I’ve touched on this subject, previously, in many places, but it deserves more focused attention. Over the centuries the church has established its own culture (negatively speaking), a “Church Culture.” By this I mean, in its attempt to separate the secular from the sacred it has succeeded in many ways only in alienating anyone and everyone outside and without its own culture. It is as if when one is converted, that one is converted to a culture. If that one fits not nicely and neatly into that church culture, then, that one is obviously not converted and in need of conversion. That is to say, “This is Christianity, and if you do not accept this culture, then you have rejected Christ.”

Granted, most in this church culture do not make this explicate claim, but the implications are clear even if the words are not. Those outside of the church and its culture (call them “un-churched” or “de-churched,” unsaved, heathen, pagan, or whatever), as well as newcomers to the faith (and old-timers as well), suffer the confusion and down-right confounding of this church culture. The world rightly views the church as the expression of Jesus Christ on earth. But what is implied in this expression is a certain culture which one must be a part. If that one rejects that church culture, then that one thereby also rejects Christ (or so it would seem). For 1500 years the outsider has had a choice of coldness toward God because of (at least a perceived) rejection, an endless struggle from within oneself of his/her place with God because the culture is not their own, or a complete and total conversional conformity to the culture of the church.

Counter-cultures, therefore, developed which poise themselves against Christ (because of the church culture implication) or at least find themselves indifferent to Christ and the church (and it’s culture). The church culture deems such competing cultures “worldly,” “wrong,” and “of the devil” and closes in upon itself, making itself an exclusive club void, by definition, of any inclusivity. But God; God moved within these counter-cultures to make Himself known. God moved in the hearts of many in the church culture to reach out to the alienated, the marginalized, the forgotten, the broken, the poor and the lepers of the norm. God, if you will, enculturated the Good News of Jesus Christ. God is the God of all (each and every) human being (whether they know it or not). God is the God of all and every culture (whether they know it or not). God cannot be contained by a single nation, a single culture, or a single people.

Today the church finds within itself a reformation – a revolution. It finds itself in the midst of a paradigm shift – a violent collision of accepted norms. There are Christians who have not converted to the church culture, but have been captured by a living Christ. These do not accept the moral/ethical decrees of the church culture but, rather, surrender themselves to the death of Christ, complete the sufferings of Christ, and experience the resurrection life of Christ. They know nothing other than the ever-outstretched arms of Christ, who loves humanity with all-inclusiveness and every form of declension, without exclusion. They do not look like, act like, talk like, walk like, or smell like the accepted church culture, but they are the church nonetheless; deemed so by Jesus Christ, the theology of His cross, and the love of God. This church is not an exchange of culture, but a change of life. It is not a conformation but a transformation. God has not made of all people one culture (sameness), but He has made of all cultures one people (oneness).

The Vision reigns supreme! This simple phrase is the only concrete rule to doing church in the present paradigm shift. It has also proved to be a phrase of contention for many within the church. One problem is that the Vision is not our own, but is in fact from the mind of God and placed in the imagination of God’s Vision casters. Another issue is that we must understand that all are not Vision casters, but most are Vision carriers. Carriers of the Vision must be in constant connection with a Vision caster. Casters of the Vision often do not see the details of the Vision but are always imagining it; recognizing it when they see it lived-out. Vision carriers are usually detail oriented. They catch the Vision by living out its values. Values are the principles of the Vision which are experienced as mission.

The Vision reigns supreme. The values of the community where the Vision is cast cannot contradict the Vision. Vision casters equip Vision carriers to own the Values of the Vision. For example: The Vision insists that Christ died for all humanity. Therefore, a value of the Vision is that all are enveloped in God’s love for humanity; there cannot be a single individual (or group) that is not included in the all-enveloping love of God. Thus, the mission is to express the love of God to all humanity, and not just a few. Likewise, the notion that church is about folks being either, “right” or “wrong,” is not a value of the Vision. The Vision does not differentiate between “right” and “wrong,” but between God’s holiness and humanity’s lack thereof. Simply, there are values that are the Vision, and there are values that are not. Examples of Values:

Law and Grace Cannot Co-Exist
The necessity of the Cruciform (the Form of the Crucifixion)
“Church” is defined not by bringing people IN, but by sending people OUT
“Church” is not a building but a people
Christ centeredness rather than self-centeredness
The Kingdom of God shapes the church
Church doesn’t dictate the shape of the Kingdom

When the Vision reigns supreme it does not displace God, but it demands Him. If it is not from the mind of God it is not Vision, but only and simply an agenda – a human made plan and purpose; a human worldview that may or may not lay claim to God. But its values will speak to its origin. Furthermore, if the Vision reigns supreme then an individual (or individuals) cannot have a plan of action around which they manipulate the Vision to fit, but must plan their action firmly within the Vision. We do not get to do what we think is proper and call it Vision, for it is an agenda (by definition). The Vision reigns supreme and we must adjust to that reality.

Though Vision carriers are drawn to certain Vision casters, they follow the values of the Vision casted. Vision carriers are drawn to Vision casters 1) whom they like, 2) whom they will listen to and, 3) with whom they want to serve the Vision. The Vision caster expresses the Vision to equip the Vision carriers. Vision carriers live-out the values of mission. The Vision caster mandates no more rules than one: The Vision reigns supreme. The Vision carriers are accountable to the Vision, not rules, and the Vision caster is accountable to the Vision carriers (because the carriers express the values). That is the Vision! The Vision Reigns Supreme!

Humanity was first brought into existence by God in perfection, but also in formation – in perfection, in the sense that it was able not to sin; in formation, in that it was built to grow in love and mercy and grace. On one hand, it was made to retain perfection, but on the other it was incomplete in knowledge, experience, and wisdom, etc. The tension between perfection and formation (incompleteness) gave humanity a dynamic nature: It had the natural image of God, enabling it to relate and learn from God and it had the moral likeness of God where it could care for God’s creation as it learned God’s worldview.

But humanity fell out of proper relations with God and was, then, not able not to sin. This original sin – the missing and subsequent moving of the mark of God’s intent for humanity – is inherent within and throughout all humanity. It is not guilt that is inherited within humanity, but it is the distortion of Truth that permeates throughout humanity. We had lost any sense of perfection and all formation of God’s love, mercy, and grace for creation. God is not a Punitive God who judges humanity for its alienation from His worldview, its separation from God’s perfect formation of creation. God is a Therapeutic God, healing the sin that humanity now identifies with – that distortion of Truth; that alienation and separation from His worldview for creation, of which humanity now imitates and to which humanity now likens.

So God breaks into creation in the form of humanity, in the Person of Jesus Christ, to rescue humanity and to restore God’s proper image and likeness in creation. The Cross of Christ satisfies God’s divine justice for the offense of alienation and separation. The Resurrection Life of Christ restores the God-likeness in humanity (the original, natural image and moral likeness), bringing the healing and wholeness of the Great Physician to creation. Furthermore, in this restoration, the Spirit of God in the Resurrection Life of Christ brings humanity back into formation by inspiring and empowering it to walk-out God’s worldview for creation. In this work of God’s grace God reaches humanity with a universal restoring presence in creation, and as a witness to that presence in the life of the church with ordinary and extraordinary gifts for the formation of incomplete humanity.

The sin of alienation and separation present at times throughout its history notwithstanding, humanity in the form of the Church – the Body of Christ – is the Kingdom come; the reality of God’s world view. The Kingdom of God is not just a future event but is also a present reality; it is now, but not yet; it is developing, the silent increase of God’s reign in the created order. God’s rescuing act is not static, but is a present movement into the future. We experience now a foretaste of the everlasting Kingdom of God. Now, we live by the spirit in the Resurrection Life of Christ but, then, we will live a life with God in actual, physical resurrected bodies (not able to sin).

Thus, in grace God’s love has gone before humanity, healing its incapacity to respond to Him. God is wooing all humanity to turn from the lie, to renew its spiritual senses. The faithfulness of Christ restored the broken image and likeness, healing humanity, and empowering it to participate with the Spirit in its own transformation. Creation yearns to return to God’s worldview, where humanity learns from God how to care for it in His image and likeness again.

In Luke chapter 11 Jesus is railing against the religious leaders for not only refusing to enter into knowledge themselves, but also for refusing to let the people they’re supposed to be leading to enter therein (VS 52). In his letter to the Romans (chapter 2), Paul argues the same point and then concludes, “The name of God is slandered because of you” (VS 24), which is a loose translation of the account where God through Isaiah is making the same argument (Is. 52:5). The first charge against the church that I receive from those who are Un-churched is that of hypocrisy. The second charge, ignorance. And the third, controlling. Whether or not these charges are exaggerated in their explanations the point is valid, as a rule many Christians are not expressing a loving faith of Good News, but a conquering religion of fear.

Though they speak not only against Christianity, and despite the fact that we usually write their kind off as rebellious pagan unbelievers, we can learn a lot (in light of the Scriptures quoted above) from the Un-churched and the “non-believers.” One of my favorite bands has a song that goes like this: “They speak of love and tolerance…but thrive on people’s ignorance…making them all slaves of fear. They feed on your anxiety to build their dead society…They nurture prejudice and hate…in the name of whatever god. Increasing power is their price. They’re feeding you lies with calculating smiles, enslavement of the human mind. As long as you kneel to their authority, religion is what makes you blind. They treat you as spineless fools and use you as obedient tools….it’s time to set your spirits free. Your minds are enslaved…they’ve locked you up and thrown away the key.” ~ Amon Amarth, Slaves of Fear (Surtur Rising ©2011)

Another example from another of my favorites is more subtle: “What pain will it take to satisfy your sick appetite? Go in for the kill. Always in sight. Pray! The time always right. Feast! Feed on the pain. Taste! Sorrow made flesh. Sweet! …Shallow are words from those who starve for a dream not their own to slash and scar. Big words, small mind. Behind the pain you will find a scavenger of human sorrow. Scavenger! Abstract theory, the weapon of choice used by a scavenger of human sorrow. Scavenger! So you have traveled far across the sea to spread your written brand of misery.” ~ Death, Scavenger of Human Sorrow (The Sound of Perseverance ©1999)

In my conversations with folks (like the members of these bands), they associate God with our expression of Him and their reception (rather, the lack thereof) of our expression. They do not understand faith (and cannot without faith), but relate any involvement with any god as “religion.” Thus, relating religion to enslavement of hypocrisy, ignorance, and control. While these descriptors do not paint an accurate picture of faith – the relationship that Christ has instituted – they do bring to bear a valid interpretation of damaging religions that counterfeit such faith. To these folks, Christianity (along with any other religion paying homage to every other god) is simply a man-made institution that seeks to enslave and otherwise capture the helpless and hopeless of society.

As noted above, faith is not understood without faith, but the life we live in faith can be easily understood by believers and unbelievers, alike, if it is what we in fact portray, and not the dreaded religion of our own making. In the Scriptures above the accusation by Paul, Jesus Christ, and God Himself is against religion that counterfeits faith, precisely. No doubt, unbelievers are responsible for the natural revelation of God that they oppose (Rom. 1:18-20), but we are accountable for not giving witness of that revelation to them as well. Making disciples of the church is hereby in question. Making disciples of Jesus Christ is the inarguable purpose of the church. The argument herewith: Religion is what killed Christ (Matt. 27:20); Faith is for what He died (Rom. 3:25).

“When the only tool you have is a hammer everything begins to look like a nail.” – Abraham Maslow —– The church in America is in a state of decline. There are more people going out the doors (be it carried in a box, or simply in mass exodus) than there are coming in them. Likewise, the groups of people who have never been a part of the church are growing in mass while their interest in the church continues to dwindle, respectively. The answers the church attempts to give speak to questions that aren’t even being asked and that haven’t been asked in a long time. The overwhelming focus within the church is polluted by the very same thinking – irrelevant and out-of-touch self-consumption.

“The problems in the world cannot be resolved by the same kind of thinking that created them.” – Albert Einstein —– The folks that know how to play church, or at least those who are susceptible to the “church culture,” are the same 40% of the population to which the church has been catering for years. It is a long-standing maxim that local churches stand and fall according to the exchange of “members” between them. What about the other 60% of the population? Are we waiting for “them” to become like “us”? Is there some point in “their” evolution where “we” take interest in “them”? What would “church” look like if “they” were included among “us”? Incidentally, church is not “Church” without “their” inclusion with “us.”

“Religion is the opiate of the masses.” – Karl Marx —– The ideology that “church” is a building to where we go, where we are entertained by a skilled professional, where we are consumers of that which is being peddled, and where we are spectators of the sport of “Christianity” is destructive and self-defeating. It is nothing more than a religion invented by humanity. It is nothing less than an addiction to a mind-numbing drug that dulls people to their responsibilities of being “the Church,” by definition. Church is the exercising of all the gifts of God in humanity.

In short, as long as the church attempts to answer the questions begged with more-of-the-same, future growth looks bleak. It is not because God has abandoned His worldview and neither is it because Jesus has abandoned His Church. It is because, at present, the church desires to manage the business of maintaining the status-quo of accepted norms. The established system senses death and seeks only self-preservation. Thus, in its death-rattle, it scrambles to produce more “programs” in an effort to prolong its state of unconsciousness.

Until we pull the plug on our self-centered religious system (and subsequently rise from the dead in Resurrection Life) we cannot answer the real questions asked and we cannot really be the Church – the expression of Christ – in a hurting world. God’s worldview is still the rescuing of humanity from itself, and Christ’s Church is still the place where God exercises that worldview. Once the Church recovers its role as the place where God meets the needs of humanity, once it ceases to operate out of human frailty (religion) and again moves and breathes in and out of divine essence (faith), once we come to the realization that Jesus Christ Himself is life for living, then we will see the true Mission of God; we will see, not conversions of cultures to Christianity, but transformations of lives in Christ.

There are three points at which the church expresses relationship (or the lack thereof). These three points are layered; that is, they are always the same three points, but the identity and/or description of the three points can be expressed differently depending on the subject or object of the relationship. The three points are Upward, Inward, and Outward. For example, Jesus expressed an upward relationship with the Father, an inward relationship with His followers, and an outward relationship with a hurting world. First, Jesus expressed the mission of God in who He was; equipping him, secondly, to express that mission in and with His followers, which, finally, could be corporately expressed to a hurting world. Because Jesus had an upward relationship with God He could have an inward relationship with His followers and they could have an outward relationship with a hurting world. The expression of God’s relationship with Jesus is the focus for His followers, which is the expression of His followers to the world.

Another aspect, or layer, of this three-pointed expression is our own individual upward relationship with the Father, our inward relationship with our own-self because of that upward relationship with God and, our outward expression of those relationships with God and self in our relationships with others. If we attempt to outwardly express a relationship with God without first internalizing the relationship, our expression is broken. We expect others to experience something we have not, yet, experienced. Likewise, if we immediately go outward without first going upward, then we offer only the same brokenness and hurt that the world already knows and experiences because we, ourselves, have not healed.

The expression of the church is to be a reflection of its upward relationship with God, its inward relationship with itself, and its outward relationship with a hurting world because of its upward and inward relationships – in that order. A church that moves from the upward relationship with the Father to an inward relationship with itself, and does not move outward to the hurting world, is an exclusive club of ineffectiveness. What is outward only serves to feed itself. A church that moves from the upward relationship directly to the outward relationship, but does not first express the inward relationship, is hypocritical. It speaks of things it does not know and it finds its identity in the numbers of people in line in its outreach ministries. And a church that begins with the inward and moves outward, without the upward relationship with the Father, is simply and only a humanitarian aid; the ultra-social gospel, where humanity is on mission to fix humanity and not God’s mission to heal humanity.

Individually and corporately, we must strike a balanced order in our relationships and there expressions. Upward, inward, and then outward is the necessary order. The balance comes in relation to the personal need of the upward to heal the inward so as to express it outwardly. We must strike the balance individually before we can do so corporately. Yet, the corporate expression of upward, inward, and outward is where the individual order is forged. Oh, the importance of the primal upward!

Tolerance is insisted upon only by the intolerable. If I do not tolerate your insistence of my tolerance, will you self-impose your toleration and tolerate the fact that I do not? We cry “tolerance,” not because we want everyone to be free, but because we want everyone enslaved. If this were not true, then, there would be no reason to cry “tolerance.” I don’t have to tolerate your opinion and you can’t force my toleration of it and, at the same time, call it “tolerance.” Forced tolerance is, in fact, the intolerance of the forceful.

The ideology of tolerance, in religion, presupposes superiority and, therefore, inferiority. What I mean is this idea that Christianity must be tolerant is based on faulty premises. In fact, the very basis of the argument is self-contradicting. The attempt to lift one religion over the other has less to do with God and more to do with the corrupted and the corruptible. And when a Christian enters into this line of thinking the point of Christianity is lost. When we talk about being tolerant, we already assume that what we believe is superior to that which someone else believes. I am not at all interested in attempting to prove the superiority of Christianity.

Let me say it another way: I do not see any world religion as being in some sort of competition with that which Christ embodies. I do not argue against the fact that the world religions are in competition (including so-called Christianity), but I question the logic of it. If any religion thinks itself superior to another, then it is only a competition of “No-Compete-Clauses” that humanity either constructs or destructs. If a religion is such that it depends on humanity condoning or condemning it, then it is nothing more than humanity’s concoction. If it has to do with God, then the point of toleration is mute. All religions are on equal grounds and neither superior nor inferior, one against another. None can reach up (or out) to God, because God by definition is impassible and unobtainable. As such, God must be the initiator of said communication if it is to be had at all. God must make the way and means for humanity to be in relations with God. And the conclusion to our religious quest is found in Jesus Christ. From wherever we come, we must come to the one place where heaven meets earth, where God is accessible to humanity – where the Killing Cross of Christ meets the Resurrection Life of Christ; not a religion, but a Faith – the faithfulness of God in Christ.

Toleration in polity is based on an elitist mentality of (guilt laden) political correctness. It is simply an irrational Utopian ideology devoid of reality. It holds that truth is relative, which actually denies any truth what-so-ever (even its own Utopia). Add to this fact that tolerance serves to make excuses for ones-self, rather than holding ones-self accountable and responsible. Ironically, this kind of toleration, too, is a form of religion (by definition).

Toleration assumes condescension of one to another. Toleration demands disingenuous pity. Toleration only exasperates an issue. There is no redemption in toleration. Do not confuse toleration with love. Toleration is actually intolerance.

I suggest, first, that any form of toleration be rejected and, second, that we not be tolerable, but accepting of one another. The Good News is not about toleration but acceptance. God does not tolerate humanity, but accepts it. Because of Christ we are acceptable and, thus, equipped to accept. Do not be fooled, tolerance is not equality. Tolerance is based on inequality, and never acceptance. Acceptance is where equality is found, but never tolerance.

God has had a mission in creation since, literally, the beginning of time (Gen. 1:3). God has had a mission in humanity since the beginning of the alienation (Gen. 3:9). The God of this mission is the God who hears the groans of humanity (Ex. 2:24; 6:5). This God moves in with humanity (John 1:14). He seeks the lost (Luke 19:10). He serves the least (Matt. 25:45). He suffered to rescue the suffering (John 19:18). He calls and equips disciples (Matt. 28:16-20). He sends the Spirit to empower the church (Mark 1:8; Acts 2:17-18; 4:31).

The God of mission has a church. The church has no other mission, but only the mission of God in humanity and all creation. The church is the agent of God’s change. The Church is a mission of transformation. The church’s mission is God’s mission. God’s mission in humanity is to invite humanity to become part of God’s life. Likewise, the mission of the church is to invite humanity to become part of God’s life. The church is a mission of extension in the invitation of God. The mission of God has a church.

Since the alienation the world has been upside-down. To everyone since Adam and Eve an upside-down world seems right-side up, however. When God moved in humanity as Jesus Christ He turned the world right-side up again, and everyone thinks He has turned it upside-down. God’s mission is a rescuing of humanity; a recovery of capsized creation. Because of a perverted equilibrium, the mission of God is counterintuitive to humanity. Because humanity is off-balance, creation is off-center.

Jesus is the Good News that God is in mission to creation. Jesus lived the Good News with His life. That Jesus died is the Good News of recovery. That Jesus is offering the Good News in His resurrection is the rescuing; it is the invitation of God’s mission – the church. Jesus is the Kingdom of God in Person. He is the Person of Transformation. Transformation is the invitation to be part of God’s life by extending God’s invitation to be part of God’s life.

God’s mission has a church that is an agent of change; an agent of transformation. The church is a sign of the Kingdom, pointing to a reality beyond itself; a sign without significance apart from what it signifies. The church as mission is a foretaste of the Kingdom, a down payment of the Kingdom; it is an instrument of the kingdom, a tool utilized to facilitate the work of the Kingdom. Transformation is a sharing in the life of God – the kingdom – together as community; God’s worldview. Community is the evidence of God in mission to humanity – the church. Creation is recovered in the rescuing of humanity in the mission of God – Jesus Christ, the Person of the God of mission.

In spite of claims (and thoughts) to the contrary, Jesus Christ came and died, and was buried, and resurrected for all creation (not just “Christians”). The word “Christian” was used in the negative sense (originally) to describe those who belonged to “The Way of Christ.” It was not an end-result of a conversion, but a categorical description of a people; a way of life. “Christians” described “Those belonging to Christ;” or better yet, “Those owned by Christ.” The term was intended by the hecklers to alienate those of The Way from those of the norm. But Christ, Himself, never intended to alienate anyone (nor did he intend to be normal). In fact, He intended quite the opposite.

The work of Christ (in the past, as well as the present) benefits all creation, not simply the church. The Church is the expression of Christ on earth. Both of these statements being true, then, all creation generally and all humanity in particular is the Church. Because Jesus was the Last Adam – the one to rectify the deficiency of the First Adam and his posterity (Rom. 5:14; 1Cor. 15:22, 45) – His cross and subsequent resurrection affects all humanity. Not only that, but it also affects all creation because of the place humanity was given in creation (Gen. 1:26-28). In short, Christ died (and was resurrected) for “All,” not only for some.

Obviously, however, “all” do not express Christ (whether within or without the church). Yet, this does not change the fact of the reality. What Jesus has done, with His death and resurrection, is to activate something that had been dormant in humanity since the Fall of Adam. Christ’s act did not institute an imposition of conversion, but it gave life to something that was already there; something in which we were created. It awakened the image of God in humanity. It resuscitated the Mission of God in creation, even if “all” humanity does not realize it. It transformed…

God has a mission. The mission of God has a Church. God’s mission forms the church (not the other way around). The mission of God is not concerned with conversion, but transformation. When the church has a mission it always entails a conversion (the conversion from any certain culture to a “Christian Culture;” i.e. the norm). But when the Church is empowered by the mission of God it is the expression of Christ – it is the embodiment of the death and resurrection; it is the express image of God in the resurrected life of Christ, again, in human form. Conversion is a form of alienation (despite the claims to the contrary). Transformation is the mission of God through the church (from the beginning of humanity) in community.

And what does the Mission of God in the church communicate? It communicates God’s love in the face of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. It dares to risk, necessarily involved in that love. It communicates the intent for creation generally and humanity in particular to love out of the love of transformation. In a word, the mission of God is “love” – a love that transforms brokenness and alienation into healing and wholeness.