St. Paul's Church - Nanjing, China - May 13th, 2012
Today was the day I would be seeing much more of the Christian community that makes up Nanjing. The church was St. Paul's Church, an Anglican Church founded in 1923. When I arrived it was crowded as in the main Chapel a wedding was being prepared for. It was a bit overwhelming because of all the people...I then got a call from my friend who let me know where the English service was, which was in a smaller but more spacious, less crowded area in a different building.
The theme of the service was the love of God. As the program said at the beginning, "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."
When I arrived it had just begun so I caught the scripture reading and Apostles Creed before the hymn and then sermon.
The first thing I noticed was how humble the place was. There was a single wooden cross in front of red drapes and the altar where the people would go to speak. The second thing I noticed was the music. Those old English hymns when sung by a good choir are some of the most heavenly things in the world. That was a major good that I experienced today, was the beauty of those hymns.
The sermon was from a brother of the church. He was quite passionate and talked about how love of Jesus means claiming souls. This line reminded me of how Christianity and Islam are the most aggressive religions historically when it comes to gaining converts (through peaceful and military means). For a while a lot of it was good and I thought he was describing virtue really well (carrying for the sick and for others, as well as loyalty to friends), and then he went off on a tangent. He brought gay marriage into it and seemed to be saying two things:
1) Those who believe in Gay Marriage are moral relativists and that "The world is" (which isn't not always true).
2) That there are false prophets in the Church who support gay marriage.
His words reminded me of how unwelcome the Church can be to people and how the love isn't unconditional, but conditional. The ironic thing in it was that some interpretations of Jonathan's relationship to David was in fact homosexual and that was what he was using to illustrate how we should love and be loyal to God (unlike Saul who used David for his vanities).
Besides the end of the sermon/tangent, it was a really enjoyable service. It was great being there with my friend I'd made last week. Afterwords I joined him and his friends for Lunch and their had a discussion with one of them in regards to Christianity versus philosophy in what should be valued. Both of us believed in truth and virtue the difference was I doubted the Bible and Christ as God (Christ can be a great example for how to live I think, just like Lao Tzu and the other great men), but I do think admitting ones own flaws and being honest about it is the only way to move forward and to grow as a person (or for a peoples to grow).
Where we differed most was I believe our relationships to others and our own actions are the most important thing that we know (living virtuously and growing), as well as the quest for truth. He believed that the truth came down from Jesus and that humanity is so broken that only belief saves us (via reward in the afterlife due to Jesus's sacrifice on the cross).
He brought up the C.S. Lewis Trilemma of Jesus being "Lunatic, Liar or Lord," as proof of Jesus's divinity, which for me didn't quite do it. There have been many throughout history who were delusional on some things but still super smart and ethical on others. He was flawed and human like them. What makes him different?
He's a kinesthetic learner and all about experience. His experiences with people who are believers and through church and relationship made him who he is. For me that's true as well, but so much of my experience of learning is through books, hearing, introspection and that was when we realized how our ways of learning compliment one another.
I told him I'd pray to Jesus and see what happens. Though I don't know if that's the best way to check the validity of Christianity (check it's claims) in regards to greater truths or the revelation it claims to be. Historically a lot of it doesn't hold up literally (Exodus, Genesis, Noah's Ark), but that doesn't change the value of the stories (though their are some un-virtuous practices in the Bible done in God's name).
It was a great day and it reminds me why I do the blog. It's about the human relationships and the quest for truth...it's the discussions and the learning that comes through discussion, study and experience.
The theme of the service was the love of God. As the program said at the beginning, "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."
When I arrived it had just begun so I caught the scripture reading and Apostles Creed before the hymn and then sermon.
The first thing I noticed was how humble the place was. There was a single wooden cross in front of red drapes and the altar where the people would go to speak. The second thing I noticed was the music. Those old English hymns when sung by a good choir are some of the most heavenly things in the world. That was a major good that I experienced today, was the beauty of those hymns.
The sermon was from a brother of the church. He was quite passionate and talked about how love of Jesus means claiming souls. This line reminded me of how Christianity and Islam are the most aggressive religions historically when it comes to gaining converts (through peaceful and military means). For a while a lot of it was good and I thought he was describing virtue really well (carrying for the sick and for others, as well as loyalty to friends), and then he went off on a tangent. He brought gay marriage into it and seemed to be saying two things:
1) Those who believe in Gay Marriage are moral relativists and that "The world is" (which isn't not always true).
2) That there are false prophets in the Church who support gay marriage.
His words reminded me of how unwelcome the Church can be to people and how the love isn't unconditional, but conditional. The ironic thing in it was that some interpretations of Jonathan's relationship to David was in fact homosexual and that was what he was using to illustrate how we should love and be loyal to God (unlike Saul who used David for his vanities).
Besides the end of the sermon/tangent, it was a really enjoyable service. It was great being there with my friend I'd made last week. Afterwords I joined him and his friends for Lunch and their had a discussion with one of them in regards to Christianity versus philosophy in what should be valued. Both of us believed in truth and virtue the difference was I doubted the Bible and Christ as God (Christ can be a great example for how to live I think, just like Lao Tzu and the other great men), but I do think admitting ones own flaws and being honest about it is the only way to move forward and to grow as a person (or for a peoples to grow).
Where we differed most was I believe our relationships to others and our own actions are the most important thing that we know (living virtuously and growing), as well as the quest for truth. He believed that the truth came down from Jesus and that humanity is so broken that only belief saves us (via reward in the afterlife due to Jesus's sacrifice on the cross).
He brought up the C.S. Lewis Trilemma of Jesus being "Lunatic, Liar or Lord," as proof of Jesus's divinity, which for me didn't quite do it. There have been many throughout history who were delusional on some things but still super smart and ethical on others. He was flawed and human like them. What makes him different?
He's a kinesthetic learner and all about experience. His experiences with people who are believers and through church and relationship made him who he is. For me that's true as well, but so much of my experience of learning is through books, hearing, introspection and that was when we realized how our ways of learning compliment one another.
I told him I'd pray to Jesus and see what happens. Though I don't know if that's the best way to check the validity of Christianity (check it's claims) in regards to greater truths or the revelation it claims to be. Historically a lot of it doesn't hold up literally (Exodus, Genesis, Noah's Ark), but that doesn't change the value of the stories (though their are some un-virtuous practices in the Bible done in God's name).
It was a great day and it reminds me why I do the blog. It's about the human relationships and the quest for truth...it's the discussions and the learning that comes through discussion, study and experience.