Occupants of Cells Without an Exit

"Here I am! I stand at the door and knock.

 If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, 

and they with me."

Revelation 3:20

Tyler Stevenson commenting on how our consumeristic culture has impacted the very way we interpret texts such as this one:

"The popular treatment of this passage demonstrates the degree to which consumerism has co-opted Christianity. In most treatments of this passage that I have encountered, we are led to imagine Jesus standing on the front stoop of the mansions of our lives. The moment of conversion in this depiction is that glorious moment when we deign to let him in, that salvific Fuller Brush man or Mary Kay rep who stands ready to make the sale that will change our lives. But this understanding is an inversion of reality. The one who crosses your threshold in such a case will not be the Lord but a Brand Jesus pitch-man. The real, living Lord does not wander the scorched suburbs of our reality, a lonely figure trooping door to door in search of those houses that could use a spiritual sprucing up.

Rather, in reality, we are occupants of cells that have no exit-no exit that is, until his knock makes a door where before there was none. Our lives are not six billion points of reference between which he wanders; no, he is the one point of reference onto which all doors open. And his invitation to 'come in and eat with' us and we 'with him' is not the plaintive wish of one begging for scraps, but the offer of a minister offering to share a meal with a condemned person in his or her cell. Jesus offers to come into our lives, not because our lives are his proper place, but because his life is ours-and until he enters, we cannot be led out into the Kingdom of God."

Just take the two pictures Stevenson paints, and ask yourself which one is more beautiful. The first picture being of the proud man who makes much of himself because of the what he has accumulated. This man views Jesus, the Lord of Glory, as just another important accessory to add to his mansion of possessions, accolades, and piety. Jesus is just a way to boost the spiritual component of his life.

Or take the prisoner. He has no exit to his cell. He doesn't have much, if anything to his name. His life has a lot of regrets; certainly he has done things he is not proud of. But, he is real with his brokenness. He doesn't wear a mask behind which he can boast. No, he is a sinner; a broken man in need. To this man, Jesus means much. To this man, Jesus is real. He another accessory to add onto his already stacked life. No, Jesus is everything to this man. 

I don't say this to condemn physical possessions, but rather to point out the spiritual reality of pride vs. humility. There is a reason Jesus said, "it is easier for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24). God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. The proud man makes much of  himself. The humble man makes much of Christ. 

For the Love of Mammon

“No one can serve two masters. 

For you will hate one and love the other; 

you will be devoted to one and despise the other. 

You cannot serve both God and mammon.”

Luke 16:13

The word I highlighted, mammon, is translated in the English as 'money' or 'wealth'. I highlighted it because the typical English translation of the word really doesn't do justice to what Jesus is actually getting at. Tyler Wigg Stevenson describes the concept of 'mammon' in his book, Brand Jesus:

"The connotation when Jesus talks about 'mammon', therefore, is that of a proper noun. It is not a generic concept that can be translated between different languages; no, Mammon is the name of a force in opposition to God." pg. 46

Stevenson goes on to show the contrast in how Jesus talks about 'mammon' and other opposing forces, such as human government. Even though Caesar was in someway opposed to the Triune God, Jesus teaches his disciples to give to Caesar what is Caesar's. He never says you can't serve both God and Caesar. It is interesting then that Jesus would say that money, or 'mammon', are completely mutually exclusive. You cannot serve both. Mammon is a complete alternative to God in a way government doesn't have to be. Stevenson continues:

"For Jesus to isolate Mammon like this, and to such a degree, gives Mammon the force of a veritable super-idol. If Mammon and God cannot be served simultaneously, then Mammon must be an idol above all other things that can become idolatrous for us. For, while it would be true to say we cannot serve both  God and an idol, note that 'an idol' is not an independent entity. An 'Idol' describes something defined by improper devotion to it. A statue is a statue; only when people start worshipping it does it become an idol. It's idol-ness comes from its devotees rather than anything inherent to it...But Mammon, it is, in itself, necessarily idolatrous..."

"Mammon, as Jesus uses it here, is another name for the spiritual goal to which the original humans (Adam and Eve) aspired in their first sin...They wanted to claim something that could be their own; not as a gift, because everything they had was a gift. No, they wanted something free and clear, something they could possess, hang on to, say, 'I have rights toward this.' In the first sin, they tried to be owners rather than stewards that God had made them to be. They tried to become wealthy. They were willing to trade the stewardship of all God's gifts-in which they owned nothing-for ownership of one thing, knowledge of good and evil. And ownership depends on a concept of wealth, Mammon, to rule it. The first humans, in seeking to own themselves, gave birth to the one who would rule over them (Mammon)." pg. 47

In essence, 'Mammon', is in direct opposition to God because its very nature inverts the proper Creator-creature distinction. 'Mammon' is the driving force behind  humans wanting to be God. It compels us to live in self-autonomy. It is exactly what Paul was talking about in Romans when he wrote, "because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator" (Romans 1:25). The concept of 'Mammon' captures the absolute pride and arrogance of our human race in seeking to build our own kingdom (or system of wealth) over and against God's Kingdom. This explains why, when Jesus came proclaiming the Kingdom of God, the imperative to "repent" or turn from your own little kingdom was also given. These kingdoms are in opposition to each other. The proud continue their vain pursuits of 'Mammon', while God graciously reveals himself to the humble. Stevenson closes his chapter on Mammon by writing:

"Mammon embodies original opposition to God and God's wishes for us. That is why Paul writes in 1 Timothy 6 that the root of all evil is the love of money. I know many Christians reading this will say that they do love God and they don't love money. But in our culture, regardless of what we say with our mouths, the way that many of us live expresses most of all a love of money. We speak about our love of God, but we live out of our love of Mammon." pg. 48

I know these are all hard words to swallow, and I don't write as one who is innocent of these realities. No, I write as a fellow culprit. I haven't really processed a response to these strong claims, but I do know that I need to repent of my love of Mammon. 

Tyler Wigg Stevenson, Brand Jesus: Christianity in a Consumerist Age (Seabury Books, NewYork, 2007). 

Wealth and the Gospel

 A certain ruler asked him (Jesus), “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”  

“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 

You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.’”  

“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said. 

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 

When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Luke 18:18-25

For anyone who reads the Bible with an open heart, these are extremely hard words to swallow, especially for those living in the present Western World which is considered by many to be the wealthiest context in all human history. What does Jesus mean in this passage? Does he mean that if you are rich, you cannot enter the Kingdom of God unless you literally sell everything you own? 

As I've been going through the Gospel accounts, I am amazed at how frequently and directly Jesus approaches the topic of wealth and possessions. Jesus gets right at the heart and holds no punches back. At first glance, most of us (myself included) will mistakenly read this text in either a moralistic or relativistic way. What I mean is this: In a moralistic reading, we take Jesus' command to "go sell everything and give it to the poor" as a universal rule that must be literally followed by anyone who truly considers themselves to be a Christian. The story is then a direct moral imperative to be followed literally and universally. The other end of the spectrum many of us will fall on (especially if we have great deal of wealth), is a relativistic reading. We read Jesus command and instantly think that there is no way this applies to me or actually demands a change from me. Jesus didn't really mean what he said. In this reading, we relativize the text in such a way as to protect our self from being faced with our own sinfulness. I think it is important that we examine our hearts and be honest with ourselves in regards to where we fall on the spectrum. Like I said, for those who hold on tightly to their wealth, and are consumed with building their own little kingdoms of comfort, you are probably going to fall on the side of relativism. On the other hand, for those who are often discontented with the status quo of 'safe, individualized, lifeless, consumeristic Christianity', you might find yourself imposing pharisee like rules on people. For the person who struggles deeply with self-righteousness (like me!), you might read the text in a moralistic way as a way to justify yourself. 

At the end of the day, both of these ways (relativism and moralism) are incorrect ways to understand what Jesus is really getting at. The proper way of understanding this text is a third way, lets call it a 'gospel' reading of the text. When we read this text in light of the whole gospel story, it is evident that Jesus is getting at something much deeper than a simple moralistic formula for how to deal with wealth and possessions. Rather, Jesus is getting at the radical way in which the gospel completely reorientates everything in our lives. In other words, Jesus is saying "the gospel changes everything." Being in the Kingdom of God is a complete reordering of everything in our lives. 

The story of the Rich Young Ruler is piercing because along with the heart of the young man in the story, our hearts are also revealed. In the story, the young ruler goes away sad because he realizes that the cost of following Jesus is too high; he is not willing to sell all that he has to follow Christ. The problem here wasn't so much that the man had possessions or power, but that he loved and trusted his wealth above God. His hearts orientation was out of whack. His life was out of order. The purpose for this story isn't ultimately that we might all sell our possessions, but that we may see the way we, like the young ruler, trust and love things (like wealth) more than God. We put other things (in this case, wealth) at the top of the pecking order. When Jesus says that you can't enter the Kingdom of God if you are rich, this means that only way you can enter the Kingdom of God is if you are living under the loving and righteous reign of the King. For a disciple, or a person living under God's reign, all other compartments of life fall under this ultimate allegiance. Money, possessions, relationships, work, family, time, energy, food, religion, they all must be orientated under God. They all must be submitted. We can see by the rich young ruler's response that this is a hard pill to swallow. Here was a man who kept all the rules and who zealously tried to live for God, but there was just one area of his life that he trusted and loved more than God.

So, the take away isn't so much a moralistic rule to follow, but a paradigm shift. The gospel of Jesus Christ brings us into a completely new worldview. Wealth is no longer something that needs to grip our hearts affections, but is something to be freely given to our God. This story is a way to ask ourselves, "what is it that I trust and love in more than God," "what do I look to in order to gain significance," or "what compels or controls me?". For this man, it was his wealth and power. That was the barrier between him following Jesus. Is this true of us? How we respond to Jesus' challenge, "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it," (Luke 9:23-24) reveals where are hearts are at. 

To close, there is good news in all of this. Just thinking about this now, I realize all the ways I fail to orientate my life completely under Christ's Lordship. It seems impossible. The crowd following Jesus thought the same thing. Read how the story finishes:

"Those who heard this asked, 'Who then can be saved?'

Jesus replied, 'What is impossible with man is possible with God'"

Luke 18:26-27

The good news is that Christ died in our place, and resurrected, that we, along with him could be resurrected to new life. Jesus lived, died, and rose that in him, we might receive a new heart, one that is orientated toward God. In our own strength and religious zeal, this is impossible. With God's supreme power and unfailing love, this is possible.