Bono Interview: Grace Over Karma

Send to Facebook

 

Bono Interview: Grace Over Karma

(Excerpt from the book Bono: In Conversation with Michka Assayas)

Bono: My understanding of the Scriptures has been made simple by the person of Christ. Christ teaches that God is love. What does that mean? What it means for me: a study of the life of Christ. Love here describes itself as a child born in straw poverty, the most vulnerable situation of all, without honor. I don't let my religious world get too complicated. I just kind of go: Well, I think I know what God is. God is love, and as much as I respond [sighs] in allowing myself to be transformed by that love and acting in that love, that's my religion. Where things get complicated for me, is when I try to live this love. Now that's not so easy.

Assayas: What about the God of the Old Testament? He wasn't so "peace and love"?

Bono: There's nothing hippie about my picture of Christ. The Gospels paint a picture of a very demanding, sometimes divisive love, but love it is. I accept the Old Testament as more of an action movie: blood, car chases, evacuations, a lot of special effects, seas dividing, mass murder, adultery. The children of God are running amok, wayward. Maybe that's why they're so relatable. But the way we would see it, those of us who are trying to figure out our Christian conundrum, is that the God of the Old Testament is like the journey from stern father to friend. When you're a child, you need clear directions and some strict rules. But with Christ, we have access in a one-to-one relationship, for, as in the Old Testament, it was more one of worship and awe, a vertical relationship. The New Testament, on the other hand, we look across at a Jesus who looks familiar, horizontal. The combination is what makes the Cross.

'Like' The Poached Egg on Facebook!

Assayas: Speaking of bloody action movies, we were talking about South and Central America last time. The Jesuit priests arrived there with the gospel in one hand and a rifle in the other.

Bono: I know, I know. Religion can be the enemy of God. It's often what happens when God, like Elvis, has left the building. [laughs] A list of instructions where there was once conviction; dogma where once people just did it; a congregation led by a man where once they were led by the Holy Spirit. Discipline replacing discipleship. Why are you chuckling?

Assayas: I was wondering if you said all of that to the Pope the day you met him.

Bono: Let's not get too hard on the Holy Roman Church here. The Church has its problems, but the older I get, the more comfort I find there. The physical experience of being in a crowd of largely humble people, heads bowed, murmuring prayers, stories told in stained-glass windows

Assayas: So you won't be critical.

Bono: No, I can be critical, especially on the topic of contraception. But when I meet someone like Sister Benedicta and see her work with AIDS orphans in Addis Ababa, or Sister Ann doing the same in Malawi, or Father Jack Fenukan and his group Concern all over Africa, when I meet priests and nuns tending to the sick and the poor and giving up much easier lives to do so, I surrender a little easier.

Assayas: But you met the man himself. Was it a great experience?

Bono: [W]e all knew why we were there. The Pontiff was about to make an important statement about the inhumanity and injustice of poor countries spending so much of their national income paying back old loans to rich countries. Serious business. He was fighting hard against his Parkinson's. It was clearly an act of will for him to be there. I was oddly moved by his humility, and then by the incredible speech he made, even if it was in whispers. During the preamble, he seemed to be staring at me. I wondered. Was it the fact that I was wearing my blue fly-shades? So I took them off in case I was causing some offense. When I was introduced to him, he was still staring at them. He kept looking at them in my hand, so I offered them to him as a gift in return for the rosary he had just given me.

Assayas: Didn't he put them on?

Bono: Not only did he put them on, he smiled the wickedest grin you could ever imagine. He was a comedian. His sense of humor was completely intact. Flashbulbs popped, and I thought: "Wow! The Drop the Debt campaign will have the Pope in my glasses on the front page of every newspaper."

Assayas: I don't remember seeing that photograph anywhere, though.

Bono: Nor did we. It seems his courtiers did not have the same sense of humor. Fair enough. I guess they could see the T-shirts.

Later in the conversation:
Assayas: I think I am beginning to understand religion because I have started acting and thinking like a father. What do you make of that?

Bono: Yes, I think that's normal. It's a mind-blowing concept that the God who created the universe might be looking for company, a real relationship with people, but the thing that keeps me on my knees is the difference between Grace and Karma.

Assayas: I haven't heard you talk about that.

Bono: I really believe we've moved out of the realm of Karma into one of Grace.

Assayas: Well, that doesn't make it clearer for me.

Bono: You see, at the center of all religions is the idea of Karma. You know, what you put out comes back to you: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or in physics; in physical laws every action is met by an equal or an opposite one. It's clear to me that Karma is at the very heart of the universe. I'm absolutely sure of it. And yet, along comes this idea called Grace to upend all that "as you reap, so you will sow" stuff. Grace defies reason and logic. Love interrupts, if you like, the consequences of your actions, which in my case is very good news indeed, because I've done a lot of stupid stuff.

Assayas: I'd be interested to hear that.

Bono: That's between me and God. But I'd be in big trouble if Karma was going to finally be my judge. I'd be in deep s---. It doesn't excuse my mistakes, but I'm holding out for Grace. I'm holding out that Jesus took my sins onto the Cross, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity.

Assayas: The Son of God who takes away the sins of the world. I wish I could believe in that.

Bono: But I love the idea of the Sacrificial Lamb. I love the idea that God says: Look, you cretins, there are certain results to the way we are, to selfishness, and there's a mortality as part of your very sinful nature, and, let's face it, you're not living a very good life, are you? There are consequences to actions. The point of the death of Christ is that Christ took on the sins of the world, so that what we put out did not come back to us, and that our sinful nature does not reap the obvious death. That's the point. It should keep us humbled . It's not our own good works that get us through the gates of heaven.

Assayas: That's a great idea, no denying it. Such great hope is wonderful, even though it's close to lunacy, in my view. Christ has his rank among the world's great thinkers. But Son of God, isn't that farfetched?

Bono: No, it's not farfetched to me. Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: he was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn't allow you that. He doesn't let you off that hook. Christ says: No. I'm not saying I'm a teacher, don't call me teacher. I'm not saying I'm a prophet. I'm saying: "I'm the Messiah." I'm saying: "I am God incarnate." And people say: No, no, please, just be a prophet. A prophet, we can take. You're a bit eccentric. We've had John the Baptist eating locusts and wild honey, we can handle that. But don't mention the "M" word! Because, you know, we're gonna have to crucify you. And he goes: No, no. I know you're expecting me to come back with an army, and set you free from these creeps, but actually I am the Messiah. At this point, everyone starts staring at their shoes, and says: Oh, my God, he's gonna keep saying this. So what you're left with is: either Christ was who He said He was the Messiah or a complete nutcase. I mean, we're talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson. This man was like some of the people we've been talking about earlier. This man was strapping himself to a bomb, and had "King of the Jews" on his head, and, as they were putting him up on the Cross, was going: OK, martyrdom, here we go. Bring on the pain! I can take it. I'm not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside-down by a nutcase, for me, that's farfetched

Bono later says it all comes down to how we regard Jesus:

Bono: If only we could be a bit more like Him, the world would be transformed. When I look at the Cross of Christ, what I see up there is all my s--- and everybody else's. So I ask myself a question a lot of people have asked: Who is this man? And was He who He said He was, or was He just a religious nut? And there it is, and that's the question. And no one can talk you into it or out of it.

 

RELATED POST: Grace Over Bono

 

RECOMMENDED RESOURCES FOR FURTHER READING:

We Get to Carry Each Other: The Gospel according to U2

Walk on: The Spiritual Journey of U2

 

Shop at Amazon and help support The Poached Egg!

Comments

[Steven Carr]

I think what Bono was trying to say is that his god killed a lot of people in the Old Testament, but at that time the children of god were all Jews, but now the children of god are Christians, which makes a difference as Bono's god can relate to them better than he could relate to people in the Old Testament.

[Peter]

"The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside-down by a nutcase, for me, that's farfetched."

I wonder if Bono has heard of Hitler ...

[Celine 2012 Sale]

In 1995 postgnzcxb in your 2nd hour | Celine 2012 Sale Oh huh construction is also fulank Celine 2012 Sale.
fkatabey ◆﹉

[J]

Bono has either has no idea of what Karma means, or he is misusing the term like just about every westerner since forever.

@the person trying to claim the 'eye for an eye' business for Judaism - Hammurabi got the jump on it well before Judaism did. Know your history before you start making historical claims.

[Patty]

This is one of the most incredible interviews I have heard in a long time. I am definitely sharing this with my friends. Thank you for sharing! <3 It is nice to know that Bono is as human as the rest of us and has not let his stardom take over who he really is in his heart. His humbleness and conviction to help others in need speaks volume to me.

[Michele Engel]

Re: Judaism and Karma, please note that the Jews introduced the concept of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" as a legal paradigm shift from the conventional practice of punishing a man or woman who stole a piece of bread with death. They were saying, you cannot take more from someone than that person took from someone else. If I poked out your eye, the most you can do for vengeance or punishment is poke out my eye (or fine me and/or put me in prison for awhile). It has absolutely nothing to do with karma. This was a radically progressive and enlightened legal concept in it's time--one which modern society often takes for granted. Unfortunately, I have seen many Christians display a complete lack of understanding of the history and intention of that phrase on bumper stickers and elsewhere. Sadly, they are knowingly or unknowingly promoting anti-semitism. It irresponsible for the members of any religion to go around speaking with authority on topics they've not bothered to adequately research.

[Lucia Frangione]

Grace over Karma is the subject of my upcoming play Leave Of Absence, plus so many ideas expressed in this article. This encourages me but also humbly reminds me nothing is original! How confirming to read so many ideas along the same lines coming out of the mouth of Bono, an artist I find so inspiring theatrically and spiritually. Grace can be controversial; it has taken me seven years to get this play produced. Thank you for putting this out into the universe, poached egg. Lucia Frangione

[melodions]

Muslims are converting to Christianity by the thousands. Did you know that there are about 10 million Christians in Egypt? Many Jews are also converting to Christianity. I know MANY Christians who were raised not being indoctrinated into any religion.

[marbegirl]

Bono, you were very eloquent in that interview! Not sure if anyone has mentioned The Case for a Creator in this thread. I'd highly recommend.

[Debra E. Tate]

Bono you are so real and such a good person. I'd like to meet you someday. I love people who love my Lord & Saviour. God gave me the gift of integrity and I thank him for that everyday. That's how I know when I see a Godly man who's for real and you meet that quota. Please call me if you're ever in L.A. and i'll make you the best sweet potatoe pie you've ever had so I'm told. I don't need anything just prayer and that's enough. I pray for you and your family and may they know how valueable you are. If you go on face book you'll see my husband and I. Stay faithful we love you.

God Bless you always.
Debra E. Tate

[Greg West]

Hey Damian,
Glad to have you back! Know worries on being away, I know the difficulties of being part of manny discussions. Your questions are always welcome here. I do not personally have the answer to everything, but I will always try to answer as best I can, or at least try to point you in the direction. You wrote "I just don't believe that we have a clue about what God actually is". I believe that we can have a clue and that it is in the Bible, which is God's special revelation to mankind. The Bible is not just one book, it is a collection of 66 books written over a period of about 1500 years by about 40 different authors whose backgrounds and geographical locations vary. And from this we have ended up with one cohesive story. From creation and the fall in Genesis to restoration and a new creation in Revelation. I was a newly committed Christian when I began to seriously study and read the Bible. Once I began looking into the reliabilty of the Bible as an historical document, it really began to blow my mind. Archaeology only continues to confirm the Bible more and more. There is not one piece of archaeological evidence that contradicts the Bible. As far as different translations go (I amake it a habbit of using several different versions) the differences are usually a matter of translation style and preference. Some people prefer a more literal word for word translation, others prefer a thought for thought translation, and still others prefer a more middle of the road approach. For instance, a wooden literal word for word translation of 1 Samuel 9:2 speaking of the future King Saul would actually read, 'From his shoulders up, Saul was taller than anyone'. Now this does not make much sense in today's language, but from the context, we know that it means, 'Saul stood head and shoulders above the rest', which would be an example of a thought for thought translation.
As far as different demoniations go, I am one of those who is all for having different denominations. While there are non-essential points of doctrine we may disagree on, there are essential truths that we must agree on, such a the divinity of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and salvation throug faith (trust) in Jesus for the forgiveness of sin. Examples of non-essential would be something like 'sprinkling baptism vs emersion' or 'how often we partake of the Lord's supper'- things like that. I think of the church in two ways: The visible church; i.e. the buildings, different denominations, etc.; and the invisible church, which is all believers united by faith in Jesus Christ. There is no one right way to worship; Some may prefer a more formaql liturgy, while others like myself prefer it to be more informal. If you were to walk into my church wearing a suit, you would be most welcome, but it would be obvious that it was your first time there. But back to the Bible... Christianity stands or falls on the Bible being true or not. There are those who will read it and read about it and simply dismiss it as a book of fairy tails, but there are also many people who read it and are lead to faith. One example of this (among many) is former Nazi V2 rocket scientist, Werner von Braun, who came to the US after the war and worked for NASA heading the Saturn V rocket program. He bacame a Christian as the result of reading a Gideon Bible that a friend had given him.

[Damian]

Hi All,

I have not had much time to be on this board as I have been working quite long hours so apologies if someone has written something and I seemed rude by not responding. I will look at these responses as soon as I can. I have in my free moments been looking at this issue of Atheists Riddle (Perry Marshal) which I am finding very intriging but just need to brush up a little more on my amino acids etc. Just to reiterate, I am not an Atheist but I just don't believe that we have a clue about what God actually is (other than what we ourselves, based on our perceptions, have defined and derived from the physical evidence of ourselves and our surroundings) and therefore cannot properly define God.

Just something that came to mind (and which is an extension of my multiple religions argument), is that why are there so many different versions of christianity. Before you answer, I agree that they are all very similar and that any variations in the bibles they use are minimal but why do we have Pentecostal, Roman Catholic, Protestant etc? Which in your opinion is the correct one? An answer that may pop up is that certain churches add to many layers in getting to "God", Roman Catholic's spring to mind :-). Interested to hear your thoughts.

Thanks

[Greg West]

@F.Corderan,

There are many passages in the synoptics that you are overlooking that reveal the diety of Jeesus, which, I will admit, that to us with our 21st century point of view, are more subtle and less frequent than in the book of John.

I will note one example here: In Luke 5 when some men bring a prarlytic before Jesus, Jesus said to the man, "Young man, your sins are forgiven."
This really cheesed off the Jewish religious leaders because they believed (rightly) that only God had the authority to forgive sins and said "Who do you think you are? Only God has the authority to forgive sins!" To which Jesus replies, "I will prove to you that I have the authority to forgives sins." Which he does by healing the sick man.

By stating that he had the authority to forgive sins, he was claiming to be God. In many other passages, when Jesus speaks of his "sitting at the right hand of power of God" these are claims of divinity. Any time he refers to God as his 'Father' is a claim to divinity. In Jewish culture of the time, a son was considered as having the same authority as his father.

You should also notice that no one in the Old Testament refers to God as their father.

One must take into consideration that each gospel was writen to a specific audience of the time and each paints a portrait of Jesus for its intended audience. For a very brief introduction to this, please go here: http://www.padfield.com/1999/gospels.html

For a much deeper study of this I would highly recommend the book, Four Portraits, One Jesus: A Introduction to Jesus and the Gospels, by Mark Strauss

You should also take into consideration that most scholars, even many who are critical or skeptics, will admit that there is evidence that Jesus was be preached and worshipped as 'God'
within just a few years of the resurrection (or for the skeptic, the alleged resurrection).

You wrote that "The epistles cannot count heavily because they were written by men who had a vested interest in promoting the identity of Jesus as God." I am wondering what you consider this "vested interest" to be? There is no historical record, biblcal or exra-biblical, of any of the apostles gaining any kind of riches or political power from preaching Christ.

The Bible tells us that they were persecuted, imprisoned, beaten, and killed. External historical evidence tells us this as well. All of the apostles (with the exception of John) are reported to have gone to gruesome deaths, all while sticking to their story that they were eyewitnesses to having seen the risen Jesus.

As for your argument about women required to be subordinate to men, that is a whole other subjest for debate so I'm going to stick to the divinity of Jesus.

Please accept my arguments in the spirit of encouraging you to dig deeper into this subject for yourself to see if your arguments stand up to scrutiny. I have no interest in winning any argument/debate or to show that I am better or smarter than you. I am just a sinner saved by grace who wants to share Jesus with others. Please keep in mind that I was not always a Christian and was once a skeptic myself.

Peace to you,
Greg

[F. Corderan]

@ Greg West

I take your point, that there are many clear statements of the divinity of Jesus in the Bible. But that sidesteps the essence of my point, which is that the synoptics, which are generally accepted as likely the most accurate accounts of Jesus's life, are almost devoid of these claims. At your link, under the heading "Jesus is God", the majority of the citations are not from the synoptics, and of those that are, the only unequivocal statement attributed to Jesus himself is that in Mark 14:61-62.

The epistles cannot count heavily because they were written by men who had a vested interest in promoting the identity of Jesus as God. further evidence of the fallibility of the epistles is that they add a number of other elements that are absent from the synoptics, e.g. the requirement that women be subordinate to men, which has no foundation in the Gospels.

The underlying problem is that the truth of Biblical statements regarding the divinity of Jesus rests on the prior acceptance of that divinity. 'The texts are true because they are inspired by God; therefore statements in the texts that Jesus is God must be true.' It's circular reasoning.

I am bringing this up not in order to score cheap points but because I feel that Bono's question, which is very commonly used in popular Christian apologetics (cf. "Lord, Liar or Lunatic?") is incredibly weak and does more harm than good in the long run. Bono's other statements about the operation of his Christian faith in his life are far more moving and persuasive.

[Greg West]

@F. Corderan,

Hello. You stated 'That question ignores a third possibility: that the Gospels are not an accurate record of what Jesus said. Given that only John has Jesus making a clear claim to messiahood and divinity, I think the third possibility is the most likely.'

Although I agree with you that John paints a broader picter of Jesus as 'God' than the other Gospels, you are failing to take into account the Bible as a whole, including the Old Testament. Not to mention the epistles, which make very clear statements of Jesus as God, and many, if not most of these were written before the Gospels. Please visit the link below:

http://www.life4square.com/bible/jesusgod.htm

[F. Corderan]

"Who is this man? And was He who He said He was, or was He just a religious nut? And there it is, and that's the question. And no one can talk you into it or out of it."

That question ignores a third possibility: that the Gospels are not an accurate record of what Jesus said. Given that only John has Jesus making a clear claim to messiahood and divinity, I think the third possibility is the most likely.

[lj]

I'm not sure where Bono gets this idea of karma? The Judo/Christian World view and karma are totally incompatible.
If I could recommend one book to Bono: The God Who is There: Dr. Francis Schaeffer

[Sue]

Jack, you rock! I totally agree with you and you are quite eloquent - you put it all much better than I every could. You go!

[Desi Serna]

@Michelle

What were the Christian crusades?
http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-crusades.html

Is Jesus a myth? Is Jesus just a copy of the pagan gods of other ancient religions?
http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-myth.html

The Origin of Christmas
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/12/19/feedback-the-origin-of-christmas

How Christianity Changed the World
http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Changed-World-Alvin-Schmidt/dp/0310264499

[Greg]

What's all the fuss about Jack? I thought this was about Bono.
Please, amateur theologians and apologists, keep quiet.
Most of you are embarrassing.

[Pat]

God's goal is receive love from His creatures rather than create puppets, hence our free choice, our will, though not in unison with His, caused us to fall.

Look at the Universe, the world, and all things created and imagine all of this was made for us. Amazing, awe inspiring.
Albeit, taken for granted. If the One Who made dirt, water and the skies can create a whole universe, it is not difficult to acknowledge His becoming flesh.

Good job Bono, it is really wonderful to hear a celebrity being humbled when he considers himself before the Creator. I am in Awe of our Lord too.

[Marty]

I wish you all peace that passes understanding.

[Greg West]

@Desi

Great job referring the 'got Questions?' link. I thinl I'll post that one today!

[darhug]

Frank J. Tipler explains in his excellent book The Physics of Christianity exactly how the virgin birth took place.

[Desi Serna]

@Damian

The best resource to explain why the evidence of a creator links back specifically and only to the Christian God is the book "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1581345615?ie=UTF8&tag=thepoaegg-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1581345615

Don't let the title give you the wrong impression. It's not just about countering atheism. It actually runs through the whole gamut of beliefs and shows how the world's different spiritual views measure up to the available evidence.

While the book presents some of the best evidences for creation from different fields of knowledge including philosophy, logic, various sciences and history, what I found the most helpful is how the authors threaded everything together and linked it directly and uniquely to the Bible.

Before I read this book, I was already familiar with some arguments for the Christian God and, although I found them interesting, they weren't compelling enough on their own for me to accept the Bible as the one and only divinely inspired text. But now I see how there is no reason to trust anything but the Bible.

The only problem I had with this book was dealing with my own resistance to its conclusion. The Bible says that the wicked suppress the truth in unrighteousness, and I can definitely vouch for that. What a fool I used to be!

In addition to the book, I also recommend this very brief article about what makes Christianity unique from other religions theologically.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christianity-unique.html