Disqus - Latest Comments for jshmueller

Re: You don’t hate me. You hate my brand.

jshmueller — Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:44:02 -0000

The sad thing is: the more you try to get away from projecting a "respectable" image and truly be yourself (all the junk and shortcomings included) the more you get judged and taken apart. I wish you the best of luck in blazing a trail (hopefully) for a gentler and kinder way to deal with each other.

Re: Four Myths about Louie Giglio’s Inauguration Prayer (or lack thereof)

jshmueller — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 02:43:26 -0000

All I know is that those who actually did spit in God's face were full of self-righteous outrage over the one who would dare to break the Mosaic law and have close fellowship with the immoral and unclean, and on top of it all claim to be the Great I Am. Maybe that's something worthwhile pondering when we think we please God the most by pointing others to their sin and do it in such a way that such things as compassion, grace and a keen awareness of our own need to grow from brokenness to wholeness disappears almost completely.

Re: Four Myths about Louie Giglio’s Inauguration Prayer (or lack thereof)

jshmueller — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 04:59:31 -0000

"Stupid morons"? Your words, not mine. I'd prefer to talk about a severe lack of humility and an unwillingness to take responsibility for how we've made human beings like you and me feel as nothing BUT "rotten and dark"! I also said "many evangelicals" (particularly those raising their alarmist voices once again now), not "all evangelicals". And that homosexuality is considered by most evangelicals in its own category of particularly grievous sins (some just seem to LOVE the fact that the death penalty was attached to this one in Leviticus) is not my imagination but a well known fact. I'm happy if your personal experience is better than mine but as Deb Hirsch once said, in most of our churches we have demonstrated an attitude towards gays that completely reverses the biblical order of acceptance first and repentance as a continuing struggle and journey we're ALL on second. So much so that one gay man confessed to me that he'd never dare to confess his struggles openly to anyone in our congregation.

Re: Four Myths about Louie Giglio’s Inauguration Prayer (or lack thereof)

jshmueller — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:04:03 -0000

What is so ironic about the whole situation is that many evangelicals are up in arms about what they perceive to be the marginalization or ridicule of their faithfulness to Scripture and yet none of the same people seems to want to embrace the Scripture's exhortation to suffer joyfully as those being misunderstood - instead we resort to demanding our political rights (which haven't even been violated) or we appeal suddenly to the kind of tolerance we neither extend privately nor in the majority of our churches to the LGTB community.
Behind it all is nothing but fear - fear of losing public influence and respect (how was it lost in the first place - duh?), fear that our kids are brainwashed into immorality, fear even of the judgment of God to fall on the nation as a whole if the "gay agenda" can't be stopped. Even if someone holds the position that homosexual practice is always sinful and destructive, how would a greater public respect for that person's conviction have a positive impact on any person with that particular sexual orientation?
There seems to be a completely irrational view (and I would contend unbiblical conviction as well) that if we can keep a certain level of public "moral majority" disgust towards certain sins alive, people involved in that sin will most certainly repent and change their ways. Not only does this kind of shaming and pattern of exclusion not work, it also conveniently would never speak out in the same way against gossip, hypocrisy, materialism and many other vices that have become more or less acceptable in comparison. Why don't we speak out as loudly in these areas? It's easy to see why. At least here most of us can say with a perfectly clear conscience: "Thank you God that I'm not a homosexual!"

Re: Biblical Hatespeech Against Obama – Wishing his orphans no mercy?

jshmueller — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:51:30 -0000

I think there is no question whatsoever that the prayer in this psalm falls in the category of "You've heard that it was said ... but I tell you .." It's hard if not impossible to see how a prayer like that would express love and blessing for the enemy. It's bad enough that a leader who is a confessing and practicing Christian is maligned as an enemy in the first place!

Re: Greg Boyd Sermon on Hell “Tormented in the Flames?” (Amazing!)

jshmueller — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 16:19:06 -0000

In the same line of open questioning Greg proposes, of course the following questions could be asked as well:

1. How is God's victory really universal if His love is able to bring to faith some but has to destructively put out of conscious existence the rest? How does this jive with the argumentation of Romans 9-11 that emphasizes and exalts God's limitless abilty and sovereignty to save and harden( for a saving purpose!) and with the fact that saving faith always remains a gift?

2. What is the point of a limited and proportionate punishment (before God's final euthanasia of the wicked) if the end result is still the same - a forgotten existence?

3. If God's fire purges believers according to 1 Corinthians 3 why is it impossible that people who have been ignorant regarding God's grace and already accomplished reconciliation come to a saving knowledge after seeing the one who died for them post mortem? What makes the timing of understanding and embracing grace before the point of physical death crucial for love to accept someone who really wants to embrace that love?

Re: Is it necessary to believe in a particular interpretation of hell to be considered a Christian?

jshmueller — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:43:45 -0000

I'm sorry you feel this way Cory. I believe I understand where you are coming from and part of your disappointment may actually stem from a misunderstanding of what I'm trying to say. I do not agree with every single thing Bell is stating in his book but before discrediting or demonizing him too quickly, I think his observations and interpretations deserve a more thoughtful response than just an expression of disgust or a typical heresy-hunter type of response that says: "my interpretation of Scripture is more orthodox than yours and if you disagree you are a heretic"!

By the way, I have never declared myself a universalist. I have said that I am a hopeful universalist in the sense that every believer's hope and desire ought to be aligned with God's universal desire to see all saved and none perish (as Scripture repeatedly emphasizes). Whether this desire will actually be fulfilled (in spite of the reality of hell) and God's saving purpose will prevail universally is a point of disagreement between Christians who all take Scripture and Jesus' words seriously. If you really want to know more how I've come to certain conclusions or why I've changed some of my past views, let's go out and talk about this over coffee!

Re: Rachel Held Evans | “What was the original gospel?"

jshmueller — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 22:12:22 -0000

As valid as McKnight's points and observations are, I'm still left wondering if the evangelical dropout rate by age 35 or the mere percentage of people wanting to follow Jesus is our actual problem. "Following Jesus to the cross" is not something I would expect to be highly popular. I hope that his book digs deeper than that. In my understanding, "good news" ought to be about something that is already true rather than God waiting for us to make it true through our response. It ought to be about seeing and understanding something that we were blind towards before. And seeing the unchangeable awesomeness of that reality is the intrinsic motivating factor to respond in love, commitment and a willingness to step into the space of suffering rather than making the gospel just a different set of demands.

Re: Groaning for Gospel

jshmueller — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 20:14:08 -0000

I can't help but think that "the distant country" in Moses' case was also a necessary time of being absent from the thinking "I've got power, I can make freedom happen!" and learn true humility as a simple shepherd, far away from the empire and what he grew up with. How else could he have healed, become more attuned to the voice of God and able to truly trust God instead of his own ability?

Re: I Really [M]ucked It Up This Time

jshmueller — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 02:50:45 -0000

Friends are friends forever. You're not alone. Whatever you do and no matter what emotional abyss you will be facing, don't lose hope. Praying that grace will continue to find you and even in defeat will help you to overcome! Much love, brother!

Re: C.S. Lewis Should Be An Evangelical Reject Too! (John Janzen)

jshmueller — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 09:24:06 -0000

I find it increasingly burdensome to pass others' litmus tests to prove I still am sincere in taking the Bible seriously. C. S. Lewis has always been a hero of mine in his example of wrestling with the intellectual integrity of faith. And there is no doubt his actual views would be considered heretical by many self-proclaimed gate keepers of evangelical orthodoxy today.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | Masculinity at the foot of the cross

jshmueller — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:26:05 -0000

That's a great answer. Thanks!

Re: Rachel Held Evans | Masculinity at the foot of the cross

jshmueller — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:46:32 -0000

I struggle the most with submission. It totally goes against my sense of pride generally and being proud of my independent (and often rebellious) spirit in specific.

I do have a question though and I think I have asked you before:

What exactly does masculinity under the cross look like that is gender specific, i.e. not in the same way present or emphasized in the opposite gender?

Re: Mark Driscoll is a bully. Stand up to him.

jshmueller — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 10:33:44 -0000

A well written response. I'm just wondering, Rachel. what you would say to the question whether there is anything gender-specific that should not be embraced by the opposite sex from a Christian point of view.

Re: What Good Does It Do When Christians Are Offended? (Dale Best)

jshmueller — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 12:55:49 -0000

Aside from the fact that being offended doesn't accomplish anything constructive in this case, I think it's a dangerous illusion that public statements about God (or their absence) are a true indicator of our actual relationship with God or a means of bringing those who are opposed to religious displays in the public arena under the authority of God.

Objectively, I believe that we are all "under God" no matter what is said, confessed, believed, legislated, or not; and in relational terms the only person I can bring into joyful and willing submission under God is myself (and even that requires some major prompting and enabling by the Holy Spirit).

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 52 percent of evangelicals think that Jesus would make a lousy one...

jshmueller — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 11:48:58 -0000

Would Jesus ever make a good evangelical ... or progressive ... or missional Christian in terms of convictions and preferences? What exactly would any particular tribe have to believe and practice in order not to be at odds with Him? Could we really ever come to a point where we could be convinced that He would sign up to join us?

As much as I applaud and support the notion that we must constantly ask ourselves the question to what degree we actually follow the teachings and example of Jesus, I have a strong hunch that there is something inherent in tribalism and in our effort to identify with people who share the same beliefs that will always be defied by God - maybe because it automatically sets us up to exclude those who believe differently and at some point will break the greatest and all encompassing commandment.

Re: Three Approaches To Pain And Suffering

jshmueller — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:36:38 -0000

Maybe the most common way to try and ignore it is by way of attempted escape.

Question: what do you tell a person who feels unable to believe that he or she is able to confront suffering and to overcome?

Re: You Might Be an Evangelical Reject If… (Rejects – Readers’ Edition)

jshmueller — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:07:29 -0000

You've been reminded for the umpteenth time that you don't preach enough about the end times and the rapture, and when you do, you still don't preach what they wanted you to say.

Re: Question To Ponder

jshmueller — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 12:20:57 -0000

The common view that anybody who chooses to accept God's love in Christ "too late" will not be accepted is based on texts like Matthew 25. The urgency the parable of the ten virgins expresses to be ready BEFORE the arrival of the bridegroom is often understood to say that the final judgement does not offer second chances but instead determines eternal acceptance or eternal rejection based on the choices made in THIS life because the offer of grace is only available before we die physically.

Personally, I cannot reconcile this interpretation with the unconditional, unchangable and eternal character of the love of God described elsewhere that desires everyone to come to a knowledge of the truth and be saved, and that rejects no one that desires to come to Him. The question remains what the temporal urgency and the "locked door" in the parable is all about then. Does Jesus' response "I don't know you!" suggest an "expiry date" on grace? I don't think so and here are the reasons why:

1. The parable is not about believers and unbelievers but a group that already knows the bridegroom and has made the choice to attend the wedding.

2. The readiness described here in terms of having enough oil seems to be referring to a maintained inner connection to Christ. In other words, "running out of oil" does not refer to "running out of time while God is willing to love you" but the inherent dangers of remaining a follower in name only without actually taking the relationship seriously. It is in fact a choice that reveals the LACK of an awareness of what God's love is all about and accordingly a rejection of what Christ desires. Judgment reveals this choice and the absence of a true embrace of God's love. The urgency of the parable is directed at those WHO ALREADY ARE FOLLOWING that they would understand the dynamic character of relationship and would continue to choose to remain in Christ and His love.

Re: Need Your Help

jshmueller — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:17:45 -0000

My question would be why hell needs to continue indefinitely post mortem if it's fueled by the construct of a false reality (a misconception of God and of ourselves). When we will see not only God face to face but also take into account that the remedy to see and enter the kingdom (spiritual enlightenment) has been at the Holy Spirit' s disposal all along, why would a drawn out suffering of continuing blindness be the only way to help us see truth and gain our willing response of love and the acceptance of the reality of grace? And why would most likely the majority of those experiencing this suffering be people who have been hardened because of the lack of experiencing true love in this life? It seems to victimize those who've already suffered the most.

Re: Is It Already Simple

jshmueller — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:01:28 -0000

Do they? Maybe we operate with different definitions of "simple" here. You seem to be saying that growing perception initiates an ability to see connections and processes we weren't able to see before and in that sense break through a barrier of ignorance. I on the other hand look at the processes themselves and the fact that with every new layer discovered the awareness of the depth of complexity grows and the task of digging even deeper becomes a growing challenge rather than a diminishing one.

Re: Is It Already Simple

jshmueller — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:39:48 -0000

I think in terms of what we need to know (which is relational at heart) you may be right. In terms of what is knowable, the awareness of the level of complexity grows and with it the sense of wonder. But isn't the latter what makes us most human - the ability to wonder and be in awe?

Just knowing that there is a very real possibility of an infinite number of parallel universes is something that tends to overload my inner circuits rather than telling me how simple it all is!

Re: The reason we were left behind

jshmueller — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 23:09:41 -0000

Hi Paul!

I've made an attempt to continue our discussion here:

http://bit.ly/l3Jeit

Re: An Evangelical Reject Who Refuses to Reject Evangelicals

jshmueller — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 10:19:06 -0000

Kurt, just for clarity's sake: isn't there a difference between rejecting "-isms" and rejecting people who subscribe to whatever ideology? I would argue that faithfulness to the revelation of God as love and as reconciler of all creation HAS to reject any system of thought that pushes away people on the grounds of what they think to be true.

I'm not saying evangelical identity (understood from its earliest historical roots) is about rejecting people. But as you well know (and as Roger Olson has demonstrated) much of current evangelicalism has been hijacked by fundamentalist tendencies to apply litmus tests of all kinds to determine who is "in" and who is "out". And this type of THINKING (not the people who are caught in it) needs to be rejected IMO if we apply consequently what you've just written.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | All I want for my 30th birthday is a drink…

jshmueller — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:57:49 -0000

What a great idea! Be blessed today and every day! And what is a greater blessing than being a blessing to people in need?