An Old Testament Call to Passive Resistance

This is a paper I wrote concerning Pacifism in the Old Testament from Jeremiah 29:1-9 (and some following verses).  The formatting may not be great on here since the cut/paste feature doesn't seem to be an exact process. If there are questions about the sources, make a comment, and I'll do my best to clarify.

“Jeremiah 29: A Call to Passive Resistance”

            Jeremiah 29:1-9 is a letter written from the prophet Jeremiah to the first wave of exiles in Babylon under King Nebuchadnezzar.  Patrick D. Miller argues that this letter is telling the exiles “Do not resist; carry on your lives; learn to come to terms with your situation.”[1] While I agree with Miller on the second point, I disagree with his first point, which is the most fundamental point to the entire passage.  I will argue that resistance is exactly what Jeremiah intends to incite through this letter.  Jeremiah is not calling for armed resistance, nor is he calling for rebellion or even civil disobedience.  Instead, Jeremiah is calling upon the exiles to maintain their Jewish[2] identity in an act of passive resistance to the Babylonian oppressors who hold them hostage.  As is often the case, when once culture dominates another, especially by force, the “victim culture” loses its identity at worst, or at best, they often maintain some of their identity with concessions and adaptations to the oppressor’s culture.  God, through Jeremiah’s letter is calling upon the exiles not to fall into the trap of losing any of their identity as God’s Chosen People.  I will begin by setting the stage for the context of this passage with a brief historical setting. Following the historical background, I will give evidence of tactics used by oppressors to remove the identity of those whom they oppress.  I will then give evidence of how this passage advocates resistance in a non-violent manner to the status quo until a time in which God will set the exiles free.  Following that, I will explore the part of the passage that says that the welfare of Babylon will be the welfare of the exiles.[3]  I will also include a section that discusses the dangers of misreading this passage in which an oppressor could “wrongly justify” their oppression using this text.  I will finally discuss how this text speaks to people today through its overt message as well as through its imagery to maintain identity as a form of non-violent resistance.

            In 597 BCE, Babylon deported a first wave of exiles from Judea into Nebuchadnezzar’s Kingdom of Babylon[4] (roughly located in modern day Iraq).  Ten years later in 587 BCE, Jerusalem was destroyed[5] and a new wave of exiles was taken into Babylon.  For some reason, the Babylonians allowed correspondence (of which this passage is an example) between Judean and the exiles in Babylon.  This unlikely arrangement can be explained by assuming that the Babylonian authorities wanted to keep the exiles informed of events in Jerusalem, possibly to demoralize them, and they also wanted to remind Zedekiah, the King of Judea, that Babylon had the real power, and holding hostages was one method of proving that and making sure that tribute payments were paid to Babylon.[6]  The exiles were held in Babylon until the Persians led by Cyrus assumed control and issued a decree in 538 BCE releasing the hostages back to Jerusalem and providing them with funds to rebuild their Temple.[7]

            “Build houses…plant gardens…take wives…have sons and daughters...take wives for your sons…give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease...”[8] Each of these commands in Jeremiah’s prophetic letter invoke God’s commands of maintaining the Jewish identity and culture amid oppression and exile.  Each command also explicitly tells the exiles that while they are to live peaceably among the Babylonians (“…seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare,”[9]), they are not to become influenced by the Babylonian culture, identity, or religion.  The exiles are to remember their identity and to produce a new generation of Jewish people, while still under oppression.  While violent resistance may produce a quick end (either end to the oppression or an end of the Jewish people through destruction by the Babylonians), God is commanding the Jewish people to resist through passive means by in maintaining their Jewish identity through forming communities by building houses, planting gardens, continuing to have children, allowing their children to marry, and maintaining their daily lives.

            We can look at other historical situations to see the tactics used by oppressive regimes to gain control of those whom they oppress.  During China’s Cultural Revolution from the 1960’s to the 1970’s, led by Mao Zedong, the Chinese leadership further oppressed Tibet, which they had annexed in 1950 into the nation of China in the name of “liberation.”  This so called “liberation” turned out to be oppression of the Tibetan people, religion and culture (along with that of most people in China).  Tibetan artifacts that were at least a thousand years old were destroyed, and the Chinese Communist regime even convinced some of the Tibetan citizens, including Buddhist Monks, that this was the right thing to do.  Names were changed and transcribed into Chinese, and thus, were pronounced with a Chinese accent.[10] Almost anything tying Tibetans to their native culture was eliminated or put under strict regulations by the Chinese Communists.  In a different book, Alex Haley’s semi-autobiographical novel, Roots gives several examples of losing one’s identity in the face of oppression.  One such powerful example is a scene where a slave in the American South named Samson approaches the character Kunta Kinte.  Samson tries to convince Kunta that his name is Toby, the name given to him by the slave master.  Kunta continues to hold that Toby is not his name; his name is Kunta Kinte![11]  By taking away his name, the slave master is, in effect, trying to dismantle Kunta’s identity as an African and to convince Kunta that his identity is an American Slave as he had already accomplished with Samson.  Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. states that oppressors begin oppression by first taking away the names and stories of the oppressed.[12] As we’ve seen in the two previous examples of Tibet and American Slavery, Rev. Wright is correct on this issue.  Rev. Wright’s sermon discusses how slave traders and then later, racist people unwilling to integrate with former slaves or their descendents treated the African-Americans as sub-human.  When cultural roots, histories, shared stories, and names are taken away from a group of people, generations will be “lost” by forced-integration into the oppressive culture. 

If we read Jeremiah 29 intertextually with the book of Daniel, a book that is also set during the exile, we see the names of the Jewish Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah being changed by Babylon’s chief official to Beltesheazzar, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, in an attempt to take away their Jewish identity.[13]  Though the actual historicity of this passage can be put into question, and many consider this to be a mythic tale, the underlying message cannot be discounted.  Oppressors attempt to change identities of those whom they oppress. In another intertextual reading with Daniel, King Nebuchadnezzar had a large golden statue made of him.  He commanded that at the sound of the music, everyone was to fall down and worship this statue.  Seeing this as idol worship and staying true to their roots, Daniel and his friends refused to worship this statue.  After being interrogated by Nebuchadnezzar, the four exiles were thrown into the Fiery Furnace heated seven times hotter than normal, but they were left unharmed through divine intervention.  In this apocalyptic story, we can see yet another account of an oppressor (in this case, Babylon, the same oppressor in Jeremiah), attempting to wipe away the culture and personhood of those under their oppression.[14] Babylon attempted to wipe out the very religion and roots of the Jewish people under their control.

As the exiles in Jeremiah 29 build houses, have children, let their children marry, and increase in population, they are resisting these oppressive tactics that would cause them to lose their identity.  By maintaining their identity under unfavorable conditions, the exiles are passively resisting the Babylonian oppressors.  In keeping homes and having families, they can hold onto their own names, culture, and religion (even just if at home), and they are holding onto the message passed from generations before that no matter what the Babylonians do to them, they are a different, special, and Chosen People of the one true God.  As they have their children marry and reproduce, they are maintaining their historical link to the Promised Land to which they hope to someday return.  Through oral tradition, they can keep traditions, stories of Israel and Jerusalem, and the hope of return alive.  Through these acts the exiles are not allowing the Babylonian culture to totally defeat them through forced enculturation.  Though they have been defeated in might and strength, by following God’s commands in this letter, they can never be defeated as a people with names, culture, religion, and history.  Even today, the Jewish people in the Diaspora hold special feelings for Israel, Jerusalem, and especially the hopeful rebuilding of the Temple.

            The idea of kinship cannot be understated in the identity of the Jewish people (or any other “tightly knit” ethnic/cultural/religious group).  Kinship of all Jewish people has been important throughout history since antiquity.  The Jewish People hardly (if at all) distinguished between “good Jews” and “bad Jews.”  All of Jewish heritage are, and have been, identified as Jews.[15]  Accordingly, the exiles in Jeremiah 29 see themselves as a people united by that very kinship.  This is proven through three observations of the text.  First of all, the exiles were taken into Babylon from one “nation (Judea),” and/or one city, Jerusalem.  Judea, and especially Jerusalem was central to Jewish life, culture, and religion.  The Temple in Jerusalem was seen as the house of God on earth.  Second, these people believed in the God of the Jewish people, Yahweh.  One can see proof of this by merely scanning the passage and seeing that the letter from Jeremiah is speaking of this one God.  Had they not been unified by belief in this God, this letter would hold no credence as a prophetic letter.  These people were the Chosen People of this God.  They were chosen by God to be the vehicle that would allow God’s justice to spread to the whole world as a “light to the nations.”[16]  Third, by maintaining their culture through the construction of houses and forming communities and families separate from the Babylonians, the Jewish people are asserting their kinship with one another.  As they kept community with other Jews, these exiles kept their roots central to their being.  Kinship assumes a shared history and/or a shared story.  When a culture loses its history, they die.[17] When a new history is given to the younger generations, those generations “die” to their native culture as well.  Rev. Jeremiah Wright explains this using the current experience of African-Americans.  Through centuries of oppression, their homeland and native culture has been called inferior to Western standards.  As this is drilled into the minds of people, they begin to accept it as true.  Each generation loses a little more of their history as each generation passes, thus causing even more of a loss of identity.  After losing identity, the exiles, (African-Americans in Wright’s example) take on the fashions, culture, and lifestyles similar to those of their oppressors.[18]  Despite the tactics that the Babylonians used, the exiles in Babylon continued to maintain their culture and identity, and they remained a people, and no less, the Chosen People of God, with a shared history, story, and culture.

            Probably the most controversial and confusing portion of Jeremiah’s Letter to the exiles is where God, through Jeremiah tells the exiles to seek the welfare of the city where they are exiled and to pray for its wellbeing because their own wellbeing is tied to that city.[19]  This must have come as an unwelcomed surprise to the exiles.  It is difficult to imagine God telling an obviously oppressed group of people that they are not only to live in harmony with their captors, but they are also to pray for them.  Logic would say that they must have wondered if this was a real command from God or the uttering of some false prophet.  Jeremiah counters this thought by writing that the prophets and diviners among the exiles (who are prophesying a quick return) are not from God, and they are not to listen to them.[20]  William Holladay describes this letter as a “Rude Letter” from God.[21]  Holladay says that in verse 7, the English translated word “welfare” is actually the word “shalom” (Hebrew for “peace”).[22]  In light of this, Holladay paraphrases Jeremiah’s letter to imply: “Ah, you are listening for ‘peace be to you’ but you listen for it in vain until you do some work of your own…(My own emphasis added).”[23] I argue that Holladay is emphasizing the need for peace and peaceful resistance.  Thich Nhat Hanh, a nominee for the Nobel Peace Price by Martin Luther King, Jr. writes, “Evil is never overcome with evil to produce peace.”[24]  War and violence only quiets or subdues the losers.  Sometimes the losers are subdued forever, but many times, the losers are only subdued until they can gain enough strength to again lash out, but this time with more anger than before.  In fact, Biblical/Christian Pacifism is not rooted in efficacy (violence often produces results quicker than passive resistance), but rather it is rooted in a particular interpretation of God’s will as discerned through the Bible.  Patience in the face of oppression “is not a means to a greater good, but it is the good itself.”[25] Jeremiah, through God’s leading, realized that the good must be honored in telling the exiles that their resistance was not to be violent.  Jeremiah realized that Babylon should not be subdued by force, but that through patience, endurance, and passive resistance, the Jewish people would be vindicated.

By telling the exiles to seek the peace of Babylon and to pray for them, and by further explaining that the exiles’ peace is tied to Babylon’s peace, God, through Jeremiah’s Letter is commanding that they not take up arms or violence against their oppressors.  Much like most cultures today, the exiles, and even the Babylonians, built their civilizations upon the lie that “we, not God, are the masters of our existence.”[26]  Almost all nations and cultural groups, whether religious or not attempt to be the masters of their own existence through trying to manipulate their circumstances in social orders, laws, treaties, and so forth. Despite Jeremiah’s letter at least some of the Jewish exiles still held to the thought that they, and not God, would one day avenge their situation.  They even composed a Psalm saying, “Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!”[27]  This Psalm came as a result of tormenting of the exiles to “sing us [the Babylonians] one of the songs of Zion.”[28]  Understandably, the exiles wanted to return home, and while returning home, they wanted to return revenge.  God’s precepts, however, do not work that way.  Ellen Davis gives and interpretation of this Psalm and others like it.  She says that these “cursing Psalms” are a cry for vengeance asking God to act.[29]  Reading this text through the lens of Christ, we can see that the call to “turn the other cheek”[30] is not unique to the New Testament, nor is “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”[31]  This is an Old Testament example of the call to live in voluntary subordination (similar to Christ’s teachings previously cited).  When doing so, the subordinate group holds the moral authority over the dominant group calling upon them to forsake their “domineering use of that status.”[32]

Even though this passage speaks to a specific situation, we must also explore the potential dangers of interpreting it wrongly.  Though it is God’s will that the exile took place,[33] it should not be interpreted that every (or any) oppressive situation is God’s will.  One could take this passage out of context and use it to justify oppression and attempt to subdue those being oppressed by saying that their situation is “God’s will.”  Oppressors have often used biblical interpretation to justify their wrongs.  For example, slavery has been justified using Genesis 9:22-27 (Noah’s curse of Ham’s descendents), the book of Philemon (Paul returning Philemon’s slave Onesimus), and 1 Timothy 6:1-6 where Paul tells slaves to regard their masters as “worthy of honor.”[34]  Though slavery was a cultural norm in the Biblical period, hardly anyone would argue that such oppression of a human is acceptable today.  So must one see Jeremiah 29.  God ultimately causes the exile and oppression for the peoples’ unfaithfulness.  The exile is not merely a military conquest with the victor claiming the resources and people.  This is an act of God after repetitive prophetic warnings.  Repressive regimes must not use this text to legitimate their oppression and say that it is “God’s will.” 

Though Jeremiah 29 calls for non-violence, it is not a call for religious people to be silent in the face of oppression.  The vindication of the exiles is prophesied in Jeremiah 50:1-3 where God says that Babylon’s idols will be put to shame, and a nation from the north (most likely the Persians led by God’s decree) will destroy Babylon.  The reader must remember that though God uses human sources to carry out this vindication and revenge, the action originates from God and not from humans.

“The word of God is living and active…”[35] Just as the call for non-violent resistance applied for the exiles in Babylon so too, it applies today.  The world is ripe with injustice and oppression.  If we are to take the words of Jeremiah seriously, we must look at our own situations and use Jeremiah 29 as a model for seeking justice and an end to oppression.  Again, quoting Stanley Hauerwas from The Peaceable Kingdom, Patience in the face of oppression “is not a means to a greater good, but it is the good itself” (page 146).  Violent action may be more efficacious and bring a quicker solution, but violence is against the Will of God.  We are not to seek our own vengeance, but rather we are to allow God to have the vengeance.  Romans 12:19 says, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”  As followers of God, we must either allow God to be God, or we must forsake the covenant and be our own “gods.”  But, if we choose the latter, we must be ready to face the consequences.  As Jesus said in Matthew 26:52b, “…for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.  Violence never has a good end.  Even if violence quashes an oppressor, there will always be oppressors and evildoers who will fill the vacuum of the one who was destroyed and blood will always be on the hands of the one who uses violence.  Even in our own figurative exiles to “Babylon” (whether in the form of oppression, addiction, conflict, or any other wrong), we must turn to the words of Jeremiah 29 and only resist passively. 

If Jeremiah’s letter ended in verse 9, the exiles then and those in exile (figurative or literal) now would not see hope in their passive resistance.  Fortunately, Jeremiah includes more in this letter.  Verses 10-14 go on to say, “For thus says the Lord: Only when Babylon’s seventy years are completed will I visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place. For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope. Then when you call upon me and come and pray to me, I will hear you. When you search for me, you will find me; if you seek me with all your heart, I will let you find me, says the Lord, and I will restore your fortunes and gather you from all the nations and all the places where I have driven you, says the Lord, and I will bring you back to the place from which I sent you into exile.”  As people of God, we, just as the exiles, can take comfort in knowing that God has a future for us, and that future is for our benefit and not our harm if only we live up to our end of the covenant.

Works Cited:

Richard A. Burridge, “Being Biblical?: Slavery, Sexuality, and the inclusive community,” HTS Theological Studies (HTS 64(1), 2008).

R.E. Clements, Interpretation: Jeremiah (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988).

Ellen F. Davis, Getting Involved With God (Lanham Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.:  2001).

Alex Haley, Roots (New York: Gramercy Books, 2000).

Thich Nhat Hanh, Living Buddha, Living Christ (New York: Penguin Group Inc., 2007).

Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1983).

Martha Himmelfarb, “Judaism in Antiquity: Ethno-Religion or National Identity,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, Winter 2009.

William L. Holladay, “God Writes a Rude Letter,” Biblical Archaeologist, Summer 1983.

Thomas Laird, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama (New York:  Grove Press, 2006).

Patrick D. Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, vol. 6, Leander E. Keck, ed., et. al. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001).

Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., “Faith in a Foreign Land,” Words from the Pulpit, (Summer 2007).

John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus: Second Edition (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994).

Dr. Anathea Portier-Young, Class Lectures (Duke Divinity School: 2011).

Works Consulted:

B.O. Banwell, “Prophets of Non-Violence,” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa.

Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001).

Rachel A. R. Bundang, “Home as a Memory, Metaphor, and Promise in Asian/Pacific American Religious Experience.

Stanley Hauerwas, The Hauerwas Reader, ed. John Berkman and Michael Cartwright (Durham, Duke University Press, 2001).

John Lamoreau and Ralph Beebe, Waging Peace: A Study in Biblical Pacifism (Newberg, OR: Barclay Press, 1981).

Victor H. Matthews, Social World of the Hebrew Prophets (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2001).

---

[1] Patrick D. Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, vol. 6, Leander E. Keck, ed., et. al. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001), 792.

[2] The term “Jewish” may be anachronistic to the time period of this passage; however, these exiles and their descendents are the people who are known from antiquity to modern times as the Jewish People.  This possibility of the term “Jewish” originating in this time period was discussed by Dr. A. Portier-Young in a class lecture on January, 28, 2011 giving the Historical Overview of that time period. 

[3] Jeremiah 29:7.

[4] Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, 791.

[5] R.E. Clements, Interpretation: Jeremiah (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988), 171.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Dr. Anathea Portier-Young, Class Lecture: Historical Overview (Duke Divinity School), January 28, 2011.

[8] Jeremiah 29:5-7.

[9] Jeremiah 29:7-8.

[10]  Thomas Laird, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama (New York:  Grove Press, 2006), 348-349

[11] Alex Haley, Roots (New York: Gramercy Books, 2000), 214.

[12] Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., “Faith in a Foreign Land,” Words from the Pulpit, (Summer 2007), 242.

[13] Daniel 1:7.

[14] Daniel 3.

[15] David Goodblatt, Elements of Ancient Jewish Nationalism (New York:  Cambridge University Press, 2006), 19-26; quoted in Martha Himmelfarb, “Judaism in Antiquity: Ethno-Religion or National Identity,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, Winter 2009, 68.

[16] Isaiah 51:4.

[17] Jeremiah Wright, 241.

[18] Ibid., 242.

[19] Jeremiah 29:7.

[20] Jeremiah 29:8-9.

[21] William L. Holladay, “God Writes a Rude Letter,” Biblical Archaeologist, Summer 1983.

[22] Ibid., 145.

[23] Ibid., 145-146.

[24] Thich Nhat Hanh, Living Buddha, Living Christ (New York: Penguin Group Inc., 2007), 75.

[25] Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1983), 146.

[26] Ibid., 142.

[27] Psalm 137.

[28] Ibid., vs. 3.

[29] Ellen F. Davis, Getting Involved With God (Lanham Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.:  2001), 27.

[30] Matthew 5:39.

[31] Matthew 5:44.

[32] John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus: Second Edition (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), 186.

[33] Mentioned intermittently from Jeremiah 1-27.

[34] Richard A. Burridge, “Being Biblical?: Slavery, Sexuality, and the inclusive community,” HTS Theological Studies (HTS 64(1), 2008),159.

[35] Hebrews 4:12.

How Mature...A Parable for Modern Times

Much of what I have to say is true.  I may elaborate some situations, but for the most part this is a small autobiographical sketch of a short period of my life.  Should you find some parable for modern times (i.e. Congress/President) in here that is completely coincidental.  Names (except my own) will be changed but the descriptions are more often than not quite accurate as I remember them.


In the mid '90's I was in high school.  I was opinionated to the point of my own peril.  I would often argue with people just to have an argument...or just to "prove" that I was right and they were wrong.

I eventually met my match.  Let's call this person Jane (all anonymous females are called Jane..I wonder why that is???).  Jane was just as opinionated as I was, and our opinions were often in direct conflict.  Whether or not we really disagreed was not the point....We just felt it our solemn duty to argue and drive everyone crazy.

We were especially vocal in one particular class.  I fear that we monopolized this class.  The class was intended to teach an academic subject, and we would argue on inconsequential issues.  I suppose we detracted somewhat, if not a lot from the issues that were really important.

Our arguments ranged from stupid things such as the best Pro Football team to our opinions on a variety of inconsequential "high school" issues.  This was not just a chance to argue...we were truly mean to one another.  All of the arguments included personal attacks on the other's character.

Looking back, I see that none of this had anything to do with "the price of rice in China."  We were just 2 stubborn teenagers who always had to be right...even when we were wrong.

Our senior year of high school, a change happened.  We realized that if we unified our opinions and arguments we could control the tenor of the class.  So, we would stage arguments where we were not actually mad at each other, but we would argue none the less.  I suppose it was attention seeking behavior.

Did anything get solved by our arguing?  Well, we annoyed a lot of people, hurt each other's feelings, and drove the teacher crazy.  But, when we unified our talent for arguing, it was amazing how the situation changed.  Now, we were the "entertainment" of the class.  But more importantly, we were no longer seeing the other as "evil" or "bad."  We saw the other as a partner.  Of course we didn't agree on everything, but we saw the value in the other person's opinion.  When we did disagree, we did it as friends.

Again, what you've read is a short autobiographical sketch.  Take it for what you will.

Letter to President Obama and Speaker Boehner

This is the text of an e mail that I sent to both President Obama and Speaker Boehner regarding their speeches on July 25 concerning the Debt Ceiling.

July 26, 2011

Dear Pres. Obama and Speaker Boehner:

As a concerned American citizen, I watched both of your speeches last night concerning the Debt Ceiling/Budget issues.  I have to say that I was completely disgusted with both of your speeches.  Both speeches were nothing but partisan rhetoric speaking “the company line.” 

The American people did not elect both of you to “do nothing.”  If 2 soldiers spent this much time arguing how to handle a military issue, people would die, and they would be held accountable.  When teachers disagree with the status quo, they are seen as ineffective and they are fired.  When executives of companies can’t reach an agreement, they are replaced.  Why should your positions be any different?

We Americans are tired of the political bantering and empty promises.  I’m sure you’ll both read this and say that the problem is from the “other person.”  And that is exactly what I am addressing. 

You and your parties are holding the American population and the population of the entire world as hostages to your ideological finger pointing.  Do you not realize lives and livelihoods are at stake here?

I urge both of you to imagine the lives of regular Americans and come to an agreement rather than using your ultimatums and scare tactics.  Your current behavior makes me ashamed to call either of you “leaders” of our nation.

Gone Before Their Time

This is not the happiest post I'll have one here...If you're not in the mood for sad reading, you have my permission to go on web surfing to a more happy place.

It all started this week when I found out that a boy (well, a man now) who went to school with my sister and was one of her friends was killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan.  Though I am not in favor of this war, and I oppose war in general, that does not mean I wish for anyone's death.  It is no secret that I am a Christian Pacifist (debate and justification of that issue is for another time), but as a Pacifist, I don't wish to see anyone die.  I knew this soldier in passing.  We hung with different crowds in school, but I knew him by name, and he knew me.  We never had a conversation other than "hi."  From what I've heard about him, he was a dedicated soldier to this cause, and he was "gung-ho" for all he did.  He leaves behind a family and a girlfriend of many years plus many friends.  What can we learn from a death like this?  It's easy to start political finger-pointing, but that won't heal anything.  How can we reconcile a 30 year old who had his whole life before him dying a violent and brutal death?  Our hope in God's Kingdom provides some solace, but God also created this life too.  And, if we take Scripture seriously, God's Kingdom is on earth and in Heaven.  Maybe more perfect there than here, but all who want it have a part of God's Kingdom within them.

Then, today, I found out that a year ago, a former student of mine from my teaching days (before going into the ministry) died.  I was a year late in finding out, but none the less saddened.  I was her music teacher when she was in 7th grade.  She was new to our school, but fit in immediately.  She was a very sweet girl who could also make you want to pull your hair out at times.  She was a typical 7th grader.  Hyper, happy, moody, but a wonderful student to teach.  Her death was not a "violent death" per se.  She had a heart condition and died after going to rehab following surgery.  She was 17 years old.  Why did this young person die?  Why would God take her and yet let lying/cheating/murdering/etc. people live?  I can't answer that question except by going by a theme in the Book of Job.  The theme isn't this explicit, but in the vernacular, we'd say "Shit Happens."  But, this is so much more than "shit."  It's depressing and it's not fair.  She'll never graduate, go to another school dance, go on a date, go to college, find a job, get married, have a family, or answer God's call to her life.  Did God take her? Or did it "just happen?"  While I can't answer with certainty, I think it just happened.  That doesn't mean God didn't act.  God brought her to the Kingdom.  God provided the seamless transition between this life and the next.  God gives comfort to those who grieve.  I don't understand it, and I don't like it, but if God's promises are true, and I have every reason to believe they are, this is something I will never understand except to say "God wins."

That girl marked the 4th former student I lost to death.  One girl died a few years back in Arizona where I started my teaching career.  I don't know the circumstances of her death.  I lost a 3rd grade boy, who would have graduated around this time by being hit by a car.  I was the first teacher on the scene to help, but there was nothing I could do.  I also had a student who was cognitively and physically disabled die a few years ago from the illness that he'd had all his life.

These are just the people I know about.  My heart breaks thinking about it, but I believe that if it didn't break, I would be worse.  By the fact that things like this upset us, it proves that there is still goodness and love in the world.

Review of Generation Rising, ed. by Andrew C. Thompson

Let me start off by saying that it is difficult, if not impossible, for me to be completely objective in this review.  I had the pleasure of having Andrew Thompson as one of my preceptors (Duke's term for Teacher Assistants in large lecture classes) during my first year of seminary.  Andrew may be one of the most modest people I've ever met.  All through the semester, I had no idea he was an author or a well-read blogger.  He was the Preceptor for Church History spanning from The Reformation to the Present.  He is not only very smart in this area, but he can communicate it well.  I have nothing but respect for him as an individual, so it is nearly impossible for me to find any fault with this book.

Generation Rising is a useful book for those of us who are part of "Generation X."  Though it is directed towards the United Methodist Church, I think any Christian Denomination can find useful information and practices.  

Generation X is roughly the generation born between 1961 and 1981.  The boundaries are not that neat, so this is really an approximation.  I came in the latter half of this generation.  Ours is a generation who saw an explosion of technology probably not seen since those born around the time of World War I.  We went from seeing basic 3 or 4 channel Television to the cable/satellite Television we have not.  We started with pinball machines, and now we have elaborate gaming systems.  We learned to write and we were graded on our handwriting, and now next to everything is typed, and not on the electronic typewriters we learned on, but on computers.  We saw the computer grow from a useful tool to a way of life.  We only got to meet people from other areas or nations if we were lucky enough to take a vacation or if our teachers assigned us pen pals.  Now, we can get on the internet and talk to people around the world.

Thompson and the others who wrote chapters for this book recognize the unique situation of Generation X, but they recognize our need for real, as opposed to virtual, community.  

We grew up in a society where God became pushed to the side for T-Ball practice or Gymnastics.  Youth group was skipped so we could play with our soccer league.  I doubt this was a deliberate attempt to push God aside, but none the less, that is what happened.  

Thompson and his crew of authors recognize this, and they also recognize the empty feeling held by many of Generation X that "there has to be more to life than this."  They address this through unique, though equally important issues:  Discipleship, Holy Communion, Preaching, Evangelism, Small Groups, Missions, Race, Ecology, Youth Ministry, Young Adults, Ordination, and Internet Ministry.

It would be very easy to blast today's culture as immoral or not God centered.  But, this is NOT what the authors do.  They take our hunger for "something deeper" and channel it into their areas of expertise.  Throughout the book, though problems are noted, hope is the main theme.  This is a breath of fresh air to the message Generation X has received over the years: we are lazy, feel entitled, have no work ethic, too materialistic, etc.  While there is an amount of truth to these criticisms, this book transcends these problems and provides hope that we can live a life pleasing to God.  A life where we grow to know God more and more each day.  

The changes proposed in this book are not major changes.  They are not changes to "cheapen" church.  In fact, it could be argued that they are not trying to change anything, but rather look at things from a different point of view.  

As a new pastor and seminary student, I see many of my generation who are not church-goers.  Many say they are "spiritual," but not "religious" (What exactly does that mean anyway??).  But, I also see my generation stepping up to take the places of our parents.  Many of us are trying to raise our children in a faith and family grounded life.  

This book is revolutionary in that it provides ways to meet Generation X and make disciples.  These ways are not against the traditional ways, but rather, they are an adaptation of tradition.  At one time, printing pamphlets was revolutionary.  Now, we can blog, text, and create websites to do the same thing.

Whether you are United Methodist or not, I highly recommend this book.  The best part is that it is not a "how to" book, but rather one to guide the reader.  It does not give solutions, but it gives paths to those solutions.  It recognizes no two situations are the same, and each situation requires unique approaches.  Every pastor and lay member should read this book to see that the future is not "gloom and doom," but rather, it is one of "hope and joy."

Back to Kindergarten

In my "previous life," I was a music teacher.  All but one year of my 10 year career was in an elementary setting.  Some schools were K-8th grade, and others were K-5th grade.  So, trust me, I know kids!  I know that fingers will ALWAYS find a path to the nose...I know that rocks sometimes substitute as a snack...I've learned that given the opportunity, even a 5 year old can outsmart a rocket scientist.

In 10 years of teaching, I've learned many ways to pacify unruly children.  I've learned to assist in negotiation with child combatants so that within 5 minutes they will again be friends, and thus cause more problems for the teacher than for each other.

As I watch and hear the news on the "Debt Ceiling," I've been cursed with "flashbacks" to my teaching days.  I see "children," (i.e. Government Officials) who would rather resort to name calling than to cooperation.  I see those same "children" whining that they aren't getting their way.  (As an aside, the 11th Commandment in my classroom was "Thou Shalt Not Whine! - I even had a framed picture saying that).  And, those "children" then go get their friends (i.e. party members) to jump on the bandwagon to keep the fight going.  These "children" are good at finger pointing and the "he started it" mentality.

So, as a good American, I am offering my talents and service to help the Government get back to work.  I'm calling this a "Federal Government Kindergarten Revisitation." As my duty as an American, I am offering to allow ALL Federal Government officials to come to my ad hoc classroom.

The Government Officials will re-assume their 5 year old lives and review all the essentials of Kindergarten.  The curriculum will be as follows:

1. Playing Nice with Everyone- We'll use play-dough, crayons, dolls, and other toys.  Throughout this "free play" period, I will intervene when conflicts arise and reteach acceptable behaviors.  When John says "Barack" took all the green paint, I will teach Barak that taking the green paint that John was using isn't nice, and we'll work on using words like "please," "thank-you," and "I'm sorry."

2. Sticks and Stones Do Break Bones, but Names Still Hurt-  Using a chart on the chalk board, we will brainstorm acceptable and not acceptable names to call each other.  When name calling begins, again I will intervene in a loving way redirecting the student to use appropriate language and teach how to express anger in an appropriate way.  When Barack says that John called him a doo-doo head, after convincing Barack that his head is in fact NOT made of doo-doo, I will tell John that his name calling hurts and he should only use appropriate words.

3.  Sharing-  Sharing is best learned through play and it is the first step to compromising.  We will learn to share toys, snacks, and ideas.  We will face "Real Life" scenarios such as the following:  There are 2 students, but one baseball...Who gets to play with it?  Through guided practice, the students will realize the baseball is more fun when everyone can have a turn with it, and then I will teach them that by playing together, everyone wins.

4.  Responsibility-  Students will be given chores in the classroom.  Cleaning the classroom pet, sweeping up after snack time, and working together to perform their elected duties.

When issues become tense, the students will be warned.  If that does not work, they will receive a "time-out," and in order to diffuse many situations, there will be mandatory nap time after lunch.

So, President Obama, Rep. Boehner and all other government officials, this offer remains open.  I know that with some practice we can make you into the "best you that you can be!"  Oh yeah, and you'll also learn how to DO YOUR JOB...I mean if the rest of us "worked" like they're "working," we'd be fired...but that's a whole different story.

Meditations on Psalm 3

Psalm 3 (The NRSV version of the Psalm is in regular type, my meditations are in italics throughout the psalm)

Trust in God under Adversity

A Psalm of David, when he fled from his son Absalom.
¹ O Lord, how many are my foes!
   Many are rising against me;
² many are saying to me,
   ‘There is no help for you in God.’
          Selah 

(According to the inscription, David wrote this while fleeing from Absalom, his son who wanted his throne.  I don't have a throne, nor do I have many human enemies.  My enemies are often "internal" attacks on my spirit.  They are feelings of "not being good enough," "exhaustion," "tryng to combat hopeless situations," and so forth.  But yet, like David, my "foes" are numerous.  My "foes' tell me there is no help for me from God.  

Selah- While there is no standard translation, I read that it may mean something to the effect of "think about what was said."  It invites us to meditate on the passage we just read.  This may or may not be accurate, but it seems to be good practice...to consciously remind us to not just read, but internalize the scriptures.)

³ But you, O Lord, are a shield around me,
   my glory, and the one who lifts up my head.
⁴ I cry aloud to the Lord,
   and he answers me from his holy hill.
          Selah 

(This passage shows both the nearness of God and the Separation, or "Holy otherness of God."  God is with us.  God is our shield...even against our internal enemies.  God lifts our heads from despair to hope.  But yet, God is a Holy Other.  God resides apart from us.  This makes very metaphysical sense.  How can God be away and yet near?  Only God knows that answer.  But, the message is clear - God hears and answers.)

⁵ I lie down and sleep;
   I wake again, for the Lord sustains me.
⁶ I am not afraid of tens of thousands of people
   who have set themselves against me all around. 

(I sleep and I wake - all normal "everyday" activities.  And through the normal, God transcends our reality into God's reality.  To say I am not afraid can be misunderstood.  I am afraid...if I were alone.  But, God is with me (and you), and fear needs not have hold of us.  No matter how strong the problem, our God is stronger).
⁷ Rise up, O Lord!
   Deliver me, O my God!
For you strike all my enemies on the cheek;
   you break the teeth of the wicked. 

(Here we ask God for deliverance....But deliverance from what???  From our enemies?  I have very few external enemies (if any).  My greatest enemy lives within myself.  It is the voice that says I'm not good enough, I'm not smart enough, I'm not worthy of God's love.  But, the Psalm goes on to say God will strike my enemies on the cheek and break the teeth of the wicked.  Notice it doesn't say God will destroy enemies.  God will just "put them in their place," because after all, they are God's children too whether they know it or not.  In our internal struggles, God will turn our self-doubt to humility.  A humility that doesn't raise us to God's level, but yet lets us know we are valued and loved.)

⁸ Deliverance belongs to the Lord;
   may your blessing be on your people!
          Selah

(God decides how to deliver us, but the promise of deliverance is there.  God will remove enemies, whether they are external or internal.  And God will bless all of God's children - that is the whole world -- Selah - Think about it).

A Review of James H. Cone's "A Black Theology of Liberation"

To be clear, maybe I have no right to review this book.  Some may even question whether I have the right to read this book.  I am, after all, a white male...one of the privileged class.  One of the historic oppressors about whom this book is criticizing.  I will readily admit that I cannot fully appreciate this book.  I've never been called the "N" word.  My car has never been stopped because of my race.  People don't follow me in stores to make sure I'm not stealing.  I can live basically wherever I want in this country without people wondering if I'll make a "good neighbor."  These are just some of the examples of why I may not be qualified to read this.  

This review is going to be from the perspective of a White American Male.  I can do no other review.  I also think Cone leaves this option on the table in that "White" and "Black" are not just "colors" of people, but rather distinctions.  "White" to Cone means oppression and "Black" means oppressed.  He concedes that a person of a white race could be "black" in the sense that he/she is oppressed or has renounced oppression and joined forces with the "black," or oppressed people.

Cone wrote this book a little over 40 years ago during the height of the Civil Rights Era.  He states in his epilogue that the history and events cannot be separated from this book, and that in 2010 (when he wrote his new epilogue), he was surprised that people still found this book meaningful.

I found this book by "accident."  I was at the North Carolina Conference's Annual Conference, and found this book in the Cokesbury display.  Several months earlier, in our Old Testament class at Duke, we had a guest lecturer on Black Theology.  Unfortunately, the speaker was given the wrong time, so I was only able to attend part of his lecture as I had a role to play in that day's Chapel Service.  Later, I was able to listen to the mp3 of this lecture, but, it was not comparable to being there in person.  

I decided to challenge myself from "traditional" European (and Patristic - N. African/Asian Theology) and read this book with an open mind.  I have to admit that Cone challenged me from the beginning.  His basic argument is White = Evil, and Black = those who must be liberated.  Am I evil as a White person?  Or does Cone have a different or more nuanced view?

The answer to that question is complicated.  Cone recognizes that some racially white people have embraced racially black causes, but that whites can never fully embrace the cause.  We can back out at any time.  Blacks, don't have that luxury.  Even the most accepted Black person to the white population is still black and must face the discrimination that goes along with that.

At first, I found Cone to be a radical racist, but after reading, I realized this was a man who had a true knowledge of scripture and the deeper meaning of scripture.  His concept of "black" and "white" were not always racial distinctions, but though they did hold racial distinctions, he asserts that one can go from one "color" to another. He compares the struggle of Black Americans to the story of Israel in their liberation from Egypt.  The Exodus holds a central place in Cone's theology.  Therefore, to live the story of God, one must renounce all types of dominations of other humans (similar to Egyptian treatment of the Hebrews) and embrace and even identify with the "Black" or oppressed individuals.

Cone makes very controversial statements by saying that "God is Black."  He is not saying that if we could see God, we would see a God with Black skin, but rather we see a God who is the God of the oppressed.  Jesus is Black in the sense that he came to "set the captives free."  Any departure from this, according to Cone is unChristian.

I would recommend every person of every race to read this manifesto and critically engage it into their everyday lives.  While the problems of the 60's-70's have changed somewhat, racism and classism remain.  We "White" skinned people should work to identify with the oppressed.  We may never fully identify, but we should never stop trying.  

While this is a theology of race, it is also a strong message of the Gospel.  Jesus came to set people free.  As called by Jesus, we too must set people free.  This includes eradicating racial/class stereotypes we all hold.  This includes making friends with those who are different from us.  This includes REAL understanding (as much as is possible) of the struggles of others, and then acting to help people struggle for freedom.  Until oppression ceases, all humanity is scarred.

As I said, I can never fully appreciate what Cone has to say.  I've experienced discrimination, but my experiences are trivial compared to African-Americans and other oppressed groups.  But, in the same breath, as a Christian, our family is all people.  One person's struggle belongs to all of us.  

Yes, I have toned down Cone's argument.  I have made it apply to my circumstances.  Cone says I (and others) should shed our whiteness.  In this aspect, I wish he had been more explicit as to what this means.  For example, I don't see myself as exploiting others, but I'm sure on some level I do.  May God show all of us how to identify with the oppressed and how to join in their struggle.