Today’s question is theological in nature. I am currently taking an independent study class on “The Person and Work of Christ” that has prompted me to think through numerous questions about Christ, thus, I thought I would ask the following question:

What is meant by the humanity of Jesus?

1. We say Jesus is fully human (and fully divine) but what does or doesn’t this refer to?
2. What is the essence of being human?
3. Is being human, the ability to sin?
4. Do you have to be born to be human (note: Adam wasn’t born)?
5. Is Jesus able to be fully human if he wasn’t female?
6. Was Jesus a master of all things (the best carpenter, mathematician, philosopher, teacher, orator, etc.) or is part of being human the inability to be the best of everything?
7. Does being human necessitate that there is limited knowledge or can Jesus be omniscient and still be human?

These are a few of the many questions I have been reflecting on. I am not going to give any answers here…I don’t have the time, energy or expertise to effectively do so, but thought the questions are worth considering.

Is the “perfect” church one in which everyone agrees on everything, or is it one in which people at times disagree but with love, respect and acceptance?

I’ve heard people say that they wished everyone in their local church believed in everything, the same way, they did. I have also heard people say that they think it would be great to be in a church were there was complete agreement on everything at annual, congregational, committee or elder’s meetings.

Is that the picture of the “prefect” church? A community where there is unanimity/uniformity about every decision; where everyone looks, acts, and even believes the same thing about everything? Does this even take into consideration the fact that God has created us uniquely on purpose (individual preferences for all kinds of things including colors, food, music, etc.). Because we have been purposely created unique, it didn’t take God by surprise when his uniquely created human beings experienced conflict when they lived in community. Unlike many of our presuppositions, conflict is not evil but how we deal with it sometimes is. This is why the Bible doesn’t call us to live in unanimity/uniformity but in unity and why the New Testament talks so much about loving each other (1 John) and about unity (Ephesians). It assumes that there will be conflict, differences of opinion, etc. in the world and in the church. This is what makes love so “defining” (it is how they will know we are Christians – John 13:34-35) and what makes it so hard.

The “perfect” church is not a place that is free from conflict but where conflict is handled with love, respect and acceptance. This may be a lot harder to live in, create, lead, etc. but it sounds a lot more interesting and possible, than a church without any conflict.

I’ve been reflecting on this question lately:

Should being financially rich be defined by “having everything you want” or “needing the least?”

In the western world we are bombarded with messages that we need more. These messages and corresponding belief system lead to an ironic twist that the more you have, the more you feel you need. This ironic twist (more like an ironic vortex) is something I often fall into and have to remind myself to regularly re-evaluate my wants and needs. I think the financially richest people in the world are not the ones with the biggest bank balances, instead they are people who have the clearest sense of what true wants and needs are.

Jesus was our greatest example of this and understood the difference between wants and needs clearly. He lived in perfect peace in the simplest of lifestyles. This is one of the reasons why the “prosperity gospel” is so outrageous. The “prosperity gospel” confirms and upholds the ironic twist/vortex. Instead of helping people be at peace with what they have or don’t have, (living Kingdom values regardless of their bottom line), it falsely teaches that more is better (even more spiritual). Consequently, people who follow this teaching never find peace with that they have and live is constant want.

Regardless of what I have or don’t have, I desire to have a clear idea of my wants and needs and to live Kingdom values regardless of my “bottom line.” I just wish it was as simply as that sounded.

Where have all the good questions gone?

I was recently asked what I thought was the biggest issue in Church leadership today. I could have said a number of things, but after some thought, I think it is the inability to theologically reflect and ask questions about why, what and how we are doing the things we are doing (or not doing).

I have great hope for the future of the church; however, I often don’t hear good theological reflection to go alongside of our new methodologies. Instead, more often than not, I simply hear that it is working (a.k.a. people are coming).

Shouldn’t our methodologies stem from our theology? Shouldn’t we be asking more evaluative questions than “are people coming?” Shouldn’t we be also asking: “Is it right?” “Does it align with our theology (Christology, Ecclessiology, Missiology, etc.)?” or even “Is it good?” If these questions are important and vital, then why don’t I hear them being asked or answered more?

Maybe we are just so afraid of missing the “next big thing” that we forget the imperative to theologically reflect on what we doing or not doing? Or, maybe in the recent trend to move theological institutions to more technical schools, we have forgotten to train our leaders on how to ask deep questions (focusing on the how at the expense of the why)?

Anyway…just some thoughts…what do you think?