Mark Driscoll on Yoga and MMA…WTF?

Over the last few days, I have read two lengthy articles by Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill in Seattle. One article was about yoga and the other about MMA fighting (both accessible on his website).  Essentially, Driscoll is addressing the question of Christian participation (whether actively or as spectator) in these two activities.

And all of it was ridiculous.

Okay, let me set forth my biases right away. I am not a Calvinist. I don’t dig Reformed theology. In fact, I find most of it abhorrent. I am more egalitarian than complementarian. I just am SO theologically opposite of Driscoll.

BUT…

I think he is a brilliant communicator, a theologically consistent preacher, and a remarkable leader. And I’ve subscribed to his podcasts for years.  One of the things I’ve always appreciated about Driscoll is his consistency. His theology is consistent (even when I hate it). His teaching is consistent. His work is consistent. And then he goes and writes two articles that are SO ridiculously inconsistent!  I’m seriously surprised and disappointed.

Basically, his argument goes like this:
Christians should not practice yoga because it is rooted in Eastern religion and the physical practice can’t be separated from its religious roots.
Christians are free to embrace MMA, even though it’s brutally violent and also rooted in Eastern philosophy/religion, because the physical sport can be separated from the religious roots and Jesus is the ultimate fighter.

Am I the only one that sees the problem with this?

Really, it’s just further evidence of Driscoll’s heavy-handed hypermasculinity. Is anyone shocked that he would “receive” MMA but “reject” yoga? I don’t care how about the injury rate compared to other sports, the strict rules, or anything else. At the end of the day, shame on us, as Christians, if we are at all entertained by bloody, brutal violence, whether in the ring, cage, or elsewhere!  Oh wait. My bad. Shame on us, as Christians, if we stretch, exercise, breathe and meditate. (WTF??)

 

Including Me

There will be people in heaven with “bad theology”.  Including me.  We should all go ahead and get over it right now. Including me.

Can You Incorporate Other Religious Ideas with Your Christian Faith?

Is there such a thing as a Buddhist Christian?
A Taoist Christian?
A Rastafarian Christian?
A Baha’i Christian?

I don’t know.

I think the answer is, “Yes and no.”

First, let me say this: I believe the Bible is sufficient  for  guiding us in faith and practice. So, this is not about the need to incorporate ideas from other religions. It is more about the risk/benefit of doing so.  So, here is how I would explain my “yes and no” answer to the title question.

YES
Anyone who has read religious texts from other religions quickly recognizes that other religions besides Christianity are rich sources of wisdom, particularly pertaining to the pragmatic matters of life.  The book of Proverbs in the Bible is full of quips about everything from how you speak to how you spend money.  Many of the sayings in Proverbs use the immediate context from which to draw illustrations and analogies.  So, you read a lot of agricultural and monarchial allusions.  Though the principles are timeless, it is a keen understanding of the allusions that makes the proverbs meaningful to the reader.  Likewise, other religions sprang up in different contexts with different references from which to draw illustrations.  Soooooo..it is not at all unthinkable that we could learn a timeless principle through different illustrations and allusions that resonate with us in a different way than farmers and kings.  In short, my point is that other religions have something to offer us when they explain old principles in a new way.  Additionally, there are indeed some issues about which the Bible says very little, if anything at all.  And other religious ideas may help the Christian formulate ideas/beliefs about such issues.

NO
A Christian is someone who has been redeemed by God and worships and follows Jesus. So, if any of the ideas or beliefs incorporated from other religions cause the Christian to, in any way, compromise their call to worship and follow Jesus, then those ideas are dangerous and should not be accepted…not even tentatively.  If any of the ideas or beliefs from other religions inspire the Christian to believe that salvation comes in any other way besides through the blood of Jesus, the son of God, then those ideas are dangerous and should not be accepted.

Conclusion
I do not think there is any need to become a hybrid, hyphenated Christian. Neither do I think it necessary to close our ears and minds to the truth and wisdom that other religious traditions may have to offer.
May our spiritual journeys be authentic and fearless, full of passion and truth, leading us evermore toward loving God and loving each other with all that we have!

A Christian By Any Other Name

I wouldn’t call myself a grammar snob.  But I am, admittedly, more particular than the average bear.  I came across this article not too long ago (probably from a snobby writer friend, ha).

In brief, the article explains how the meanings of words have changed based on common expressions.  For example, the word “disinterested” is accurately defined as “impartial”.  However, people frequently use that word to mean “uninterested”.  So, in essence, the definition has changed because of wide colloquial misuse.  Funny, huh?

Beyond being sociolinguistically interesting, the phenomenon is raising some interesting questions for me in a different context.

CHRISTIAN.

What do people think of when they hear that word?  How is “Christian” commonly defined (whether denotatively accurate or not)?  My point is this.  If the meaning of “Christian” has changed such that it no longer accurately signifies my beliefs or values, am I still a Christian?

The meaning of “disinterested” is still “impartial”. But it is so widely understood to mean “uninterested”, that it would not be wise to use the word “disinterested” if “impartial” is what you really mean to express.  In the same vein, it may not be wise to say “Christian” unless you mean “conservative, traditional, anti-gay…”

So, I’m searching for a new label for myself, as someone who deeply loves Jesus. Someone trying to live like Jesus. Someone who loves and accepts gays and Buddhists and Republicans and potheads and rednecks and hippies and Muslims and poor people and….

The Problem With Hangin Out With Non-Christians…

I saw this tweet pop up in my Twitter feed today:

“When Church folk judge other Christians for hangin w/”worldly” people, I say, “should doctors only operate on doctors?”

At first I thought it was a clever way to make an important point. But on second thought, I think the comment is actually part of the problem.  See, on the one hand, you’ve got Christians who judge other Christians for hanging out with non-Christians.  And on the other hand, you’ve got Christians making evangelism projects out of people in order to justify to the judging Christians why they hang out with non-Christians. They both come down to the same thing.  And since when did you have to have a reason for hanging out with certain people?

Maybe they hang out with non-Christian people because they like those people.  Mind blowing, I know.

Are We Talking About the Same Christians?

You know how the Inuit people have like a thousand different words for “snow”?

Yeah. Well, I’ve been thinking we need more words.

My love for language and rhetoric, together with my increasing tendency to self-reflexively ask, “Am I a bad Christian?” has led me to ponder on the terms we use to describe Christian people. Here’s the problem…

Words have denotative meaning and connotative meaning. Some words have more connotations than others. For example, if I were to ask 10 people what “love” is, I would probably be met with 10 different definitions.  But if I were to ask 10 people what “chair” is, I would probably be met with 3 definitions at the most.  So when I say “chair”, there is a really good chance that the people I’m communicating with will share a common understanding of the word. “Christian” is one of those words with many connotations.  Sometimes that word evokes thoughts of pious, devout people (a la Mother Theresa).  Sometimes that word evokes thoughts of ultra-conservative, dogmatic people (a la Jerry Falwell). The result is that when two people are talking about “Christians”, we cannot be certain that they both have in mind the same group of people.  So how do we decrease the ambiguity and increase the precision?

I’ll hang that question on the line to dry for now.

 

 

Can Non-Straight People Be Christians??

Yes.

There, I’ve laid my cards on the table.  Now, hear me out, if you’re still on board.

Like the previous post, this post comes on the heels of some conversations with a friend.  I have always been taught that homosexuality (or anything other than heterosexuality) was wrong. I am not going to attempt to answer that question in this post.  The bigger question is: Can someone do or be wrong and still be a Christian?  When phrased that way, an affirmative answer seems obvious.  After all, is there any Christian who can claim perfection in thought or deed?  No.  Yet that does not exclude them from communion with God.  …Or does it?

See, for me, the issue is consistency.  Some would say that an “unrepentant” homosexual cannot be a Christian.  Applied consistently, this means that  the “unrepentant” selfish, greedy, consumerist, exploitative capitalist cannot be a Christian either.   Damn, there goes a lot of American Christians!  (How often do you hear that sermon?)  My point is that the conditions for exclusion/inclusion are not applied consistently.  The conditions for being counted among the family of God is that we repent and believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior. That’s it. Simple.  We are born again and justified and enter into a process of sanctification.  Perfection is not required. It is acquired.

So, if the wrongness of homosexuality or bisexuality excludes those persons from fellowship with God, then a multiplicity of other wrongs are excluding a whole host of other people…and they don’t even know it, ’cause they don’t even see it.

Hmm.

Who Shows Up?

“When they had crossed over, the landed at Gennesaret.  And when the men of that place recognized Jesus, they sent word to all the surrounding country.  People brought all their sick to him…” (Matthew 14:34-35)

Who shows up in your life?  Fabulous people?  Sometimes we are fortunate enough to be surrounded by wonderful, great, fabulous people.  And thank God for that. But is that all?  See, if we are like Jesus, I think we’ll find lots of people of a different sort showing up in our lives.  Sick people.  People with physical ailments.  Despairing, rejected, dejected, outcasted, “abnormal”, unclean people.  So, look around.  If you don’t see these people, maybe it’s because they don’t see Jesus in you.

Ugh! Fall Out of Love Already

I’m kind of tired of Christians who are super in love with their theology.  Could be me.  I might be that Christian.

I love the blogosphere, but if you hang out here long enough, you see a lot of the same thing—people expressing how much they love their ideas about God more than they express how much they love God.  What is this theological  neurosis that’s always got everybody up in arms?  Why is so much time spent debating things that will barely matter when Jesus returns?  Like females being pastors.  If you don’t think women should be pastors, go to a church that doesn’t think women should be pastors, and be done with it.  If you DO think women can be pastors, go to a church that agrees, and be done with it.  

There’s no way to say what I’m saying without sounding like I don’t think beliefs and critically thinking about beliefs are important. (I’d have a lot more free time if I didn’t think it was important.)  It’s just that…how important is it really?

And now I will make dinner and play my iPod on shuffle mode.