Despite God’s promise we decided to take out an insurance
policy against a future world-sized flood by building our own protective
tower. It was a remarkably dim idea, but
managed to capture the attention of everyone in the day. Once we changed, some of us darker, some
lighter, and most with different dialects unable to clearly communicate with
each other, we grouped together and began to migrate away from each other
across the new face of the world. A
series of small communities that would evolve into the nation states of the
world we know today. This is the origin
of racial differences within man. And
these differences continue today.
But Christ came to unite us.
Does that not imply that there should be no more differences between the
brotherhood of man who carry the Christian banner? Should we not be able to rise above the
influence of culture and the bigotry of history, and form a united front in the
name of Christ? While on the topic it is
also worth addressing the concept of chauvinism. Are men and women equal in the site of God,
and is not the history of subservience of women culturally induced and not
scripturally mandated? It’s worth a
look.
Senator Obama has had his share of difficulties recently
because he attended a “black” church in Chicago with a somewhat controversial
preacher who was a close friend. Think
of the implications of this phenomenon.
In order to obtain the votes needed to win a ‘general’ election, the
preacher selection of our democratic candidate must NOT be controversial. The preacher must not make inflammatory
statements, or hold unusual beliefs.
Christianity is not something the world loves to embrace, it teaches
love to respond to hate, love to respond to enemies. People decry Jeremiah Wright for making
statements of consequence, or allegations of responsibility. But no-one embraces the idea of praying for
Osama Bin Laden, and sending only love in his direction. It is interesting what we in the collective
determine is ‘extreme’ speech.
But Jeremiah Wright is held in lower regard as well due to a
long standing difference in worship style based on cultural differences. “White” worship services and “Black” worship
services have always been as different as the people who are involved in
them. Loud boisterous music and speech
is not a usual part of traditional white worship. Participation in most white church audiences
is sedate at best. Clapping has been
introduced to show approval, but in general a quiet (and therefore presumed
reverent) view of worship has been the fare for generations. Rhythm has no place in the pulpit in “white”
churches or does it?
In general “black” churches have expressed the feelings and
emotions of its people. Preferring not
to be bound by time constraints, preferring to be immaculately dressed, and
keeping with intense emotional music and sermons; rhythm is no stranger to the
pulpit or the choir in a typical “black” church. These singular differences have been so
pronounced throughout our history that we have elected to segregate at worship
times each week to avoid conflict.
Although both types of churches promote love, and Christ as our singular
savior; we maintain different views steeped in culture about what is acceptable
forms of worship, and appearance before God.
The biggest crime of “white” missionary America, and of
missionaries all through history, has been the indoctrination of culture and
cultural habits OVER the pure Word of God.
We have not been content to share ONLY the gospel, we also feel
incomplete without condemning every ‘foreign’ aspect of every culture on earth,
attempting to make only a traditional conservative view of worship the accepted
form before God. Dress, music, order of
service, and style of preaching have been boxed and shipped and demanded of new
converts as the ONLY way to address the new found God. Nudity, rhythm, dance, and emotion have been
condemned as mere tools of the devil.
The term ‘savage’ was applied to those with less clothing than we, and
deeper communal love than we have ever shown.
Savages it turns out, historically, have always been the well clothed
invaders, not the less-so indigenous peoples.
Talk about your catch-22; for years those who craved truth
and were hungry to learn of a Savior God who loves them and would even die to
save them – had to accept “white” traditionalism along with the truth. They were taught that deviation from the
traditions was tantamount to rejection of the gospel. But where in scripture does the great
commission state “go in the world and teach them the gospel” somehow adding
“and make sure you enforce strict worship standards along the lines of your
supreme cultural understanding”. I don’t
think so. Cultural differences are to be
expected, and nowhere advised to be destroyed.
It is our arrogance at work again.
It is the insidious nature of pride to believe your worship style is
“the” only worship style God prefers.
But can’t culture conflict with God you ask? What happens when it does? The problem with the premise of this
statement is the viewpoint from which it is often asked. We think ourselves fit judges of others
actions and behaviors. We are not. And far worse, we know and care even less
about motive. Take for instance the idea
of Nude Dancing as an example. How many
Christians are ready this morning to strip it all off, down to their birthday
suit, and dance before the Lord, in FULL view of everyone? Ready set go.
I don’t see you dancing … Your
look of relative horror at my suggestion ignores that King David of Israel of
old, did exactly this. In fact, he did
it in front of the Ark of God (you remember, the box of solid gold, containing
the original 10 commandments). He did it
all the way into the city of Jerusalem.
And He did it to humble himself in front of God. David was the king. He had excellent clothing that few could
afford. He had jewels and wealth, and
prominence. He debased himself in public
to show that no-one should stand proud before God; that we are all, even a
king, humbled by the creator of the universe.
And God accepted his worship and loved him all the more for it.
We have taught natives to get dressed, and wear their best
clothing to come to church. This lies in
stark contrast to the word of God.
Nowhere does it say we should take pride in our clothing or
appearance. We should be putting off our
jewelry, and our pride. We should be
clean before God, both physically and spiritually through the process of
salvation, but not well adorned. Even in
heaven we wear only robes of light, not ornate clothing, designed by fashion
consultants, and costing more than others can afford. Taking pride in anything, is taking sin into
our hearts, souls, and minds. David’s
act of humility was not an overall endorsement of naked dancing, it was a
condemnation of our ‘standards’ of worship style, and a revelation of motive
over deed.
The other portion of David’s act that is often overlooked in
all the nudity is the dancing. All
throughout the Bible, believers have danced for joy before the Lord. I doubt this dancing resembled the grinding,
dry humping, that is designed to replicate and then induce sexual
behavior. But it was also unlikely
ballet either. Using your own judgment
you can imagine that dancing was simply a physical expression of joy, a
reaction to happiness accompanied by music.
However traditional “white” culture, you know the repressed one that
comes from the pilgrims who founded this nation, put quite the damper on
dancing (and in fact on joy in church).
It is a wonder that God’s honor survives at all in the face of the
teachings that have been passed off in His name. God does not strive for the absence of joy in
His service, or the inability to express that joy physically. These are traits of the evil one. God longs for us to actually KNOW the joy of
serving Him, and longs for us to enjoy that service, and express ourselves
accordingly.
In order to ever reunite Christians under one banner, even
within a singular denomination, we must begin by undoing the crimes of the
past. As each snowflake is different,
each fingerprint unique, each flower somehow beautiful – we must learn to see
our differences as a thing of beauty and enrichment, not as absolutes. We must begin to embrace the different, and
become enriched by it, not disgusted by it.
There is some value in the style of “white” religion, it is not all to
be avoided. But it is not all to be
thought of as the complete capture of acceptance before God. We will discuss unity further in our next
entries …
No comments:
Post a Comment