book of love

Here's one fine piece from our own brother Ken Hsu some time ago:

We often heard or used the phrases "authority of the scripture" or "based on the scripture." So, what exactly is this "authority" we talked about? Most of us have preconceived ideas on what authority is. As such, we start with authority and then we try to fit Scripture into that mold.

Take driving, for example. We have a rule book that "authoritatively" tells us what we can do and what we cannot do in any given situation. At any moment, we can thumb through this rule book and find answers to our questions regarding driving on the road. Take the charter for any organization, and we find, again, rules on what to do and what not to do for membership in the organization.

Is this our Bible? Do we read Scriptures to get out of it a list of rules to follow? Do we read Scriptures looking for answers the way we look for traffic law questions? How does the Scriptures "authoritatively" guide and lead us?

Think of this analogy (from N.T. Wright). Let's say we have, in our hand, a play from Shakespeare. The play consists of 5 acts. However, we only have the first 4 acts. The fifth act has been lost. Then, after watching the first 4 acts, the audience clamor for the fifth and final act. What to do? We gather up scholars who are familiar with Shakespeare's work and who are familiar with that period of time in our history. Together with the actors, we come up with a story for act 5 that is consistent with the stories from the first 4 acts and bring the play to its closure.

In a similar way the Scriptures tell us a story, a story of a loving God reaching out to His wayward children, to redeem them, and to bring them back to His glory. Does the Scriptures tell us the entire story? Not yet! We have a glimpse from the book of Revelation how it's all going to end. However, we are "continuing" the story right now. We are bridging the gap between now and the end day when God renews His creation.

How are we to bridge the gap and continue the story? In a consistent manner with what the Scriptures have "authoritatively" told us how God had dealt with His people in Scripture's stories. Going back to the analogy of a play. The first few acts in the Scriptures consist of God, prophets/judges, Christ, and apostles. Now it's church's turn to be on the stage. How are we, the body of Christ -- church, to continue the storyline of the play?

First we recognize our mandate from God. He is sending us out into the world to proclaim the Good News. The word "apostle" comes from the Greek word "apostellein" and means one sent with a message. This is where the authority lies. The authority of the Scriptures comes from God. Our authority comes from God. God is ultimately the authority on everything we do as He sends us out and we are His messengers.

What did God send us out with? A rule book to follow? Pharisees tried that approach and failed. A question and answer book? A quick glance of our Bible tells us that's not it either. What then? Sotries. God sends us out with stories and parables.

Rules and doctrines are used to control people. They put people in a box from which they cannot grow. In the end, the box becomes their coffin. Stories, on the other hand, speak to people's worldview. In hearing the stories, the hearers get to situate themselves in the framework and settings of the stories, from which they can come to a new paradigm to set their worldview with God's view.

That's what Scriptures should do for us, to turn our worldview into "God-view." Let us live out the stories, let us continue the stories that God had started long ago, that many saints throughout the centuries had faithfuly continued, and let us read our Scriptures with that in mind. They are not just ancient stories written in ancient languages that are remote to us. They are stories, God's stories, from which we come to understand how God wants us to face this fallen world, from which we are to continue to act in a consistent manner to complete the story, God's story!! A-men.

Peace,

Ken

pride gets in the way

Back in my "salad days" when I was going in and out of campus crusade groups in college "looking for God," one day a girl Christian a couple years senior asked me: "Tell me, what's the real reason that's stopping you from believing?" I was a bit surprised by such direct question, but I gave her my honest answer: "I am looking for the Truth, and I will accept it when I find it." (Now that I am recalling it, it brings to mind the part of the New Testament where the Roman Governor Pilate murmured "what is Truth" when he questioned Jesus if he is a Jewish king and Jesus answered "I came into the world to testify to the truth"... )

Anyway, back to that episode, two key words there are "surprised" and "honest": I was surprised by such question because I honestly didn't think there could be any other way than to accept it if you find the Truth--Kudos to the idealistic and pure heart of my youth!

Now if you ask me the same question: "What is really hindering you from completely accepting God as your savior, supreme commander, Lord of all facets of your life?" I would say "Most likely, pride."

Pride can be in many forms. Thinking I know better is certainly one form of pride. Knowing I am no better yet still wanting to hold on to my own way, is another form of pride--foolish pride, in that case. 

Truth can be of many forms too. But one truth I think we can all recognize by now is that all things in life are not under our control; there must be something or someone greater out there in charge. Recognizing that, if I still refuse to believe in that superior being, what else could it be but my stubborn sense of self that wants to hold on to be the "master of my own destiny," sad and lonely as it might be? Or as Ernest Hemingway once said in his defiant statement: "A man can be destroyed, but he cannot be defeated." Pride is so tragic.

I have read a couple of interviews/debates Rick Warren had with journalists and atheists. At some points, I would see Warren went out of the thought track of the arguments and asked questions such as "if I said so and so, would you not like me any more?" half jokingly, or "so you just don't want a boss over your life so you don't have to change the way you live, right?" Critics gave negative points to such statements and decided they are indications that Warren is losing the debate intellectually. But I sympathize with Warren because I know he's really trying to hit the heart of the debater's problem there ("the heart of the problem is the heart"), rather than trying to win the arguments intellectually (no one gets won over through intellectual arguments, anyways). "People don't believe because they don't want to believe", we all heard this before, but now it rings so true to me.

Pride is actually a bondage too. Since I made my surrender to God, gradually I see it's really a great relief I get in return, as I don't have to carry the yoke of life all by myself, as I can look things with greater ease and perspective, knowing that I am no longer the center of the universe any more. How funny!