Alden Swan dot com

It’s amazing what I find looking back at my own writing. 4 years ago I began this theological journey that led me to start to write another book, something which I really had no energy for at the time. Looking at this post, I can see that my vision hasn’t changed, and this indeed could be the forward. Enjoy.

Initially published 3-19-19

If I were to write another book, it could be another, even clearer, presentation of the gospel.

If I were to write another book, it would be because my wife told me I should, because the good news is way better than even I thought it was a couple of years ago.

If I were to write another book, this could be the Forward.

Foreword

It is coincidental that here, in mid-Lent, I have just finished reading my fourth book in a row on the atonement, besides listening to various sermons and lectures online. It’s not that unusual for me to lock onto a subject, but I don’t think I’ve ever locked on to something this meaningful and relevant, for it relates to everything (if you happen to be a spiritually-minded person). For that matter, it’s relevant even if you’re not, but that’s a topic for another time. It’s relevant to everything because at the heart of the atonement issue—and the larger issues of life, death and everything—is the nature and character of God.

At this point in my studies, I am more than ever convinced that a majority of evangelicals around the world have been taught things about the atonement—and subsequently the nature of God—which are heretical. In this, I am in line with most of the church throughout history. It is unfortunate that so many church attendees will have to listen to sermons about justice and wrath and how God abandoned Jesus on the cross because He couldn’t look on sin, about how we are all worms saved only because God poured his wrath on Jesus instead of us.

This kind of thinking not only portrays God as being not at all like Jesus (and somewhat schizoid), but pits God against Jesus, antagonist versus victim, dividing the Godhead. This thinking, by the way, came from Calvin, who was forced to this conclusion to make sense of his other heretical ideas.

This is not good news. If anything, this should cause us all to wind up on Easter with a case of PTSD. Even after being saved by the skin of our teeth, we still have to deal with the fact that our God would have crucified us, and will still go on to throw most of the world into hell for all eternity. This is supposed to make us happy? Rejoice! We’re saved, but the rest of the world will burn forever!

With this kind of thinking, it’s no wonder that some of evangelical Christianity (if it can be called that) has turned into a kind of war-mongering hate group, fostering various “us against them” mindsets and acting not at all like Jesus (who, by the way, is not coming back on a white horse to smite anybody).

Thankfully, none of this wrath-based thinking is true. It doesn’t even make sense. (Part of the problem is that words like wrath, ransom, and hell have been mistranslated and the English words mis-defined.) If God was paid off by Jesus, that’s not really forgiveness, is it? If someone else pays off my mortgage, the bank hasn’t forgiven the loan; it was paid in full. Calling it forgiveness is not being very honest. Plus, it makes God into someone other than who Jesus said he was.

The Good News is so much better! Here’s a basic outline of the true story, which (with various nuances) has been believed since the early Church (if I were to write another book, these are topics that I would explore in depth):

• God is exactly like Jesus (the Bible tells us so).

• God is love. Period. (It’s all about the love, ‘bout the love, no wrath…). The wrathful God is a myth.

• There is no original sin/guilt as invented by Augustine/Calvin. Mankind is not totally depraved. Sin is a plague, and we are victims.

• God never wanted sacrifices. (This was news to me, but a couple of later OT writers—and Jesus—make this point.)

• Jesus was born (incarnated) to join man back to God.

• Jesus is in the Father, and the Father is in Jesus (they are not like Legos that can be pulled apart).

• God forgave us apart from Jesus’ death. He forgave us without payment or incentive. (There’s no forgiveness if payment was required.)

• God did not turn away from Jesus because of sin; God looks at sin all the time. The verses in Habakkuk need to be read in context, which actually is making the point that God does indeed tolerate sin. 

• Jesus died to save us from sin (the plague) and death. He basically blew death up from the inside when he rose on Easter.

• Jesus died “for the sins of the world.” Yeah, that’s everyone.

• We don’t become saved to get into heaven or escape hell; we are saved from sin and death so that we can become one with God (at-one-ment is an English word made up by translators to try to capture this meaning).

• God is not sending anyone to hell (which is nothing like Dante described it). 

• Jesus is not coming back to destroy anything (forgiveness and wrath don’t mix). Revelation is not meant to be read literally. And those looking forward to future violence are more apt to tolerate it on Earth now.  

• God is good. Always.

• God is love. Always. No qualifiers.

Now isn’t that so much better? It should be, because this is what the Bible actually teaches, if we really look at it apart from those screwy notions we’ve accepted as truth.

The Good News is that God loves [all of] us and forgives [all of] us because that’s who God is; exactly like Jesus showed us.

Aldenswan dot com is now back up and running, at least for the most part. I think everything is back sans most of the images. As I get time I will try to upload those that matter, Check back here for more insightful, provocative and random thoughts.

From June 22, 2020

I am no expert on philosophy, by a long shot. I’ve always been a philosopher of sorts, I’ve just not studied enough to qualify as an expert on anyone else’s philosophy. If I had to categorize my own philosophy by other’s criteria, I suppose I would be considered a Christian existentialist, a la Søren Kierkegaard. Although, he would likely disagree with me in many ways.

The whole concept of existentialism (summarized to the point of error), is that the world is absurd (as other existentialists claim) or paradoxical, as Kierkegaard claimed. Both words work, I think. The world, in it’s current state, does not make logical sense and you cannot derive your meaning in life from the world we live in. In itself, the world cannot provide a meaningful narrative by which to live. For example, if we were to accept a Darwinian mentality, or more precisely, one based in genetics, we find no individual purpose in merely evolutionary terms, and any choice we think we possess is but an illusion. We even have to question our choice of narrative; some have even suggested that a belief in God is an evolutionary trait.

Even some who believe in a creator/god will argue that history is written beforehand, and the world as we perceive it is all scripted as in The Matrix–including whether we go red pill or blue pill. Again, it’s a narrative that gives no meaning to our lives. Score one for non-Christian existentialism. Life is absurd, deal with it.

The concept of either being merely a product of the universe or controlled in some other way seems to be entirely un-Biblical, and is not much fun. However, it does absolve us from any personal responsibility to succeed or for being a failure. For some, this is a positive, I guess. At best, we go on playing out our roles as we were programmed to do, as characters in a daily soap opera, eagerly awaiting the upcoming plot twists. If we don’t like our character’s story arc, we can blame genetics, the universe, or god (whichever one you want).

Kierkegaard, famously, talked about the “leap to faith” or “leap into faith” (not “of” as typically quoted). As I understand him, he believed that while we cannot derive meaning from simply being, we come to an existential cliff of sorts, and have to leap into a better narrative. For him, that was a faith in God. Sartre thought he was nuts and leapt elsewhere. Some just merely went with the flow of absurdity for the fun (or despair) of it.

CONSPIRACY THEORIES

Most people don’t think about it all that much, or perhaps not at all. Life is what it is, and, as Shakespeare wrote,

All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts…“As You Like It”

“It is what it is,” of course, works in many narratives, including an existential acceptance of the world. We live and we die, and we make the most of what’s in between. However, to do that, we must create for ourselves a working narrative to avoid insanity. Sometimes that calls for creating a certain type of narrative in which we appear sane, at least to ourselves.

A few days ago I ran across an interesting article from Time Magazine which stated:

According to a pair of new studies published in the journal Applied Cognitive Psychology, conspiracy theorists—and there are a lot more of them than you may think—tend to have one thing in common: they feel a lack of control over their lives.

So far, this makes sense. In an absurdist or paradoxical universe, the perceptive among us realize that yes, we have no control over what is going on around us. However, as I just mentioned, we need a sense of control to avoid insanity. The article goes on to say:

Past research suggests that if people feel they don’t have control over a situation, they’ll try to make sense of it and find out what happened. “The sense-making leads them to connect dots that aren’t necessarily connected in reality,” van Prooijen says.

Thus, a belief in conspiracy theories. If we aren’t in control, someone else must be, and there must be some way we can retain some individual control. They are, essentially, bedtime stories that help people feel in control, or at least a sense of purpose and meaning, in a world that is seemingly out of control.

I think that personality cults exist for the same reason, perhaps in response to a certain conspiracy narrative. Someone needs to be in control, so it’s either Donald Trump, or the “deep state.” I find it interesting how many people believe in both, and because the deep state represents evil, the binary choice is a die-hard commitment to Trump.

While I may be off on the nuances, in general I think this is all a response to what we refer to as “existential dread.” That is, the feeling that the universe is random, absurd, and totally out of control, and us with it.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD

Now, here’s where I get a bit hypothetically theological. That is, I am willing to accept I am wrong here, but to me this makes sense.

The Kingdom of God (alternatively, the Kingdom of Heaven, as appears in Matthew), was the focus of Jesus’ ministry on Earth (up until he died for the sins of the world). It’s normally defined as the state of being ruled by God, or the place or state where God is ruling (aka in control). This is what the Gospel of Mark has to say about the beginning of Jesus’ ministry:

Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”Mark 1:14 15 (ESV)

Throughout Jesus’ ministry, he would teach, “the Kingdom is like this” or “the Kingdom of God is like that.” He contrasted any earthly activity with Kingdom activity. Jesus was building a new narrative about what it was like to live as a resident of God’s Kingdom, in response to a world order that didn’t represent God’s Kingdom, and as opposed to any earthly worldview. He spoke against religious legalism, he spoke against political rebellion, and he spoke against relying on money or power. As Jacques Ellul wrote, Jesus taught us to live “upside down.” He taught that the greatest in the Kingdom was the least, the meek, the lowly, the sinners–not those who claimed power or authority.

While I believe in the traditional concept of the Kingdom of God–as living as an authentic citizen of Heaven–I am seeing that Jesus presented this as an existential narrative, in contrast to other means of dealing with an absurd (sinful) world. At the edge of the cliff, with the absurd universe at our backs, Jesus encouraged us to make a leap into the Kingdom narrative, leaving all other narratives behind.

Faith in politicians? “My Kingdom is not of this world.” Earthly power? “Take the lowest seat at the table.” And what about the need for security in an absurd world?

“Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? ²⁶ Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? ²⁷ And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? ²⁸ And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, ²⁹ yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. ³⁰ But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? ³¹ Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ ³² For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. ³³ But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.Matthew 6:25-33 (ESV)

Jesus never merely preached a simple “get saved and live forever in heaven” sermon. He let many people go without ever preaching the “gospel” message, or even telling them who he was. It was almost as if that weren’t crucial to his message, or to his purpose.

What Jesus did, to my understanding at this point, was to provide the one true narrative, the “narrow gate,” the truth that will set us free (John 8:32). This message is not just for our eternal destiny, but it has real-time applications. It is a working existential narrative. We should be living in this “upside down” narrative now, in order to be free of the absurdity around us. This is the beginning of the process of “being saved (1 Corinthians 1:18).”

COMPETING NARRATIVES

This narrative, by the way, is in opposition to some existing “Christian” narratives, many of which are popular in America and elsewhere. Fundamentalism is a competing narrative, as well as much of what calls itself evangelicalism. You can tell simply be comparing what is taught and demonstrated to what Jesus taught. Simple enough.

There are also a variety of prosperity narratives, “Christian” political narratives, and various supernatural narratives. All of these are self-focused (more power, more money, more prestige, more privilege), and are contrary to the basic Kingdom narrative. As a wise man once said, “not by might, not by power..”

I believe we have choice. We can choose the narrative by which we live. As Jesus taught, we have the ability to choose the Kingdom of God over the kingdoms of men. I also believe that we are faced with many distractions, as you would in a paradoxical world, and Jesus also talked about being focused and ready, and not distracted by false teachers and prophets. We shall know them by their fruit, and their fruitcakes…

WRAP-UP

Now, when I talk about making a leap to the Kingdom of God, I’m not talking about being “saved” in the classic, evangelical sense, going to Heaven when you die. I don’t care if you prayed a “sinner’s prayer”–that doesn’t automatically mean you’re living the Kingdom narrative. No, I’m talking about being “saved” in the midst of absurdity, living the Kingdom of God narrative here and now. The Gospel that Jesus taught had immediate, real-world benefits that foreshadow eternity.

Making a wrong leap will leave you swimming in absurdity, trying to make sense of the chaos. Conspiracy theories, political “saviors,” fluctuating retirement portfolios, and the rest, are all false narratives. In fact, I would simply call them idols. There’s no eternal benefit to putting faith in them, and likely no immediate benefit either, just more absurdity and uncertainty.

In an absurd, paradoxical, uncertain world, we are faced with a number of absurd narratives. I believe that Jesus presented the only valid, true narrative for surviving in the midst of chaos, one which stands against the false narratives of politics and society; and that narrative makes it fairly easy to make leap after leap, remaining in the Kingdom (mindset) of Heaven.

From June 8, 2020

There’s a story in the bible about this guy named Jonah. You’ve likely heard of him. And, you’ve likely heard of his encounter with a whale, or big fish, or the Loch Ness Monster. Whatever. This story is largely immaterial; it’s a preamble, like The Hobbit is to Lord of the Rings. However, unlike LOTR, most people never get to the important part of Jonah.

The whole whale incident was because Jonah was very reluctant to go and preach hell and damnation to the people of Nineveh. After he was thrown into the sea by frightened fishermen, swallowed by something, then spat out onto a beach smelling of dead fish, he had a change of heart, and went off to preach.

After he got done doing his Jonathan Edwards bit, lo and behold, the Ninevites repented! You’d think Jonah would have a bit of job satisfaction, or even pride at his powerful delivery, but no–he was torqued. He had really been looking forward to God smiting those guys, and after all he went through, he was ready for some real fire and brimstone. But, God forgave them, because after all, they repented.

SO…

Lately I’ve been reading and listening to some of the far right political nonsense, and the attitude started reminding me of the Jonah story. I’m not correlating liberals with Nineveh, or anything like that, and definitely not suggesting that the far right have been asked by God to preach whatever they’re preaching. What I’m noticing is the tribalistic attitude. With Jonah, it was him and God against the Ninevites (whether they repented or not); with the far right, it’s them and God against the liberals/Democrats, whether they’re right or not.

It’s pure tribalism. If a Democrat did anything that a Republican would have done a couple of years ago, it’s still socialist evil. It doesn’t matter that Bush, Bush, or Reagan did or said the same thing. If a Democrat says it, it’s evil, and they need to be destroyed. It seems that Democrats could even agree with the Republicans, but somehow they’d still be wrong.

TWO CAN PLAY…

I know that you’re already out there thinking, “Democrats do the same thing!” and, yes, they do. Tribalism runs both ways, and it’s always wrong (at least the attitude). Tribalism is nothing more than a big ad hominem–judging the man rather than the argument.

However, most liberals I know would gladly agree with a conservative–even a far-right conservative–should they be on the same side of any issue. I’ve even spoken positively about Trump the 2 or 3 times he did something I could support. It’s not common, but he has made a couple of good calls in the last 3 years. And, there are quite a number of Republicans who have said and done good things, and that needs to be celebrated.

The far-right media, however–Fox, Breitbart, and dozens of youtube nutjobs–have created such a divisive situation that for a Republican to ever agree with a liberal (heaven forbid Obama!) would be tantamount to treason. The result is the same kind of tribalistic attitude that our friend Jonah had about the Ninevites.

AND THE MORAL OF THE STORY…

If we are ever going to get back to working together, we (all of us) need to stop demonizing those different from us. At least listen to what they’re saying and judge the words, not your emotions. Don’t be like Jonah. No one wants to hang around with someone who smells like dead fish.