Grace is recieving what we don't deserve. Simplified, Karma is getting exactly what we deserve. I take grace over Karma anyday.
Perhaps that is why I struggle with a dominant strain in Charasmatic circles of what I call functional Hinduism. I especially encountered this in Montana. Several times at ministerial prayer meetings I heard the phrase, "every physical and mental problem has a spiritual root." Meaning, if you are stuggling with depression, than you are somehow less spiritual and ungodly. Or if you have health problems, it is because of generational sin or a curse that you have taken on. It is like salvation is limited to its economic metaphors, and then the rest is works righteousness. I started carrying my Institutes around to Ministers Council meetings to remind me of God's grace. Well that and I wanted to piss off all the openness theology bullies in the room. (I am a little bit of a rebel that way)
In Scripture, if you buy the JEPD theory anyway, there were people who were grounded in Dueteronomic theology. Everything was about blessings and cursings. If you were rich, it was because you were more righteous. If you had problems, it was because you did things wrong and God was cursing you. Then came the prophets, of which the theology of Jesus more closely aligns, who said a "yes....but" to these people. Sometimes we reap what we sow, they might say. But life is life. Often the poor are not poor because they deserved it, but because they were being pushed down or oppressed. Job had problems and he never understood why. Jeremiah was doing God's will, but he seemed very unhappy most of his life. And as rebellious as the Israelites were, they were not any less righteous that the Babylonians and the Romans.
The way of Christ teaches us that the spiritual life is all about grace. It is by God's grace that anything we have has come our way. It is by God's grace that we have any manner of goodness in us. All is gift. We always get better than what we deserve. And God's work and God's grace are mystery than mathematics or scientific method. I am not a functional Hindu. As U2 says, "Grace travels outside of Karma."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Book Review of the Second Testament by Scot McKnight
The Second Testament: A New Translation By Scot McKnight IVP Press ISBN 978-0-8308-4699-3 Scot McKnight has produced a personal translation ...
-
Book Discussion: The Shack Overview Questions If you were to rank the book: THE SHACK on a scale of 1-5, what would you rate it and why woul...
-
Ok, so I am remiss on doing any real original posts leading up to this holiday season. With a job change and a new baby on the way, as well ...
4 comments:
Just a question: What does openness theology have to do with karma vs. grace? Having read semi-extensively on openness, I haven't encountered that dichotomy before. Or is there a joke that I'm missing somewhere?
I dont mean to sound snotty, but you may want to re-read the blog.
The comment about openness was parenthetical, even though it was not punctuated as such.
The same people that push this abusive form of Charasmatic stuff (and I think the spriritual warfare mentality that I discuss is both spiritual abusive and drifting away from a theology of grace) also push the openness stuff in a similar manner. In both cases I felt bullied and demanded to conform, so I brought the Institutes along in proest to both.
I hope I am clearer in this comment than in the original post about my stream of consciousness thinking.
That same conference is, actually, one of my strongest memories of you. We were stuck at the table with the Interim Pastor in Rusty's old church. You were leading music. I remember trying to listen to him (it was not that easy), and you clearing my dishes and patting me on the back, then coming back and clearing the whole table. I thought now that is a Jesusy, classy woman with a servants heart. Anyway....I digress.
Another explanation is for what I wrote is to prime the pump for a debate/discussion on openness theology and Greg Boyd as a theologian by keeping putting passing references to these things in my blog. But I would never do that. Never.
:)
You're right, I needed to re-read the blog. I tend to get really defensive when people start to dis openness theology, mostly because I don't feel they understand it correctly and they dismiss it because they just don't understand that it's not an attack on God's sovereignty or on God's omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence. And I get so used to defending it that I tend to stop reading.
I am also a Charismatic (admittedly), so I was immediately skeptical. I do, however, agree with this "abusive charismatic" idea and have seen it firsthand.
I also got your email and can't reply for some reason (stupid internet), and the answer is "no"...and that I hope it wasn't in reference to this post from last night.
And if you're greasing the wheels for a debate on openness, bring it on. But wait until Nicole gets back from Florida on Sunday!
And on a side-note, I didn't know "Jesusy" was a word. You must be a post-structuralist. Ha! :)
I felt bad about assuming things for you on Traci's blog too.
I borrowed Jesusy from Anne Lammott. (sp)
As for Nicole, I dont think she reads my blog, does she?
I read Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport last week. That was a fun book. Dont think you would like it though. What other openness theologians have you read besides Boyd.
By the way, I have a couple of books to send your way soon. I still have an old book on demonology from Lynn, and I want to give you a small cheap collection of Chesterton's Father Brown mysteries. (I purchased the book that has a more complete collection)
Post a Comment