Great Conversation

This past week I had the opportunity to have a great conversation.  Although it did not have to do specifically with our work in Hamilton it was a very good opportunity to think through and work with some of the ideas about evangelism and discipleship in a practical setting.  I initially shared some of our thinking on the subject in a previous post that you can find here:
Discipleship
To summarize for the sake of this story, there are two things that I have really been thinking about lately.  First is the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus.  I recently had the opportunity to preach in Oakville during which I made a comment that at some point all discussions about Christianity had to get to the resurrection.   I said "if He came back to life, you might want to listen to Him, if not then just sleep in on Sunday."  (As an aside, when I got home I noticed that someone had Tweeted the quote while I was still preaching.  Times are changing fast!) The basic premise is that if Jesus was not who He said He was, and we do not have the proof of his authority from the resurrection then who cares about the rest of it.
Secondly, I have been thinking a lot about just encouraging people to try to get to know what Jesus said about Himself and what He did for themselves.  There are a lot of people and groups etc. who claim to know about Jesus and either represent Him or tell us why we should not believe in Him.  I have been wanting to encourage people to let those voices fade to the back, to pick up a gospel and read it for themselves to see what Jesus actually did, said and asked of his followers in order to make an informed decision for themselves.   
Well,  I was at dinner with a couple and the conversation steered towards the interaction of faith and science.   I know that they are not "believers" because, for one thing I know them, and secondly, because someone had asked one of them that morning... 
Going on a complete tangent for a moment - I have come to appreciate what an unhelpful term "believer" is when interacting with those outside of the Christian faith and culture.  We all had a great laugh about the "churcheese" that tends to get thrown around but that does not really translate universally.  Someone asked her if she was a believer during the question and answer session of a lecture she had been giving on a subject that had nothing to do with faith.  In the context, faith in Jesus may have been the least obvious interpretation of "are you a believer" that there could have been.  It created a very awkward moment as they tried to figure out what each other was referring to.  Good thing she has a great sense of humour.   So...back to the story...
The question of faith and science came not as a debate but rather what it was like dealing with the question within the Christian community, between believers.  Did I ever feel at odds with those who disagree, was there pressure to think one way or the other etc.  I was able to share a bit about how I see the issue of faith and science, and how it plays out within the larger Christian community.   I was able to share that there is quite a wide spectrum of thought with regards to how the two interact and that there is not unanimity across the Christian world on the subject.   I also shared that  like many other things, those at the polar ends of the spectrum, who like to lob grenades at one another and sensationalize the discussion, often get the most media attention. 
The other thing I shared, however, was that I do sometimes find the question a bit frustrating.  As important as the question is, it is not actually a central question.  At this point I just shared a bit about what we hope to do in Hamilton.  I shared that to start with, I would hope to encourage people to pick up a New Testament and have a look at what Jesus did and said.  I then shared a bit about the resurrection.  One first has to came to a decision about the resurrection.  If Jesus came back to life, one may want to listen to Him and the biblical record that Jesus himself treated as authoritative.  Only then does what the Bible have to say about anything really matter as anything more than just an interesting sociological or anthropological survey.  It did lead to a discussion about whether Jesus could be seen as just a good teacher or prophet.  Borrowing from C.S. Lewis, I suggested that if He was not who He said He was then he was either lying of crazy, either of which would not make him "good."  I was presented with a thought that I had never heard before, about whether he could have just been a great, charismatic salesperson (or politician I suppose), casting this vision that many would want to follow.  The only thought that I had was that it lead to the most horribly gruesome and cruel death imaginable and so it did not really work out all that well for Him.  If there was no real substance I don't think that anyone would choose to follow after that.

All in all, I really appreciated the honest and yet respectful conversation we were able to have.  It was immensely helpful for me to have a chance to put some of our thoughts into practice.  It was also really important for me to hear from others outside the Christian faith about their perspective.  I am looking forward to more conversations like these.