Comments on: George and Darren: The Finale

By: Darren Bell

Darren Bell — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:08:55 +0000

What I see is that through a combination of forces that religions operate very powerfully in peoples lives. Religion operates on a social and psychological level and also involve a Truth claim. Because of it's power and the far reachingness of it's claims on my own life and what it says about the world I find it difficult to balance it with other forces in my life. And in fact there are a number of people that claim it should not be balanced with any other forces in your life, that this is itself heretical.

Because of this power that it has the ability to excerpt over people I believe it to be necessary to have some mechanism in place to keep it spiraling out of control.

Jeff suggested conscience and humilty. Conscience I don't think cuts it, but humility is what I was saying in all my writing up to this point.

To use a CS Lewis analogy: the greater the angel the greater the demon. Religion operates on the same principal: the more power it has in a persons life to effect good, the more power it has in a persons life to effect evil.

That being said. I think a great deal of evil is being done in the world today in the name of religion and the chief artifact that all of these evil-doers have in common is a lack of humility.

By: Tony

Tony — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:14:31 +0000

The discussion of extremism reminds me of what is likely the single largest dilemma I find myself debating (with myself and a couple of unfortunate others) regarding Christianity: That Jesus was either the unequivocal son of God in flesh or he was a complete liar and lunatic. And if indeed he was who he said he was, and is the Son of God, that is pretty extreme, and so is the Bible. Yet I see very few people living extremely. This is a huge discussion regarding our comforts of life here in America while billions around the globe are hurting and hungry, but most 'christians' you can find around you are fat and happy (even with common 'struggles' we all face, which are NOTHING relative to other nations) and fairly comfortable with embracing God as their convenient buddy, much like the $5 coffee every morning. And I will be the first to tell you that I am not living extremely. I'm scared of it and debating it, for some reason. But at least I'm debating it, I guess. Has anyone read "Radical" by David Platt? Our pastor mentioned it recently, but I haven't read it yet.

So my basic question is… If Jesus was God, and we really believe that, along with the teachings in the Bible, most specifically the New Testament, how the heck can we even have the audicity to build 'bigger barns', stock our 401k, spend thousands on a new deck, boat, carpet, (insert random item you want here), etc. while millions yearly die and burn? Seems like some extreme "Francis Chan living" should be a bit more common among us, yet how many people do you know who are truly concerned with living this type of extremism? Not me… not yet, but maybe soon. I don't know…

By: jeffsdeepthoughts

jeffsdeepthoughts — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:22:03 +0000

Thanks, folks. This is a topic I'm actually quite intense about at the moment… and I'm always priviliged and honored to speak whenever Marty invites me to.

By: Jennwith2ns

Jennwith2ns — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:14:10 +0000

Amen! No, seriously, Jeff. Preach it. Tell Marty to let you preach again or something.

By: Jennwith2ns

Jennwith2ns — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:12:03 +0000

NICE! Thank you! You won't find it, though. You'll have to get them to order it for you.

By: gnormanlippert

gnormanlippert — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:03:55 +0000

Thanks Jenn. It's a touchy topic that I know snags a lot of people on both sides. Now, out of raw curiosity, I am going to go to my local Borders and seek out "Trees in the Pavement".

By: gnormanlippert

gnormanlippert — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:50:59 +0000

Very well said, Jeff! Wow! I love it.

I do think that there is room in certain quarters of the faith– even a necessity– for creeds and doctrine, so long as those things are, at their heart, fed by that child-like faith you described. Doctrine may be the skeleton that frames the organism of the church, but simple faith is its heart and center.

"…at the core of a child-like faith sits a conviction that can't be fully expressed in words but which raises it's fierce head in the face of un-Godlike acts." WOO! That's so good and true. Preach it.

By: jeffsdeepthoughts

jeffsdeepthoughts — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:07:45 +0000

I totally agree with Jenn and Gnormanlippert on the distinction between extremists and adherents to a faith tradition.
But I wanted to toss something else into the mix: The bottom line for me is that the extremists are not embracing a child-like faith at all. I don't mean this to sound flippant. But I've never known a kid to contemplate a crusade, a jihad, or a suicide bombing.
Extremists, as a general rule, have very carefully formulated creeds which they are intense and dogmatic about.
A child like faith is one which recognizes that God is bigger than our words and thoughts, much as a child trusts his parents to protect him from dangers he is not yet mature enough to understand.
I think it's a fair and reasonable to ask, "How do we guard against being misled, manipulated, and decieved?" if we have a child-like faith. (Which I think is what Darren was asking.)
I would respond with 2 thoughts.
The first is that when we believe we can cage God and contain him in our petty little creeds, that is when we are guarenteed to be decieved and manipulated.
The second is that at the core of a child-like faith sits a conviction that can't be fully expressed in words but which raises it's fierce head in the face of un-Godlike acts. I strive toward a child-like faith which is bordered by an understanding that there are things (such as acts of terrorism) which are simply not in God's nature. If a voice is asking me to engage in these acts, it is certainly not coming from God.

By: Jennwith2ns

Jennwith2ns — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:37:04 +0000

George–I'm glad you challenged it. I never know how to, and yet the argument frustrates me no end, because, if it's not outright false, it is at least extremely slanted and narrow. I remember sitting with my devout Muslim friends in East London right after 9/11/2001 and listening to them talk with confusion and horror about how it could be possible for fellow Muslims to perpetrate such an atrocity. I think the reason one might reasonably fear perpetrating atrocities onesself is because we're human and all people are a mix of darkness and light. I don't think it has anything (real) to do with religiosity or the lack thereof. Religion (or some other fraternity, as George points out) may provide a convenient justification for one's behaviour, but it isn't the religion that DOES it. It's the person. Blaming extremism, from whatever corner, is a lot more accurate than blaming a certain segment (albeit a large one) of people who believe in God/absolute Truth.

By: gnormanlippert

gnormanlippert — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:43:42 +0000

I've been hearing this argument (that religion is the cause of great evil in the world) a lot lately. I know it is very popular. But it is not true.

What is being called religion is actually extremism. The Muslim religion is not responsible for political extremists who wear that religion like a mask. Nor is the Christian religion responsible for the bigoted extremism of the Ku Klux Klan, despite their claims. The best of Christians and Muslims reject the extremists, and call them what they are.

Extremism exists in absolutely every human institution. To judge religion (any religion) as bad because of its minority extremists is truly like abandoning a solid house because it has mice in the walls.

Of course, there is lesser evil in the church, as you rightly point out. Not all errors of extremism result in bombings and hate. But again, any human institution is full of these imperfections because (gasp) it is full of humans. We can no more abandon religion because of the flaws of its members than we can abandon family, nationality, politics, or any other conceivable fraternity.

And in the interests of real fairness, I wonder, if one were to balance the good that religion (ANY religion) has done against the bad, how the scales might surprise us? It is a human tendency (and I am just as guilty of it as the next) to rest on a sense of superiority by passing lofty judgments on previously respected institutions.

Sorry if that sounded confrontational. I do mean it with respect. This is just one of those premises that I cannot accept without challenging.