word. BUt Jesus said the father seeks those who worship Him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:23) At the beginning of Joshua’s ministry, he is told to meditate day and night in the Word because that is the key to having the power of the spirit to do what God called him to do.
CJ,
The genealogies of Jesus recorded in Matthew 1:1–17and Luke 3:23–28 are different. Even the best historical explanations can make sense of why they’re different but no one claims that they are both the genetic lines of jesus through Joseph which is what the Bible claims.
This one is easier than you might think. Verses 31-38 of Luke are the same as Matthew’s account because Mary and Joseph were both descendants of David. But Luke’s account from verses 23-31 differs from Matthew’s because Matthew traces the line through David’s son, Solomon, to Coniah, or Jeconiah, a man whom God pronounced a curse (Jeremiah 23:28-30). Therefore, although Joseph was technically in line to take the throne if there was a throne being given, spiritually he couldn’t do so because his line had been cursed. So what happens? The term “son of” can mean “son in law of.” Therefore, Luke’s account is actually Mary’s geneology. And, as seen in verse 31, Mary’s genealogy is traced not through Solomon, but through Solomon’s brother Nathan- an un-cursed line. This means that he who traced the royal line legally, ignoring the curse of the old testament, would have to conclude that Jesus had a right to the throne because he was supposedly the son of Joseph. But he who believes the curse of the old testament could find that in Luke’s account, Mary’s genealogy bypassed the curse altogether. Therefore, legally or spiritually, both genealogies lead to Jesus of Nazareth- the only Person in history who could possibly fulfill both lines.
What you have with people like Dan Davis or Jill that claim that the bible is errant and contradictory, yet call themselves Christian is really a contradiction of their own. As Jill claimed that people who hold the bible to be inerrant explain away the contradictions. I would posit rather that they explain the Word away into contradictions so that they can have the security of Jesus without the authority of Jesus over them. This is evident in how they recite all the verses Jesus talks about love and ignore the verses Jesus talks about hell. They will show you one extreme of Christianity as if it justifies their own extreme. They take the many phonies in the evangelical church and use them to mock the entire denomination. Yet when someone rebukes them for their contradictions, they cry persecution. What the church really needs today is not some d-bags to ignore the authority of the bible and make compromises with the world. The church needs real persecution. That way, the phonies will leave because they really care about their money and those that really love Jesus will suffer as Christ did. The early church spread because it was something real. There were no phonies because they were intensely persecuted. That’s what the church today needs. So go ahead and mock us all you want. It will only purify us as we endure it and the phonies high tail it out of the church. Thank you.
Are you quite finished yet?
CJ, I was considering continuing to engage you, but I will go ahead and draw my line for our conversation. I appreciate the dialogue though. Let me be honest and clear about my reasons for ending the dialogue, lest you be tempted to call me a coward for pulling out at this point. Far from it, as I mentioned before, I enjoy this kind of critical dialogue about religion – I could indeed go on and on about contradictions I find in the bible and how I still maintain my faith in light of them. I take no pleasure in the contradictions I find in the bible actually, but am nevertheless quite convinced of the evidence as I see it. I’m not shrinking back from the challenge, regardless of what you may like to think. I would rather enjoy hearing you wrestle with the problems I have with inerrancy.
I only hope you will be respectful enough not to use this as a chance to attempt to shame and discredit me. Either way, I suppose it’s your decision. I won’t be posting on this topic again.
This conversation has gone on for almost two weeks now, if I read the dates right. I don’t usually spend this much time chatting on the internet, and at this point I have other “non-digital” responsibilities I must attend to. I do apologize for dropping out on the conversation. I know you are hoping for more, but I can’t justify the time involved in this blog. I think this has been an important conversation for both of us, and perhaps we both learned something in the process.
The current trajectory of this conversation is likely headed in the direction of dissecting/defending the whole of Christian faith, tradition, scripture and arguing on and on about it. As much as this would completely thrill me (to be totally honest), I can’t commit to this conversation anymore. The medium is not exactly efficient for the complexity and subtleties of this conversation.
The direction of the conversation is becoming far too broad for the purposes of this thread and the original reason I jumped in the conversation. My original intention in joining the conversation was to challenge your representation of Catalyst. As far as I’m concerned, that part of the conversation ended quite some time ago.
Lastly, I also draw a line when the arguments regress to name-calling – “d-bags”, for example. Don’t worry – I realize you’re actually in good orthodox company. Many of the early church fathers loved calling their opponents names to vent their “righteous” anger and further discredit their opponents – bishops Irenaeus and Athanasius, for example. The problem was, even when I agreed with them, they lost a bit of my respect when they lashed out like this. I challenge you to stick to your convictions, but choose your words more carefully in the future.
Peace out.
Son of, cannot mean “son in law of.” That is why the bible doesn’t say that. Pick your translation. Besides that genealogies are always based on the father. Strong’s #5207
Also, according to 1Chron. 28:4-10, the messiah had to come through Solomon not Nathan. So both genealogies are cursed.
anon, I’ve shown there isn’t a contradiction because Matthew and Luke are talking about different genealogies. If you want to dispute whether their genealogies are correct, that’s another issue. I was simply pointing out that they aren’t talking about the same thing. Matthew’s gospel is about the son of God. Luke’s is about the son of man.
Anyway, I’ll go ahead and take up the discussion. The bible wasn’t written in english. There was a different culture and language. Just as spanish verbs are translated into english, “he does this/he is doing this”, the Greek and Hebrew translation of son of can mean son in law as well as adopted son. So when you say, you “can’t” I can only reply, Matthew does.
What Matthew is talking about is an adopted son that receives the inherited scepter. You may have heard of the recent Disney film “The Prince of Persia”. In the story, the man known as the prince was adopted. One thing the film gets accurate about the ancient culture is that adopted sons are treated just as biological sons in regards to inheriting a throne.
Also, 1 Chronicles 28 is not contradicted. Luke links Jesus to David through Solomon and Matthew does not disagree, only shows another genealogy for the royal argument. As I said, because Matthew and Luke aren’t contradicting each other, they aren’t contradicting 1 Chronicles either.
I have to stop myself because there is so much I want to say about Matthew’s genealogy that says so much more, especially about women’s rights. There is a prostitute in the genealogy. God chose each person in the genealogy to say something about His Kingdom in contrast to the idea of the kingdom that religious people create.
Jill, with this generation, I think that sometimes we need to say provocative things to get their attention. It’s easy to get carried away with our pride and cross a line we can’t see. I do like the term “douchebag” as it is used in our culture today. It speaks of a person who thinks he is more than he really is. He is puffed up with pride and ignorant of his smallness. While there are no complete douchebags, we all do douchey things, as I did in the post you rebuked me for. And I do accept your rebuke. I apologize to you.
Habbakuk 2:4 “See, he is puffed up;
his desires are not upright—
but the righteous will live by his faith
CJ,
As you said Mathew’s genealogy is through a cursed king and cannot be used. Luke’s is through Nathan not through Solomon so it can’t be used either. There is a reason that the words aren’t translated the way you want them to be and that is because the Greek doesn’t say or mean it that way. I wish a lot of verses said things that they don’t but we don’t always get our way. Also there are of course many other problem with the genealogies including the name Shealtiel which appears in both but is not linked to any of the same people. Luke puts in the name Cainan where it doesn’t appear in the Genesis 11 genealogy.
“And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the Son of Heli, which was the son of Matthat…”
The greek word for “as was supposed” is “nomizo” which means, “it is the custom”. Check it out.
The other reason we have to believe that this is Mary’s genealogy is that Luke focuses on her story and says that she is an ancestor of David (Luke 1)
Also, where Matthew’s includes women, Luke’s genealogy is only men. So it makes sense for him not to mention Mary’s name but Joseph as son in law.
In a place like this, where we have reasons to choose either contradiction or non contradiction, I have to say that I respect Dan Davis for choosing his words carefully. He says he doesn’t deny the errancy of the bible, leaving himself neutral, neither claiming the bible to be errant or inerrant.
If you choose to believe this is a contradiction, I have no argument with you. I just want to be able to propose the reasons for believing it is inerrant. Thank you for your time.
CJ,
Even if you believe that Luke 3 is Mary’s genealogy even though it doesn’t say that. It still would put Jesus’s bloodline through Nathan and not Solomon. You would still have to explain why Shealtiel appears in both but is not linked to any of the same people and why Luke puts in the name Cainan where it doesn’t appear in the Genesis 11. Not to mention the differences in number of generations between the two and in comparison to Mathews claim of the 3-14 generational periods. To give up and claim we are at some impasse where the rubber meets the road shows only the truth that Scripture will always make us look like fools when we claim we have it all figured out.
CJ,
In Mark 2:26 Jesus references 1 Sam 21,”In the days of Abiathar the high priest…” The only problem is that if you read 1 Sam 21, you will see that Ahimelech was the high priest, Abiathar’s father. Was God in flesh mistaken or is “God’s Word?
“Scripture will always make us look like fools when we claim we have it all figured out.”
Then let the word show you are a fool.
Ahimelech and Abiathar were both names of father and son:
1 Samuel 14:3 – “And Ahiah, the son of Ahitub”
1 Samuel 22:20 – “And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David.”
2 Samuel 8:17 – “And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, were the priests . . . ”
1 Chronicles 18:16; 24:6 – same as 2 Samuel 8:17.
Answer this question. Did Jesus rise from the dead? If so, was it physical or spiritual?
Yes, Matthew’s genealogy of Joseph is through a cursed king. This fulfills the prophecy that the messiah would not come from his seed because Jesus was not of Joseph’s seed, but a virgin birth.
Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed..
The term “her seed” is an apparent impossibility unless One would come from the woman in a way that would be supernatural.
Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time has come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, mad under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.
Frankly, your idea of a contradiction between these genealogies is forced. These are obviously two different genealogies. It’s absolutely impossible even for the casual reader, much less a learned scribe, to miss or overlook this as some sort of mistake. It’s not like it’s one word or one sentence out of place. No error that huge could have ever been overlooked. This fact alone ‘proves’ that this was a perfectly understandable writing, at the time that it was written. It is only time and change of customs which make it appear contradictory. Heli was understood to be the father through the line of the bride, and Jacob to be the father through the line of the groom. Simple.
As for the difference in number of generations, Matthew paraphrased Jesus’ ancestors. This is evident when he organizes his genealogy into three sets of fourteen: 14 generations from Abraham, 14 generations from David, and 14 generations from the exile. Matthew also uses the word “gennao” which can refer to either an immediate or long-term descendant (as in a patriarch begetting his descendants, although not directly). By contrast, Luke uses the word “ho” which represents the son of (definite article). Luke also recorded his Gospel using a more historical approach as compared to Matthew, Mark, and John (which explains his more thorough documentation).
The paraphrase of generations referred to by the word “gennao” also explains why Shealtiel appears to have two different fathers. The next question would be why Shealtiel shows up in both genealogies. Easy. Joseph and Mary were first cousins. Incest only became taboo in the 20th century. Even our president Roosevelt married his cousin. Back then it was customary for Jews to marry within the trible. See the book of Numbers for the law regarding this.
Wow, I was just looking at Catalyst’s website and I realized I was wrong about Dan Davis. When he said, he didn’t believe in the inerrancy of the text, I took him at his word. As I investigated further, I find that this is what he meant:
“it is well to remember that all our formulations of Christian truth must ultimately conform not to some preset statement but to the Scriptures, all parts of which are divinely inspired. Thus, sloganeering can never be a substitute for the careful, patient analysis of what God’s Word teaches, including what it teaches about itself.”
It was the word “inerrancy” that he didn’t believe in. See, I wasn’t raised in the traditions of the church. I’m new to it. I became a believer in grad school studying philosophy. So I thought inerrant simply meant by definition, not understanding that there is a whole lot of religious baggage attached. With this understanding, I would like to deeply apologize to Dan Davis if he has been reading this. I jumped to a conclusion and misunderstood the word. I took you to mean what you literally said, lol. But there was more meaning to what you said. I can’t said that you should have been more careful with your words, because I should have been more careful with my interpretation. Dan, I hope you read this and accept my apology.
Alright then. Let’s stick a fork in this thread and call it done, eh?
Agreed. I’d also like to apologize to all Catalyst members that came out in defense and invited us to meet. I think if we had met or visited the church, these misunderstandings would have been cleared up. I sincerely apologize to each of you. I feel like the biggest douchebag in the universe. If anyone wants to continue a discussion, they can leave their email address.
It’s been a while since I’ve posted to this thread. And by the looks of it, it may be the last time.
I wanted to say thank you to CJ for your insightful and encouraging words.
If you would like to get together to talk or share a cup of coffee and a meal, I can be reached at marc_mcgowan@hotmail.com.
It’s been a while since I’ve posted to this thread. And by the looks of it, it may be the last time.
I wanted to say thank you to CJ for your insightful and encouraging words.
If you would like to get together to talk or share a cup of coffee and a meal, I can be reached at marc_mcgowan@hotmail.com.