peterskim blog

This post is a continuation on my previous post entitled “Do Not Deny Self”.

Let’s start at a place we can all agree on. What is a Christian? I believe a Christian is someone who is human, therefore a sinner, but has made the commitment to repent of their sinful nature and welcome the Holy Spirit to dwell within them and guide their lives.

From that point forward, I believe there are two general philosophies one can accept: 1) negative and 2) positive. The “negative” philosophy focuses on the sinful human nature and causes the person to live their whole lives working to reduce their sinful nature. The “positive” philosophy focuses on living a life that is Spirit-led and fulfilling God’s mission on earth. You may say that categorization is overly simplistic, which I would agree with, but for the sake of argument, please try to follow me here.

Ideally, we should strive to be more holy as we live a life of mission. But I think it’s human nature to think simply. If you had to boil down the Christian life to one phrase, what would it be? “Make disciples of all the nations” or “Be holy”? I would say the former.

This leads me to my argument for why I believe Lent is unhelpful for a lot of people. The practice of Lent assumes that people have a problem “giving up” things in their life for/to God. I think the bigger problem is that people aren’t “giving” enough for/to God. What’s the difference? Once again, this may be a half-empty/half-full type thing but I believe “giving” is more honorable than “giving up”. “Giving up” involves getting rid of things in our life that we are in control of or have possession of for the purpose of decreasing what we have. In the eternal picture, that is not a lot, even for the richest of us. “Giving” has a much more positive connotation. “Giving” is about transferring things out of our abundance to others. What are we in abundance of? Not material wealth. We, as Christians, are in abundance of spiritual wealth. Christians have plenty to give because God is our Father.

This is a similar we’re-focusing-on-the-wrong-problem situation to my argument for why I think there is an overemphasis on rest. People use the whole “God rested on the seventh day” story to justify their theology on why people need to rest more. But I think the greater problem is not that we don’t rest enough. The greater problem is that most of us waste way too much of our lives on eternally insignificant things. Most of us spend 40+ hours per week in a job that God did not intend for us to do. That is what makes us tired, not being overworked.

I wish we could change the focus of Lent from “giving up” to “giving”. Instead of being self-focused and try to *give up* what makes us unholy, we should focus on the world around us and see how God might use us to *give* His love to it.

p.s. This may be hard for some of you to believe but the point of these posts is not to judge or to criticize. I am simply sharing some things I’ve been reflecting on as I consider how I should live my life.

The wife and I were a little sluggish getting ready yesterday morning and missed the bus to go to church, so we decided to go to the evening service instead. I’m glad that happened because the sermon by Tom Baskett, one of the leaders of the international student ministry at Park Street Church, was one of the best I’ve heard in a while.

Warning. He makes some pretty strong statements. He basically says that if you are not willing to live a life of mission, you are not a follower of Jesus Christ.

Tom Baskett – Matthew 28:16-20, “All Authority is Given to Me”

I think self-denial is a terrible life philosophy and one that completely rejects part of God’s intent for creation.

I believe that a core nature of God is God as the Creator God. The Creator God is who we first encounter as we read Genesis. Perhaps because I am an engineer and a photographer, I strongly resonate with the part of God that is the Creator God.

It is unfortunate to me that people strongly promote this idea of self-denial. They argue that we need to be afraid of “self”. That “self” is inherently evil. “Self” is always up to no good. “Self” ruins relationships. I can understand why people would come to that conclusion but in the end, I believe that denial of “self” is to deny God. Do we truly believe that God painstakingly made us even from our mother’s womb? If so, why should we continue to deny “self”? I think a lot of people think that since self-centered behavior gets in the way of relationships with people and God, we should just deny self. I would like to argue that acknowledging “self” can be an entirely God-honoring and God-glorifying act; and instead of seeking to deny “self”, we should strive to *redeeem* “self”.

Recently, I heard a story of someone who felt like they had to deny their pursuit of creative expression because they felt like it was for self-glorifying motives. While I think it is honorable that the person was aware of their sinful nature and could see how the creative expression that should be meant for God’s glorification was being used for his own glorification, I think there is something not right about that situation. Instead of denying the pursuit of creative expression, I would hope that the person would embrace the pursuit, fully aware of their sin, but hopeful that God would redeem his actions in the process.

I don’t think we need to wait until heaven to see the expression of creation’s glorification of God. God made us unique and gifted us with an abundance of skills and talent for a reason. I believe that when we act more like robots and automatons, we do not glorify God. When we express the uniqueness of who we are, we glorify God. Do not deny that. I would go as far as to say you are almost sinning if you deny the way that God created you. It’s like telling God “You messed up!” Express yourself. Do it for His glory. And even if you can’t fully do it for His glory, make that your intent and I believe God can and will redeem it in the process.

A lot of you are going to think I’m absolutely ridiculous but honestly, I don’t like the tradition of Lent. In general, I don’t like the philosophy of self-denial; or at least self-denial in the way most people interpret it and practice it. I think too much of many people’s practice of Christianity is negative rather than positive. It’s too much about what you can’t do rather than what you can do. It’s too much about trying to fix all the bad things in your life rather than striving to incorporate more good things in your life. It’s too much about denial rather than realization and creation.

Maybe it’s just a matter of perspective. Seeing a glass half empty vs. glass half full. But I think that perspective has such a strong influence on how you view yourself, others and God.

Therefore this Lent (and recent years’ Lents), I am not fasting. I am not denying myself of anything. In fact, I am embracing and welcoming for myself everything that God has for me. I want to taste and feel the fullness and richness of God’s blessings.

A friend of mine sent me this link summarizing a study which describes a movement that I seem to be a part of:

http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=201

Here’s a snippit:

Relying upon national research conducted over the past several years, Barna profiles a group of more than 20 million adults throughout the nation labeled “revolutionaries.” He noted that although measures of traditional church participation in activities such as worship attendance, Sunday school, prayer, and Bible reading have remained relatively unchanged during the past twenty years, the Revolutionary faith movement is growing rapidly.

Asked if this meant that the Revolution he describes is simply a negative reaction to the local church, he suggested that most Revolutionaries go through predictable phases in their spiritual journey in which they initially become dissatisfied with their local church experience, then attempt to change things so their faith walk can be more fruitful. The result is that they undergo heightened frustration over the inability to introduce positive change, which leads them to drop out of the local church altogether, often in anger. But because this entire adventure was instigated by their love for God and their desire to honor Him more fully, they finally transcend their frustration and anger by creating a series of connections that allow them to stay close to God and other believers without involvement in a local church.

WHOA. I think there must be something supernatural going on with regards to this “movement”. During the past few years, I’ve been ranting and raving about this new philosophy I have on faith and church–especially the bit about “Church” (with a capital C) vs. “church” (with a little C). I’ve gone through this faith journey as a result of many different factors: experiencing disappointment with the local church, absorbing new ideas about better ways to attack the problem of poverty, setting goals for my future, etc… I used to think my ideas were coming from a place of hurt and therefore weren’t valid; and other people have definitely made me feel like that’s true. I’ve even started to accept it and become resigned to the fact that I’m a weirdo.

But this article validates everything I’ve gone through. It says there are about 20 million other American Christians who are similarly discontent with the conventional belief that being a Christian is just about going to church services every Sunday and being a good person. There are 20 million other people who agree with me that God is calling us to more than living a comfortable life. There are 20 million other people who believe that God is calling us to submit *everything* to him: not just 10% of our income, but 100% of our lives.

Think about faith and service with a larger perspective. What can you do to make a difference in this world? Does serving your local church fill your God-serving quota? Think about serving God in a much larger capacity.

I love Gordon Hugenberger. He’s my favorite preacher. It’s been great to be able to hear him preach every Sunday. I don’t know why I ever left Park Street Church five years ago (oh, that’s right… to find a wife…).

Anyways, he’s so well-loved that he even has his own Facebook fan club:

The Unauthorized Gordon P. Hugenberger Fan Club

I’ve talked to a good number of people the past few weeks about their careers. It’s actually been quite an interesting experience asking people to tell their stories of how they’ve gotten where they are in their career.

Many people I spoke to seem to be content with just getting by. Especially when one has many responsibilities besides work (spouse, children, etc), it can be difficult to give 100% to pursuing a career. Constantly pursuing advancement and growth takes effort; if we’re good at what we do and content with it (and how it pays), why should we want more? Is it just about being materialistic?

One can argue that those who are too comfortable and content with their current situation are most likely to find themselves out of a job eventually. The labor market is becoming increasingly competitive with people in formerly poor backwards societies competing for our jobs from thousands of miles away.

For example, many people feel bad for auto workers who have worked in the industry for decades whose jobs are being eliminated because of global competition. But perhaps the fact that they were in the same job for decades was precisely their problem. In order to avoid having your job eliminated by competitive forces, you have to continue obtaining new skills to stay on top of the game.

Anyways, besides that very practical reason of maintaining competitiveness, I think there is a much deeper and meaningful reason for pursuing career growth: discovering the limits of how you were created.

How different would history be if Michael Jordan decided to quit pursuing basketball as a career when he was cut by his high school basketball team?

Life is short. I’m already completed almost 28 years out of an approximately 70-90 year life span. That’s a good chunk. And one could argue, at least physically, that it’s all downhill from here.

However, I don’t accept that I’ve even come close to reaching my peak mentally and spiritually. I think God has much greater things in store for me and I’m going to go find what those things are. Is it being overly ambitious to discover what God made me capable of? I don’t think so. In fact, I believe that settling for what’s easy and comfortable is the least faithful thing I could do with my life. We must not confuse rest with laziness. It is good to find rest when we can, but only when in the context of mission.

I am not in pursuit of fame or fortune. I am in pursuit of influence. The means to influence companies to invest in poor neighborhoods and poor countries. The means to influence people to want more out of life.

In the end, maybe being a computer programmer is all that God has in store for me. That is nothing to be disappointed about. But maybe God has much more in store for me and there is nobody is going to discover that except for me.

“Do the thing you fear and the death of fear is certain.”

A good friend and I were talking about church (in general) the other day and we agreed that the most important thing to us about finding the “right” church for us is their philosophy of ministry.

What does that mean? My ideal picture of ministry (as I’ve talked about previously on this blog) is that lay people fully take on the role and responsibility of being messengers and ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There ought not be this idea that church “leaders” are the ones that “do” ministry while the rest of us just receive.

My belief is that the ministry of the lay people is to reach out to a hurting world that needs the hope and love that can only be known through Jesus. The ministry of church leaders is primarily to support the laity in order that they can be effective ministers; this includes biblical teaching, encouragement, and spiritual guidance.

I take this to, what I believe is the next logical step, and suggest that churches should be much more “lightweight” and focused than most churches are now. I think most churches have way too much overhead and are structured in such a way to lend itself towards becoming institutional and stable rather than missional/entrepreneurial and radical. I believe churches should rid themselves of most of their programs that are not directly related to Biblical teaching or encouragement; yes, this includes programs to help the poor or some other subset of people with needs.

Why? Because I think such efforts can be so much more effective and life-changing when done outside the confines of a church. Instead of trying to run those programs within a church, people who are passionate about the homeless or the hungry or needy children should start non-profit organizations whose sole mission is to help those people. There are so many advantages to doing things this way… 1) you can get people involved who might not have otherwise. 2) It would be much easier to get outside donors who might otherwise be hesitant to donate to a church. 3) It will help focus the mission solely towards helping these people, rather than have the mission be clouded by other goals (e.g. using the programs to boost Sunday attendance or to make the church seem more socially conscious, etc.). 4) It will force people to step up, develop leadership skills and take ownership over the work they are doing (when serving at church, it’s easy to just submit to someone else’s [usually a pastor's] authority and just do what is told).

There’s countless more reasons… but anyways, my point is that most churches are too “fat” and unfocused in their mission. And when you think you can do everything, you end up doing nothing at all (or at least do nothing well).