Do you agree with Kirk? Do you disagree? Would you like to talk about it?

I’m glad this marketing effort has brought discussion of first order questions to the public conversation! The issue now is how we’ll engage that conversation.

As in a letter to the State News, the concern is that there isn’t much openness for interaction. Whether or not that is true, at The Dialogues we’re dedicated to open and thoughtful dialogue while encouraging people to stick with their convictions. Pressuring people or shaming people or belittling people to convince them is never a good idea! We want to help people be convinced by reason, and to be convinced because they are convinced, not because someone else is.

If you’re interested, we’d love to have you join us! And we’d love to hear what you think … if you’re willing to listen to others as well. We’ll be in the Alumni Memorial Chapel this Sunday evening (11/6), 7-8:30pm.

Last week we considered the idea that sometimes our efforts to improve our standing on first order questions may actually make matters worse. Maybe it is trying to please God or maybe it is trying to gain the approval of people. Either way, what if we make things worse rather than better? In our dialogue we considered the idea that doing things that we think God wants so he’ll be more likely to do things for us that we want is a game that God won’t play. He is a generous God, but He is offended when people try to manipulate him for their own gain. Sadly, this is exactly what much religious activity turns out to be.

This week we’ll look at a related issue: That is,

When might doing good things actually have no value?

Maybe those things are religious, like going to church or praying, or maybe those things are good for others, like serving or feeding the poor. What if those good things, for which we sacrifice significantly, don’t do anyone any good? It would be a tragedy for someone to give up his or her life, and then have it turn out to be a useless sacrifice.

Join us Sunday evening (10/9), 7pm, in the Alumni Chapel!

Note that we will *not* be meeting again until November 6. In November we will take up the question of what does a good, strong faith look like? Although it can have a reputation as being passive and unthinking, good faith is actually very thoughtful, bold, and active.

– John

So when does religion offend God? To answer this question a definition of religion. I would define religion in two ways, the first very broad, and the second a bit narrower. So for the broad definition:

Religion consists of the things we do that we hope will help us
on ‘first order issues.’

First order issues include our sense of self-worth, our hopes for what happens when we die, and the like. To address these things, people use many things, including success in their careers, pursuing pleasures, amassing money, building a reputation, leaving a legacy, among other things. People who pursue their self-worth through any of these things treat these things as their religion.

The narrower definition simply does these same things in reference to God. That is:

Religion narrowly defined consists of the things we do that we hope will put us in better standing with God and thus help us on ‘first order issues.’

With this narrower definition, obviously people use church attendance, prayer, being good, self-sacrifice, giving money, helping the poor, building a reputation among fellow religious people, and the like.

So, to the question, when does religion offend God? Obviously the question assumes the existence of God. For the purposes of this discussion I will assume God’s existence, though the question of God’s existence is an interesting one in its own right.

So my first answer is this: if God exists, and people try to address first order questions without reference to him, that would be in some sense offensive to God (for it treats God as too small to matter for my own sense of worth), but it would be more pathetic than offensive. If there is a God, he of necessity factors into questions of ultimate meaning and what happens when we die (as well as every other issue in life or death), and it is folly to leave him out of the picture.

So then, assuming that people are dealing with God (the narrower definition of religion above), what would make religion offensive? Of course it would be offensive if people’s religion is a knowing sham, just pretending to do what God wants. God, if he is God, wouldn’t be fooled by people who pretend to be his friends but aren’t really? Again, this seems more pathetic than offensive.

The concern is that there are people who sincerely think they are doing what pleases God, and yet they are actually offending him. That is a frightening thought. It means that I could be sincere and well intentioned in my efforts to please God, and yet be making matters worse.

We know that this unfortunate circumstance happens often in our lives. It happens when people keep flooding an engine that won’t start. It happens when people demean the poor by treating them as helpless. It happens when people treat a child as lazy who actually has a disability that is misunderstood. It happens when someone continues in ignorance as he or she offends his or her spouse in a struggling marriage. It happens whenever people are ignorant of the ways in which their actions are bringing more harm than good.

Now if it happens in many other arenas, it seems reasonable to expect that it could also happen in our responses to God.

So, how might people, though well-intentioned and sincere, be trying to please God and yet actually be making matters worse?

It would seem to make sense to let God speak for himself on the issue, if that is possible. From the Jewish and Christian perspective, the prophet Isaiah spoke for God around 2,700 years ago, and he wrote specifically on this issue.

Two key religious activities of that day that were used to secure God’s favor were fasting on appointed days, and not working on the Sabbath. In Isaiah 58, God declares to the people why their fasts were offensive to him, and he tells them the right way to observe the Sabbath. The question is, what didn’t he like about their current behavior?

God begins by telling Isaiah to proclaim loudly to the people that their ways are actually offensive to him without their realizing it.

“Cry aloud;
do not hold back;
lift up your voice like a trumpet;
declare
to my people their transgression,
to the house of Jacob their sins.

² Yet they seek me daily
and delight to know my ways,
as if they were a nation that did righteousness
and did not forsake the judgment of their God;
they ask of me righteous judgments;
they delight to draw near to God.
³ ‘Why have we fasted, and you see it not?
Why have we humbled ourselves, and you take no knowledge of it?’

The people were seeking God, even in some sense delighting to know his ways, yet God’s assessment of what was really happening was quite different. And even they realized that their fasting was not working. They complained that they had humbled themselves in fasting, yet God hadn’t noticed or blessed them.

Behold, in the day of your fast you
seek your own pleasure,
and oppress all your workers.
⁴ Behold, you fast only
to quarrel
and to fight
and to hit with a wicked fist.

Fasting like yours this day
will not make your voice to be heard on high.
⁵ Is such the fast that I choose,
a day for a person to humble himself?
Is it to bow down his head like a reed,
and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him?
Will you call this a fast,
and a day acceptable to the LORD?

God declared what was offensive. The people had made themselves uncomfortable in their fast, yet at the same time they continued to hurt other people. They oppressed their workers but didn’t see that as an issue as long as they had made the sacrifice of going without food, bowing down in prayer, and kneeling on sackcloth and ashes, symbols of repentance and grief.

God went on to describe the kind of sacrifice and humility he really wanted:

⁶ “Is not this the fast that I choose:
to loose the bonds of wickedness,
to undo the straps of the yoke,
to let the oppressed go free,
and to break every yoke?
⁷ Is it not to share your bread with the hungry
and bring the homeless poor into your house;
when you see the naked, to cover him,
and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

God wanted his people to bring justice and to alleviate suffering and poverty rather than simply bowing oneself to God. The people believed that God’s emphasis was on a personal, private religious act toward God, while God wanted a change in how the people related to others. Religion for God had profound ‘horizontal’ implications (people to people) whereas the people had a very narrow view of how they might express the ‘vertical’ dimension (just between them and God) while ignoring how they related to others.

Far from being unseeing, God went on to promise great blessing to the people if they would live out his values toward others. He wanted to bless them, and he was watching. The problem was with what he saw. If they would fast as he wanted, he would certainly bless.

⁸ Then
shall your light break forth like the dawn,
and your healing shall spring up speedily;
your righteousness shall go before you;
the glory of the LORD shall be your rear guard.
⁹ Then you shall call, and the LORD will answer;
you shall cry, and he will say, ‘Here I am.’

Later in the passage he addressed another central religious practice of that day, and that was not working on the Sabbath.

¹³ “If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath,
from doing your pleasure on my holy day,
and call the Sabbath a delight
and the holy day of the LORD honorable;
if you honor it,
not going your own ways,
or seeking your own pleasure,
or talking idly;
¹⁴ then you shall take delight in the LORD,
and I will make you ride on the heights of the earth;
I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father,
for the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”

Here God had more to say about the people’s vertical relationship as well. They were to delight in God, rather than in their own pleasure. They were to follow God’s ways rather than their own. And when they did, God promised to bring blessings.

So what is the positive truth? What kind of religion is pleasing to God? It seems that true religion submits to God in all dimensions of life. It believes what he has said. It does what he has said. And true religion does these things because these things are true and good, not because God will then be obligated to return good things for the worshiper.

What offends God is when people try to give God what they think he wants in the narrow sphere of ‘religious actions’ like attending church or praying, in the hopes that in return God will give them what they want. They retain their own agenda and enlist God to serve their purposes while they ignore his.

One significant religious action that was practiced in Isaiah’s day and is still practiced today is repentance. We realize that we have done things that are wrong. In wanting to remove our guilt, we repent, admitting our wrong and stating our intention to change our ways. Yet even repentance can be offensive to God. Consider this description of ‘good’ repentance:

“Repentance is not for the purpose of getting God to do anything;
it is an expression of the conviction that
my ways are wrong and God’s ways are right,
whether he does anything for me or not.”
John Oswalt in The Book of Isaiah, p. 497

Anything we do that is intended to get God to help us fulfill our agenda rather than God’s is offensive to God. It treats God instrumentally, as though his value or worth is to help me get done what I care about.

But God, if he is God, is immeasurably wiser and more significant than I am. It is offensive to try to use him to help me do what I want to get done. Such manipulation clearly treats him as lower than I am.

True religion recognizes the truth of God and the goodness of his ways, and willingly believes the truth and follows his ways. And the great good news is that God is good, meeting the needs of the needy and blessing those who submit to him. When I submit to him because it is right, rather than because I want good things from God, the great surprise is that he gladly blesses. True religion, when I let go of my claim for God to be good to me, ironically leads to God’s abundant blessing.

The “Good Samaritan” is a model for good neighborly behavior, taking care of those around us in need.

But surprisingly, Jesus of Nazareth, the great moral teacher who taught that story, also taught that sometimes serving others is not the best thing!

So when is serving others not a good idea? One key answer to that question may surprise you, and has profound implications for our approach to school and work and community service!

Join us this Sunday, 7pm, at the home of Adj. Prof., John Bell (College of Education), 5929 Eagles Way in Haslett.

Rides available upon request: info@theDialoguesAtMSU.org or text/call 517-917-0498

On the one hand, it can seem that we cross the line if we critique, that faith is a personal thing and we should just let people believe what they want. On the other hand, “ideas have consequences” (to borrow the title of a fascinating book by Richard Weaver, 1948) both for those who hold those ideas and for those around them. A caring person wouldn’t let people blindly harm themselves (if they hold harmful ideas – if such things exists) and others without even an initial conversation about it!

What do you think?

Our first dialogue this fall focused on these questions:

• When is a strong faith a bad thing?
• When is a strong faith a good thing?

Our conclusion? It all depends upon the ideas in which you have put your faith. Some ideas, like the claim that all men are created equal, is an idea worth having a strong faith in. And people like William Wilberforce (instrumental in ending the slave trade in the United Kingdom) and Martin Luther King, Jr., paid dearly in pursuit of that idea. Their strong faith enabled them to make great strides forward at great personal cost.

Other ideas, like the belief that having lots of money and lots of friends is the ideal life are not worth having a deep faith. In fact, those who have a deep commitment to weak ideas will eventually pay dearly.

On the flip side, a weak faith in good ideas can be just as deadly. The solution to the dangers of strong faith is not a weak faith, and cautious move not to be committed to anything. Rather, it is to have a strong faith in strong ideas.

If you’re going to live all out, you had better be sure that your ideas are sound.

If you’re going to live without a deep commitment to good ideas, you had better hope that ideas don’t matter.

Is it okay to critique someone’s faith? Or is faith off limits?

That will be the focus of our dialogue this coming Sunday evening (9/18). What do you think?