Christianity Without Religion (PTM) has a short article up by Brad Jersak, People of the Book or the Book Above the People?
It includes this comment by Barbara Brown Taylor on the Bible and how people worship the words in ink more than the concept of putting those words into action and doing something about it. This has been the malady of the Church of God for decades. The words in The Book, the inked out words, are far more important than actually doing what it says. The church has always been selective in what it believes and practices when it comes to this. This is part of the reason Pack, Thiel, Weinland, Weston, and Flurry are all about talking and writing so much. They think their spoken words and their writings are far more important than actually being 'followers of the Way' and getting off their privileged asses and putting their so-called faith into action. These fake leaders and far too many other COG leaders think their words are far more important than following Jesus. In the same manner, they have deified the words of the Bible and the book itself as the reality instead of moving past the printed words and into doing some kind of action. This is why so many COG members ignore church leadership any more.
"… I notice [that] whenever people aim to solve their conflicts with one another by turning to the Bible, defending the dried ink marks on the page becomes more vital than defending the neighbor. As a general rule, I would say that human beings never behave more badly toward one another than when they believe they are protecting God. In the words of Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mohandas, “people of the book risk putting the book above people.” "
"I know that the Bible is a special kind of book, but I find it as seductive as any other. If I am not careful, I can begin to mistake the words on the page for the realities they describe. I can begin to love the dried ink marks on the page more than I love the encounters that gave rise to them. If I am not careful, I can decide that I am really much happier reading my Bible than I am entering into what God is doing in my own time and place, since shutting the book to go outside will involve the very great risk of taking part in stories that are still taking shape. Neither I nor anyone else knows how these stories will turn out, since at this point they involve more blood than ink. The whole purpose of the Bible, it seems to me, is to convince people to set the written word down in order to become living words in the world for God’s sake. For me, this willing conversion of ink back to blood is the full substance of faith.
In practice, this means that my faith is far more relational than doctrinal. Although I am guilty of reading scripture as selectively as anyone, my reading persuades me that God is found in right relationships, not in right ideas and that a great deal of Christian theology began as a stammering response to something that had actually happened in the world."
-Barbara Brown Taylor
The bible is a description of what God created rather than being some ultimate reality. Churchianity often gets this back to front by demanding that its members look away from reality, and blindly believe a particular interpretation of the bible.
ReplyDelete"You shall know them by their fruits" means that observing the world is a valid source of truth, and in practise more reliable than embracing some church's religious package.
This pretty much describes Bob Thiel. He is all words and no action. After David Pack and Gerald Waterhouse the church has never had such a shallow man speaking on such useless topics.
ReplyDeleteAll words and no actions. In the military we were trained to Lead by Example (LBE). Those officers who got out from behind their desks and actually physically worked with the soldiers, were the ones the soldiers respected. I was once told by a colleague to not be doing certain type of labor, labor that was for the enlisted personnel. I told him that I prefer to lead by example. Later a senior NCO said to me, "You're the only officer in this building who the soldiers respect."
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine any of the top "leaders", looking out the fourth floor window of the Hall of Administration, actually getting involved in the physical labor? A token effort to let the workers know that what they are doing is appreciated, would mean so much to them. RCM would mention a baptizing tour or evangelistic campaign he was involved in years ago. I seemed to me that his "service" was just the means of getting his ticket punched so that he could rise above that sort of ministry. Once he made rank in the WCG, he may have thought it was beneath him to do some sort of labor. There were probably a few top leaders who weren't so focused on rankings. Herman Hoeh was probably one. He lived away from campus and marched to the beat of a different drummer than some of the others. I think RCM was the worse. If I recall, he would say that he was number three in the church. Oh, how he wanted to be number 1. Do you think he was happy to see GTA booted out? Imagine seeing his reaction when Tkach was named successor to HWA? Real servants don't seek top floor offices, titles, perks, etc. Sorry for rambling.
Looks like Greg Albrecht's Plain Truth Ministries staggers on with this offering from Jersak.
ReplyDeleteI have to chuckle about this Christiainity without the Religion thing, that he promotes now. Albrecht was one of the biggest Nazis as Dean of Students back at AC. I always find it fascinating when those who had the least ability in an area, become the new propaganda chiefs of the new kinder gentler church narrative.
Well, I guess the idea is once an AC Grad and minister and chief of the brethren, then always an AC Grad, minister and chief of the brethren.
This is what I've thought about COG groups for a number if years but havent been able to put down as eloquently. The classic example for me was being able to seriously argue that giving to disaster charity was "unchristian" because that money was better spent spreading the word that the world would end.
ReplyDeleteChristians true relationship is with God the Father and Jesus Christ. Jesus taught about being the Vine.
ReplyDeleteThe Bible is important as God's inspired word but the bible is NOT a replacement for having a relationship with God.
At one pole, there is the pragmatic view of Christianity and at the other pole there is the conceptual view of Christianity. It is not good to gather around one pole or the other and just stay there. I would advocate the middle ground as the most useful place but sometimes a profound focus at one pole is required. I see Barbara Brown Taylor as lamenting the subordination of the pragmatic to the conceptual. The vehicle she uses to do this is the Bible.
ReplyDeleteArmstrongism, like Christianity, has both pragmatic and conceptual poles. And like other religious organizations, the poles inform each other. There is a process by which concept is implemented as behavior and action. I think many of the comments on this post focus on that process somehow not working in Armstrongism. I would disagree with the comments. I think Armstrongists are ever zealous to implement - they are just conceptually weak.
For example, I would imagine that the typical Armstrongist does not understand that HWA's philosophy is polytheistic. They have no carefully written systematic theology that contains, as its first chapter, the Doctrine of God. (I will use the Doctrine of God, instead of something more easily connected to Taylor's writing like "love" because the Doctrine God is the preeminent doctrine from which the others emanate.) They just have a little collection of booklets along with their seldom cited but often used inherited ideas from foregoing Millerite writers and, of course, the Waterhousean, Blackwellian and Hoehist corpus of preachments and writings. There might be some Wesleyan influence - purportedly someone found a copy of one of John Wesley's (or was it Charles) books in HWA's desk after he died. If concept is weak, then carrying concept into action will be impaired and there will be the phenomenon that Taylor observes.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Try being true to thyself NEO it would make life so much easier than having to carry the burden of a disclaimer.
ReplyDeleteI'm simply stunned that this blog is quoting Plain Truth Ministries without slapping it in some way.
ReplyDeleteWhy? I am a fan of Barbara Brown Taylor's writings and she nails it with the comment that was quoted. I am also no fan of Albrecht, but he has outside writers who write relevant articles for Christians and they are beneficial to ones walk with God, unlike the junk most COG's preach.
ReplyDeleteNEO
ReplyDeleteThis is no clash between the conceptual and pragmatic Christianity if both are properly understood and applied. The problem is that churchianity has deliberately muddied the water with both. Which why I found most members morally confused during my church stay. It's a manifestation of partiality towards evil. The give away is one liners for important matters, and streams of articles on trivia.
One is forced to go solo acquiring knowledge and understanding, which is appalling considering the amount of money that people hand over to these churches.
Some thoughts:
ReplyDeletehttps://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2020/11/losing-my-religion.html