So, Are You a ____________?

I've been asked quite a bit lately, "Are you even a Christian?"  That's a loaded question.  There are so many layers to that question it is hard to give just a simple "yes" or "no."  Some questions are easy to answer with a "yes" or "no".  For example, if somebody asked me, "do you work for Nurses Care."  Then my answer is a simple "yes."  If I were asked, "Are you married to Amanda?"  Once again, simple "yes."  If you asked me if I had a son named John, I would simply say, "no", and correct you with, "His name is Nyles." 

The whole Christian thing/identity spans over 2,000 years and traveled over a few continents before it got to us over here in 'Merica.  Not only has Christianity spanned over time and continents, but through splits, reformations, rebranding, reidentitying itself (Catholic/Protestants/Eastern Orthodox), and thousand of denominational interpretations.  Then to heap more stuff on top of all of this, you have churches that have membership factors that plays into identifying what "Christian"is, hierarchy that influences doctrine that determine if somebody is a Christian or not, along with creeds, statements of beliefs, and mission statements.  They all go into the identity of "Christian."  To make this an even more complicated issue you might as well throw in the religious subcultural conditioning of each area, education, upbringing, and influence of family members that all go into determining how the word "Christian" is defined. 

I told somebody this once when they asked me if I was a Christian or not, and they said, "Wow, you sure make things confusing."  He was probably right.  I wish I could just give a simple yes or no to this answer, but my brain doesn't process information this way. Even though it is probably impossible, when I'm asked this question I want to give a simple answer genuinely and completely honest.  Therefore, I need to add caveats.  Not only do I need to add caveats, but I need to be very careful when I answer this question based upon who is asking it.  I need to know more about the person asking the question then the question itself because my answer will cause the person asking the question to create an identity for me in their head.  I can be the greatest guy in the world, but if the person asking the question only sees Christianity as an abusive system that hurts people and I identify with Christianity, it is not based on my definition, but how he/she defines it.  Once I identify as Christian to this person, my identity immediately changes from positive to negative.  My definition means nothing, their definition means everything.  Their definition will shape their reality of how they see you.    

Here is another example: Let's say I consider myself a Christian according to my definition.  A right wing, conservative, fundamentalist asks me if I'm a Christian and I say "yes" without an explanation. Then they attempt to fit me into their conservative fundy identity of how they define Christian.  If I go outside of that mold then I suddenly become a "non-Christian."  So, "Christian" in that sense is all relative to the one defining it.

My wife tells me that I lose people when I pontificate like this,  but there is a simple reason for my silly philosophical rants.  This question, "Are you a Christian" is not a question simply for "gaining more knowledge", but a relational qualifier, which in my opinion, is wrong from every angle.  Most people, not all, ask this to simply see if they can be in a relationship with you or not.  I watched a friend of mine join a fundamental independent right wing--uber conservative Christian group and he immediately eliminated all of his friends that didn't join him.  He cut all ties and those he hung out with, he no longer did because his values changed. He now attempts to convert Christians of other denominations to his denomination and calls it "evangelism."  In essence, if you aren't a ________(fill in the blank) then you are not a Christian in his eyes.  You're "lost." 

I don't know if Jesus was really concerned about labels that identified your religious affliation.  Peter Rollins once said that Jesus, "constantly reached across the divides (for example talking with a Samaritan woman and eating with a Tax Collector), and who condemned those who held rigidly to their own traditions (the religious leaders of the day)."  Rollins goes on to say that when you identify with Jesus, "a person finds oneself having more in common with those who believe something different, or who have different practices, or different desires, than those who have the same beliefs, practices and desires."  Jesus was more concerned about the relationship and the deepest human need, than a label that was completely relative to the person's interpretation. 

The whole Middle Eastern drama that we hear about constantly with Israel and Palestine is over religious identification at its core.  Almost every war that has ever happened, every disagreement, or terrorist attack throughout history can be traced back to how a person interprets their religious identity--all through the lens of the interpretter and what they feel entitled to according to what they create in their mind.  Paul had a novel idea about created labels, identities, and relationships as he wrote to some folks in Philippi in the first century:

"Does your life in Christ give you strength? Does his love comfort you? Do we share together in the spirit? Do you have mercy and kindness? ² If so, make me very happy by having the same thoughts, sharing the same love, and having one mind and purpose. ³ When you do things, do not let selfishness or pride be your guide. Instead, be humble and give more honor to others than to yourselves. ⁴ Do not be interested only in your own life, but be interested in the lives of others.

⁵ In your lives you must think and act like Christ Jesus.
⁶ Christ himself was like God in everything.
    But he did not think that being equal with God was something to be used for his own benefit.
⁷ But he gave up his place with God and made himself nothing.
    He was born as a man
    and became like a servant.
⁸ And when he was living as a man,
    he humbled himself and was fully obedient to God,
    even when that caused his death—death on a cross. (Philippians 2:1-8)

"Be interested in the lives of others."  Notice that labels and identities were completey torn and stripped in this letter.  They mean nothing!!  It even says that Jesus stripped himself of God and became nothing--he became like man, a servant.  His identity wasn't religious--as a matter of fact, even the generic "God" label was stripped.  Just go ahead and take that identity out of the conversation.  He became "human."  This is the simplest identifying factor of everybody that has ever lived.  A servant of the human race.  The cross was the identity stripper--NOT an identifier.  When a person comes to the cross, they become "human" and suddenly relate to everybody.  When a person comes to the cross they suddenly care about others more than protecting what they believe.  Creeds, believe statements, church memberships, denominational names, and any other thing that we say we are.  "Christian", "Jewish", "Muslim", "Atheist", "Hindu", "Buddhist", etc--are gone when you approach the cross.  We are all just human and have to learn to relate on that level, and that level alone.  Would being fully "Christian" be defined as being "fully human" at its most primal foundational level?

My answer to the question, "Are you really a Christian," would be, "I'm a human...nice to meet you." The more I read the Bible, the more I begin to question, "Do we have this completely backwards?"  Underneath all the layers of "skin" I've identified myself with, I've realized I am nothing more than just a human.  The more I've attempted to identify with Jesus, the more I've found myself not identifying with religious labels...the more free I've become.  Yeah, I'm happy with the label, "human."  Let's keep it simple!!  Lech lecha!

Heretics and Hypocrites...and an Occasional Beelzebub

One time Jesus was sending out a demon who could not talk. When the demon came out, the man who had been unable to speak, then spoke. The people were amazed. But some of them said, “Jesus uses the power of Beelzebul, the ruler of demons, to force demons out of people.” -Luke 11:14-15


Image (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beelzebub.png)

The Jewish people were very much a tribal nation throughout the entire Biblical text.  They were constantly at war or in some kind of battle with their enemy.  Even when reading the New Testament there is still an enemy, it’s just that it changes from outsiders to insiders within the Jewish culture. Nevertheless, they were still at war.  The way they degraded their enemies was by degrading their gods and render then impotent.  It was the ultimate smack in the face to degrade a city state's or tribe's god.  If you read through the book of Exodus you will find one of the biggest theological "bodyslams" in ancient historical writings.  The plagues weren't just plagues against Egypt, each plague was directed at an Egyptian deity.  After all the Egyptian gods were debunked, Egypt let them go. 
One of the biggest enemies of the Jewish people were the Philistines.  You remember the story of Goliath--you know, the big giant that David killed.  He was a Philistine, and in a literary sense, he was a symbol of something larger.  The author of this Bible story specifically gives measurements of his weapon and what it looked like.  It said his "armor" was like "scales."  Scales of what?  You got it...a snake!  The Hebrew writers were describing their nemesis as a giant snake (referring back to Genesis 3).  They also gave a name to their god.  Check out this little gem:

2 Kings 1:2-3

² Ahaziah fell down through the wooden bars in his upstairs room in Samaria and was badly hurt. He sent messengers and told them, “Go, ask Baal-Zebub, god of Ekron, if I will recover from my injuries.”

The Hebrew writers gave the Philistine god a name: "Baal-Zebub".  When you take this over into the New Testament and into Greek, it comes out as "Beelzebub."  Beelzebub literally means “lord of the flies” and was a deity invoked by the Philistines to bring "pestilence" and death to their enemies.  It also invoked conquest when the enemy would terrorize a village…isolate it, or cut off the water supply to subdue it, etc. Thus it would, of course, be demonized and seen as an evil entity by Jews. 

Demons and devils were the gods of other city states or tribes that the Jews went to war with.  As the culture began to change and shift in the 3rd century BCE, religion began to adapt to a more Greek philosophy, culture, and religious influence.  Theses city state/tribal gods that were the enemies of the Jews began to take on a new form in the shape of demonic creatures of the underworld Tartarus.  They took on a more mystical, spiritual form that weren't just enemies but spiritual forces.  

Enough history, because I know I’ve probably lost many of you by now.  So, in the simplest form of who this Beelzebub is - the arch enemy.  He was a make-believe god.  Back to the story at the top of this page...there was a man who couldn't talk.  The common belief in the time of Jesus was if someone had an illness or disorder, it was the result of their parents’ sin or their own disobedience to God.  They believed God punished people by giving them disorders.  You would avoid these people at all costs because they were "unclean."  Kinda like much of religion does today...there are certain things that make you "not fit to be around."  I remember being in Israel back in 2007 and when I went to the Dome of the Rock, the Muslims looked at me like I had leprosy.  I could not go into their holy place.  The same is true for many Christians.  They attempt to shelter themselves in fear of contamination.  Jesus went and did something you weren't supposed to do.  Jesus went against that which was politically correct.  As a matter of fact, Jesus went against everything that was religiously acceptable. 


Image: http://barlowesrealm.deviantart.com/art/Inferno-Beelzebub-s-Flies-283814250

Because Jesus did something they weren't accustomed to, was not accepted, and religiously taboo--even though it was good, he was labeled.  He was accused of "working for the enemy", "being on the other side", or as we would say today, "obtaining demonic powers."  Jesus became the enemy by just doing something they weren't used to, but had positive results.  

Some things never change.  People within religion fear what they don't understand and want to label it as "the enemy."  It becomes about "us" and "them."  The battle isn't Satan vs. God or the devil vs. Christians.  The battle is very similar to the battle in 1st century Palestine.  We label our own as "Beelzebub" if they go outside the lines we draw.  How ridiculous is this statement they made about Jesus: "Jesus uses the power of Beelzebul, the ruler of demons, to force demons out of people."  In my last blog I quoted an encyclopedia and study group that found over 33,000 denominations in Christianity and 242 in Catholicism.  We throw people out that have new ideas, different perspectives, and see things from a different angle.  You see, we are all heretics and hypocrites to those who won't open their minds beyond their own. Our insecurities can drive us to ascribe motives to those we disagree with.  When we label others, it is really a sign of our own insecurity and lack of understanding.  God told Abram; "Leave your country, your relatives, and your father’s family, and go to the land I will show you" (Genesis 12:1).  From my perspective God is telling Abram, "Leave your security, embrace your insecurities/fears, and experience a world outside of your own."  When Elijah was on the verge of suicide and thinking he was the only one that had it right and everybody else was his enemy and out to get him, God reminded him, "I've got 7000 other prophets that haven't bowed the knee to Baal."  
When you are told by a religion, a church, a leader that you are a heretic, hypocrite, or demon possessed...know you are in good company--they did the same to Jesus. 


We are all heretics and hypocrites to those who won't open their minds beyond their own.  It's real simple: 

Micah 6:8
The Lord has told you, human, what is good;
    he has told you what he wants from you:
to do what is right to other people,
    love being kind to others,
    and live humbly, obeying your God.

Do this, and you will be a heretic...maybe even Beelzebub--EMBRACE IT!!

Our insecurities can drive us to ascribe motives to those we disagree with. - See more at: http://askdrbrown.org/are-people-projecting-their-own-hurts/#comments

Our insecurities can drive us to ascribe motives to those we disagree with. - See more at: http://askdrbrown.org/are-people-projecting-their-own-hurts/#comments

A Splash of Color

 ^{A Splash of Color}

^{1 John 1:7-8}

⁷ But if we live in the light, as God is in the light, we can share fellowship with each other. Then the blood of Jesus, God’s Son, cleanses us from every sin.

⁸ If we say we have no sin, we are fooling ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 

 
MARSHALL MCLUHAN...have you ever heard of him?  Marshall McLuhan was a philosopher of communications.  He was the one that coined the phrase, "the medium is the massage."  "McLuhan adopted the term "massage" to denote the effect each medium has on the human sensorium, taking inventory of the "effects" of numerous media in terms of how they "massage" the sensorium" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan).  Let's try to figure this out in a "non-academic" common language that we all use every day.  This guy believed that the message of any media outlet was perceived by the general public as the person communicating it.  When I think of "Nike Basketball" shoes, I don't think of shoes, but a person--Michael Jordan.  It wasn't a product, but a person, and that person was the product.   

Everybody in the entire world is looking to believe in something.  I would argue in a generic sense that everybody is religious--it is something just built into our DNA.  That religion doesn't have to be mainline religions like Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc., but could be atheism, humanism, or just believing in self.  I'm not here to rip on any of them--that isn't my job.  I'm simply saying that it is human nature to want to believe in something.  The belief itself has a medium--a face, a personality, a person.  For instance, let's take atheism--the belief that there is no god.  The person communicating this belief, effectively in essence becomes the belief.  The better the communicator, the better the message.  Therefore, that person "becomes" atheism, rather than atheism is just what the person believes.  When a person then thinks of atheism, they won't necessarily think of all the bullet points, beliefs, theories, and arguments the person communicating had, but they will think about the person.  The person becomes the face of a belief.  

I can only speak at this point of that in which I know, Christianity.  For the last few years, I've been the biggest cynic of Christianity because I strongly disagreed with the "mediums" communicating the message and it appeared the mediums contradicted themselves.  You've got a right wing medium (conservative fundamentalists), a left wing medium (liberal), and a middle ground called "contemporary".  It was usually a hidden political motif clothed in Christianity--Republican or Democrat.  Both claimed God was on their side, which is quite laughable in the grand scheme.  If you will allow me just a few minutes of your time, an open mind, I would like to share with you the medium of the Christian message, that appears very "unChristian" from a western, consumeristic, institutionalized version of the message.

"If we live in the light..."  Light...a word that has been used from the beginning.   It was the first thing God spoke into the embryonic chaos the Hebrew Bible called "tehom."  "Let there be light..."(Genesis 1:3).  A few verses later in 1 John, the writer talks more in depth about this "light," 

"Here is the message we have heard from Christ and now announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all."

The medium of the message is the "light" and the "light" is God.  There is one small problem...we don't really have a definition of light.  Some commentators I read have said that "light" is symbolic of God's goodness and truth.  The only problem in this theory is that it becomes just something to describe--an adjective.  Light is the noun and is used to describe God--the medium.  God is the message.  Then, according to Christianity and the Bible, God puts on human flesh and becomes Jesus.  Jesus then becomes the medium of this message.  When you think of Christianity, one thinks of Jesus.  Then Jesus bestows the medium-ship on people, in which he calls "the church", or the "Body of Christ."  Now the medium becomes a group of people.  All of this goes back to one fact that defines them all--LIGHT.   

Second problem--and this is a real biggie: people just can't seem to agree upon anything...especially when it comes to religion.  Take a good hard look at Christianity.  Christianity Today did a study and claimed there were over 38,000 denominations within Christianity.  The World Christian Encyclopedia of 2001 counted 33,830.  There are 242 Roman Catholic denominations!  And another: It is estimated there will be 55,000 denominations by the year 2025.  In one religion alone, there are tens of thousands of different perspectives all claiming they are right...all claiming they are "walking in the light."  Sound ludicrous, obnoxious, and even moronic...but is it? Why would people argue and split over something if there is just ONE true answer...IT MUST BE FALSE...or, there is another layer.

Light--we are to walk in it, God is in it, and God is it.  If you look deeper in the Hebrew and Greek of this word it doesn't give a whole lot of insight.  Light is light...but the color of light is what opens up a whole new world of possibilities, especially when we talk faith. 

 
 Light is NOT made up of a singular color.  This statement alone changes everything.  If truth is light, and light is a spectrum that messes up everything that I've ever been taught.  I was taught there is only ONE truth, not everybody can be right, there is an obvious right and an obvious wrong, but the number of denominations obviously denies that fact.  Not everybody can be wrong, and not everybody can be right.  Light is red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and violet.  That's just the colors our little brains can wrap around.  Who knows, it could be more, but I'll just go with what we know.  

It says if we walk in this "light" (multicolored spectrum), it says we have "fellowship."  I have to stop here and make a comment.  I was involved with one particular denomination for many, many, many years.  I struggled with many of their concepts.  When I finally came out and gave a perspective that opposed theirs, rather than stopping, listening, and considering--I was called "poison," "apostate," "heretic," and in danger of eternal damnation.  I was disenfrancised.  They broke fellowship with me.  Fellowship is based on "light" and the many colors of it.  Early rabbis taught that the text was like a diamond and when the light hit it, it brought forth many different colors.  They focused on the beauty, rather than the differences of colors.  They saw how awesome it was for something they could only see a singularity of color, shined through angles, brought forth even more color...like a birth.  

          Black is the absence of color (and is therefore not a color)
Explanation:
When there is no light, everything is black. Test this out by going into a photographic dark room. There are no photons of light. In other words, there are no photons of colors.

White is the blending of all colors and is a color.
Explanation:
Light appears colorless or white. Sunlight is white light that is composed of all the colors of the spectrum.  A rainbow is proof. You can't see the colors of sunlight except when atmospheric conditions bend the light rays and create a rainbow. You can also use a prism to demonstrate this.


Could there be so many denominations, perspectives, interpretations, etc. because of God being light.  I know this will get me in hot water, but I'll say it anyway....could there be so many perspectives because their are so many angles and colors of truth when it comes to God.  If one person or one denomination, or even one religion had all the truth there is to know about God, would they be a god.  Would there even be a need for God at that point?  Living in the light, is living in the spectrum of possibilities and perspectives.  We all can learn from others if we are just willing to shut our mouths and just genuinely listen.  If we would just listen to what they have to say, where it comes from, and try to understand the experiences they are drawing from to come up with their beliefs.  To "walk in the light" is to walk in the spectrum of beauty--the many different colors, because God is a multi-faceted, "multi-colored" God.  

I'll close with one of the most profound questions anybody has ever asked.  Pilate asked Jesus, while Jesus was on trial, "What is truth?"  Check out this conversation between Pilate and Jesus:

³³ Then Pilate went back inside the palace and called Jesus to him and asked, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

³⁴ Jesus said, “Is that your own question, or did others tell you about me?”

³⁵ Pilate answered, “I am not one of you. It was your own people and their leading priests who handed you over to me. What have you done wrong?”

³⁶ Jesus answered, “My kingdom does not belong to this world. If it belonged to this world, my servants would have fought to keep me from being given over to the Jewish leaders. But my kingdom is from another place.”

³⁷ Pilate said, “So you are a king!”

Jesus answered, “You are the one saying I am a king. This is why I was born and came into the world: to tell people the truth. And everyone who belongs to the truth listens to me.”

³⁸ Pilate said, “What is truth?” After he said this, he went out to the crowd again and said to them, “I find nothing against this man. 

Jesus never gave Pilate a clear-cut answer.  There was no "cookie-cutter" version of truth that was laid out in bullet points or read from Webster's dictionary.  It was up to Pilate to discover the beauty of truth.  I know there will be people that label me and try to tell you that I am in the camp that "believes in no absolute truth", and "new ager's think truth is relative," but I will just turn it back around and say, "light is multi-colored, but darkness on the other hand, has only one color--the absence of light--black."  And technically, black isn't even a real color; black is the absence of color.  If the medium is the message, then be a spectrum of light that listens, gives off beauty, is multi-dimensional, multi-faceted, and open to seeing other colors.  That is a reflection of God!!!