This “season” of the podcast, we are trying to give brief and focused responses to the chapters in the new bok by Melissa Florer-Bixler, How to Have an Enemy: Righteous Anger and the Search for Peace, by Herald Press.

Together, we’ll try to pinpoint a few key elements in each chapter, as well as perhaps some underlying concepts that may not be as obvious. Hopefully, our dialog will help you with your reading through this book.

At one point, Karla mentions a study guide that is available for this title. It is available at Herald Press as a PDF download.

For additional background, check out the conversation with Melissa Florer-Bixler on The All That’s Holy Blue Collar Podcast, episode 58.

Karla and Craig sat down to review some of the way this conversation regarding the image of God has developed. We review some key ideas, leave out lots of stuff, and take some time to ask about what kinds of practices and habits we can create to foster an awareness of the image of God in others.

This is an excellent conversation to encourage you to look back yourself at the ten earlier conversations we have had and think about the ideas that have stood out for you. And, since we put a lot of emphasis on living and doing the life of following Jesus, we want to ask you how might these conversations lead you to develop your own habits and practices that are shaped and formed by the conviction that each person (and even creation) has the image of God.

Let us know what you think, and what questions you have. We are figuring this out as we go. Our huge disclaimer is that we are learning too, and that we might be wrong, but we believe that through conversation around the scriptures, with a community of faith, we can begin to discern. So, partnership with others is crucial in this adventure.

Musical intros, transition music, and the outro are by At the Speed of Darkness. You can support At the Speed of Darkness through purchasing his music on Bandcamp. https://atthespeedofdarkness.bandcamp.com/

Karla and I sat with Dr. Thomas J. Oord, theologian and philosopher, to discover the how Open and Relational Theology (ORT) views the concept of the “image of God.” We had no real outline for our conversation. Instead, it was just three friends talking. And one of those friends is really smart, eloquent, and had a few lessons to teach us.

I hope you enjoy our conversation with Tom. Make sure to follow him on social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) . Also, from his website, you can also subscribe to his newsletter, and follow his blog. Through his website and newsletter, you can also find his amazing collection of photographs from his travels, and especially throughout the Pacific Northwest.

Let us know what you think, and what questions you have. We are figuring this out as we go. Our huge disclaimer is that we are learning too, and that we might be wrong, but we believe that through conversation around the scriptures, with a community of faith, we can begin to discern. So, partnership with others is crucial in this adventure.

Musical intros, transition music, and the outro are by At the Speed of Darkness. You can support At the Speed of Darkness through purchasing his music on Bandcamp. https://atthespeedofdarkness.bandcamp.com/

episode 9: all in the family (of God)

One of the aspects that is lost when begins to consider a theology that asserts that God’s love wins in the end, is the promise of heaven and the threat of hell are changed. If one leans toward universal salvation, hell is removed from consideration as a significant threat. And, if heaven becomes a gift of grace from God, why does it matter how we live now, especially if Jesus has paid the debt for our sin so that we do not have to? Many of the traditional motivations become obsolete and religion itself seems unnecessary. And if that were the case, announcing the good news of Jesus may be thwarted by disinterest, that is, if anyone remained motivated to speak the good news of God’s realm and reign.

Humans have a religious impulse

In Brian McLaren’s latest book, Faith After Doubt, McLaren poses two interesting ideas to contemplate.

According to Jonathan Haidt and other teachers of moral foundations theory, whatever our religion or politics, we all use the same six basic lines of moral reasoning to defend our beliefs and opinions: justice, compassion, purity, loyalty, authority, and liberty.5 People of a conservative temperament, theorists explain, often feel morally superior because they emphasize all six. Liberals or progressives, however, focus on two: justice and compassion (pg 84).

And later, McLaren describes his experiences while at the rally countering the Unite the Right march in Charlottesville, VA. After describing what he saw and did, Brian goes on to state:

In the days after the event, I was given access to screenshots of the private communications among the fascist and white supremacist groups who organized the event (and who were called “very fine people” by the president). These communications convinced me that when people leave traditional religious identity behind, or subordinate it to a political or racial ideology, they don’t advance to a blissful secular harmony. No: we humans just as easily shift the sense of identity we once found in a passionate Stage One or Stage Two religious faith into what we might call quasi-secular religions like racism, nationalism, fascism, classism, and other -isms. (pg 110).

Humans, it would seem are religion-making social organisms. So the question may not be faith or no faith, religion or no religion, but rather which religion? One primarily motivated by love and justice; or, one guided by the exercise of authority, purity, liberty, and loyalty?

Ephesians 314-19

Every ethnic group in heaven or on earth is recognized by him (whom every family [πατριὰ] in heaven and on earth takes its name, NRSV). I ask that he will strengthen you in your inner selves from the riches of his glory through the Spirit. I ask that Christ will live in your hearts through faith. As a result of having strong roots in love, I ask that you’ll have the power to grasp love’s width and length, height and depth, together with all believers.

 Questions for consideration:

1.       What is the good news of God (that’s the way Mark’s gospel says it)?

2.       Is there any motivation to or fear of consequences associated with not accepting the God’s gift of Jesus and the reign and realm he inaugurates?

3.       What do you make of the idea that we are religion-making creatures?

4.       What might it look like to announce a gospel of love and justice?

No one should have to tell you that empathy is not a sin. But in case you were wondering, we don’t think so.

A blogger on a popular evangelical website has the gall to try to write in the voice of CS Lewis’ Screwtape Letters, addressing these remarks to Uncle Screwtape’s nephew, Wormwood:

“Now, sufferers have been placing such impossible demands on others from time immemorial. In response, our armies have fought for decades to twist the Enemy’s virtue of compassion into its counterfeit, empathy. Since we introduced the term a century ago, we’ve steadily taught the humans to regard empathy as an improvement upon compassion or sympathy.

Compassion only suffers with another person; empathy suffers in them. It’s a total immersion into the pain, sorrow, and suffering of the afflicted. Under our influence, we’ve taught the humans to think, ‘Only a heartless and unfeeling beast could oppose such a total immersion, such a generous act of ‘love.’’ Our recent success in this conceptual migration has given us ample opportunity for mayhem” (by Joe Rigney).

Intersectionality

Here’s a quote from Womankind.org that proves a basic definition of the concept of intersectionality. Among other benefits, the theory of intersectionality can prevent us from shallow, one-dimensional assumptions about another’s identity.

“Put simply, intersectionality is the concept that all oppression is linked. More explicitly, the Oxford Dictionary defines intersectionality as “the interconnected nature of social categorisations such as race, class, and gender, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage”. (from https://www.womankind.org.uk/intersectionality-101-what-is-it-and-why-is-it-important/).

People are complicated and multi-layered. The additional layers, roles, and identities, while complex, can also allow for ways to connect and build relationships for equity, justice, and friendship. These roles are social identities, that is, they are defined by the ways culture defines these identities and become the opportunities for connection, or the differences that lead to rejection.

These social intersections were continually identified by Jesus, and can be seen as a subplot in many of his interactions with others, especially with those who are suffering. In one story, a victim is suffering from disregard. In another story, a victim is suffering by being isolated and seen as the focus and center of attention and the locus of the problem.

Luke 10.25-37

John 7.50-8.11

1.       How do we see Jesus crossing boundaries to enter into the pain, sorrow, and suffering of others? How do we hear Jesus’ “go and do likewise”?

2.       Consider the stories of the beaten man by the road and the woman accused of adultery. Discuss the ways intersecting roles combine with suffering and injustice.

Are there other stories of Jesus where he crosses boundaries to enter into the suffering of others to rescue the image of God with each person.

Episode Seven: We’ll leave the light on

(Disclaimer: During the recording of the conversation, there were some issues with Internet quality. It may be annoying but suffer through it and you’ll be rewarded with enlightenment.)

We still want to be a part of God’s project of reconciling the alienated human family of God. Rather trying to teach the techniques of becoming a better listener, we wondered about going deeper into understanding God’s intention of human beings as co-humanity, working on strategy more than tactics, foundations and not just practices.

Humans are fully human in relationship. Genesis 1.26-27 continues to be the touchstone and the counter-myth of Babylonian gods and highlight God’s original intention for humankind. Over the past couple weeks, during our conversations, we became curious about the tradition of the inner, or inward light that is central to the Society of the Friends, more widely know as Quakers, or just Friends.

This week, Karla and I sat down for a conversation with a couple of friends, Dr Carole Spencer, and Dr Colin Saxton. And both of these friends are Friends. Carole is a retired, but still teaching, professor of Christian Spiritual Formation. Colin is a recorded Friends minister having served in domestic and international roles, and now is a stewardship consultant for Everence. Both reside in Oregon.

What we are curious about:

1) what is the inner light?

2) is this from creation or only for Jesus’ followers?

3) Is there scripture that provides foundation for this interpretation?

4) does understanding the inner light affect practices of pastoral care, spiritual formation, justice and equity, human rights, empathy and compassion, as well as engaging in the missio dei?

Some ideas for consideration:

View the following video on Youtube about this Friends’ distinctive, the inward light. Then consider this statement from one the early founders of the Society of Friends, James Nayler.

Art thou in the Darkness? Mind it not, for if thou dost it will fill thee more, but stand still and act not, and wait in patience till Light arises out of Darkness to lead thee. Art thou wounded in conscience? Feed not there, but abide in the Light which leads to Grace and Truth, which teaches to deny, and puts off the weight, and removes the cause, and brings saving health to Light. (James Nayler, ca. 1650)

Scriptures

Light:

Isaiah 42.6; Isaiah 49.6

John 1.4-5; 9

“That of God”

Romans 1.16-20

Episode Six: Reconciling, pt 2

Reconciling is about welcoming others into relationship. Certainly there are many other facets to reconciliation that can be addressed, but in the absence of “conflict”, reconciliation is simply about finding commonality, developing relationship, and building unity.

I got a little tripped up on my definition of hospitality in the New Testament. I had the right Greek words, I just had them in the wrong order. Xenophilia is the word translated as hospitality. You might notice it is similar to another familiar word, xenophobia, when means fear of others. Xenophobia usually leads to isolation and self-protection. While xenophilia moves the other direction – to the stranger.

Scripture Highlighted

Ephesian 2:11-18

11 So then, remember that at one time you Gentiles by birth, called ‘the uncircumcision’ by those who are called ‘the circumcision’—a physical circumcision made in the flesh by human hands— 12remember that you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us. 15He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, so that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, 16and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it. 17So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father.

I Corinthians 12:12-16

12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. 14 Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15If the foot were to say, ‘Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body’, that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16And if the ear were to say, ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body’, that would not make it any less a part of the body.

A Sixteenth Century Anabaptist Mystic

A Poem by Hans Denck:

Oh, who will give me a voice that I may cry aloud to the whole world

that God, the all highest,

is in the deepest abyss within us

and is waiting for us to return to him.

Oh, my God, how does it happen in this poor old world,

that You are so great and yet nobody finds You,

that You call so loudly and nobody hears You,

that You are so near and nobody feels You,

that You give Yourself to everybody and nobody knows Your name!

Men flee from You and say they cannot find You;

they turn their backs and say they cannot see You;

they stop their ears and say they cannot hear You!

A helpful overview of Denck’s life and legacy can be found here.

Again, Calvin Wasn’t All Wrong:

“We should not regard what a man is and what he deserves: but we should go higher - that it is God who has placed us in the world for such a purpose that we be united and joined together. He has impressed and pressed his image in us and has given us a common nature, which should incite us to providing one for the other. The man who wishes to exempt himself from providing for his neighbors should deface himself and declare that he no longer wishes to be a man, for as long as we are human creatures we must contemplate as in a mirror our face in those who are poor, despised, exhausted, who groan under their burdens.... If there come some Moor or barbarian, since he is a man, he brings a mirror in which we are able to contemplate that he is our brother and our neighbor: for we cannot abolish the order of nature which God has established as inviolable.” (Christine D. Pohl. Making Room: Recovering Hospitality As a Christian Tradition (Kindle Locations 733-738). Kindle Edition.)

“In Louisville, at the corner of Fourth and Walnut, in the center of the shopping district, I was suddenly overwhelmed with the realization that I loved all these people, that they were mine and I theirs, that we could not be alien to one another even though we were total strangers. . . . If only they could all see themselves as they really are. If only we could see each other that way all the time. —THOMAS MERTON, Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander” (Quoted in, A House That Love Built, Sarah Jackson)

A Fellowship of Differents

THERE ARE THREE WAYS TO EAT A SALAD: the American Way, the Weird Way, and the Right Way. The American Way of eating a salad is to fill your bowl with some iceberg lettuce or some spinach leaves, some tomato slices and olives, and maybe some carrots, then smother it with salad dressing — Ranch or Thousand Island or Italian or, for special occasions, Caesar. The Weird Way is to separate each item in your salad around on your plate, then eat them as separate items. People who do this often do not even use dressing. As I said, weird. Now the Right Way to make and eat a salad is to gather all your ingredients — some spinach, kale, chard, arugula, iceberg lettuce (if you must) — and chop them into smaller bits. Then cut up some tomatoes, carrots, onions, red pepper, and purple cabbage. Add some nuts and dried berries, sprinkle some pecorino romano cheese, and finally drizzle over the salad some good olive oil, which somehow brings the taste of each item to its fullest. Surely this is what God intended when he created “mixed salad.”

 and…

CHURCH LIFE SHOULD MODEL THE CHRISTIAN LIFE My claim is also that local churches shape how its people understand the Christian life, so let’s think about this briefly. If the church is a mixed salad, or a fellowship of differents, then. . . We should see different genders at church. Do we? We should see different socioeconomic groups at church. Do we? We should see different races at church. Do we? We should see different cultures at church. Do we? We should see different music styles at church. Do we? We should see different artistic styles at church. Do we? We should see different moral histories at church. Do we? We should see different forms of communication at church. Do we? We should see different ages involved at church. Do we? We should see different marital statuses at church. Do we? Even more, if the church is a mixed salad in a bowl. . . We should understand the Christian life as a fellowship. Do we? (McKnight, Scot. A Fellowship of Differents (pp. 14, 16-17). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.)

episode five: reconciling

Common Hymnal, If We Walk Together (demo version)

Support Common Hymnal through Patreon

“My road ain’t your road, your road ain’t mine, but if we walk together, be just fine/If you come with me, I won’t be scared, with you by my side, we can be anywhere/If we walk to together, be just fine.

Though you can’t compute my struggle that doesn’t make it right to disregard/I’m just asking for your ear/I hope that you’ll be near/ the wall and worries of my heart/We can build this bridge together/we’ll use the bricks of my dividing wall/they’re will be nobody that we’ll leave behind/we’ll walk together and we’ll be just fine/If we walk to together, be just fine….Now I’ll go with you, so the world will know/every color of the rainbow/If we walk to together, be just fine”

Doing Theology

We concluded the last time by saying that we need to do some theology. Theology is simple:

               Theo (God) + Logos (Word) = Theology

It means talking about God. Traditionally is a structured and disciplined fashion. But really, when it is God-words, it just means we all engage in theology from time to time when we talk about God.

One of the first steps in formal theology sometimes is called, prolegomena:

“the study of preliminary matters that are necessary to “set up” the formal theological study. These issues might include how the theological study will be conducted, how we acquire knowledge and arrive at truth, the theological system or tradition that will govern the study, and the sources that will be considered authoritative. Prolegomena issues are important because they are often unspoken, but they powerfully govern the conclusions at which we arrive.”

Where are we starting from?

One of the pieces we need to figure out, based on the idea that Jesus is the Human One, the one who holds the full image of God. So let’s lay out some prolegomena:

Jesus is the full image of God: a title that was ours to share from Genesis 1.26-27. But we also believe the Jesus is fully God and fully human.

Nicean Creed: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made; of the same essence as the Father. (4th century)

Jesus came as redeemer, to free us from death

the tree of life in the garden we no longer have access to

It is interesting that early Christian metaphor was about Jesus dying on a tree, and in the graveyard, being mistaken as a gardener.

Eden imagery: Incidental, or intentional?

Jesus invites us to a mountain (Eden?) with him, Matthew 28

if we think of ourselves as his followers, and tells us to go to the cultures and sub-cultures

ethnos, recall Leonard Sweet’s illustration of skater culture

And this last piece of “prelegomena” is that we regularly confess:

Jesus is the center of our faith

Community is the center of our life

Reconciliation is the center of our work

God reconciling the world: II Cor 5.118-19

“All of these new things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and who gave us the ministry of reconciliation. In other words, God was reconciling the world to himself through Christ, by not counting people’s sins against them. He has trusted us with this message of reconciliation.”

The Early Church Responding to Imago Dei

Galatians 3.25-29 - “clothed in Christ”

Where else have we read about God providing clothing? What was being covered by the clothing? Genesis 3.7,11,21

There is neither Jew nor Greek: Galatian 3.25-29. If it is neither, what is a more positive way of saying what this relationship is, (using the language of the biblical metaphors already being discussed)?

 Some Radical Reformation History

Hans Denck: Denck believed that God desires the salvation of all persons:

"Since love in him was perfect and since love hates or is envious of none, but includes everyone, even though we were all his enemies, surely he would not wish to exclude anyone. And if he had excluded anyone, then love would have been squint-eyed and a respecter of persons. And that, [love,God] is not!" (Whether God is the Cause of Evil, p. 102.)

Hans Denck was criticized for his belief that disciples of Jesus should fellowship with other seekers of other faiths. In his meditation on Micah 4.2-7 he noted that on the mountain of God, each person will worship their god even as we worship Yahweh. But God’s work of restoration is that we be together. Jesus brings us to others as we all move toward God.

This interpretation is inspired from Micah 4.5, specifically:

Micah 4.5 “Though all the peoples, they shall walk, each man in the name of his elohim, Yet we/ shall walk in the Name of Yahweh our Elohim, for the eon and further.” (Concordant Literal Version)

There are a lot questions, and there’s a lot that we did not get to.

What is your set of prolegomena when it comes to understanding God, relationships, and the role of Jesus in seeing others?

Karla spoke about Jesus being a filter, or a lens, through which we see others, regardless of what we may initially think about that person and what they represent. How do you see Jesus effecting the way you see other people?

The writings of Paul in the New Testament spent a lot of time in trying to reconcile disperate, separated, and often clashing groups of people. Jesus, in what is called the Great Commission, sends all disciples out. What if we see a fundamental role and practice of being sent as being reconcilers rather than being “evangelists” or “missionaries”? How does the change in name change the type of interaction?