I've had it. The video went viral. It was hype. It was cool. It was spoken word. It was a kid we've seen before from Seattle who did spoken word on sexual brokenness. He brings it up here. He's compelling. He's cute. He's well spoken.
See Here
And I yelled through most of it.
Because his thesis is this: Christianity is NOT a religion. It's a relationship. And anything that smacks of Religion is damaging to the human soul and to the picture of Jesus. For example: wars in the name of religion (all religion's fault). Or the use of religion to justify politics (he took some time to hate on Republicans).
No.
No. No. No.
Let's clarify. I am a Christian. I work for a church. I love Jesus. Sure, I've got complicated relationships with my political upbringing. I'm the prototypical "good kid" who struggles with guilt and hidden crap. That's me. And looking pretty for church can be a problem. But this has nothing to do with me being part of a religion.
THIS IS NOT "RELIGION'S" FAULT.
This is my fault.
A religion is a structure that enables a community of people to practice their belief system in an organized, consistent, and long term sustainable fashion. You want to talk about sustainable practices! Communities built around small institutions that help and support one another. A religions is a system of practices.
Religion has precious little to do with the many things that have been done in its name. Religion (read: structure) is not an inherently bad thing. Structure it good. You want to question what that structure is but the idea of structure in order to enable faith practices to be practiced is NOT a bad thing.
And it has nothing to do with whether or not you love Jesus.
People have problems. People are why wars are fought. People inhabit the structure that is religion and because PEOPLE are messed up, we get things like hypocrisy and the "good kid" Church Guilt. And we get hate and oppression of other races and religions. We get wars. We get the Crusades (side note: more about politics masquerading as religious faith than it was about actual faith/religious practices).
So when you tell me that Jesus is not about religion but a relationship, I'm calling BS on you. He was totally about overthrowing the previous structure, but to institute a new covenant. Covenant? Yeah. That sounds like religious structure to me.
And when you say Christianity/FollowingTheWay/Loving Jesus is not a religion, you lie. You take away something that has given beauty and order and sustainability of a faith. Relationships are practiced through religion. Own it. Stop trying to make Christianity sound nicer than you actually need to.
See Here
And I yelled through most of it.
Because his thesis is this: Christianity is NOT a religion. It's a relationship. And anything that smacks of Religion is damaging to the human soul and to the picture of Jesus. For example: wars in the name of religion (all religion's fault). Or the use of religion to justify politics (he took some time to hate on Republicans).
No.
No. No. No.
Let's clarify. I am a Christian. I work for a church. I love Jesus. Sure, I've got complicated relationships with my political upbringing. I'm the prototypical "good kid" who struggles with guilt and hidden crap. That's me. And looking pretty for church can be a problem. But this has nothing to do with me being part of a religion.
THIS IS NOT "RELIGION'S" FAULT.
This is my fault.
A religion is a structure that enables a community of people to practice their belief system in an organized, consistent, and long term sustainable fashion. You want to talk about sustainable practices! Communities built around small institutions that help and support one another. A religions is a system of practices.
Religion has precious little to do with the many things that have been done in its name. Religion (read: structure) is not an inherently bad thing. Structure it good. You want to question what that structure is but the idea of structure in order to enable faith practices to be practiced is NOT a bad thing.
And it has nothing to do with whether or not you love Jesus.
People have problems. People are why wars are fought. People inhabit the structure that is religion and because PEOPLE are messed up, we get things like hypocrisy and the "good kid" Church Guilt. And we get hate and oppression of other races and religions. We get wars. We get the Crusades (side note: more about politics masquerading as religious faith than it was about actual faith/religious practices).
So when you tell me that Jesus is not about religion but a relationship, I'm calling BS on you. He was totally about overthrowing the previous structure, but to institute a new covenant. Covenant? Yeah. That sounds like religious structure to me.
And when you say Christianity/FollowingTheWay/Loving Jesus is not a religion, you lie. You take away something that has given beauty and order and sustainability of a faith. Relationships are practiced through religion. Own it. Stop trying to make Christianity sound nicer than you actually need to.
10 comments:
Often when I hear people say that Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship, they define religion as rules or laws. They pit Jesus against rules and say they like one but not the other. The problem is that Jesus doesn’t allow that distinction. For instance, Jesus ran afoul of the Pharisees many times. Often the debate was over the Sabbath. The Pharisees accused Jesus of not keeping it. (cf Luke 6:1-10) At no point does Jesus say, “You are right, I don’t need to keep the Sabbath because I am in a relationship with my father.” In fact, in every response Jesus gives, he shows that he is, in fact, keeping the Sabbath and in the way it was intended to be kept. Jesus doesn’t dismiss the religion, he shows that he does it better than the Pharisees. (Matt 12:11-12)
Jesus had a high regard for religion and specifically the law. He said “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.” (Luke 16:17) And Jesus doesn’t divorce religion/law and love. He says “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)
If I may be quite honest at this point. What I usually see from the people who separate Jesus and religion are people who do not want to follow “the law of liberty” (cf James 1:25; 2:12) and are looking for a way to justify that. And before I am accused of being judgmental, I’m just following Jesus here, “You will recognize them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:16)
Now if we assume that the Christianity = relationship crew don’t equate religion and law (which I have yet to see, but let’s be hypothetical), we only need to briefly glace at what the Bible says about religion to notice a problem. James says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.” (James 1:27) Micah has a similar statement, “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Micah 6:8). So, why all the consternation regarding religion? I thought all those things were good things.
Dana, this is quite a passionate response to the overwhelmingly viral new video. I think many people would like to find fault in a system (perpetuated by the PEOPLE) rather than take a look at the people themselves. The argument is age-old. It's really a matter of when will people finally begin to dig into the Bible and seek the Lord Jesus for themselves.
I get both 'arguments' or stances about this topic of religion and respect them both. I think this kid was more denouncing our cultures perspective of what Christianity is, as a set of rules or a system of self righteous acts or restrictions to get a right standing with a higher power. I would think that he had a specific audience in mind. I believe the intention was more to reveal how "a relationship with God" is based on grace and not law.
This blog is sensitive no matter what angle you look at it. I mean there are plenty of churches still functioning as the typical republican, conservative, law keepers. I dont know if I seen this video as a shot at those people more than a shot at how Christianity is viewed in America. I mean if you listen to mainstream music, or heck even look at facebook, people are not reluctant to talk about "God" because there typical view is the karma approach, and the people who really follow religion are just super good people. I think the word religion as it is viewed in our culture is a word that just pushes people away even if it "has given beauty and order and sustainability of a faith." Its more of the notion that people think they have to follow a set of rules to get to heaven and people know they cant or dont want to follow them.
But I do understand, i think, your point Dana. The issue isnt religion, but sin. We are the problem, not religion. Its the sin nature, not the law. So if we look at religion as the law, like I beleive he was implying, the whole context is different and I get your point completely. The law is the law and it is written in our fabric, and it is good (romans 7). And like Daniel said “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.” (Luke 16:17) And Jesus didnt come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. So let me see if I can tie this together. I can only think of Pauls writing's specifically galatians (I do not think the book of James is a good reference, not that it is not sufficent or that you did not make some good points, but bc it is written in the imperative and I think it is a very dificult book to view in the eyes of grace when tossing out scriptures for a subject like this). Fulfillment of the law is no longer found by obeying rules or right behavior, but by the Holy Spirit. We are still going to be judged by the law, but the life of Jesus that has fulfilled the law is now in us who believe by faith and are led by and submitted to the Spirit, so we are no longer obligated to follow the law, but we should follow Jesus by His Holy Spirit. Obedience is yeilding to the Holy Spirit, not how well you can explain grace or understand and exegete the scriptures, what matters is faith expressing itself through love. For us who have repented from our attempts to fulfill the law on our own and believed this good news of recieiving Jesus' righteousness and life, we have been set free from the law!!
So I dont think that 'religion' is even the debate here at all. I think it is the fact that he is missing the fact that we are responsible for the law! But that because the scriptures say we are slaves to sin, we cannot fulfill it, so attempting to is a dead end. without admitting we cant fulfill the law, we are betting on our self righteousness and we are therefore "religous". But there has to be the awareness of God's holiness and our sinfulness to understand this amazing grace offered by the gospel. Who cares about religion, we need a full view of the mercy and grace of God!
But I do beleive you are both on the same side and our passionate about sharing Jesus and His gospel! Lets not lose sleep over this, it will at the least spark conversation. I respect and love both of your hearts!
These are incredibly thoughtful responses. Thank you. I'd like your individual points stand and add, perhaps, a clarification on my stance to this video.
First, the words we use are important. The vocabulary we use is paramount. Words change the world. So if this poet wants to attack legalism and law keeping and earning our own salvation, then let him use those words. Does American culture associate those things with "religion" and "religious people"? Perhaps. But the actions of appearing a certain level of goodness is a human trait, not a specifically an American Christianity one. By all means, let him preach the Gospel! Chris, you are right in saying that he and I are on the same team. But use the right words.
When you attack religion as an unGodly and unOrdained thing, you attack the Church as an institution and spiritual reality. And I will not have that.
Secondly, since its my blog, I'm making a rule: no one is allowed to hate on conservative, republican, traditional churches. There is as much sin and as much Gospel in those churches as there is anywhere else. I grew up in those places and I still attend those places. Not the point of this conversation.
Let the conversation continue!
Well spoken, Dana, on all counts. I, too, had trouble listening to this video. But unlike you, I couldn't quite pinpoint my hangups so eloquently. Thank you.
Lol I humbly comply to the rule. But I do think that there is a maturation process with this subject. I didnt grow up in a conservative, republican, traditional church; but I did grow up "catholic" (I use that lightly because we were not very committed)in an area heavily influenced by catholicism. And I was so zealous with hatred and resentment towards the catholic institution when I first started to experience grace, and even was in a baptist church in Italy that fed my zeal and encouraged it. But it was more out of confusion and the hurt of my perception of it than its intention. I have come to respect the catholic church as an institution, and understand that they are built on the right foundations, and i think you said it correctly "There is as much sin and as much Gospel in those churches as there is anywhere else." And realize that all churches are different, reguardless of what denonimiational name they carry. All that to say.. I heard a great line in a movie "I have a respect for tradition, but I have a passion for the truth." maybe that was the angle he was coming at, I dont know but I can sure relate being young and zealous. But I just think the kid needs some leeway or atleast some grace and time to come to the respect the term religion as you know it and how I am coming to understand it. The kid definitely has a passion for the gospel and so do you. I know Im still working on fully trusting a church in general and letting down my guard against people so that I can truly walk this walk, and at the same time coming to terms with the wackness in them as I continually come to terms with the wackness in myself. Its Grace and its a process! We are saved to His church, and I am so thankful He is good and patient with us. BUT all of this doesnt take away the fact that I completely agree with you in using the right words. I think in the end of his spoken word he really gets off track with the word religion.
Its like I respect and agree with both of you and I think I am confused with this whole conversation now actually. What exactly am I talking about? I feel like I need to just be in Pslam 131. I just want to rest in the grace and mercy of the gospel, and follow the works the Lord has created me to do in Christ, and not concern myself with these matters lol! Ill leave that up to you all. Im just excited that Christ is being preached and I am seeing it on kids walls who I dont even think are Christians, and I hope that opportunities will come out of it to come to a saving knowledge of the truth reguardless. He is Soverign!
Im forgiven because You were forsaken, Im accepted You were condemned. Im alive and well Your Spirit is within in me because You died and rose again! Amazing love how can it be!!! Bless us to all listen to Your voice Lord, and trust and obey you in our own walk.
It's complicated. I can hear both of you...
Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics, six million words from the key figure in 20th-century theology, contains an 80-page section (CD I/2, section 17) entitled "The Revelation of God as the Abolition of Religion". Barth is insistent that Christianity - no less than any other religion - is "abolished" by the revelation of God. Here is the thesis statement for that section:
"The revelation of God in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the judging but also reconciling presence of God in the world of human religion, that is, in the realm of man's attempts to justify himself before a capricious and arbitrary picture of God. The Church is the locus of true religion, so far as through grace it lives by grace."
To Video Guy (VG), I think he might say: Good for you for perceiving the frequent corruption of "religion". But to oppose "Christianity" and "religion" is a mistake. The correct opposition is between *all* religions - "Christianity" included - and the judging and redeeming word of God himself.
But to you, Dana, I think he might say: Yes, we are made to be in community, and structures for practicing faith in community are necessary. But all such structures (including Christianity) can take on a demonic life of their own. In Saint Paul's language, I think "religions" are examples of the principalities and powers that Jesus will lead captive.
I think our religion is often like Elijah's altar on Mount Carmel. All our pious or not so pious efforts are just pouring water on the altar, in other words, making things more difficult and unlikely. The real question is whether there will come fire from heaven, or not.
Hope these thoughts are helpful...
I agree with you!
Myself, I dislike the word religion because of its connotation, which to many people is, as you say in your comment, "legalism and law keeping and earning our own salvation." But I think, as Jesus is the law, so He is also the fulfillment of religion, which the videographer calls "man searching for God." He makes the finding possible.
I've explored this on my own blog in two parts {with a separate post set for clarifications and responses to the comments I anticipate}, set to publish next week, with a more in-depth linguistic exploration. Words are paramount, as you say, and I think it's important that before we begin a discussion on whether Jesus likes religion or not, we establish what exactly religion means. And I think you do that, here, and more clearly and concisely than I was able to do when I wrote my posts, haha.
Interesting follow-up (second thoughts from the guy in the video) at this location.
I think that the point that is made in the video is this: When we get away from Jesus message, and rely to heavily on traditions, or feeling good about ourselves because we belong to a church, then we begin to become stagnant. We begin to feel good about belonging or attending and we forget the mission of the church.
I attended Bob Jones University, and am reminded often an adage of Dr. Bob Jones III: "The most sobering reality in the world today is that people are dying and going to hell today".
Is that really the message that your church teaches? If it is, you should feel proud to be part of such an organization. If it is not, find another church.
If your church is a place that you go to feel good about yourself, then find another church.
Now I will admit, I am not Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, or Methodist. I don't feel the need to be identified with words that man has invented to describe their systems of belief.
So what do I believe? I believe that a sovereign God from eternity past exists, that He created man by direct and purposeful act, that man once created sinned and brought death and a sin nature upon all mankind. I believe that God in his mercy sent his only son to atone for the sins of all men, past present, and future. I believe in eternal judgement for those who do not accept Christ as Savior. I believe that the members of Christ's church are called Christians, and I believe in heaven as the eternal destiny of the redeemed.
Most importantly, I believe in inspired word of God as recorded in the Bible. I do not hold the traditions of man as inspired revelation of who God is or his plan for believers.
So why do people have a problem with this video? In my opinion for two reasons:
1. They feel guilty because they belong to a church like he is describing, or
2. They don't understand the point that he is trying to make.
I guess it is up to each of us to decide which category we fall into if we find ourselves offended by this video.
Post a Comment