Recently, I have been reflecting on a statement that Jesus makes in the sermon on the mount, where he says, "Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." (Matthew 5:33-37)
At times, I have found myself puzzled by the force of this statement. Is the way in which we make (or break) promises really one of the potential domains of the evil one? Indeed, it is, in a most powerful way.
For a long time, I would have maintained that love is more important than anything else. Paul himself writes that when you boil everything down, faith, hope, and love are what remain, and the greatest is love. Never being one to disagree with the text of the Bible (at least not intentionally), I have come to realize that my definition of love needs amendment. Perhaps I am simply more blind than most, but I always interpreted Paul's statement that "love never fails" as being a general principle that love always somehow wins in the end.
However, I have come to realize that I have (rightly) placed a great deal of emphasis on kindness in my definition of love, but I have neglected another central aspect- the one which causes love, in the words of Paul, to never fail: integrity.
While I believe firmly that random acts of kindness are needed and valid, I have come to realize that kindness without character is really not love at all. I have become aware that all the random acts of kindness in the world cannot make up for a lack of character. If I promise you that I am going to come by and drive you to a doctor's appointment, and fail to show up, it doesn't matter how often I randomly show up at your doorstep with free pizza and a case of pop, or offer to take you on a road trip to any corner of North America at my own expense. The simple fact of it is that, as kind as I may try to be, I have failed to show love. Kindness comes easily, but what I end up being, in the end, is a very nice liar.
Much harder to build, then, is a simple consistency of character which says that I am going to be who I claim to be. I cannot be all things to all people- the key is to be passionately present in those places and with those people with whom I have agreed to be. While I know that there are theological reasons for Jesus to say what he said- cautions against blasphemy, for example- there is also the implication that while we might come across as nice people, even kind people, in the end we are useless and deceitful... that certainly does quality as being from the evil one.
So what does all this mean? I don't know really. Recently, I have become very much aware of how utterly frustrating and discouraging it is living in the presence of persons who simply not who they claim to be. That's not meant as a jab at anyone in particular. Rather, it is a call to introspection and repentance.
In taking the time to reflect on this sort of thing, I have to admit that I, too, am not the person I claim to be. The seeds of hypocrisy are like mold that proliferates in the dark- they wait to spring up when I am not actively letting the light of Christ shine in my corners.
Secondly, it is a call to action. Imagine a world where those of us who are part of the church are marked by unswerving character. Imagine if those who knew us were drawn to us by the way that we simply come through for them and for one another. Random acts of kindness are wonderful things, but they simply aren't enough- integrity is tied up in love and cannot be removed.
Without integrity, my acts of kindness are scattered and ineffective, at best an unfocused attempt to love in a meaningful way, and at worst, they are an attempt to atone for all the ways in which I simply have not been there as the man of God that I have purported to be. God help me, because that's where I find myself so many days... the worst part is, the people around me probably can't tell which one it is.
Those of us who are in Christ stand as proof of divine integrity- Jesus remained true to his calling and purpose. Regardless of what many moderns "scholars" would say, he was more than just a great example of humanity, or a great teacher. His obedience to God was an aspect of the integrity of his love- a love that carried him in obedience to a Roman cross.
Anyway, I hope I am making sense. I figured it's better to just let this stuff spill out... after all, I'm not writing a theology textbook.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Life from Death
I think that it's important to note, first of all, that I am not an Emergent, nor Emerging. I don't live in the Village, or anything like that. In a sense, I just want to join the Conversation without the theological framework laid by some of the more prominent thinkers in the Emergent movement, such as Brian McLaren.
I say this because I am in 100% agreement with the questions that this movement asks, but I disagree almost as completely on the way which they have begun to answer them. I get the sense that if there is a portion of Christian doctrine which is troubling, the natural response is to get rid of it.
My goal, however, is not to trash the Emergent movement. They're already taking a hard it from other directions and I don't feel the need. Frankly, I'm also not that well-read yet. There's also the added challenge that understanding the nature of Emergent theology is like trying to nail jello to a tree.
I think that a good portion of the reason why they are taking such heavy criticism is that they are asking questions that many would prefer remain unasked, and challenging ideas that some feel are best left unchallenged.
The truth is, I am beginning to despise the label of "Christian". That's not to say I hate Christians, since I fall very easily into that category. It is the label, and the way that it is understood, that rubs me the wrong way.
The label of Christian, at one time was synonymous with a death sentence.
The label of Christian was a label for a radical- a man or woman who was marked by their allegiance to Jesus Christ in defiance of the culture at large, no matter what the cost.
I don't know when the word "Christian" was first used as an adjective, but it is certainly not used biblically. It seems the early church was far to busy being Christian (and dying for it) to come up with an exhaustive market campaign.
Love was the marketing campaign, love enabled and fueled by the Holy Spirit of the Resurrected Christ- killed and raised again to life as Sacrifice and High Priest. United and bound by one Spirit, one purpose, and one love, they were to be the aroma of Christ- the scent of death to the dying and of life to the living.
While that purpose remains, I fear that we, as a Christian community, have given in to culture more than we have witnessed to and redeemed it. We have watered down the message of the gospel so that it is neat, pretty, and appealing. A dear, former co-worker of mine once commented that he actually saw the motto "We preach a convenient gospel" on a plaque on the wall of a church.
The label of Christian has become a designer label, as evidenced by the great number of Christian products floating around out there. As I have thought about our Christian books, music, and culture, I have come to realize that the label "Christian" in the modern era has come to mean that whatever you are about to read or listen to is, above all, inoffensive. It is safe and soft. Some writers and speakers even go so far as to treat Jesus as a cosmic Dr. Phil, who has died and risen again so that we can be free from depression, low self-esteem, bad habits, and financial strain.
Yet the Bible is seditious, and those who ingest it become seditious people. For the past 2,000 years, the call of Jesus and the Word of God has called the people of God to do irreverent, dangerous, and irrational things. Men and women of all ages have gone to gruesome and horrifying deaths rather than deny Christ (I believe upwards of 70,000,000 in the past 2,000 years). People have given up fortunes or promising careers, because they felt that they could serve Jesus better somewhere else- just look at the apostle Matthew or Zacchaeus.
In short, what I'm talking about is the life of Christ in us making a difference- as much of a difference as the dead dry bones in Ezekiel 37 coming back to life. We were once dead in our trespasses and sins, and Christ has breathed new life and freedom into us.
Freedom from the wrath of God.
Freedom from sin and its guilt.
Freedom from the chains that this world has placed on us through its labels- we are no longer "pervert", "murderer", "thief", "adulterer", "homosexual", "drunkard", "addict", but we are now "in Christ", if indeed we are born again by the Holy Spirit.
Paul says in Romans that we are no longer slaves to sin, but slaves of righteousness. Our lives and our service will bear out the allegiance of our hearts.
The difference, my friends, is the difference between life and death.
I say this because I am in 100% agreement with the questions that this movement asks, but I disagree almost as completely on the way which they have begun to answer them. I get the sense that if there is a portion of Christian doctrine which is troubling, the natural response is to get rid of it.
My goal, however, is not to trash the Emergent movement. They're already taking a hard it from other directions and I don't feel the need. Frankly, I'm also not that well-read yet. There's also the added challenge that understanding the nature of Emergent theology is like trying to nail jello to a tree.
I think that a good portion of the reason why they are taking such heavy criticism is that they are asking questions that many would prefer remain unasked, and challenging ideas that some feel are best left unchallenged.
The truth is, I am beginning to despise the label of "Christian". That's not to say I hate Christians, since I fall very easily into that category. It is the label, and the way that it is understood, that rubs me the wrong way.
The label of Christian, at one time was synonymous with a death sentence.
The label of Christian was a label for a radical- a man or woman who was marked by their allegiance to Jesus Christ in defiance of the culture at large, no matter what the cost.
I don't know when the word "Christian" was first used as an adjective, but it is certainly not used biblically. It seems the early church was far to busy being Christian (and dying for it) to come up with an exhaustive market campaign.
Love was the marketing campaign, love enabled and fueled by the Holy Spirit of the Resurrected Christ- killed and raised again to life as Sacrifice and High Priest. United and bound by one Spirit, one purpose, and one love, they were to be the aroma of Christ- the scent of death to the dying and of life to the living.
While that purpose remains, I fear that we, as a Christian community, have given in to culture more than we have witnessed to and redeemed it. We have watered down the message of the gospel so that it is neat, pretty, and appealing. A dear, former co-worker of mine once commented that he actually saw the motto "We preach a convenient gospel" on a plaque on the wall of a church.
The label of Christian has become a designer label, as evidenced by the great number of Christian products floating around out there. As I have thought about our Christian books, music, and culture, I have come to realize that the label "Christian" in the modern era has come to mean that whatever you are about to read or listen to is, above all, inoffensive. It is safe and soft. Some writers and speakers even go so far as to treat Jesus as a cosmic Dr. Phil, who has died and risen again so that we can be free from depression, low self-esteem, bad habits, and financial strain.
Yet the Bible is seditious, and those who ingest it become seditious people. For the past 2,000 years, the call of Jesus and the Word of God has called the people of God to do irreverent, dangerous, and irrational things. Men and women of all ages have gone to gruesome and horrifying deaths rather than deny Christ (I believe upwards of 70,000,000 in the past 2,000 years). People have given up fortunes or promising careers, because they felt that they could serve Jesus better somewhere else- just look at the apostle Matthew or Zacchaeus.
In short, what I'm talking about is the life of Christ in us making a difference- as much of a difference as the dead dry bones in Ezekiel 37 coming back to life. We were once dead in our trespasses and sins, and Christ has breathed new life and freedom into us.
Freedom from the wrath of God.
Freedom from sin and its guilt.
Freedom from the chains that this world has placed on us through its labels- we are no longer "pervert", "murderer", "thief", "adulterer", "homosexual", "drunkard", "addict", but we are now "in Christ", if indeed we are born again by the Holy Spirit.
Paul says in Romans that we are no longer slaves to sin, but slaves of righteousness. Our lives and our service will bear out the allegiance of our hearts.
The difference, my friends, is the difference between life and death.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
