Category: Blog

At the Personal Democracy Forum, Jim Gilliam gave the following talk “The Internet is My Religion” on June 6th, 2011 (transcript).

A very moving talk to be sure—I find it to be fascinating but also quite troubling. I myself spend most of my days online and am immersed in Internet communication and building the Internet in my work as a web developer. I love being interconnected with people from all around world and having access and providing access to information at a scale never before imaginable, and doing so at a rate that is increasing more rapidly than ever before. But to what end? Is the underlying hope that if we can connect enough people and disseminate enough knowledge that humanity can save itself? Jim says, “Humanity connected is God”—is this what we’re moving toward?

I think it is dangerous indeed to put so much faith in humanity, especially ultimate faith; as Jim shared, “We have faith that people connected can create a new world.” Didn’t we have a similarly optimistic impression of humanity at the beginning of the 20th century with all of the scientific progress of modernism? Then came the World Wars, the Great Depression, the Cold War, and so on. If the Internet is the most powerful structure ever made by humanity, then it seems to me that historical precedent shows that it’s only a matter of time until it gets used in a very powerfully bad way. It troubles me to say this as I myself directly contribute to the construction of this latest “Tower of Babel”.

Jesus told us that we’re going to have trouble in life, so we shouldn’t be surprised when our lives fall apart; but contra fatalism, in the same breath Jesus also said that he has overcome the world (John 16:33), and also he will restore the creation and reconcile to himself all things. This is the movement that we are called to participate in, one in which Jesus is at the top—not humanity. As Christians, our faith is not in connected-humanity being able to create a new world, but rather as a community united in Christ and filled with the Spirit, we participate in the redemptive work of the Triune God. We can affirm Jim saying, “Every one of us has our own unique skills and talents to contribute to creating the kingdom of God.” How then can the church as the body of Christ use the Internet to be Jesus’ actual hands and feet in this world in the way which Jim so desperately needed?

[@Jim, I’m sure you’ll get a Google Alert from this post. I’d love to hear what you think. Thanks for being vulnerable and sharing from your heart.]

We’re pleased to share this great article about the work of Dr. Michael Tso, who serves as a Fellow with New Wine. Dr. Tso’s work at His Mansion Ministries has New Wine’s theology of cultural engagement written all over it. We’re blessed to be continually influenced by Dr. Tso and to be acknowledged as a catalyst in his theological development.

Click here to read the article.

I gave the ordination message for Milan Homola and Josue Gonzales Sunday morning, July 3rd, 2011. In this message, I encourage and exhort Josue and Milan in their lives and ministry callings to define success and leadership biblically and relationally and not according to certain predominant cultural norms.

How do you define success in life and ministry? This was a key question raised at the ordination council meeting for Milan Homola and Josue Gonzales.

Many people today and throughout the ages define success in life according to one or more categories; a few of the big ones for defining success are economic excess, physical prowess and academic progress. While financial viability, physical strength and educational advance certainly have their place, they should not define our lives in terms of what we prize most. Unfortunately, economic excess, physical prowess and academic progress so often do define the lives and views of success for many.

Such values and definitions stand in stark contrast to Scripture. Paul quotes from Jeremiah 9:24 in 1 Corinthians 1:31, where he is challenging the false boasts of the Corinthian Christians. Paul declares, “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.” Paul calls on them to boast in their relationship with the Lord–the same Lord who reveals his power in weakness and his wisdom in foolishness in the cross (1 Corinthians 1:18-25). The boast in Jeremiah 9:23-24 puts everything in perspective: “This is what the LORD says: ‘Let not the wise boast of their wisdom or the strong boast of their strength or the rich boast of their riches, but let the one who boasts boast about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness [“steadfast love”–ESV], justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,’ declares the LORD.” (NIV)

Jeremiah challenges those who boast in their academic or intellectual progress, physical prowess and economic excess to go deeper and define life and success by way of intimacy with God, who although he is all-wise, all-powerful and owns the cattle on a thousand hills, defines himself relationally, as set forth here: the LORD exercises loving-kindness/steadfast love, justice and righteousness on earth in relation to us, for in these things he delights.

Josue and Milan, I heard your hearts the night of the ordination council. I was so struck by your relational instincts and concern for God and his people. I encourage and exhort you to continue defining yourselves in relation to God and intimacy with him, and in exercising his steadfast love, justice and righteousness toward those you serve, for in these things God delights. If you boast in the Lord and in bearing witness to his loving-kindness, justice and righteousness here on earth, you will live and minister well. You will succeed in the midst of fading failures and passing discouragements in ministry, as you succeed with God. Those who don’t define success in life and ministry along the lines described here will have a hard time making it down the road, for their boast is not in the Lord.

Let me go deeper. We live in a church age that values charismatic preaching, cutting edge marketing along with entrepreneurship, and CEO leadership. But do we value good shepherding? I believe those who truly define success the way I have defined it above will approach leadership and shepherding of God’s people in Jesus’ way.

So, what makes for good shepherding according to Jesus? Jesus says, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep” (John 10:10-13).

Good shepherds are not ravenous wolves: wolves steal the lives of the people.

Good shepherds are not volunteers, who simply donate their time and labor to people.

Good shephers are not hired hands. Hired hands sell their time and labor to the people.

Good shepherds labor to lay down their lives for their people–daily.

Alluding to Ezekiel 34 which he fulfills, Jesus is the good shepherd, who contrasts himself with the failed shepherds/leaders of Israel: specifically those leaders who opposed him and the healing of the man born blind in John 9–the previous chapter. These supposed shepherds were ravenous wolves at worst and hired hands at best. But Jesus laid down his life for the sheep, even this man born blind whom he healed at great cost to himself at the hands of these bad shepherds of the nation. Such acts of sacrificial love led Jesus to the cross at the hands of his enemies, the same enemies of the sheep. Even the man’s parents wouldn’t sacrifice themselves for their son born blind, whom Jesus healed. They were so unlike my own dad.

My dad passed away in May after a long battle with cancer. My dad was not a pastor. He was not a Christian celebrity. But he was a precious Christian minister in his own right, who lived out the name of his parish church–“Good Shepherd.” My dad was a simple man, who was profound relationally. Simple profundity. My dad certainly had regrets about never being able to visit Europe. But he had no relational regrets. In this sense, he died a great success. My dad sacrificed his life and body to get me through school and life, working all hours of the day and night, for my mother, siblings and me. He cared for those from all walks of life with whom he came in contact–letting them know how much they mattered. The world was his parish. God used my dad more than anyone to bring me back to the faith after an intense time of rebellion in my youth. It was not a philosophical argument that brought me back. I could beat my Dad in any debate. It was his love for Jesus–the Good Shepherd–and me. My rebellion was no match for my Dad’s ceaseless and sacrificial love poured out on me. My key verse from my time of restoration from my life of youthful rebellion was John 10:10: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” Jesus came to give each of us life to the full and he used my dad to snatch me back from the hands of Satan the thief who had come to steal and kill and destroy my life.

Milan and Josue, I find you to be men marked by love. Don’t listen to how so much of the surrounding church and secular culture defines success and leadership. Listen to the men who were in the room with you that night in the ordination council meeting. Their values were and are precious to me. Define success and leadership the way Jeremiah and Paul and Jesus define success and leadership–in terms of God’s sacrificial love poured out for others. As you move forward in ministry, listen well to Paul and Peter, who learned a thing or two from Jesus about how to lead and shepherd well. I close with the words of Peter as he exhorts fellow leaders in 1 Peter 5. Josue and Milan, these are my closing words to you. May your eyes and heart be open to your high calling and Christ’s deep love for you and through you to those entrusted to your care:

“To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder and a witness of Christ’s sufferings who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away” (1 Peter 5:1-4).

This post is an excerpt from a dialogue with the New Wine, New Wineskins Advisory Council on relational spirituality.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for this enriching conversation. I am including current and future Advisory Council members in my response.

The conversation on the Trinity followed by this conversation on the theology of the affections is vitally important to New Wine, New Wineskins. As you know, New Wine’s theology of cultural engagement model is framed by the sacrificial love of the Triune God revealed in Christ and created in our lives by the Spirit.

I have articulated this in various ways over the years. I would encourage each of you on the AC now and those coming on board in the near future to read my essay, “Free at Last,” in New Wine Tastings. There I build on Martin Luther’s essay “Freedom of a Christian,” which was a foundational treatise for the Protestant Reformation. Further to that essay, Luther told Erasmus in his debate on “the bondage of the will” that Erasmus got to the heart of his writings: the matter of the heart (over against the enabled will), not the indulgences. Luther maintained in response to Erasmus that the will is enslaved to the desires (whether they be ungodly desires or godly desires). In my theology classes, I speak of hostility toward God vs. captivating affection from and for God over against disabled will vs. enabled will (the latter model is found in many Roman Catholic and Protestant circles–I reject the latter model as unbiblical and contrary to the Reformation teaching of Luther).

At New Wine, we speak of a Trinitarian theology of the affections. Affections change behaviors, according to Luther. Behaviors don’t change affections. Luther’s associate, Melanchthon, in his 1521 edition of the Loci Communes, develops this model at great length. Luther references Melanchthon in his debate with Erasmus, saying that Melanchthon’s work should be in the canon, and that Melanchthon’s arguments crush Erasmus’s model (most unfortunately, Melanchthon later modified his view, though Luther never did in my estimation).

According to Luther, whom I believe is true to the Apostle Paul’s teaching in Romans and Galatians, we are not made good by doing good things; we do good things because we are made good. For Luther, we are made good as God’s love is poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5–the later Augustine, Luther and Jonathan Edwards all developed their model of salvation and grace in relation to this text). All good moral actions flow not from spiritual habits and virtues that enable godly desires; rather, all godly actions flow from the Spirit of love poured out into our hearts. Sanctification, for Luther, is not a second work. In fact, he never developed a doctrine of sanctification, in my estimation. He feared that it would compromise the focus on the transformation of our hearts that occurs as the Spirit of God is poured out into our hearts thereby creating faith (Galatians 2:20; no doubt, Luther would also call to mind Paul’s challenge to the Galatians: “… Having begun with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?”–Gal. 3:3).

While I find people performing godly actions growing in their love for the Lord, I believe that Scripture teaches that such godly activity flows from a prior love from the triune God of grace poured out in our hearts. As that love is poured out and we respond to that love which is instilled in our hearts by the Spirit, we then perform godly actions. This response to God’s love continues to express itself in godly actions. I am ultimately talking about a deep affection and not a passing feeling of infatuation. Sometimes I may not want to honor God given my struggle with the flesh; but I want to want God as the Spirit of God moves in my life. The affections from the Spirit wage war with the affections of the flesh (Romans 8, Galatians 5).

I have risked speaking more theologically here to get some fundamental issues out on the table. This is consistent with what I was driving at in the discussion of the triune God as love. In addition to the New Wine essay, I also wrote on this for the Westminster Theological Journal (“Mystical Union With Christ: An Alternative to Blood Transfusions and Legal Fictions”), challenging the Roman Catholic notion of infusion of righteousness and the Protestant Scholastic notion of imputation (which I believe is secondary to such participation and follows from mystical marital union with Christ through the affection of love poured out by the Spirit that creates faith in our hearts and the ensuing moral activities). You will find more concrete engagement of this material in my book, The Gospel of John: When Love Comes to Town. John’s Gospel is steeped in these categories. See John 8, John 14 and John 15 and my discussions of these texts in When Love Comes to Town. I flesh this discussion out culturally in New Wine Tastings.

I hope this moves the conversation forward even further. Thanks so much for your friendship and partnership.

Best wishes,

Paul