As I was foraging around in my files, I came across this sound bite from some sharing that I did a number of years ago back up in the Connecticut Shoreline. I haven’t yet succeeded in finding the rest of the message from that day, but thought perhaps this stands well enough on its own to post it here. It puts Jesus back in the center of human history where He has been, and still belongs.
To listen to this short audio, Click Here
Love!
This past weekend during a time of rich fellowship and conversation, we touched on the best selling book, “The Shack.” When asked my opinion I sent the author a qualified rave review:
“Dear Paul,
… It came to me to speak about the Word and the Spirit in terms of the “lyrics and the music.”
Go ahead and ask me if I’m not just a little bit envious that you write such beautiful music while I seem only gifted to slog along a little closer to the earth, just doing the words, in fact, more often than not just trying to “do the math.” That said, there is something to be said for a good lyric, and perhaps, together we might be able to collaborate on a beautiful love song or two.
Sometimes it’s not so easy to distinguish or separate the words from the music. Jesus said that “… the words I have spoken to you are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63
If the content of those words was spirit when Jesus spoke them, then I’m inclined to treat them as such, even in the written form by which they have been passed along to us. In other words, I believe that it is important to continue to get what Jesus said, and is saying now, in the Spirit, whether in written form or spoken by The Spirit to our hearts.
I really appreciate your stronghold pulling down, and imagination smashing paradigms – certainly very needed, if we are going to move from being terminally religious to eternally, and divinely relational. :-)
I also appreciate your willingness to use lingo, seemingly calculated to win the new age “lost,” even at the expense of offending the allegedly “Christian saved!” :-)
I find your portrayal, and even defense of the Trinity a wonderful contrast to your willingness to blow so much crippling theology to hell.
I guess you know that there is pretty near as much controversy over the Trinity as there is over “UR.” (Ultimate Reconciliation)
Before getting deeper into the lyrics and the music, just a few thoughts concerning the present anti-Bible environment. I believe the root cause is what has been calling itself “church,” and what has been calling itself “Christianity.” As you know, I don’t believe that there is anything wrong with either of those words, “Church” or “Christianity.” The problem is with who is doing the calling. When we are doing the calling, it’s primarily out of desire for reputation. That is not Christ – that is anti-christ. I believe, everything else being equal, this applies to most all the stuff; “ministries,” “churches,” “dotcoms,” “cyber-cathedrals, “networks,” “organizations,” “programs,” “coping mechanisms,” (I was very happy to see you identify these by that description in you book) “positions,” “offices,” “titles,” etc.
The problem is that Jesus, and The Bible have been, and are increasingly tarred with the same offended brush as what’s calling itself “church!” The war against the Bible right about now is probably proactively, intentionally, and maliciously worse than anything that has been seen since the canon of the Scripture was settled early on. That’s why I feel the need to say a word on behalf of the Lyrics. The Lyrics are part of the love song, and it is not for human instruments, intent on leading disciples away after themselves, to change the words of the song. (I hope you know that I am not referring to you here.)
As for me, the veracity of the Scriptures was settled early on in my own experience of The Lord. I am making no claims for any particular translation here, only for what was originally written and compiled in, and by The Spirit. Where detractors point out “contradictions,” I see only the result of my own lack of understanding or revelation. I have come to see the apparent contradictions as divinely inspired incentives to press us further into Christ for the answers. In short, it’s for the Holy Spirit to make the obscure or seemingly contradictory clear, not for men to manhandle the Lyrics. Religious experts have a way of turning the Lyrics that God wrote into a discordant cacophony resulting in division among the music lovers. It has been this way right from the beginning, at least, since the apostle Paul began to warn the elders at Ephesus about it.
So here is my concern with your wonderfully creative liberty in writing the music of The Shack. Clearly what you have written is being used or taken as encouragement by the Biblical detractors, for their further distortions of the Word of God – distortions that, in effect, even if not by design, gather followings to and for the benefit of the religiously ambitious at the expense of the cause of Christ.
You clearly have a number of agendas in writing your book. As far as I can tell they may certainly be Spirit led agendas. God knows it’s past time for “liberty to be proclaimed throughout the land” once again.:-)
What I would like to do is share a few elaborations or etudes connected to your greater symphonic movement that may help with some needed damage control.
I guess you know that the symphony of God’s communication with us is rather large and complex, no matter how we look or listen at it. Like any symphony, it is diminished when instruments or portions are left out. Now, I realize that in a finite amount of time and space it is not possible to cover it all, but care needs to be taken that what we do play is not heard in such a way as to give misleading impressions about instruments or portions that are not played.
I understand, for instance, that The Shack is not about “UR” but it seems to have had the effect of creating a “UR” impression in the minds of many. If I am correct in my understanding that you are or have been a “UR” person, then this “UR” bias may have played a little too loudly against the background of other things that God has been communicating in and by His lyrics over the years.
It looks to me like this is a problem, not so much because it runs counter to the “lion’s” share of historic doctrine, but because of the way it is feeding into the anti-Biblical bias in our present culture, and even “church.” Please don’t get me wrong, I’m certainly not in favor of sending people to Hell, not even a temporary one, and certainly not one to condemn “lost souls” to eternal torture. (Truth be known, I’m one of those “annihilation of the soul” people, who believes that God doesn’t beat a dead horse.)
It’s not that I insist on getting rid of those who are considered undesirables, by, at least, some, it’s just that I think we need to leave room for the possibility that God has communicated some things in the Lyrics that we may well ignore to our own peril, (Perish the thought! :-) ) Romans 9, for instance: (I know you are being hypothetical here, but still it’s part of the lyrics) “What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make His power known, bore with great patience the object of his wrath – prepared for destruction? What if He did this to make the riches of His glory known to the objects of His mercy, whom He prepared in advance for glory – even us whom He also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?” verses 22-24 – NIV. (I have read the presently popular “UR” book, including the footnotes.)
Now don’t get me wrong! I believe in progressive revelation, even while the Lyrics were still in process. I see indications throughout the New Testament Lyrics that the instruments of their writing were in process just like the rest of us who came along after. I think it was in the Heart of God to allow us to see the process and progress. I also believe that it violates the symphony to leave that part out, you know; wrath – judgment – things like that. I do draw great encouragement that the saints pictured at the finish line will be shouting praises to The Lord for the perfection of His judgments, Revelation 19:1-3. I hope to be in that number – those who finally get to see that God has known what He was doing all along. :-)
Okay, so, like I said, I know The Shack is not about “UR,” but here is the problem as I see it: it has fed into the anti-Biblical offendedness of the surrounding culture, and that is a problem, that I really don’t think you wanted to make worse than it was already becoming.
What I am hearing along with all the stuff about the “sacred feminine” fanned into flame by the The DaVinci Code, and right there next to a marvelous exposition on “Sophia” so well echoed in The Shack… what I am hearing is that the Bible isn’t really The Word of God after all, it is simply the contrivance or compilation of post apostolic, (and maybe not so “post-apostolic”) religious male chauvinists with very controlling agendas.
I must confess, I have some sympathy with that position, what with the sudden disappearance of Mary Magdalene, from the symphony, and that with hardly even a “fare thee well” from the writers of the New Testament lyrics. (I don’t think the Biblical critics have really seen what a big advantage that is for their anti-Christian cause. As for me, I am hoping to get enough of a handle on where she went to answer the attack when it comes, at least, when it comes within my reach.) You see, for me, Who wrote the lyrics, and Who watched over their compilation became a settled matter early on, not at the hands, and or mouths of fundamentalist influence, but as the fruit of my own more or less private, (although I think The Holy Spirit showed up quite a few times in that period of my spiritual development) and intensive study of the Lyrics. Nothing has come along since that has made me doubt for even a moment, that the Lyrics are every bit as much a part of God’s work as the Music of His Spirit, and The Word “… becoming flesh, and dwelling for a while among us.” My very strong impression is that the lyrics are still around, only now they are dwelling in us. One more disclaimer: The God who loves me, and gave Himself up for me, is not “I Was,” but “I Am,” and I am persuaded still Is. :-)
Perhaps that’s enough expressed concern for now.
What I would really like to talk about is the AWESOME intimacy of the Trinity, You know, the “Us,” Who created us in the first place. It is my impression that what has been calling itself “church” is intent in only getting us back to the garden. (That seems to be as far as you are seeing as well.) That may be good, but it’s not good enough. What we require, and I believe The Creator is hoping for, is to get us back to where we were before the removal of the woman.
As I have come to understand it, that’s when the creation was subjected to frustration, and I believe it was subjected to frustration, because “the Trinity” needed one more person – a woman. I believe that God was hoping for, not created sons, but begotten sons, Sons more compatible with His very own, and only begotten Son.
To that end “… the Creation was subjected to frustration… by the One Who subjected it in hope.” Somewhere in the Lyrics, it is written, “Who hopes for what he already has?” Perhaps the Trinity was not as complete in Itself as your book suggests, and perhaps the intimacy God is after is even greater than we have seen to date.
That’s what I would really like to talk about!
Beyond that I have little else to say except that your book is a really great and very much needed contribution to our understanding of What God has done, and will do for and in us. – Thank you Paul, and thank you Lord!”
Love!
Perhaps I might share some overall impressions.
Some years ago now, a brother in the Lord made a plea for us to “…overcompensate by not using the word “rule” which will lead many to misunderstand the term and thus interpret it as controlling. Instead we should use definitions such as “lead,” “guide,” ‘care for,” “watch over,” etc. that will keep us focused on serving God’s people.”
Many of us can appreciate this need to “overcompensate,” as coming from so much abuse of authority in what’s been calling itself “church.”
My brother had gone on to say,
“We all know these forms of bondage are practiced in various degrees of severity among us and that these issues have been discussed for several years now. Jay, you say ‘With the revelation from The Father of Christ and His cross, we can set the captives free, the gates of Hell don’t stand a chance against us. The sons of hell, the Satanic gate keepers have been completely disarmed.’ Suppose I am in one of these “churches,” how are you going to set me free? Where will I go if I leave the “church” I am currently in? I believe we need to go beyond speaking in generalities and start pointing to specific solutions. This is not an exercise in head knowledge but a real time crisis among God’s people. Many suffer in silence as we speak but what solutions can we offer?”
I responded:
“Certainly I can hear your pain, and the pain of all those who suffer at the hands of ‘the children of the slave woman.’ I would like to suggest another possibility than ‘overcompensation,’ however. Your following paragraph reminded me of something, which, I think is very important in this connection:
He had written:
“My main plea to you that begs for a response is please give me specific day to day examples of what authority over the ministry and authority over the church (God’s family) means. Does authority over the ministry mean controlling how a church service is to be run? Is the minister to control every aspect of the church service (who speaks when, who plays what instrument, what is taught, what is studied)? If authority over the ministry means any of those things then the family members are directly affected. Does ministerial authority extend beyond the ‘service’ or meeting and continue on when the building doors close? If not then what does authority over the ministry mean? Does it mean deciding where to travel to preach the word and who to bring with us? If so, does not every man who is led by the Spirit have the opportunity to have the Holy Ghost speak to him on these matters and not just ‘apostles’?”
My response:
“Our model, much like that of Luther, remains too religious, too ministerial, too institutional, too programmatic. The result of all of this is that our language has been destroyed. It has become too loaded. There is too much jargon, too much lingo, all of it loaded, all of it tending toward exclusivity and isolation. God The Father is more than willing to speak the language of those he is trying to reach. We, on the other hand, are inclined to speak the language of the already reached.
God The Father had already spoken through the law and the prophets, but more recently, He has said, in effect, ‘in other words, ‘Jesus.’ I would add that, God The Father still wants to say what He has already said, but in other words, and he wants the other words to be us – how we are and what we say. And the reason that He needs to say, ‘in other words,’ is because the words already used, have not yet reached those that God is trying to reach.
God has already spoken to them, about the invisible things of Himself, through the things created. That’s already enough to leave them without excuse but in His mercy God is willing to say it all again in other words through us.
In the old creation, He has revealed to the created things how he does life. Now in a new creation He is doing life once more, and we already know how He does life, and that is the model, not all of the religious edifices and structures that we have set up.
We know what elders are from life, and that is the way we ought to understand them for new life as well. We know how God nurtures life in the old creation, and that is the way life should be nurtured in the new creation as well.
But until we begin to live this out in relationships that Jesus has done, relationships that Jesus has revealed to us and is sustaining in us, we have very little to say, if anything, to a world which has long since lost track of how to get along with itself. In other words, I have no business trying to call God’s people out of Babylon, until I am manifestly living somewhere else. The People of God need an alternative place to live. I call that place, ‘relationships that come from God.’ They can be found from house to house, in the Spirit. God wants to nurture people in households, not in institutions. Healthy parents do not try to make retards out of their children for the sake of parental ego gratification. This is so clear as it has been worked out in the things created, that we truly are ‘without excuse,’ Romans 1:20.
For 1700 years, the church has been more a display case for the male ego, than it has been the revelation of the life of God’s Son. In an old creation place, God wants to superimpose only one new creation place, not two or more. Once we let go of that geographical constraint, all hell breaks loose, and that is what we have, and we have it in the name of the Lord. May I say, ‘This should not be.’
He responded:
“So, yes, the sheep of God’s pasture want to be one but not with the goats. It is unfortunate that the word ‘unity’ sends such warning bells in my mind but I believe ‘unity’ is an integral part of the great deception ‘that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”
I continued:
“As for unity, there are, at least two kinds, one is Spiritual, and the other carnal. Let’s not throw out the spiritual because of the threat of the carnal. There is only one, “where I live.” That is true for everyone. Let’s not offer two or more alternatives, in the same place, that is a violation, not a manifestation of God’s heart. If you can separate the goats from the tares, you are doing well, but unfortunately the tares are left to grow in the same field as the wheat, at least until the time of the harvest.
My next-door neighbor may be an abusive parent and husband or wife, but that does not give me the right to have him thrown out of town. It is enough if I can live in, and model a redemptive alternative in my own house, without dictating how he or she behaves in his or hers. I am now speaking of spiritual households. A household is one thing, a “church” is quite another. Lets not get the two confused, and lets not allow the fact that the body has many parts to be an excuse to dismantle the Body and call the parts the whole.
Finally, when I speak of elders, I am not speaking of old creation years of age, but rather New Creation years of age and service. I believe that it was Paul’s concern for Timothy that people not look down on him because he was young in old creation years. The fact was that Timothy was mature in New Creation years, and in The Lord, that is what counts for something.”
Love!
Loving Like God 