Jesus' Dualism and the Early Church's Theistic Understanding of Jesus as Savior or Rescuer*

Jesus was very definitely dualistic in his worldview. Fundamental to his entire religious understanding were the two opposing pairs of soul and body, and God and the Devil. The Gospel of Mark stands as a key to his basic viewpoint: "What will it profit one to gain the whole world and lose one's soul?" (Mk. 8:36).

The "world" to which "soul" is opposed consists of two separate entities: the "world" of the body and the "world" of the Devil. Both worlds are intended in the passage from Mark just quoted, for Jesus had just said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan!" (Mk. 8:33). Both views of the world appear in Jesus' most famous parable as well, the Parable of the Sower. The Parable of the Sower sows seed on four types of ground. Three types fail to bear crops: the first because the Devil takes away the seed; the second because of persecution; the third because of the worries of the world and the lure of riches (Mk. 4:14-20). The types of ground - that is, the hearers of Jesus' teaching - are faced with two major obstacles, one internal and one external. The internal is the natural desire to have a good life in this world, a desire that often draws one away from following the gospel. The external is "the world" as a spiritual system run by the Devil, opposing anyone wishing to follow Jesus.

Faced with these obstacles, human beings needed help from outside. It was no longer a case of being obedient to the law while living in a good "place," the world created by the God of Genesis. The world was, in reality, not such a good place anyway: life was short and difficult, full of diseases and hardships. But now people had souls that they could lose and did not know their danger; in addition, they were living in the enemy's camp. They were trapped.

That is the point of the scriptural story about tying up the strong man cited in Chapter 4: "No one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered" (Mk. 3:27). the "strong man" is the Devil; his "house" is the world system he rules. Jesus came as the Savior, as the Devil's opponent from outside his "world," to plunder his house; he came to rescue his people. Those who came to have eyes to see, as in the story of the Samaritan woman at the well, could say, "This is truly the Savior of the world." (John 4:42).
____________________________________________________________
*Excerpt taken from The River of God: A New History of Christian Origins, by Gregory J. Riley, pp.217-218.

Preachers Misusing Funeral Sermons

Howard Thurman tells of being seven years old when his father died, and he has never forgotten the trauma he experienced when the guest preacher delivered a funeral sermon that did violence to his father's memory. That guest preacher handling the funeral had not known Saul Thurman. Yet that preacher dared to assess Saul Thurman's nonmembership in the local church the family attended as evidence that he was a nonbeliever, and he forthrighly declared him lost and in hell. That preacher wanted to make the occasion an object lesson for all who were "outside the church."

As young Howard sat on the mourner's seat, he kept saying to his mother beside him, "He didn't know Pappa? Did he? Did he, Momma?" Alice Thurman, Howard's mother, held her calm through the service and gently patted her son's knees to comfort him as the verbal violence ate away at his young mind and spirit. It was the handling of that sermon by that preacher, Thurman tells us, that turned him against the church for awhile during his youth. Lacking intimacy with the family, that preacher would have been wiser and more helpful if he had chosen to comfort the family rather than interpret the life of the deceased. That preacher used the occasion as an evangelistic opportunity. This type of sermon is common among fundamentalist Christian preachers.
_____________________________________________________
(Source: Excerpt taken from Designing the Sermon: Order and Movement in Preaching, by James Earl Massey. William D. Thompson, editor, pp.78-79)

Love described or love defined

TO DESCRIBE LOVE OR DEFINE LOVE  are not similar statements. The latter can define or possess you; but the former cannot, as it is only a description of what is at work in you. Once you absolutize this "love" that is at work in you, you can either die for it or hurt or kill others for it. That's why there are people who are willing to die because of it, and these same people can also hurt or kill others for it. So never define or absolutize this "love" that is at work in you, so it cannot possess or define you, for once you absolutize or define it, it becomes your "God" who can possess you absolutely. Once this happens in you, you turn this God or "love" into a monster at work in you. Unlike the love that you describe that is at work in you and, therefore, it cannot define or possess you, as you cannot fully possess it. Only by defining it, not describing it, can it possess people or by people possessed by it. So love as described, is preferably better than love defined. Or, another way of saying it, God (or love) described, is preferably better than God (or love) defined. Both, however, are continually at work in each person's being. It is also at work in the life of each community, or nation, Christian or non-christian.

Biblical Literalism

WHY BIBLICAL LITERALISM MUST BE REJECTED (outline)
I.While certain portions of the Bible can be understood and done literally, I believe most of it must be
   rejected. We can offer some alternative ways of understanding the Bible. Some of the words, syings, or
  commandments we can read and follow literally are: "Thou shall not kill," "Love your enemies," "Love God
  and neighbor, " "Thou shall not steal," "Thou shall not covet your neighbor's wife," etc.

II.Some reasons why biblical literalism must be rejected:*
    1. The scientific world demands it. The language and worldview of the people in the Bible are male-domi-
        nated.
    2.The Genesis creation fall story is wrong.
    3.The miracle stories in the Bible are all made up.
    4.The God in the Bible is a vicious and violent one.

III. How to affirm the Bible: an alternative to biblical literalism
    1. Read the Bible contextually. (fundamentalist christians still understand and/or interpret the Bible literally)
    2. Use other names for God, that are non-sexist, like "Wisdom," "Rock," "Light," "Spirit," "Creator,"
        "Friend," etc. All these names for God  and many more are found in the Bible, but people don't use
        them more often than male language, then and now.
    3.God loves all - men, women, even the LGBT, and the whole creation. In Genesis God calls them "very
       good."
    4.Use miracle stories in the Bible metaphorically. After all, I believe, that's the intent of all those miracle
       stories.
    5.Use non-theistic language (as opposed to theistic**) in our understanding of God, in our theological
       (re)formulations, and also in our church liturgies (prayers and hymns).
________________________________________________________
*See file, "A New Way of Affirming And Appreciating the Bible"
**God "up there" beyond the clouds, who comes down or sends God's angel, or Christ, when
    people pray or call for help to bless, save and rescue us.

Prepared by JNR/Aug 2012
   

Postmodern Thought and Creativity

Postmodern Thought and Creativity Vs. St. Augustine's Doctrine of Original Sin

St. Augustine's doctrine of Original Sin has been challenged by post-modern thought and creativity. According to Augustine, humanity has fallen from his original condition because Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit. To recover humankind's original condition, Augustine claims, our faith in Jesus Christ can rescue us and help us recover the "image of God."

Post-modern thought and creativity, however, claims that "creativity is about making mistakes. In fact, there is no such things as 'mistakes' in the creative process; there are only different ways of doing things.

"We should not be afraid of our mistakes. The moment we are afraid, we limit our chances of exploring new creative avenues. If our mistake (or sin) does not lead us to anything creative this time, at least we can learn from it. Next time we'll know which steps to avoid to be closer to our goal."
 .....................................
"Do you mean Augustine was wrong?", his student asked.
"He didn't know he was wrong. . .thought he was right based on primitive science," his teacher answered. "That's always been the problem of Christians ever since," he concluded.
_____________________________________________________________________
Source: creativXpert.com/travel/accidental-discovery-port. With additional comment by J.N.Riingen

"Federal Theology"

Did you know that there is a term, "Federal Theology"?
"Federal" came from a Latin term foecus, a covenant. There was a movement in the 17th century Reformed theology to present a comprehensive history of salvation, working from the Old Testament (see Westminster Confession chapter vii). Federal theology specifically refers to the theory of Johannis Cocceius (1603-1669), who taught mainly in the Netherlands and whose teaching threw the Church into turmoil. Cocceius held that the original natural covenant of works was 'abrogated' in five steps in accordance with the super-natural covenant. The steps were: the Fall; the inner-trinitarian pact between God and the Mediator; the proclamation of the covenant of grace in the Old Testament, fulfilled in the New Testament; the death of the body and sanctification; and the resurrection of the body. Federal theology deeply influenced pietism (we call it today as fundamentalist christians), and all later philosophies of history.(from Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, article by J.C.O'Neill, p. 210)

Biblical Literalism

Literal Bible Interpretations: A literal Bible presents me with far more problems(liabilities-jnr) than assets. It offers me a God I cannot respect, much less worship; a deity whose needs and prejudices are at least large as my own. I meet in the literal understanding of scriptures a God who is simply not viable, and what the mind cannot believe the heart can finally never adore.
                                        -Bishop John Shelby Spong, "Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism" (1991).