The Bell Has Rung, and He Struck a Chord

Throughout November and December of 2013, Rob Bell has been posting multiple articles in a blog series he is titling What is the Bible?. The posts were initially takes on Old Testament stories that most in modern culture have problems with. For example; he explains how when one is to look at some of the controversial or mythical aspects of Biblical stories and have that be what we focus on (whether they are true or merely mythological) we miss the beautiful message actually being taught. Most recently though, and what I will be analyzing, is his opinion that too many people view the Bible as a static report and think we need to view it all as what God is like now, rather than reading it as an evolving narrative that progresses with human consciousness. I whole-heartedly agree.

The specific passage I will be responding to in Rob Bell’s series is Part 16: Awkward. In this section, Bell starts off by talking about how after he released his controversial book Love Wins, a pastor contacted him to have a meeting because of some “concerns” he had. Bell stated that whenever he would try to state a positive characteristic of God “Jesus spoke of the renewal of all things”, this other pastor would immediately counter with something negative like in the book of Judges “God might decide to wipe out a whole village”. Bell explained to this other pastor why they weren’t understanding each other, he states: “I don’t read the Bible like a flat line. I don’t see all of the passages in the Bible sitting equally side by side so that you can pick one and then counter it with another and go back and forth endlessly, always leading you to the randomness of God. I read it as an unfolding story, with an arc, a trajectory, a movement and momentum like all great stories have” This is profound, this is what I will be responding to.

Have you ever read a book? I’m assuming (or hoping) that you have. While reading that book, was everything revealed to you in the first chapter? Or if this was a series, was everything revealed to you in the first book? Probably not, if so, it was probably a rather lackluster piece of literature and didn’t hang around for over 2,000 years... Stories evolve with the progression of time. The same is true with the Bible. The Bible is a story about civilization and God speaking to civilization where they are currently at. To paraphrase Bell, It is a story based around the evolving consciousness of those who the story is being told.

Over my four years of High School, I took multiple advanced placement English courses. I was introduced to a wide variety of ways and theories on how to interpret literature and also multiple pieces of literature to make what I learned applicable. The main concept that I took away from my studies, and probably the most important concept, is that stories are a work that is reliant on the whole but are also continually headed somewhere. Within the whole of a story there are multiple different themes, motifs, and ideas that unfold depending on where the reader currently is at in the book. Every story, or at least the ones worth mentioning, have a moment that everything previous becomes resolved and there seems to be some sort of peace within the tale.

I believe the same is true with the Bible, and I believe the resolution we find in it is Jesus. This doesn’t mean that everything else told previously in the Old Testament wasn’t God, it means that God has moved past the moments that seemed to be full of despair and resolved them with not just the death and resurrection of His son (obviously a largely important part) but also with the teachings of His son. Gods story, his “evolving narrative” as Bell says, has a beautiful and transforming resolution with Jesus. Obviously we are not perfect and the world is not perfect, but with Jesus, we see the potential and image of perfection. The image of perfection is not war, or the warped treatment of women, or other concepts that are found in the Old Testament that are seen as coming from God. Those images are images of the culture those people were in, the perfection or glory of God, is seen in the beauty of how He transforms those ideas into something else. A push forward in a sense, all leading to the character and teachings of Jesus. 

The implications to approaching the Bible like this are incredible and transforming. This opens up the faith to a whole multitude of different people. No longer is God viewed as some primal destructor, God meets us where we are at, very literally. In Bells book What We Talk About When We Talk About God, he describes this process as God working in clicks, taking us from point a to point b. If He were to take us from point a to point f, we would be beyond confused and wouldn’t know how to react. When we look at the Bible like a piece of literature, a story, or an unfolding narrative, we see it to be the progression of God, not a story about a god who is confusing and seemingly inconsistent.

This does not deny ideas like scripture being God breathed. All it means (in my opinion because I don’t come close to knowing everything about God) is that God is speaking certain things in the Bible with the awareness of how the world is at its current state. Joseph Conrad didn’t wan’t you to be introduced to Kurtz initially in Heart of Darkness because the story wasn’t ready for that yet. God didn’t reveal Jesus to the world immediately in flesh because they too weren’t ready yet. I feel weird and slightly wrong drawing parallels between Kurtz and Jesus, but the truth that needs to be shown is there. When Kurtz is revealed, theres a major shift, and his death doesn’t satisfy everything, if anything it asks more questions (i.e the horror, the horror). Jesus’s death doesn’t satisfy all the questions either, but what does is his resurrection, that is the transforming part about the Bible, the idea that sets it apart. 

Now to the big question as to why I decided to side with this argument and why I think it is important. When we focus on parts of God that were highlighted over and over again in the Old Testament and even parts of The New Testament, we continue to miss the picture of the God that is literally God... Jesus. If we look at the unfolding narrative of God and see where it is headed, we see that it is not about condemnation, war, the judgement of homosexuals, or social placement. What we find is that it is about the renewal of all things. When the story of God is a static report, it doesn’t lead to anywhere but back and forth bickering and frustration. When it is an unfolding and progressing story, slowly headed to a beautiful end because of the death and resurrection of Jesus, it becomes like a ride in an innertube down a lazy river. So enjoyable, refreshing, and beautiful that the little flaws we pass along the way are seemingly meaningless, because the river will take us where it needs to take us regardless.

Christianity has gone from a renewing, transforming, insightful, and beautiful faith found through Jesus, to a judgmental, hurtful, demeaning, and pompous faith found through the majority of its followers. Take each of those sets of four words, use them to describe the characteristics of two different people... which individual would you rather be friends with? This is exactly my point. The important aspects of Christianity aren't found in the arguments of what is right and what is wrong, that is all relative. The important part is that Jesus died for and loved all. And because of that, we are free. If we don’t take the static approach but take the unfolding approach that Bell has brought to light and that Jesus alludes to when He says He is “renewing all things”, we can begin to welcome more and more people into the faith with our openness and acceptance. 

Expanding on the Christian Ecological Perspective

Imperative Action: Christian Environmentalism

Christians need to begin to take awareness, use their voice, and partner with science to prevent further degradation of environments as a result of the corrupted logging industry and irresponsible release of fossil fuels leading to the destruction of important ecosystems. Christianity, as a whole, is not considered to be an advocate for environmental protection, and with the changing conditions of the world, that must change with Christians becoming some of the loudest voices in the advocacy for this change. Christianity needs to break down the Enlightenment constructed wall put up between them and science to bridge a gap necessary for both areas of thought.

Unfortunately, because of the loud and proud in Christianity, the faith is often directly tied to the accusation of being against furthering scientific understanding. People see Christianity and conservative politics as nearly one in the same, and conservative culture doesn’t put a huge emphasis on environmental protection. Christian faith focuses on salvation as the most important concept to grasp, and rightfully so. But when Christians put blinders on to the rest of the discussion within the Bible that speaks about responsibility and creation care, worldly credibility is lost. Unlike eastern religions that can often take a pantheist perspective directly resulting in creation care, Christianity sees nature separate from God, making the protection of the world not as valuable and pressing an issue. Yet the Bible clearly still speaks on the topic. Psalms 65: 9-13 discusses how God is the artist constructing the beautiful harmony that is the coexistence of man and the earth he inhabits. This passage articulates how God provides for us through the creation He has given us, if we take advantage or spoil that, we essentially are imposing on the blueprint God made for creation and are infringing on the mechanical system God set up through his creation.

Now, to a more specific topic consisting of logic... In this section I will be borrowing and expanding on ideas brought up within the essay Spiritual and Religious Perspectives of Creation and Scientific Understanding of Nature by Calvin Dewitt. When we look at the correlation between thought throughout different areas of perspective we should start with the shape of an equilateral triangle; every side is equal and plays an integral part to the whole. The first of the three parts is Science which expands on and explains how the world works within its current state. That is just a basic reality, as humans progress, our knowledge and understanding of the world progresses as well. Next, we have the concept of ethics or what Christian morals are founded on. This area of thought expands on what ought to be. Finally, we have the culmination of them both: praxis. Praxis takes the knowledge of science, the moral compass of christianity, and points us to the understanding of what must we do based on the conclusions ethics and logic have yielded. Praxis is relative of course, it is dependent on the important components that make up the time we occupy.

Considering my argument is shaped around environmentalism and its importance in Christianity, lets focus on that. Combining Science with Ethics in the area of praxis leads us to the understanding that both areas speak and promote the conservation of earth, one morally, one logically. Praxis, therefore, would say we should take the necessary steps to have these two partner together and work toward their common goal.

A claim against this stance would state that ultimately, creation is broken, and to conserve it to an extent that limits the ability to put it to good use for us as humans is irresponsible and unnecessary. This however, is rather ignorant, because if you take this stance, you are basically saying that all that is broken doesn’t deserve the opportunity for the life it is given. If you are a Christian and you take that stance, why are you here? Each aspect of creation that is broken is broken because of humans if you believe in the literal understanding of the Adam and Eve story. If that is the case, it is the humans fault the rest of creation is broken. Which in turn should convict Christians even more to feel bad for what has been done and not cause such destruction to the world.

Humans love logic, but logic without emotion is tainted by strictly thought and lacks transcendence, a powerful concept that points us to the more significant meaning behind the basic understanding. If we do not work towards the cease of the destruction us humans are causing, the ability to connect to God through His amazing creation will slowly cease as well. Nature, although not God Himself, does point us to Him in ways that are profound and compelling. Just as we can experience God through a conversation with someone, we can experience Him by looking at a tree or listening to a bird sing or watching a mother deer care for her children. When I look at a tree, I see an organism with outstretched arms, welcoming all other creatures to inhabit and come live communally with each other within its grasp. A tree represents an ideal definition of community and the open arms God has for his children. Nature is more than a resource, it is more than a means to production and a practical and lucrative way of building up our civilization. Nature, the harmony it consists of, is a book of seemingly endless metaphors that God has provided us. A book whose pages are never ending and full of the potential for us to continually draw closer to God. Every tree we cut down without legitimate necessity, is a page we are tearing from this beautiful and awe-inspiring book.

Thoughts on Christianity and Ecology

As humans, we tend to get caught up in all the world has to offer and often consume and exploit it. We may not always be consciously aware of this, but it happens to be a fact and way of life within our society. Through this unconscious exploitation, we end up harming the ecosystems and beauty that God has surrounded us with. Because Christians have earned the label of not always dabbling with the thoughts and research scientists develop, we have been labeled a major cause of the ecological crisis occurring in our world today. 

If we are going to try and maintain the the ability to seek and learn from God through nature, we need to seriously consider promoting the harmony of science and faith and not make each mutually exclusive. Science has wonderful concepts to offer our world, as does faith. We must be willing to bridge the gap. Science combined with theological understanding is a force that can help combat both emotional and physical scenarios. Without these two being synchronized dance partners, each is limited to certain areas and ways of perception. Religion without acknowledging the current progression of science is looked at as primal and not “up to speed” with the human mind. Science without religion lacks the integrity of the moral compass.

When we combine each of these aspects and work toward a common goal, especially in the area of ecology, we will be able to sustain and promote a healthy and sustainable earth. Pointing fingers and classifying someone as the culprit of the negative will become impossible. Existence will find a harmony within itself, it wont be corrupted by disagreements but will be united by an understanding of how much more power a bond between perception has compared to one single mindset being exclusive to itself. We must look at the world through a system of understanding: How does the world work? What ought to be? Then because of each of this, what must we do? This is science, ethics, and praxis respectively (Dewitt 33, The Good in Nature and Humanity). When we combine these three, we can reach a point as a civilization that extends itself past one narrow minded perspective. Each are reliant on each other to truly have the world work harmoniously. When we allow that to happen, build a bridge between two respectable ways of perception, we progress forward and expand the potential of civilization.