Implications of John 15:1-11, part 1

Tonight was a good night. A bit different. But great at the same time. Lot of stuff that I took in simply from the text that we read; more, in fact, than from the message spoken thereon. I think I'll take several posts and dissect some of the things I got from it. But, without further ado, here's the whole chunk of text:

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments, you will abide in my love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full."

The best place to start, I guess, is at the beginning. So, we'll do just that.

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the vindresser. Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit."

I must confess that this is the part of the passage that is most mysterious to me. The first sentence has significance, of course, but is more obvious that the rest. Jesus is the true vine. This would imply that there are false vines. We can see those at every corner. A church down the street is based totally on false vines, so to speak, being a Universalist Unitarian Church. They exclude all religions by trying to accept them all. The whole point of a religion is to have a set doctrine of beliefs separate from all others. I'm falling away from the text, however, so let's get back to it.

The next portion is what leaves me wondering. "Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away..." The branches are claimed by Christ ("Every branch of mine..."), yet are "[taken] away" by the vinedresser, the Father. Why would Christ claim such a branch? I really want to grasp what the text is saying here. I'll post as soon as I do.

The other part, however, makes sense and is apparent in Christians' lives. God prunes us. We get disciplined. Cut back a little bit. Why? So we can grow more, and, ultimately, glorify God by the fruit grown as a result.

The small chunk of text I pulled out tonight had more questions left with me than implications, but, I'll move forward to the stuff that hit me hard in the next day or two.

Test Time

So, you learn something for a few weeks, then your teacher gives a test. Correct? They want to see how well you learned it. They also want you to realize how well, or poorly, you learned the material.

Looks like it is my turn for a testing.

The last two posts were about how crappy the American church has become, some general things that make up this crappiness, and how, despite first reactions, I/you/we should not give up on it, but try to refine it to be more of what we believe the Bible teaches it should be.

Well, the past few days I've been corresponding with a Christian dude about what really makes a "Christian band" worthy of that very title. His desire is to petition a record label that is considered "Christian" in hopes of them signing only true "Christian" artists/bands.

My beef isn't so much with that as it is with the claims that he has about these bands and the assumptions that are being given place towards the actions, intents, and character of these bands. Just because a band doesn't sign "Jesus loves me, this I know", but, rather, has a song about a friend dying of cancer, or their parents divorce, or just a general synopsis of how crappy life can be at times does not, in any way, mean they are less a "Christian" band than someone like David Crowder Band, Chris Tomlin, or Casting Crowns, in my opinion.

The difference isn't a matter of who is Christian and who isn't. It's their placement and type of ministry that is different. Some musicians are given their talents for in-house, church-based ministry. Others, such as those in question, I believe, have their talents (and the success granted to them) for the purpose of reaching out and connecting with people who may never hear a David Crowder song, people who won't show up for church, etc. Didn't Jesus meet people where they were at? Interesting how the "Church" crowd in His day accused him of being demon-possessed.

Maybe taking crap from church people is part of the deal when you take up your cross and truly follow the plan Christ has for you...?

fatalism, structure, and grace (part 2)

in continuation....

I am very much cynical when it comes to discussing the Church system here in America. However, in light of what was said in the last blog, it is time, now, more than ever, to not disasssociate, run, or try to destroy the system, but, rather, work on improving it and pointing it in the right direction. This will, I think, in part, require the system to disassociate with some of its principles, ideals, and other attributes that we could, ultimately, refer to as failures. That, in no way, imiplies that we as Christians should abandon the ship and let it sink with other brothers and sisters who might be mistaken and caught up in the game.

God has setup the system. Fighting against the system is fighting against God. end of story. However, fighting for the system is an entirely different thing. Let us not be confused, though, when speaking of "fighting for the system." The only way to fight for it is to, almost, fight with it. There is a fine line between the two. Fighting for it requires a fight against the misconceptions, bad doctrine, and overall social tendencies that are contrary to what the Bible teaches about our faith's purpose being.

There is a disease in the American body of Christ. Just as with our bodies, the only way to correct the body, as a whole, is to destroy (fight against) a ruined portion that is somewhere inside the body itself. Same concept here.

This is where grace comes into play. I am all about grace, no doubt, and its role in our Christian lives. However, I must admit, I struggle with having grace, patience, etc for those who are so blinded by preconceived ideas about their faith that they don't really have a faith of their own, simply a regurgitation of someone elses words/belief/faith.

So, let us fight fatalism by realizing that God is doing something worldwide, deciding to help support the structure established here in America by doing all we can (in a Christ-like fashion, of course) to "cure" the system of its disease, and, all the while, have and share the grace of Christ, no only with the lost, but also with our fellow saints who might be, for the time being, blinded, misguided, or mistaken.

Amen.

fatalism, structure, and grace (part 1)

So, through the course of events that have thus far made up what I refer to as "my life," I've been left with quite a sour taste for the Church. However, I should be more specific by clarifying what I mean by "the Church." Really, what I mean, is "the domesticized, American Church." I read an article the other day that highlighted some points made by Philip Jenkins in his book, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. I plan on purchasing the book as I have found the bits and pieces read thusfar very, very interesting. This, for example...:

Over the past century . . . the center of gravity in the Christian world has shifted inexorably southward, to Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Already today, the largest Christian communities on the planet are to be found in Africa and Latin America. If we want to visualize a “typical” contemporary Christian, we should think of a woman living in a village in Nigeria or in a Brazilian favela. As Kenyan scholar John Mbiti has observed, “the centers of the church’s universality [are] no longer in Geneva, Rome, Athens, Paris, London, New York, but Kinshasa, Buenos Aires, Addis Ababa and Manila.” (p. 2)

What is it about our society that has caused our people to loose sight of what our true calling is? European Christianity can be described as archaic and archeological whilst America's spin is one that is totally sociological and clings to the consumer and market for dear life. Is this true religion, true Christianity? Not according to James 1:27...

Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.

Doesn't seem like our cup of tea here in the states, now does it? Of course, we should still take care of the orpahns and widows today. However, the concept here, in my opinion, is to take care of people "in their distress." Orphans and widows were on the very fringes of society during the time this was written. Who are those, in present society, that are on the very edge of existence? Drug attics? Or the sellers? Prostitutes? Or the pimps? Drunkards? Then, obviously, there is our own little reality. Maybe the people about to be pushed off your map of acceptance are homosexuals. A certain race group, perhaps? There are those who are social outcasts because our society is built-so that the rejection of those peoples is pretty much an intrinsic function of the populus. Then, there are those that, based on our personal experience and rearing, have become outcasts and social rejects.

Let us all examine ourselves to the end that we glorify God by fleshing out this true, pure, and undefiled religion that James speaks of. Amen.


Selah...