John H Armstrong

In God's Name

In God's Name: Wisdom from the World's Great Spirit Leaders is one of the best religious documentaries I have seen in some time. Produced in association with the acclaimed French filmmakers, Jules and Gedeon Naudet, the film explores the most complex religious questions of our day. Twelve of the world's most influential religious leaders are interviewed and share their intimate thoughts about faith, life, terrorism and death. The way their story is put together flows wonderfully and is most satisfying. The voices here include all the major world religions; e.g. Buddhism, Islam (Sunni and Shi'ite), Shinto, Orthodox Jew, Hindu, Sikh and Christian (Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, Southern Baptist and Lutheran). Behind the production of the film is a book and even a training seminar called "A Course in Miracles." A number of related resources can be found by searching the Web under the title: "In God's Name."

In the introduction the Moslem Sunni leader, Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, expresses something that tends to run like a thread throughout: "People of all faiths and homelands are divided into reasonable and unreasonable people. All that I wish and pray to God for is that the reasonable people would outnumber the fools."

French brothers Jules and Gedeon Naudet happened to be shooting a documentary about New York firefighters that became "9/11," a riveting CBS production, when the idea for this film occurred to them. This project was originally aired on CBS on December 23, 2007. The Naudet's goal was to explore religion through personal and engaging interviews with twelve spiritual leaders. They eventually spent one month working on each leader that they filmed. Knowing how this type of project works I would guess that they film six to ten hours with each person just to get the material they included in this 90 minute documentary. Included in the DVD is an added bonus of another 75 minutes of answers to very specific questions. This was also superb.

The filmmakers sought to find the commonality of different religions rather than to explore what motivates some to use faith to promote extremism. They did not seek to contrast the different religions in a negative way. Indeed, each of these leaders condemns extremism of all types.

Leaders featured, like Pope Benedict XVI and the Dalai Lama, grand ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah and Hindu leader Amma, chief rabbi of Israel Yona Metzger and Michihisa Kitashirakawa, high priest of the Shinto Grand Ise Shrine, all weigh in from different perspectives on the great riddles: What happens after death, the meaning of life, the fundamentals of their faith.

Many of the leaders discuss religion in the context of intolerance, terrorism and violence, with most echoing the pope--that religions "can never become vehicles of hatred." What is of particular interest to me is the treatment of the philosophical issues in the different religions. One reviewer notes: "Even through the veil of translation the leaders exude their own kind of charisma--from the Dalai Lama's playful smile to the archbishop of Canterbury's soothing meditations on morality. It's a reminder, however subtly, that these religions are large institutions and certain qualities are required to ascend within them."

Christians will be most interested in the five Christian leaders included on the film These are Bishop Mark Hanson (left), of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams (right), Pope Benedict XVI and Frank Page, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention. Conservative Christians will listen for answers to their specific doctrinal questions and some will likely feel dismay at times, though little is said that in any way stands outside the main tenets of Christian faith. Mark Hanson suggests that we must understand we can co-exist if we realize that we share two things in common: our human selves and the cosmos. I could not agree too strongly. It is beyond me why even the most conservative Christians cannot recognize the correctness of this statement and the utter necessity of believing it in the modern world. Alexy II, the Patriach of Moscow, will teach non-Orthodox Christians a great deal about an expression of the Christian faith that they little understand. Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams makes it very clear that God has revealed himself in Jesus Christ and that he accepts orthodox Christian teaching. But some will wish he had said more if they are determined to find fault. Pope Benedict XVI is the least interesting of the four Christians because the film of him was not done in private interview but in open public meetings. I so wish he had granted the filmmakers personal time so we could have seen the "real human person" who is Benedict XVI, a likable and lovely man. Finally, Frank Page is warm, Christ-centered and humble. Rarely have I seen an evangelical put in such a context who comes across as so genuine and filled with love. I have never seen Frank Page, except in short news clips, and I found him one of the most impressive Southern Baptist leaders I have listened to for many years. One could hope that men like Page remain the face of the SBC for years to come.

In a time when religions are actually talking to each other, Christians are in danger of two extremes. We who openly and faithfully confess orthodox Christian faith must affirm all that is good in others, including the good that there is in the teaching of non-Christian religion. We have specific Christian categories for understanding these truths without resorting to the language of evil and opposition. We must remain firmly committed to Jesus Christ as Lord over all but we can do that without bigotry and fundamentalism. Doing this in the modern context is a serious challenge, one that many of us have not done well. I found this beautiful film a lovely illustration of how this can be done.

The Tragic Story of the Colorado Killer Matthew Murray

The young killer, Matthew Murray, was clearly a disturbed individual as we have discovered from today's reports. His pleas for help were noticed by some. These people sought to counsel him. He also posted serious threats on the Internet between his two killing sprees this past Sunday. His warnings were anguished, despair-filled cries from a man who used the screen name: “nghtmrchld26.” Murray was a home-schooled youth who had once applied to work with Youth With a Mission, an organization known for strong training techniques and very Pentecostal theology. (I am not saying this in a pejorative way, it is a simple fact.)

On Sunday Murray posted this comment: "God, I can't wait till I can kill you people. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame, I don't care if I live or die in the shoot-out. All I want to do is kill and injure as many of you . . . as I can especially Christians who are to blame for most of the problems in the world."

The Associated Press reported this evening that at least eleven posts, between the two shootings on Sunday, were put on a site run by the Association of Former Pentecostals, a non-profit group that says it was created to help people who have left Pentecostal and charismatic churches.

Another Murray post added: "It's time for me to head out and teach these (expletive) a lesson." And then this added comment: "See you all on the other side, we're leaving this nightmare behind to a better place."

Meanwhile Murray’s family spent Tuesday quietly, "in reflection and prayer for the families of the victims and those who were injured," said a representative for the bereaved family. Murray's family has acted with great dignity from all we can tell. They must suffer immeasurably right now and should remain in our prayers.

Murray was actually dismissed from Youth With a Mission in 2002 for what the training center has described only as health reasons. (He would have been 18 or 19 years old at the time, a fairly typical age for YWAM workers.) Murray's parents also donated $250 to the prayer center several years ago, New Life Senior Pastor Brady Boyd told The Associated Press. The church also discovered a visitors card indicating that Matthew Murray attended services several years ago when Ted Haggard was still the minister. But Pastor Boyd said no Murray family members were members of the church and he downplayed the connections. (I do not understand this response by Pastor Boyd since Murray chose this particular church to attack and also mentioned Ted Haggard by name!)

The online rants make passing references to New Life and founding pastor Ted Haggard, who was dismissed last year after a former male prostitute alleged a relationship with him. The online threats also appear to include whole passages lifted from a manifesto written by Eric Harris, one of the two teens who carried out the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, only thirteen miles from Murray's hometown.

Leading up to the Sunday shootings Murray gave a post with the title: "My YWAM Horror Story." He complained about being removed from the youth mission program and added, "Why was I told that I couldn't be a missionary because I wasn't 'social enough'? I was told that I was 'an introvert. Everyone else got to go on their outreaches except for a few who lied about smoking (cigarettes). The authoritarianism and hypocrisy is outrageous."  Calm reflection on policy and practice will reveal that YWAM is very heavy on authority in training very young people. This again is a simple fact, not an attack. 

In an October 6 post Murray also wrote: "We'll make our own religion and be our own God's instead listening to some abusive pedophile church like what I was raised in telling us who's 'saved' and who's not. During this dark period I've realized this is not the way just to be a martyr. I can't walk alone any longer and I'll fight for the ones who can't fight. If I lose at then least I tried. If I have to give my life you can have it." Here is the classic false-martyr cry from a deranged young man.

In regard to seeking and taking psychological help Murray wrote of his need over some period of time. He said: "I've already been working with counselors." He added: "It's so funny how many people want to help you and love you and counsel you and 'work with you through your pain' when there's money involved."

Sadly, Murray’s troubled soul was clearly in very deep turmoil. In a time when religion so passionately moves the feelings of impressionable and immature people, both pro and con, and in a time when violence is so profoundly rooted in our culture, a sad story like this one reveals again the dark level to which conflicted people can be taken by the power of the Evil One. But merely blaming Satan in this instance can be a convenient Christian cop-out for real reflection, at least in my view.

Without blaming YWAM at all, which has done so much good for world missions, or New Life Church, which is also a place where much good has been done, I do think it would be very healthy if Christians within these circles asked some very hard questions about how they communicate their brand of “perfectionism” and “radical Christianity,” a kind of faith that can be abused by disturbed people to resolve their inner conflicts with violence. While I can recall one incident of a killer who belonged to a mainline type congregation (The BK Strangler) it is not ordinarily Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans or Anglicans who reach this level of emotional despair and then resort to such a violent reaction in killing others in the name of God. There is, in much of this type of emotionally intensive youth training, a good deal of sexual sublimation combined with overly demanding expectations to reach a certain standard of human emotion and response. Some people are simply not able to do this easily and when they become deeply disturbed the chance for a Matthew Murray will always surface.

What I am suggesting here is an open, self-critical discussion that does not attack either motives or people. This discussion should look at sexuality, as one huge component of this tragedy. It should also look at the emotional and spiritual immaturity brought about by something less than classical orthodox theology and spiritual formation (or lack thereof) that is rooted too deeply in human desires and passions, a subject the ancient Church understood much more about than the modern. In the end this kind of discussion could only help all who are Christians to learn from such a tragedy and hopefully prevent new ones from taking place down the road. We owe this to God, each other and the world that wonders about us so deeply.

How Appropriate is Aggressive Confrontation for Jesus?

A friend sent me a 68 second video clip from CNN that I invite you to view. I found it stunning for several reasons that I will later explain. I would love to provoke a "serious" dialog about this video clip and see if some of you can help us all find better ways to reach our culture with the gospel of Christ. Without further comment from me watch the clip.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/07/12/vo.senate.prayer.arrests.cnn

Now, my questions. Are these three Christians in the Senate chamber acting courageously? Are they right in what they actually pray? Should they have been there taking these actions in this place? What do their actions say about who we all are as Christians today. How should we appropriately respond to the presence of numerous non-Christian religions that now share the public religious platform with us in modern America? What should a genuinely missional Christian do in the face of modern pluralism and the various false teachings that confront the one true faith as it is revealed in Jesus Christ alone?

I find these actions, by the extremely zealous Christians, totally out of line. They were courageous but very foolish, completely unwise. Christian love is "kind" and it is "does not dishonor others" according to 1 Corinthians 13:4-5. Another translation of 1 Corinthians 13 says love is never "rude." These actions, regardless of the truths uttered about abomination, were simply rude and unkind. Every one with an ounce of common sense can see this on the video, indeed you feel it. I felt embarrassed, not because of Christ and his glory but because of bad behavior by those who likely share the same basic faith claims that I do. I teach bold Christian evangelism as a profession and I know the history of the early Christians in evangelism (cf. Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church) and I assure you this behavior is not consistent with how Rome was transformed by the gospel.

Secondly, we no longer live in a culture where we have the power to make others conform to Christian thought and practice, even if we ever did have it in the first place or should have it ever in the future. To confront error in this manner does our mission, that of proclaiming the Lordship of Jesus over all people and cultures, great harm. We  must promote his Lordship, even over the U. S. Senate, but the issue here is the manner in which it should be done. The Christian Right has fostered "confrontation" as the primary means of expression. This video is a reflection of that style and approach. It will only please those who are angry and want to fight back against the losses that we have sustained in the culture. It is not a strategy of victory but of final defeat. We win people not simply by right words, which we should already know, but by right actions. The actions taken here are inconsistent with the mission of Jesus. They only make our job harder in terms of faithful witness.

Third, I do not believe Ephesians 6:10-20, and the biblical teaching on spiritual warfare, supports this type of behavior at all. Our warfare, the apostle tells us, "is not with flesh and blood." Our warfare is not even with false religions but with the spirits behind false teaching. We can honor and love false teachers and tolerate their practices in a civil way (not of course within the Christian Church where the principles are quite different) without surrendering the battle image that we are clearly called to by Paul. Our problem is not with battle but with wrong tactics in the battle.

Finally, I expect more of this kind of confrontation to take place in the future, not less. Christians tried to regain power in America by the ballot box and we changed nothing in the wider culture. (I grant that we improved the Supreme Court makeup but that is about it on the moral front, at least nationally.) Since 1980 Christians have actively pursued political power as if this was their primary role in the society. (Christians should run for office, be involved in government and raise moral and social issues!) We have had direct access to the White House and what has it done to make the church more like Christ? What has it done to restore the heart of God's people to the Lord? What has it done to truly change the minds and hearts of young people who are leaving the church in droves, now more than ever in American history.

I would love to hear your thoughts. Pro or con, this discussion desperately needs to take place. This video creates a context for it better than almost anything I've seen in years.

A Visit to GTU

GTU is the Graduate Theological Union, a fully accredited association of theological schools situated in the San Francisco Bay area. I visited GTU yesterday with my friend Andrew Sandlin. We went to look for that special book that we have not yet found! We enjoyed a gorgeous day, with a sunny blue sky and temps in the low 80s. We also enjoyed an incredible lunch with Andrew's son Richard, a wonderful, thoughtful and tender-hearted young man who recently completed his B.A. in philosophy at Cal. Richard is now beginning preparation to pursue his doctorate in philosophy. I have no doubt that he will make a first-rate teacher someday.

GTU is an intriguing place. You can study subjects like art and religion, biblical languages, biblical studies, Buddhist studies, Christian spirituality, ethics and social theory, Jewish studies, Near Eastern studies and systematic and philosophical theology. They have just about every thing you could want in the field of religion. And you are across the street from Cal Berkeley, a world class university, where you can also take classes. GTU draws from traditional Christian roots but seeks to address current issues from a liberal social and political perspective. You can find traces of Christian orthodoxy at GTU but only traces.

The strengths of a place like GTU are the exposure you have to the modern world and the real dialogue with living religions. The weakness of GTU is evident and it underscores my central concern for the church in this age---pluralism. Almost everything I read and saw at GTU suggests that being a Christian is valid so long as you do not insist that "Christ is the way, the truth and the life" (John 14:6). While fundamentalism refuses to enter the dialogue with other truth claims people at GTU appear to allow the dialogue to determine the outcome, an outcome that is not acceptable to Christians who affirm the creeds and follow the historic Christ as he is revealed in the storyline of the New Testament. GTU invites conversation and research. This is great. GTU does not seem to offer much direction for the serious orthodox Christian. It may be a good place for strong believers to do research but it would not be such a good place to send a young student who is not yet rooted in the deep mysteries of the historic Christian faith. This is not a fundamentalist reaction but a pastoral concern for the formation of Christian faith in a challenging age.

Paganism is Alive and Well in America

I often hear evangelical Christians refer to everyday non-believers as "pagans." This designation is, of course, quite wrong. Pagans actually practice real religion, just not those most closely identified with Christianity or the more traditional religions of the world. Pagans build altars in their homes, they use religious symbols and icons, and they clearly promote ancient liturgies. Pagans are very religious folk. And they probably live right in your neighborhood.

Pagans employ "magick" (spelled with a "k" to differentiate it from the illusions and tricks performed by so-called magicians in shows) as central to faith. They hang certian kinds of flowers in their homes, use colors for various religious reasons, promote creativity in numerous ways, and they most definitely now live in the suburbs.

Modern pagans are most likely practitioners of Wicca, an earth religion steeped in ideas like energy and harmony. Pagans are monists, believing that all is one and one is all. And local "meet-up groups" for pagans abound across America. Such groups typically gather around a potluck meal, dancing and different types of rituals.

Not surprisingly pagans see their practice as loving and respecting the earth. And since they make no moral demands on adherents, many same-sex partners are often drawn to paganism, if they are spiritually hungry people.

How do we deal with paganism? The same way the early Church dealt with it. We live our faith in practical ways, showing the superior quality of our love for all men and women, and we resolutely teach the great biblical truths of creation, fall and redemption. Christians will increasingly face challenges to their faith in coming years. We had better get ready to deal with real paganism. It is clearly on the rise and you will most likely enounter it very soon in your community if you haven't already.