!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> Emerging Women .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Reflecting on God in Everyday Life - interview with Ed Cyzewski
Coffeehouse Theology: Reflecting on God in Everyday Life by Ed Cyzewski just came out, and for those who are interested in approaching God, life, and lived out theology not just from an single access point (for instance, like objective truth) this book posits an interesting perspective with a postmodern sensibility.

Ed agreed to let me pick his brain, and ask him some questions about some ideas from his book, at my blog and your thoughts, comments, questions, or even gripes are welcome.

This book offers plenty of resources for additional reading, which is great too. It brings up things some of us often wonder about...like how do we truly live what we believe in light of what we can really know about God, in history, and in all his mystery....what role can, does, or should Scripture have in knowing God. . . how does the church integrate the global church perspective ...where does tradition fit in.. should it? cultral context .. and mission of God and church... lots to chew on and good stuff, especially for a few people to tackle together, I liked the study guide companion for that.

Hope you can participate.
(emergingpa.blogspot.com)

Labels: ,

 
posted by LisaColónDeLay at 5:30 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 0 comments
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Book Discussion: The Chocolate Cake Sutra
The Chocolate Cake Sutra, by Geri Larkin, is a fun and nuanced look into the lifestyle and actions that lead to a "Sweet Life." Larkin writes as a Jesus-friendly Buddhist and her prescriptions sound familiarly scented not only with "Sweet Life," but with the Abundant Life offered when we live in harmony with the Spirit and act in ways that incarnate the kingdom of God.

You can find a review here .

The prologue and introduction are full of fodder for growth and an interchange of ideas. Let's start with the story Larkin tells of a "young man named Eugene who was desperate to find a truly holy person with whom he could study." After much searching, Eugene eventually happens upon a guy in woods who works for a hot-shot holy woman called Jaya, who has an incredible reputation for what she can do for her students' spirituality. It takes Eugene taking three years and many near-death experiences to even gain admittance into Jaya's complex, where he is instructed to wait in the shrine room. Eugene is told it won't be long before Jaya is able to meet with him.

So Eugene waits. But he really has to pee.

"'I have to go to the bathroom,'" Eugene says to Jaya's assistant.
"'You have to stay in the shrine room.'"

Eugene sure waits his best, and at last, hours later, he aims at a corner of the shrine room and pees like nobody's business, whereupon he is dragged away by two acolytes, with the largest bellowing,

"'How dare you!'"

"'You show me a place that isn't holy, and I'll pee there!'"

"'He stays'."

"It was Jaya."

1. What is your reaction to this approach to the holy?
2. What can communities of Christian disciples learn from this story that can be applied to worship?

In her introduction, Larkin isn't afraid to deal a significant blow (or is it constructive criticism?) to her celebrity crush, on a serious count of spiritual arrogance.

Larkin writes, "The Interview was about a movie he had just directed. It was about Jesus Christ. As a card-carrying Buddhist, I have have always been moved to tears by the last hours of Jesus. Even as I write, I can barely fathom the depth of love and compassion for the people harming him. It is the best love story ever." Larkin goes on to describe the situation that sparked her accusation:


My crush was responding to criticisms of his interpretation of the story...As I remember it, the interviewer asked how he would respond to someone criticizing his film.
A pause. 'I'd forgive them.'
Oh, no. The arrogance in his voice told me he had it wrong. It was that 'I'm-better-than-you tone that gives me the goose bumps because it's the same tone that says 'You don't get God because he's ours.'


3. What is it like for you to read about a non-Christian pouring her heart out over her love of Jesus? What feelings and ideas come up for you?

4. What is your sensibility about what differentiates self-perceived spiritual accuracy from self-deceived spiritual pride?

5. What's your favorite story or quote in the book so far?








Labels: , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 2:47 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 2 comments
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Sabbath, Rest, and Guilt

I was sitting in the swinging chair enjoying the spring Phoenix day. It wasn't too hot, and the breeze was refreshing. And I was feeling guilty. Why? Because I wasn't doing anything. I wasn't working. I wasn't being productive. I was on vacation and feeling guilty for being on vacation. How American is that? It took me a whole day, but I finally did it: I stopped feeling guilty about taking a break and resting. I found out what true rest, true letting go feels like. Or may be I remembered how to let go and rest.

Genesis tells us that God created the heavens and the earth in six days and then rested on the Sabbath. Keeping the Sabbath and not working one day a week is one of The Ten Commandments. It is also the commandment that's most often broken by Chrsitians and non-Christians alike. We can wax eloquently all we want to about not taking God's name in vain or not committing murder, but bring up keeping the Sabbath, and the room gets very, very quiet. Why do some branches of American Christianity insist that God created the earth in six literal days, but then fall silent when it comes to taking what God did on the seventh day literally?

And on the seventh day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation (Genesis 2:2-3).

Why is it so hard for us to stop and rest?

On of the reasons is that we have believed the lie that we are what we do. We believe the myth that what we do is who we are. So we work. We perform. We jump through hoops. One of the reason for keeping the Sabbath is to remind us who we really are: children of God. The Sabbath also reminds us that everything we have comes from God. God provides for all our needs. The Sabbath is for remembering: remembering who we are and remembering who God is. God rested on the seventh day, and God commanded us to do the same. If it is okay for God to rest, then it is okay for us to rest as well.

In fact, it is imperative to rest. We need a day where we let go of the worry and stress and our work, and we trust God to take care of us.

The last three Sundays I have rested. In fact, I've even been taking naps. I rested, and I did not feel one iota of guit.

What about you? Do you take time off? How do you rest?

Related post
An Update Merry-Go-Round

Labels: ,

 
posted by Shawna Atteberry at 2:24 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
The Year of Living Biblically Week 3
The Year of Living Biblically is a humor-filled, yet fantastic entry point into a discussion of biblical interpretation. Hopefully you've been enjoying the book! Even if you haven't read it, here are a few questions to get at how interpretation shapes our lives:

1. What's one contemporary issue about which you have changed your mind?

A) Did experience cause you to reexamine your biblical understanding or did your biblical understanding cause you to reshape your approach to the issue?

2. What do you think is the most commonly misunderstood/misinterpreted bible passage?

A) What are your feelings toward people who hold this view with which you disagree?
B) What do you think is the best way of approaching touchy yet important topics with others of varying persuasions?

3. What do you think is the most damaging or dangerous widely-held misunderstanding about the bible as a whole or a specific scripture, in your opinion?

4. What has been the most life-giving practice/belief/way of being in the world you have gleaned from the bible?

Labels: , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 5:53 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Monday, April 07, 2008
The Year of Living Biblically Week 2
1. What does it mean to live biblically?

A.J. Jacobs shares the insight he gets on biblical interpretation from Steven Greenberg, the first out-of-the-closet gay orthodox Jewish Rabbi:

"The whole Bible is the working out of the relationship between God and man," says Greenberg. "God is not a dictator barking out orders and demanding silent obedience. Were it so, there would be no relationship at all. No real relationship goes just one way. There are lways two active parties. We must have reverence and awe for God and honor for the chain of tradition. But that doesn't mean we can't use new information to help us read the holy texts in new ways...Never blame a text from the Bible for your behavior. It's irresponsible. Anybody who says X,Y and Z is in the bible -- it's as if one says, 'I have no role in evaluating this.'"


2. What ways have you experienced a happy cooperation between mind and Spirit in the Word coming to life for you?

3. Have you ever used "the bible says..." as a cop out when you didn't actually believe what you were saying?

4. What, in your opinion is the healthiest way we can approach biblical texts with which our spirits deep down cannot agree, at least in terms of a traditional interpretation of the passage?




Labels: , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 6:43 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 4 comments
Monday, March 31, 2008
Book Discussion: The Year of Living Biblically
by A.J. Jacobs

"My quest is this: to live the ultimate biblical life. Or more precisely, to follow the bible as literally as possible." So begins A.J.'s year-long sojourn, which he has made into a funny, informative and thought-provoking book. You can learn how You too can live biblically, see before and after pics of A.J's hair (see if you agree he resembles the unibomber,) and view a link on How to be good at at A.J's website.

At the project's start, A.J. decides to get himself some good biblical studies resources. Upon walking into a Bible bookstore, a sales clerk offers A.J. some advice, as he points to a suggested bible, which is, "designed to look exactly like a Seventeen magazine: An attractive (if long-sleeved) model graces the front, next to cover lines like, 'What's your spiritual IQ?" Open it up and you'll find sidebars such as 'Rebeca the Control Freak.'"

"This one's good if you're on the subway and are too embarrassed to be seen reading the Bible,' says Chris, [the sales clerk] It's an odd and poignant selling point. You know your in a secular city when it's considered more acceptable for a grown man to read a teen girl's magazine than the Bible." (p 9)

This interchange caused me to think about this quandry/opportunity:

1. What does it mean to be unapologetic and open about our humble walk with God when so often we feel ashamed and very apologetic about certain aspects of our religious "families of origin." and the dogmas that often supplant life in the Spirit? What can we claim from our origins that abides in light, love and truth in place within our spirits where deep calls unot deep? And what could it look like when we let that Light shine?

On page 39 A.J. writes:

...one of my motivations for this experiment is my recent entrance into fatherhood. I'm constantly worried about my son's ethical education. I don't want him to swim in a soup of moral relativism. I don't trust. I have such a worldview, and though I have yet to commit a major felony, it seems dangerous.
I thought it was funny to observe that A.J. actually agrees with fundamentalists about relativism, even though this is the view he espouses. I wondered,

2. Is there an alternative to relativism and absolutism?

3. Have you wrestled with "what to tell the children," either in your family or spiritual community? I am curious particularly in areas of sex, salvation and evangelism how your own journey/ambiguity or ambivalence impacts what you say, avoid saying or otherwise communicate to a younger generation.

4. What approach do you take to instilling, offering, modeling and otherwise helping nurture young disciples, whether they are your own children or spiritual children you feel are entrusted into your care in friendship and/or ministry?





Labels: , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 12:17 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 11 comments
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Theology beyond experience
In my ministry / relational interactions . . ." on the street" research lately I have been running into a lot more wafer thin theology among devote Christians. (Like if you poke a stick at it, (MAYBE) it could collapse like a bubble gum bubble.) For instance, one guy... I'll call him Bazooka Joe, explained that experience precedes (or overshadows) theology. For his faith walk with Jesus this is the deal. No distinction could be made for anybody's experience in a spiritual sense, good or bad. He didn't want to determine what that was, b/c who's to say? It becomes individual, if not almost arbitrary to sort that out, he seemed to think.

I thought about this, but then something didn't seem to quite fit, so we interacted a bit him more. When I asked him about his conversion from atheism, and if that experience would then have more weight, he admitted, logically it couldn't, of course, based on what he said, and what he believed to be accurate about experience.
So experience is. . .well, not like Theology.

How does Theology fit into experience, and experience into Theology?
or for you, does one inform the other?
how?
discuss. . . .
: )

Labels: , , ,

 
posted by LisaColónDeLay at 5:25 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 32 comments
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Book Discussion Forever & Ever, Amen by Karol Jackowski
Well, one problem with being a book lover and the mom of a toddler is that books suddenly disappear when you are about use them, and so this post isn't going to have any quotes. I hope if you've had a chance to dip into the book you've found some gems of your own, and please feel free to share any that inspire you!

In the latter part of the book, Karol talks about the breakup of the old order, with its imposition of sameness, at the cost of individuality and the voices of the sisters. She describes the crisis of community that occurred when after years of oppression, the freedom to dissent suddenly arose, causing the foundations of friendship, sisterhood and solidarity to be shaken, and the cost both of that oppression, and the pain of its lifting after being normative for so long.

1. Where is your community at in the process of valuing the voicing of its members, even when it means the loss of uniformity?

2. What is your community doing or not doing to foster an environment where people are/feel loved and safe enough to stretch beyond comfort zones to include the Other, even when the other is the person in the next seat or pew?

3. Describe a time you took a risk and voiced a dissenting opinion about theology, community or spiritual life? What was it like?

4. Describe a time you did not voice a dissenting a opinion, but felt one? What was it like?

5. Describe a time when someone else's dissenting opinion felt threatening to you? What was it like?

6. What is your heart's urgent prayer for the church/God's people?

Labels: , , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 7:46 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Book Discussion Forever & Ever, Amen by Karol Jackowski
One of the main themes that emerges in this book is the issue of blind obedience. We have suffered so much for being/not being blindly obedient to our churches, to theologies, to authorities who come in the name of God, be they spiritual or political. I love Sister Karol's voice because she offers a third way: that of sensing the voice of God in our authorities and in ourselves, our peers and those whom we influence as authorities.

Karol Jackowski writes,

"It's not that I didn't believe sister Beatrice's [her superior] voice was the of God -- I did. But I also believed that we too speak with the voice of God, and listening to what we had to say was an important part of being obedient." (p 149)

And,

"Nothing is more deadly to the holy spirit of community that silencing the divine voice of i
ts members, because it's then that we silence the voice of God." (p150)

1. What has been your experience with blind obedience?

A. Are you by nature a white sheep who tends to follow blindly, even to the slaughter?
B. Are you a black sheep who tends to buck anything that smells faintly like authority?

2. What ideas do you have for how we can listen to the voice of God in all people? What practices and methods of discernment help root you and your community, if you have on, in the Spirit as you seek to listen to the voice of God in authority, in yourself and in all who travel side by side or in your care on the path?

Labels: , , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 6:06 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Monday, February 04, 2008
Christian Agnostics/Deists?
At what point does doubt slide into some form of agnosticism or deism? Is it possible to be a Christian if you're not even sure if God exists?

I ask because I'm becoming less and less certain of my beliefs. Most days, I'm relatively sure that there is *something* out there...but not always. And often I can't say whether that *something* is God as we think of him/her. I just don't know. Strangely, this isn't a disturbing thing to me in most situations. Although it can become a little awkward when other Christians attempt to convince me of X by pointing out bible verses or saying, "the church teaches...."

To me, those sort of arguments are beginning to make about as much sense as attempting to prove that Santa exists because his name was on some of the presents under Johnny and Sarah's Christmas tree last December. ;)

Labels: ,

 
posted by Lydia at 10:55 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 18 comments
Monday, November 26, 2007
Tuesday Book DIscussion: The End of Memory week 4
On page 110, Volf states based the human tendency to commit injustice, we have two unacceptable options:

"We can simpy disregard justice (as Nietzche did) and abandon the world to the interplay of forces, thus plunging the unprotected weak into suffering; or we can insist on the relentless pursuit of justice and end up with a "rectified" world-in-ruins, a world completely torn apart by the unsparing hands of retributive justice."

The third option (drum roll for this big shocker, please) is forgiveness. Volf writes,

"In the memory of the Passion we honor victims even while extending grace to perpetrators. shouldering the wrongdoing done to sufferers, God identifies it truthfully and condemns it justly."

Although Volf argues for an ultimate healing where offenses no longer comes to mind because love has entirely suffused and reconciled the human community with one another in and with God, he is careful to point out that "one should never demand of the those who have suffered wrong that they "forget" and move on....Any forgetting other than that which grows out of a healed relationship between the wrongdoer and the wronged in a transformed social environment should be mistrusted."

Clearly this works for catastrophic and clear cut wrongs, but what about the smaller offenses where perceptions plays a huge role not only in memory but in interpretation?

I've thought of this idea recently and wondered, since God *could* forgive without the cross, because God is God, if part of the atonement is to both honor the victim by validating the inexcusability of the wrongdoing, while offering grace to the one who does wrong. And in situations where memories differ and it's a game of he said, she said, then if God in Jesus died for ALL sin, God covers whoever *deserved* (from our human standpoint) punishment, and we all are called to show grace to ourselves and one another, even when we disagree about who was wrong, who was more wrong etc.

1. Is there a sense in which, in God you can either be right or your can be happy (because God in Christ has made all things right)?

2. What criteria do you use to decide what truths/memories are worth fighting for and what can be let go and healed by a general appropriation of the Passion with its grace and its humbling effect on all people?

On page 171 Volf analyzes Kierkegaard's depiction of three women abandoned by their lovers, who act as forgiving as a good Christian possibly could, yet remain largely unhealed and despairing. The women are un-liberated by their forgiving actions because "the bond between the lover and the beloved is 'an alliance of self-love that shuts God out.' As a result of this selfish idolatry, the self of each woman is left unprotected and subject to the mercy of her fickle lover."

3. In what situations have you deluded yourself into thinking you were selflessly loving another but in actuality you were putting a human love ahead of keeping your ultimate identity in God, to your own detriment?

Labels: , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 7:34 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 7 comments
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Made in the Image of God: Female
Gifted for Leadership’s most recent post is What Our Feminity Means. Here is an excerpt that sums up the entire post:

The benefits of modesty aside, femininity became a new way to behave, a role I played, a corset I wrapped around my soul and tightened down to get approval. Femininity quickly became something I did to get what I needed or wanted in life. It was something to use, not something I owned.

I don’t think this is what God intended when he created Woman. In Genesis 1 God wanted to splash more of the Trinity onto Earth. So God made Man and Woman to mirror his image (Gen 1:27). Femininity in its truest, original sense was one way God’s image appeared, and this image was not weak, catty, emotionally crazy, or inferior because God is none of these things. Femininity wasn’t a role Eve played to get what she needed; femininity was part of who she was. Even after Eden, as broken image bearers, we reflect God. If a child is humble, she mirrors her God. If a man is gentle, he mirrors his God. If women are feminine in the original sense, we reflect our God.

My main problem with this is that “feminine” and “femininity” are social and sociological constructs, not biblical or theological terms. Genesis 2:26-28 states:

Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

God did not make “masculine” and “feminine” in God’s likeness. God made Male and Female in God’s likeness. And what does this image and likeness look like? According to these verses it means that man and woman subdue the earth and rule it as well as being fruitful and multiplying. Both the man and woman are commanded to have a family and to have a vocation.

In Genesis 2, we found that God created a human being and placed the human in the Garden of Eden. God decided that it was not good for the human to be alone, so God made an ezer cenegdo for the human. After the ezer is made there is now man and woman. What exactly is an ezer? Outside of Genesis 2, it appears 20 times in the Bible*. Seventeen of those times, ezer is used to describe God. In each instance military imagery is used to describe God coming to help Israel against its enemies. I found Psalm 146 particularly fascinating:

1 Praise the LORD! Praise the LORD, O my soul!
2 I will praise the LORD as long as I live; I will sing praises to my God all my life long.
3 Do not put your trust in princes, in mortals, in whom there is no help.
4 When their breath departs, they return to the earth; on that very day their plans perish.
5 Happy are those whose help [ezer] is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD their God,
6 who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them; who keeps faith forever;
7 who executes justice for the oppressed; who gives food to the hungry. The LORD sets the prisoners free;
8 the LORD opens the eyes of the blind. The LORD lifts up those who are bowed down; the LORD loves the righteous.
9 The LORD watches over the strangers; he upholds the orphan and the widow, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin.
10 The LORD will reign forever, your God, O Zion, for all generations. Praise the LORD!

After telling the congregation not to put their trust in human leaders, the psalmist proclaims: “Happy are those whose ezer is the God of Jacob, Rachel, and Leah!” (author’s paraphrase). The psalmist then goes on to describe how God helps Israel: God executes justice for the oppressed, gives food to the hungry, sets prisoners free, opens the eyes of the blind, lifts up those who are bowed down, and loves the righteous. God watches over the strangers, upholds the orphan and widow, and brings the way of the wicked to ruin. God’s help is not to dominate the people, but to lift them out of poverty and hunger, to set them free from oppressors and oppressive debts (most people in prison then were in debtor’s prison: they could not pay their debts). God helps the orphans and widows: those in society who have no one else to help them and be strong for them. God uses God’s strength and power to help those that no one else will help because they are seen as weak, poor, and marginal. Again we see military imagery used to describe God as Israel’s ezer or helper.

Carolyn Custis James does a wonderful job of exploring the word ezer and its military connotations in her book, Lost Women of the Bible: Finding Strength & Significance through Their Stories, in the chapter on Eve. She translates ezer as “strong helper.” Woman was created in the image of God to be a helper to the man as God was a helper to Israel. But this does not make her superior to the man. That’s where the second word of the phrase comes in: cenedgo, which means standing or sitting face to face. It means equal. So the full translation of ezer cenedgo is a powerful helper equal to. Woman was created to be a powerful helper equal to the man the way God is a powerful helper to God’s people.

Man and woman are created in God’s image to image God in our world. Psalm 146 gives a description of what God is doing in the world. God is not only fighting enemies and saving God’s people. God is also taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves. This means that both man and woman should be doing the things God does to image God to our world. This includes fighting systemic and spiritual evil, but it also includes tenderness and compassion toward those who are poor, needy, and those whom society overlooks.

I want to look at two women in the Bible; one in the Hebrew Scriptures and the other in the New Testament. Deborah is the woman of Hebrew Scriptures that I want to look at. We are introduced to Deborah in Judges 4. She is a prophet and judge, and she leads Israel. The Israelite people come to her with the problems and disputes, and she mediates God’s will as Moses had once done. She is married, but she is a working woman. God has called her to be a prophet and judge, and she has answered. When God commands Israel to go to battle with their enemy Sisera and the Canaanites, Deborah summons the military commander Barak, and tells him what God says. But Barak will not go into battle without God’s representative, Deborah. Both Barak and Deborah lead Israel’s armies into battle. Here we see a man and a woman working together to fight the people’s enemies and obey God’s words and will. And irony of ironies is that Deborah’s husband, Lappidoth, is probably in the troops following his wife.

Deborah, Barak, and Lappidoth do not resemble or act according to the societal constructs of masculine and feminine, but they are obeying God and building God’s kingdom side by side. Leading men into a battle is not considered “feminine” in Western society, but Deborah was obeying God. God called her to lead her people and protecting them from their enemies. She was an ezer who was imaging God in her every word and action.

The next woman I want to look at in the New Testament is Priscilla (or Prisca). Priscilla ran a business with her husband, Aquilla. They made tents together. They worked in Corinth with Paul where they heard the Gospel and were saved (Acts 18:1-3). Later the couple would meet Apollos who had heard only of John’s baptism and not heard of Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension or the baptism of the Holy Spirit. When Priscilla and Aquilla heard him, they took him aside and “explained the Way of God to him more accurately” (v. 26). They also lead a home church when Paul wrote his letter to the Romans (Romans 16:3-5). It is very odd during this time for a wife’s name to be mentioned before her husband’s, and yet four times Priscilla’s name is put before her husband’s. Many scholars believe that she was the dominant one in ministry: the teacher and pastor of the churches that met in their home.

Again we see a man and woman working side by side making a living and building God’s kingdom. There is no mention of what is masculine and what is feminine. They work together as the team God created them to be.

I think being made in male and female in the image of God has very little to do with modern notions of femininity and masculinity. It has everything to do with faithfully imaging God to our world by obeying God’s callings on our lives and working together–both men and women–to build the kingdom of God on earth.

*Exodus 18:4; Deuteronomy 33:7, 26, 29; Psalm 20:2; 33:20; 70:5; 89:19; 115:9-11; 121:1-2; 124:8; 146:5; and Hosea 13:9.

The New Revised Standard Version is used for biblical quotes unless otherwise noted.

Labels:

 
posted by Shawna Atteberry at 3:41 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 24 comments
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Creed
The Gospel According to Mark
(A creed created from a reading of Mark's gospel)

By Jemila Kwon

We are the family of Jesus, God’s beloved, God’s anointed one.
Woven together in doing God’s will, we enact God’s kingdom here and now, serving and loving God and neighbor,
Spreading the good news
Including the outcasts,
Lifting up the least,
Healing the sick,
Making the unclean clean
Honoring the destitute
Bringing the dead to life
Freeing the oppressed and the demonized
Forgiving sinners
Exposing the power-hungry
And Empowering the powerless through parables, miracles and a new way of life. We are fishers of human beings and servants of all, for the last shall be first and the least shall be greatest.

God prepared the way through John the baptizer
For Jesus to bring us the Holy Spirit

Jesus was tempted in the wilderness,
Who calmed the storm
Who cast out demons
Raised the dead to life,
Healed the sick,
Was misunderstood by family
Mocked by acquaintances
Rejected by his own faith community
Betrayed by his friend Judas
Given capital punishment to appease the crowd
Crucified alone on the cross
Shed the Passover blood,
Died and Raised to life,

Our Lord Jesus Christ says:

Do not be afraid
Where is your faith?
Give Love Live
Receive!
All things are possible with God, only
Believe!

Abandon all but Love of God and Neighbor
Spread the good news that God is acting again!
God is here
God is now
The time is now to spread the good news

Before God’s kingdom is consummated in full
Before our generation passes away
Let the good news go out that God is acting again and his will is to forgive, heal, free the oppressed, make all things clean, serve the least, raise the dead to life and call all who have ears to a new way of life.

What is the new way of life?

The way of loving God and having faith
The way of loving neighbor and loving stranger
The way of standing for life, even to death
The way of believing God, and following God’s beloved son, God’s anointed one

We follow God’s beloved son, God's anointed one
We walk in the steps of Jesus Christ
We act in his name
We are the family of God, woven together in doing God’s will

We believe God is acting again!

Labels: , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 9:19 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 10 comments
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Forgiveness
I was listening to a lecture for a class I'm taking in seminary this week, and the teaching professor said something that totally threw me for a loop. He was talking about the difference between true peacemaking and appeasement, and he said that we have cheapened the concept of forgiveness. Referencing Luke 17:3-4, he said that we should listen again to what Jesus actually said:

"If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him."

Which could imply that if he doesn't repent, you shouldn't forgive him.

I've been taught that forgiveness has two dimensions: 1) the actual act of forgiving someone - no longer holding them accountable for what they did to you (tho how this actually works in the context of some choices having consequences I don't always quite know) and 2) the emotional benefit that comes from forgiving someone. Bitterness and unforgiveness do as much - if not more - hurt and damage to our own hearts as they do to the person towards whom we hold them.... So shouldn't we forgive? At least in theory, even if practically our relationship with the person in question is altered by whatever fall-out there is from the situation? According to what Jesus says here, maybe not...

What do you think about this? I'm happy to say that I don't think there are any situations in my life that make this question pressing, but there have been in the past and there probably will be again someday, so I'm hoping to think this through a bit while I'm not emotional. :)

Labels: ,

 
posted by Happy at 7:42 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 17 comments
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Tuesday Book Discussion: The Faith Club
Stereotypes

Ranya, Priscilla and Suzanne -- three women, three faiths, taking off the politically correct gloves and getting real -- respectfully and in the context of friendship, yet holding no punches.

Ranya struggles with feeling left out and even banished (referencing the Judeo-Christian interpretation of the story of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar & Ishamel,as well as personal experience) from the monotheistic club/conversation, as well as the more conservative expressions of Islam. She pleas for a recognized Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition, instead of just a Judeo-Christian tradition.

Priscilla struggles with intense identification and fear related to the Holocaust and doubts about the existence of God, as well as with how to stand up for Palestinian rights within Jewish community.

Suzanne struggles with how she is perceived as a member of the majority faith as well with her own (previously unconscious) stereotypes and sense of spiritual superiority.

Together, three women come to recognize how sacred scriptures of all faith traditions are used at times in ways that engender intimacy with God and mutual appreciation of neighbor, and at other times in ways the foster a sense of one "people" being superior, endowed with the right to even commit violence in the name of God, or a promise of God found in the scriptures or taught by religious leaders. Priscilla finds God, Ranya finds validation and Suzanne embraces more ambiguity, along with a new sense of sisterhood with Ranya and Priscilla.

After Suzanne admits that she was uncomfortable being mistaken for a Jew, a lively, honest discussion of stereotypes ensues (chapter 5) and Priscilla pushes Suzanne to explore her stereotypes of Jewish people.

Suzanne: "Alright, I sighed. "I guess it's someone who is pushy. And, well, someone who cares very much about money. And then there's the Woody Allen neuroticism."

Priscilla: "Suzanne, two out of those three things justified the Holocaust...You know whenever there's a scandal on Wall Street, we Jews say, please God, don't let it be a Jew! We're paranoid about the stereotype of Jews obsessed with accumulating money."

Suzanne: "Do you think that stereotype is a vestige of the Jewish struggle against persecution?" I wondered. "Wealth and Education are two ways to ensure survival when you're being persecuted."

Priscilla: "Could be," Priscilla said wit ha shrug.

1) Imagine a stereotype you have of a group of people who live in your community. Lift it up to God and open yourself to new understandings. If continue to feel there is a grain of truth in a generalization (positive or negative) about a group of people, what factors, such as pain, fear or persecution might have given rise to certain patterns as a survival mechanism?

Ranya states, "I think Muslims and Arabs are now the only groups in our society about whom other people think they can make racial slurs and jokes without being labeled racists."

2) How does America's fear of the militant forms of Islam impact our ability to treat Muslim people with honor and care?

3) What might Jewish and Muslim people look to in Christian scriptures, and in the words of Christian leaders that might make them afraid that Christianity is a violent religion?

4) How do you feel (viscerally/emotionally/physically/mentally) when in the presence of a Jewish or Muslim person? How do you feel about your own feelings?


5. Ranya describes some of the positive contributions of the Muslim people to western culture: Preserving the classics, discovering/creating algebra, inventing the maps used by Christopher Columbus to find America. Are these facts new to you?

Priscilla describes her impression of Christians: "I think of Christians as good people, but we don't need the propaganda."

6)What does she mean? Have you ever found yourself engaging in "Christian propaganda"?

7)Is Christian Propaganda different from evangelism or sharing the Good News?


Labels: , , , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 9:12 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 6 comments
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Tuesday Book Discussion: The Faith Club
by Ranya Idliby, Suzanne Oliver, and Priscilla Warner.

Each Tuesday this September we'll be discussing themes from The Faith Club, an interfaith journey between three women friends -- a Muslim, a Jew and a Christian. It's an easy, engaging and rich read -- if you're busy, keep it in the car and read at stop lights, or a sneak in a few minutes before bed. If you haven't started yet, come join the conversation and share your reflections and experiences.

The beginning of the learning year is a good time to look out into the world, as well as into our own hearts to discover what it means to understand, appreciate and grow in relation to people, faiths and experiences very different from our comfort zone.

This week I invite you to share your experiences with people from different faiths, both positive, negative and whatever ambiguous feelings lie in the spaces between these poles.

1. When was the first time (if ever) you had a close friendship with someone of a different religious background?

2. On page 28, someone is quoted saying, "'I never liked that word "tolerance." It's too passive. Think about it. To tolerate someone? That doesn't sound very positive. It's not a call to engage and understand someone else. I like the phrase "'mutual appreciation.'"

What do you think of the word "tolerance?" Do you have any alternatives that you find have more to offer?

3. Why is interfaith friendship and conversation important?

Labels: , , , , , ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 7:48 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 8 comments
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Tuesday Book Club - Misquoting Jesus Part 1
In the introduction to Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman discusses his journey through various Christian traditions and approaches to the interpretation of scripture. From nominal mainline, to born-again fundamentalist, to evangelical, and back to mainline, Ehrman experienced some of the most prominent expressions of Christianity in America. As is typical in those traditions, Ehrman viewed those outside his current placement with derision. Those who were from other traditions or who interpreted scripture differently were often not even seen as real Christians. In fact in his fundamentalist days it was unheard of to even admit that biblical interpretation takes place since everything was supposedly inerrant and literal. But as he studied ancient languages and history and went further in his Biblical studies, Ehrman realized that there was much more involved with the Bible than his simple conceptions had led him to believe.

Over the course of this month, we will explore some of the theories and interpretations Ehrman presents, but this week it might be good to explore our backgrounds.
  • What traditions have we come from and how did those traditions approach the Bible?
  • Were you taught that the Bible was the inerrant word of God? And what exactly did that mean?
  • Did your tradition interpret the Bible literally, metaphorically, or dynamically?
  • Did your tradition even admit that the Bible is interpreted at all?
  • Did you ever encounter the historical and cultural setting of the Bible or did that matter?
  • Was the Bible presented as the Word of God or the writings of men, and what did that mean for how it was read?
  • Have you ever even heard of textual criticism, original documents, or translation issues?
  • Was the Bible the fourth member of the Trinity and the first point on your church's statement of faith or was it a coffee table decoration?
  • And were those to saw the Bible differently that the tradition you were a part of looked upon with scorn and derision or not even considered real Christians?


This whole issue is a very emotionally charged issue for many. I remember when I first encountered (at Wheaton like Ehrman) the idea that there are other valid ways of interpreting scripture and being a Christian than that with which I had grown up. I was fascinated by that and sought to explore and learn more. Others I knew denied the idea and shut down any conversation on that topic. I still get nasty comments and emails from fundamentalists when I bring up the mere concept of Biblical interpretation on my blog. So I want to start this month's discussion with a time to share our stories. To let each other know our journeys and our struggles. I ask for truthfulness and respect and hope that we can better understand what this issue looks like from a wide variety of perspectives.

Labels: , ,

 
posted by Julie at 9:57 AM ¤ Permalink ¤ 14 comments
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Knocking from the Inside: A Theology of Redemption in light of God's Omnipresence
If God is everywhere, then s/he must be Everywhere, including within the vibrating cells of unbelievers, nonbelievers, partial believers and even gay haters, gluttons and grass. Even me. Even before I was becoming a Christian, opening to an increasing awareness of God's truth, grace -- really just God's love in all its many faces, like justice and joy and the cross and being alive.

God is willing that none should perish; Jesus asked his Father to forgive those who know not what they do, and our Divine Creator sent his only begotton Son -- which could just as easily have been a her only begotton daughter -- not to condemn the world, but to save it. Grace is free, and it's already here. Grace is alive, waiting, present for everyone, anytime. All we have to do is wake up and open the Present of Christmas morning: God with us.

Holy Spirit can't not indwell a person, whatever they do or believe, because God indwells Everything. But if we are blind, our hearts are cold and our ears can't hear, we are cut off from being alive to this gift that's wrapped with longing affection and waiting within our heart. God is knocking on the door from the inside. "Open me," says Holy Spirit. "And I will open you."

Labels: ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 9:10 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Friday, July 20, 2007
Self-Love
Miroslav Volf writes in Free of Charge that when the Spirit of Christ indwells us, God occupies the space, of "I," so that Christ lives in and through us; the cooperation and intimacy between our spirit and God's spirit becomes so intimate that there is in some ways no distinction.When we love, it is truly God loving through us. When we will God's will, it is also God willing through us.

What does this have to do with self-love? Simply that when we love ourselves, it is God loving us through us.

It isn't even controversial to talk about showing someone else the love of God, or letting God love someone through our presence, our actions, our listening, our acceptance. But somehow when we apply this exact same theology to self-love we feel a little worried. Is it self-indulgent? Selfish? Shouldn't we make ourselves feel guilty for our failures so we can improve? Is God loving us through loving ourselves too close to saying that we are God?

Or sin of all sins, Is self-love New-Agey?

If it's wrong to allow God to love us through our own spirit-filled self-love, then let's be consistent: It's plain wrong to let God love others through our love. Trying to let Christ shine through us to others is too close to self-worship.

Or does loving self in God's Spirit actually lead to the death of ego and the birth of a renewed life?

Labels: ,

 
posted by Jemila Kwon at 10:47 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 5 comments
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The Woman At The Well.
I hope people don't mind me posting here again so soon, but I came across something that really moved me, and that taught me a huge amount in the space of a couple of minutes. I included it on my blog already, but I've extended the post a little for Emerging Women.

This video is obviously a church ad, but the poem is incredible. "To be known is to be loved, and to be loved is to be known". Isn't that all we really want? Isn't it what moves and drives all of humanity? The need for love is built in to everybody, and it follows us from the time we're born until the time we pass away.

The video is based on the feelings the that Samaritan woman who Jesus met at the well may have had. It has made me want to look a lot closer at the Samaritan woman to find out what more I can glean from her and her encounter with Jesus. I've never looked at it in this way before, and I probably never will again.

It's certainly given me lots to think about.

Heather.

Labels: ,

 
posted by Heather at 7:57 PM ¤ Permalink ¤ 8 comments