Wednesday, March 25, 2009

AIPRAL Conference Part 1: Theology. A.K.A. "Alex Preaches To The Blogsphere Not Necessarily About Being A YAV In Peru"

So I'm back, once again to my original adventure after having returned from another adventure.

The AIPRAL conference was a breath of fresh air, theologically speaking. Sean and I had gotten pretty used to the very traditional biblical interpretations, forms of worship and overall "way of life" associated with the evangelical churches where we work and worship here in Peru. The main points of our churches' theology are pretty much as follows:

1. God is in charge of everything.

2. God's divine son Jesus Christ, the Messiah, lived on earth and sacrificed himself to be crucified so that the sins of whoever believes in him will be forgiven.

3. If you accept Jesus as your personal Savior, you will have eternal life in heaven after your life on earth is over. If you don't accept Jesus as your personal Savior, you will suffer eternal conscious torment in Hell after your earthly death.

4. In the meantime (during THIS life), you should "turn your life in" to Jesus. This means:
4a. Going to church regularly
4b. Reading the bible regularly (and memorizing as much of it as you can)
4c. Praying regularly (or even "without ceasing" - 1 Thes. 4:17)
4d. Abstaining with all your might from sin/idolatries (things that distract you from serving God) such as alcohol, drugs and sex outside of marriage.
4e. "Spreading the gospel" always by proclaiming your faith in effort to convert as many people as possible to Christianity so that they too, might be saved from Hell and given eternal life in Heaven.

5. The Bible (old and new testaments; the standard protestant canon) is God's authoritative, infallible Word. It was revealed perfectly by God Himself to writers inspired by Him. It is the Christian's definitive guide for what to believe and how to live.

Now, before I get into any metaphorical hot water, let me just say that although I don't agree 100% with these basic tenets of belief/doctrine that guide the churches with which I work here in Peru (and the majority of protestant/evangelical churches), I DO think that generally, they are a fine set of beliefs. They are most certainly Christian. They are most certainly biblical. They most certainly have created and guided life-changing spiritual/religious experiences for millions of people all over the world during the course of 2,000 years.

However I, along with the folks at AIPRAL, believe that Christians are called to more than just personal purity, and that people should have more to look forward to besides eternal life after they die. In addition to individual sin, there is societal/structural sin. And Christian beliefs can also do a lot of good in "saving" people from earthly "Hells" during THIS life, not just the next.

Enter the theme for the conference: Economic Justice. The majority of the first few days of the conference were dedicated to Bible studies and discussing just why exactly, from a Biblical point of view, Christians should be worried about poverty and global economic equality. Then during mostly the second half of the conference, we had some games/discussions/activities to learn about how/why economic injustice exists and what in the world we can do about it.

The first bible study was on 2 Corinthians 8, and discussing ways the church can be an example/beacon in demonstrating how communities can exercise norms of generosity, reciprocity and rejecting economic greed. We also discussed Isaiah 58 to demonstrate how God actually DEMANDS repentance for social sins of oppression, poverty and injustice rather than just personal purity.

The next bible study/discussion was centered around Revelation 18, in which God condemns the city of Babylon, a center of trade and city of great wealth, power and greed, to be destroyed. Although the connection was never explicitly made, there were implied similarities made to the United States during the discussion. This session wasn't really a bible study as much as it was a bible-based lecture on the history of external debt in Latin American countries. While over 50% of the population of Latin America lives on less than $2 per day, Latin American governments are using hundreds of billions of dollars a year to pay back loans taken from other countries, principally the United States. Because of compounding interest, the countries have already paid back several times over the amount originally borrowed, and will continue paying the interest for years and years to come. The most infuriating part is that these loans were used to finance the killings and "disappearance" of the government's own citizens during the tumultous 1970s and 1980s, the most obvious example being the "Dirty War" in Argentina, where the government accounted for an estimated 30,000 disappearances. The bible study leader asserted that the US government not only knew that it was funding dictatorships with the loans, but also that the other governments would never be able to pay the sums back. Biblically, we discussed the Jewish mandate of "Jubilee" years. According to Mosaic law, the Jewish people were to forgive all debts, redistribute wealth, pardon offenses, free slaves etc every 50 years, when God's mercy would be manifest. In Luke 4:18-19, Jesus says he's come to do exactly that as he quotes from Isaiah 61:

"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor [Jubilee]."

The concept of Jubilee as being a manifestation of God's mercy/forgiveness of sins should be an example/inspiration for us to forgive debts ("forgive us our debts as we forgive our debters" -- very Presbyterian!). This biblical/theological point, as well as the story of Jesus' anger towards the money lenders in the temple (told in all 4 Gospels ex. Matthew 21) was used during the discussion to show how unchecked capitalism, as an economic system, is one of (or perhaps THE) biggest root of social/structural sin in our society.

So those two bible studies/discussion were the background going into the third bible study, which for me was the most interesting. This bible study was a theological discussion of Jesus' Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25: 14-30). In this parable, a "Master" of a great estate leaves on a trip. While he's gone, he leaves 3 "servants" to manage his money, giving 5 "talents" to one, 2 to another, and 1 to a third. When the master comes back, he finds that the first servant has managed his money well - using/investing the 5 talents to make another 5. So has the second: he's made another 2 talents with the 2 he was given. The third, on the other hand, simply took the 1 talent he was given, buried it in the ground and returned it to the master when he returned. The master, obviously, is pleased with the first two servants and ticked off with the third. While he promises the first two servants more responsibilities and privileges, he takes the 1 talent from the third servant and adds it to the total of the first, calling the third servant wicked and lazy. He then demands that the third "worthless" servant be thrown outside where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Traditionally, this parable is seen to be about spiritual "gifts" rather than money -- indeed it's supposedly the origin of our modern word "talent," meaning "ability." So the parable traditionally is taken to illustrate how some people are born with lots of talents, and others aren't. But the quantity/type of your talent/gifts don't matter; what matters is that you do something with what you have. This is the traditional moral: it implies that if you don't use the gifts God blesses you with, you will be shut out of the Kingdom of Heaven.

This is a decent interpretation/moral: nobody likes a lazy person. Many sermons have used this parable to preach the message that we should be thankful for what we have and dedicate its use to God, being good stewards. However the seminary student who led this bible study (named Mauricio), thinks there's a different meaning when you look at the original Greek (the language in which the New Testament was originally written).

While a couple versions say Jesus introduces this parable by saying "The Kingdom of Heaven is like," according to Mauricio, the ones that stick closest to the original Greek do not include this phrase. This parable then, isn't necessarily about the Kingdom of Heaven. Furthermore, this parable, along with the Parable of the Ten Virgins (another parable that is striking for its total lack of Grace - one of the cornerstones of protestant theology) comes smack dab in the middle of a discussion Jesus is having with his disciples about the signs of the end of the age! So this parable, according to Mauricio, actually could be about the evil in the world that serves as a sign that the Kingdom is near.

Furthermore, analyzing the Greek, Mauricio says that the word used to describe the "Master" in the parable is not keiros, the Greek word for Lord, which Jesus normally uses when describing "Masters" in parables about the Kingdom of Heaven, but rather the Greek word for "Man" (or human being - which is "anthros" or something like that, I didn't write it down). Additionally, the word that is usually interpreted as "servant" was actually the Greek word for "slave" -- you know, the people that Jesus claimed he was sent to set free, as I mentioned above.

By now, you can probably figure out where this is going. Mauricio is turning the traditional view of the Parable of the Talents almost completely on its head. But really, we're just getting started.

During Jesus' time, a Greek "talent" was a unit of currency worth 6,000 drachma. One drachma was the equivalent of a standard laborer's daily wage. So because I'm too lazy to do all the math, let's just suffice it to say that this "Master" was the ancient equivalent of a millionaire. And as most of us know, Jesus didn't exactly predict that millionaires would have a particularly easy time getting into the kingdom of heaven.

However, the most damning evidence that invites us to turn this parable's traditional interpretation on its head is the reason the third, "foolish" servant gives the master for simply burying the money in the ground: "I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed." What's more is the master does not reject this claim but affirms it! He says: "So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed..." This is definitely the verse that frustrates the HELL out of traditional interpreters. In the traditional interpretation, where the master is seen to symbolize God, this makes absolutely no sense! No Christian believes in a God who would take as his own the fruits of someone else's labor. Such a God is unjust, deceitful and dishonest - a thief!

At this point in the Bible study, I got pretty excited. I had ALWAYS been frustrated with this parable, even as a little kid. I always sympathized with the third servant -- I mean, at least he didn't LOSE the money, right? Mauricio's interpretation seemed to resolve everything. Until, that is, you get to verse 29. In the parable, after the master takes the one talent of the third servant/slave and adds it to the 10 talents of the first servant/slave, he says "For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him." Reading this verse I became frustrated again, because it reminded me of something Jesus says in Matthew 13, after telling the Parable of the Sower. (The only reason I knew about this is because I happened to have preached a sermon on it to Km. 13 Church two weeks earlier.) After telling the parable of the sower, Jesus himself says plain and simple to his disciples almost the EXACT same phrase: "Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him" (Matthew 13:12). So during the bible study, I pointed out both instances of these verses and posed what I thought was a "checkmate" (as Stephen Colbert would say) question to Mauricio: If the MASTER in this parable is really the wicked one, why would he be saying the exact same teaching Jesus himself had said in an earlier parable?

Unfortunately, I asked this question during a moment of the bible study in which LOTS of people had things to say, and the time was running out anyway, so Mauricio didn't really have a chance to go through and give a thorough answer. So I had to reason it out on my own, but I think I figured it out.

In the context of the parable of the sower, Jesus says this phrase about adding to the amount of people who have a lot and taking away from the people who have none in reference to the Pharisees. Furthermore, he wasn't talking about money (much to the chagrin of contemporary religious right wingers who tout the "justice" of laissez-faire supply side economics) but understanding. The Pharisees/teachers of the law were positive that they perfectly understood God's law/will and had everything figured out. So they spent their time trying to force the regulations of the law on other Jews. Jesus, however, spends most of his ministry speaking out against the pharisees, calling them hypocrites and telling them that the people they consider to be "sinners" will actually be the ones who inherit the kingdom of heaven. Basically he tells them that despite (or perhaps BECAUSE of....) their pompous assertions that they are the experts on God's law/will and they kingdom of heaven, they actually don't have a clue.

So I think Jesus has the "master" in this parable use this phrase, the same phrase Jesus himself once used, to depict the master as a Pharisee. Like a Pharisee would do, the master takes the Word of God and COMPLETELY misuses it. He twists it to fulfill a purpose totally contrary to God's will. Jesus disciples (to whom he was telling the Parable of the Talents) would have recognized this phrase as something Jesus had said before -- and would also recognize that the character in the story had used it to justify evil rather than good. I think Jesus uses this part of the parable to illustrate/give an example of something he warned the disciples about just 1 chapter earlier while describing the signs of the end of the age: "Many will come in my name, claiming 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many" (Mat. 24:5). Included in that might be people who use the teachings of Jesus/word of God to try and justify riches, greed and economic injustice.

So there you have it. That's about it. The awesome thing about this parable, as with many parables and biblical passages, is that the traditional moral: using the spiritual gifts/talents God has given you to further the glory of God and the betterment of society rather than letting them go to waste, is still a beautiful moral. This just goes to illustrate the timelessness of scripture - as authoritative, special and unique for all peoples, in all contexts. The same parable can offer two distinct interpretations, both of which are helpful, life-affirming and prophetic in the right contexts. I don't say this to mean that there is no such thing as a WRONG interpretation of the Bible -- the Bible has been used to justify racial superiority, genocide, war, the oppression of women and a host of other social ills -- but rather that the Spirit of God moves in a variety of ways that we can't appreciate if we close our minds to keep out perspectives we hadn't previously considered.

2 comments:

Meg said...

That was a really good read, Alex! I discussed the Pharisees with a friend of mine last week during a (duh) discussion on those like John Hagee and Joel Osteen who make all the money, and while I haven't read that parable in a long time, I remember it being kind of confusing from when I was little. I think your analyzation here is really great, and shows a lot of thought and a great deal of the talent (no pun intended) required of the actual writers (whether you interpret that as God's Word or the physical writers inspired by God's Word) to piece the language together like that.

Joe Tognetti said...

I stand by my comments from your Facebook post...except to say that I think there is PLENTY in Scripture to challenge and convict us to wrong social ills and disregard a materialist lifestyle without the interpretation of the Parable of the Talents you described. But again, thanks for posting it, it's been a great online discussion!