It's one thing to turn an atheist into a Christian. But sometimes it takes a miracle to turn a die-hard Christian into a real Christian. Yet that's the work that Gregory A. Boyd (himself a former atheist) is about. And I increasingly find myself cheering him on.
Pastor Boyd could have taken the easy way out in recent years, as religion and politics began intermingling in freshly toxic ways. Like so many of his evangelical peers, Boyd could have felt he fulfilled his responsibilities -- while avoiding enraging his flock -- by offering a few vague admonitions about not being overly attached to worldly power.
Instead, Boyd decided to speak out boldly, at the impassioned height of the 2004 presidential elections. Boyd began preaching to his mega-church congregation that their beloved Gospels demand that they take seriously the notion that, in a fallen world, there are no divinely favored nations or cosmic battles between good nations and evil ones.
Congregants voted with their feet. And their wallets. Some 1,000 members walked away as a result of Boyd's eloquent articulations of what their faith required. And although another 4,000 remained, consider what an earthquake a sudden 20% decline represents for any organization.
Boyd persevered. Numbers no longer mattered to him, even though most pastors rate themselves on whether they have a "growing" ministry. "I don't see anywhere in the Gospels where things have to be big, or where you have to have the 'wow factor'" that's associated with mega-churches, Boyd told me last week by telephone. "The Lord only calls us to be faithful."
For God chose the world's foolish things to shame the wise. God chose the world's weak things to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things, to nullify the mighty things, so that all would be humble before him. -1Corinthians 1:27-29
Whoever wants to be first among men must willing to be the slave of all. For even the Son of Man himself didn't come to be served, but to serve all." -Mark 10:44-45
They tell you, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies as though they were yourself. Pray for those who seek your ruin. In this way you are children of your Father in heaven. -Mathew 5:43-45
Faithfulness, to Boyd, meant reminding all who would listen that the Gospels represent an upside-down kingdom which stood conventional values on their head. Boyd calls it a "kingdom under" approach, a humble and life-affirming alternative to the "kingdom over" approach. The latter represents conventional authority, while the former represents true spiritual authority. And Boyd is not shy about criticizing a blending of the two kingdoms as idolatry. Boyd seems to appreciate fully the paradox of living within both kingdoms, but his concern is about which kingdom Christians most eagerly invest their hearts and treasure in.
To Boyd and virtually all classical theologians, the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of earth use entirely different laws of physics and different logic. The Gospels offered a tantalizing new physics, with a different mission and different desired outcomes.
Why, then, do believers typically favor conventional logic to that which they are told is divine? And when C.S. Lewis noted that heaven is an "acquired taste," and that it is our business in this lifetime to acquire it, why do most believers mock that sort of palate as naïve, unrealistic, and silly? In short, why might someone who most fervently champions Jesus also most fervently mock his commands?
Those sorts of conundrums drove me away from a fifteen-year stint as an evangelical and away from organized religion altogether, a journey described in greater detail in my Lessons from the Holy Wars book.
No, it wasn't anyone's "hypocrisy" that drove me away. It was the growing sense that religion really didn't make people better; it merely made them more so.
But Boyd, again, remains intriguingly faithful. He hangs tough to a notion that the authentic demands of the New Testament are dramatically distinct from -- and infinitely more nourishing than -- those of generic monotheism or civil religion or secular materialism.
Most church authorities rationalize their flocks' thirst for violence and materialism as a little innocent sinfulness that's to be expected from fallen humans. Yet these authorities huff that other teapot tempests -- over the ordination of gays or the definition of marriage or governmental policy on abortion -- are hills of Biblical authority on which true believers must be willing to die.
"People don't realize how much they're co-opted by the culture," Boyd told me, "in how they can justify hoarding resources and greed and gluttony. If there's anything the Gospels criticize, it's that. But it's normalized in our culture. People think, maybe a Mercedes isn't a big deal but being homosexual is a big deal. Jesus does the opposite, telling us to consider others' sins to be dust particles, and our own to be tree trunks."
Boyd feels that church-and-state bed-mating results in unattractive offspring, especially for the church. "Opinions are cheap, he said. "Anyone can cast their vote for what Caesar should do. The real issue is, how is my life going to be different?"
He says the Christian's call isn't to boss around government, even in a democracy, but to figure out how he or she will work with her church brothers and sisters to serve the poor, bless their enemies, and stand for the "kingdom under" worldview of the Gospels. He isn't at all against voting, but he appears decidedly against getting attached in any way to the fallen machinery of secular politics.
Boyd penned a landmark 2007 book, Myth of A Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church. In it, he traced much of the church's power addictions to its first taste of power in the fourth century: "We have become intoxicated with the Constantinian, nationalistic, violent mindset of imperialistic Christendom. The evidence is all around but nowhere clearer than in the simple, oft-repeated slogan that we Christians are going to 'take America back for God.'"
Yet it would be wrong to portray Boyd as one who has only criticized the right's co-opting of Christianity. He has good friends among Christian progressives who rue his failing to stand behind their efforts to bring the kingdom of heaven to earth via healthcare schemes or social-justice campaigns. Boyd's message is the same for these well-meaning persons: don't confuse the two kingdoms, and be leery of the mess that arises when you try to use the Gospels as a cudgel for a secular, pluralistic society.
By now, I imagine we've more than established that Greg Boyd can "preach it." But does anyone listen? And does anyone respond? Boyd is optimistic. He said he is cheered whenever he can "hear the coin fall into the slot" -- whenever a well-meaning, devout person of faith begins to understand what is most distinctive about her faith, and understands how this is different from the general assumptions of our culture.
Boyd said more of his peers - those crucial men and women with actual theological and ecclesiastic influence -- are growing willing to express the sorts of views publicly that he, at great personal and professional cost, has expressed. "Some pastors are finding it easier to see idolatry of christening one party" as the good guys, he added.
"I'm encouraged to see more people gravitating toward a 'third way' where we're not going to unambiguously translate the Gospels into political categories," he said. "The political climate has gotten so divisive and nasty. There is no partisanship. Voices on both sides are getting more acrimonious, and we're losing the capacity to agree." Count me among those who feel that the nastiness is fueled partly by devout Christians who export their good-versus-evil zeal to mundane tax and budget debates.
Bear in mind that Boyd isn't attempting to reform the political system. He's attempting to work with others to reform the church, convinced that, if they succeed in putting first things first, they will bring the sort of "salt and light" to the rest of the world that will advance the Kingdom of Heaven in the manner that counts.
I mentioned to Boyd that, if there were a thousand other Greg Boyds out there, I'd probably still be serving communion each Sunday as a church elder in Los Angeles.
Yet again, Boyd doesn't measure success in numbers. "I don't worry about the big picture as much as I used to," he told me. "It's not about who's wining or who's gaining ground. It's just about being faithful to what God's calling me to."
Perhaps then we don't need a thousand Boyds, then. But we can appreciate how Boyd is calling his fellow Christians to all be the persons they need to be to let their best light shine before others.
Follow Rob Asghar on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rasghar
When people reject sacred superstitions it does not necessarily mean they hate the sinners, they just resent the efforts to establish “a tyranny of ignorance.â€
MY BLASPHEMOUS BLOGS
Bewildering Bible Legends
http://bewilderingbiblelegends.blogspot.com/
In the East God Won - The high cost of organized ignorance.
http://whengodwins.blogspot.com/
Holy Cows and Calves - Sacred superstitions, aka religions, from the Indian subcontinent.
http://holycowsandcalves.blogspot.com/â€
The devil tempted Jesus. Turn stones into bread! Throw yourself off the temple and have the angels catch you! Have all the kingdoms of the world!
In other words, be comfortable, be impressive, and be powerful.
Christianity was the default religion for America#1, but no one saw any problem. Megachurch! Megabucks! Pastor Rockstar happily took his seemingly rightful place in the halls of power.
See, Satan offered the church the same things he offered Christ, and the church said “Yes! Yes! Yes!"
http://kirkcowell.wordpress.com/
When I hear/read stuff like this, I think of the passage in John where Jesus hints to Peter of how he is going to die (after asking him to "feed his lambs"). Peter asks Jesus, "Well what about John?" Jesus tells him, "What is that to you? You follow me." We never should inform our faith based upon our observation of the supposed lack of commitment to the faith of others.
Life is a mystery, no matter what you choose to believe. Religion is just man's way of putting himself above every other species on the planet.
Plus also, I bet all the Pat Robertson fans who read this end up with blood pressure 5% higher for at LEAST five minutes. Awesome. Rock on, Mr. Boyd.
I note that all churches, of all faiths, that have military chaplains who do not counsel their parishioners to resist the wars instead of participating in them are for the war, not against it.
Politics is a slimy business that's why most people regard it with such disdain. No religion should ever involve itself in politics. Unfortunately, some religions( the Theocons of the Repub party, including my religion-Catholic) are in the slime up to their noses.
My religion needs another Protestant Reformation, the last one was of great benefit. However, this time, I think if we Catholics do not demand a "reformation" there will be none.
God isn't the problem, religion, man-made religion IS the problem. But some religions, the Theocons (Catholic,Mormon, Evangelical fundamentalists; not all Evangelicals, please) have sold themselves to the Repub party for 30 pieces of silver and the diabolically enticing illusion of power. What a seductive plate Satan has cooked up for those who commit the sin of Pride, knowing it all!
I know that the Methodists(Nov,05 and Nov,07) separated themselves from the hate, viciousness and killing(Iraq for oil) spewing out of the Repub party(Cons, Neocons, Theocons). Ray McGovern reports that the Presbyterians are also not a part of this Repub use of religion and God as political/economic/war weapons. Just try to imagine the rampant screaming hypocrisy of the very idea of killing for God(Thou shalt not kill).
However, the religions of man serve a purpose in the grand scheme of things. They place the "moral code" before the people [i.e. The Ten Commandments in Judeo-Christian religions; and in the Eastern religions - their belief systems]. It is the "followers" choice as to whether they will follow the Spiritual laws that have been placed before them. Visit my website at: http://www.psychickaren.com
By the way, the original meaning of evangelical is "rooted in the Gospel." Lutheran churches worldwide have traditionally been called evangelical as a statement that Lutheran theology has the Gospel at its heart. The current popular use of the word evangelical is a perversion of its true meaning.
And Mr. Asghar, if you will look, you will find many more than a thousand Greg Boyds if you only look. The ELCA pastors I have known have much in common with him. And there are over 18,500 ELCA pastors.
I think we are at a very peculiar time in regards to Christianity. Many of the hard-core fanatical Christians have totally alienated many people that could have benefited from the highlighted part of this article. To these others, everything is literal “all-or-noneâ€, and judgmental. Anyone who doesn't agree with them going to hell, your spirit will be tortured through the rest of eternity, all because you don't agree with them. That has spread hatred and evil, and promotes ignorance. They give the rest of us a bad name. Any fanaticism like that is no good, to me.
My belief is more Jungian and Gnostic. This outlook provides no conflict with science. I believe walking on water was a vision (from the disciples), but not a physical event. It does not matter if it was from a dream or fever, it was still “real†(Kant, Jung) and it still was Jesus. The symbolism is eternal. I’ve only met 1 other Christian (in person) who believes this way. So I am a kind of outsider, too. It is not a popular outlook.
My Methodist, church-going parents were not educated (I am), but were opened-minded. My mother and I believed in reincarnation (some early Christians did, but were wiped out). We believed "born again" was literal (get out the moccasins).
None of us know for sure, either way. You do the best you can do. The Fundies do harm, in Jesus’ name.
The same needs to happen a lot of places.
He was right that the modern church is too concerned with the world and it's power, rather than with being "really christian".
Did he start with only evangelicals and change their ways? Did he convince them to no longer hold the positions they deemed important? How many were convinced of the error of their ways?
I rather see a good article about an atheist who found out that there is a real way to believe and practice faith, that idea I see proven and demonstrated in this article.
Each religious group/denomination needs to be convinced to practice true "religion"-to love God and one another.
As an outsider, sometimes I am drawn in by one Christian's interpretation of this or that scripture then immediately repulsed by some other Christian's interpretation of something else. Just sayin'.
As a Christian, I tried being rude to our latter day Pharisees, but had zero good results with that approach. I've toned it down and been able to engage quite a few people and had some effect. When someone says, "You've corrupted me. Before I met you I was a perfectly good Pharisee, but I just can't do it anymore. Thank you." (true story) I know I've helped one find sanity. Other times, I act like a mirror and show them how they're perceived from the outside. That's sobered a few up too.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
(KJV)