christian idioms

Ok, I couldn't resist.  I tried.  For at least 36 hours.  But being a (former?) spoken word poet myself AND a lover of good theological discussion, I caved and decided to chime in on an already over-popularized and over-reviewed video:  "Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus"

First, if you've not seen it, check it out - Jefferson Bethke actually does a good job talking about what Christianity is in a medium that makes definitions difficult.  (I've always struggled to express accurate theology perfectly in verse)  Things like "Religion says do, Christ says done" echo a friend's vision for his recent church plant, "Unfinished people resting in the finished work of Christ."  

But a whole poem whose focus is a trite idiom from evangelical subculture?  An alternate title for this post could be "Shit Christians Say" in a tribute to the popular YouTube video epidemic.  Such phrases as "I love Jesus and hate religion" or "love the sinner hate the sin" are unhelpful on several levels, including that they gain meaning and context from within the church and therefore seldom resonate with those outside.  So who is the audience for this piece? And towards whom is Bethke aiming his darts? 

1)  Unchurched?  If this piece does nothing else, I hope that it draws out the tension in the assumptions that many inside the church have about those outside.  No one outside understands the distinction between "faith & religion."  The distinction is rooted in twentieth century evangelicalism, and therefore it either assumes the context of a Christian subculture or comes across as inane.

2)  Dechurched?  I sense this is closest to the mark, trying to convince people that their previous experience of or interaction with Christianity shouldn't define it.  Implicit in this argument is that Christianity has changed .. how so?  Is it cooler?  More palatable?  I think Jared Wilson addresses this best in his response "Jesus Was Religious."  Go read it, it's better than this one.  A quick teaser:  

Some make a boogeyman out of the idea of "religious people," by which it becomes clear what they mean is "traditional people" or the uncool. My feeling is that the Bible-thumping, starched suit-wearing, hellfire and brimstone religious people taking the fun out of fundamentalism are becoming fewer and farther between, while the church is brimming with self-righteous hipsters and cooler-than-thous. The Pharisees look like Vampire Weekend now. I'm not saying Jefferson is one of those guys; I'm just saying he's offering them red meat.

3)  Churched?  Is it a warning to those in church to be less religious? Possibly a good personal reflection and distinction, but a dangerous accusation to introduce within the church.  As Jonathan Edwards noted in discussing the harvest of the First Great Awakening:  

They, therefore, do greatly err who take it upon them positively to distinguish and gather out the tares from amongst the wheat.  Many of the servants of the owner of the field are very ready to think themselves sufficient for this, but their Lord says, "Nay, lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.  Let both grow together til harvest."  (Commentary on Mt. 13:28-30, taken from "Marks of the Work of the Spirit of God")

Perhaps the biggest problem is that the premise of comparing Jesus to religion assumes that Jesus needs to be rescued from religion.  In fact, it's the opposite - religion needs to be rescued by Jesus - that's why he came!  No matter what the audience, the piece seems apologetic in nature, and while apologetics (defense of faith) can be helpful, they aren't what ultimately convinces people.  Jesus convinces people.  If I want to see people changed, I need to talk about what Christ is - beautiful - rather than arguing about what he's not.  I can attest that I have won a lot of arguments, but never any converts though those arguments.  Again, as Edwards noted in his observations on revival,

"For persons to profess that they are so convinced of divine truths so as to esteem and love them in a saving manner, and for them to profess that they are more convinced or confirmed in the truth than they used to be ... are two very different things."  (Edwards, "Marks of the Work of the Spirit of God")

micro-darwinian comparative advantage

"We love the illusion of distance from death.  When we see a car wreck, we assume they must have been driving recklessly ... We distance ourselves by assuming bad things happen to other people because of some inferiority." 

~ Ray Ortlund, 4.dec.11

I watched "J. Edgar" last weekend, and was struck by the sketch presented of the man who shaped our country's federal police force.  The film draws heavily upon the discrepancy between the man and the myth, between his person and his image, which wouldn't be very curious at all except that he created his own image.  The movie highlights the idea that he personally provided the misinformation on which his legend was built.  Why?  We all have a reason for what we do ...

I believe it's the same reason that he is shown using "uppers" in the movie.  Here is the man who lived through Kennedy & King's death - and probably heard of both first.  He lasted through eight presidencies.  With all the misfortune he witnessed, how could he not have felt the imminence of his own, or at least felt the fragility of his life?  I think the director (screenwriter?  I am definitely not a hollywood expert) hits on a deep truth here: Hoover distanced himself from death in the same way we distance ourselves from tragic wrecks - by constantly reminding himself why he was superior to others.  First, through facts: "I'm not a lecher, like King & Kennedy. I'm a stronger leader than Nixon." And then embellishment: "After all, I've made important arrests - personally."  I think this same comparison - and delusion - drives me too.  If I can convince myself that I am better or more fit than the people around me, then I must be farther from death.  Micro-darwinian comparative advantage:  survival of the fittest meets pure capitalism on the scale of our individual lives. 

Jesus was the antitype of Hoover - and of us, I'd wager.  Christ did not fear death, and felt that death imminently, from his birth when the magi brought myrrh (an embalming agent) to his rebuke of his disciples when Peter claimed Christ would not suffer and die.  This is why survival of the fittest is such a dangerous thought - not because it threatens some creation narrative, but because it allows us to entertain a false reality, believing ourselves far more safe in our own abilities than we really are.  It doesn't challenge God's ability to create - it denies his sovereignty over our current fate.  It is not atheism - it is deism.  Darwinism enables us to maintain an illusion of distance from death, while Christianity drives us to our cross.  I fear my creation theology matters very little when my life is functional darwinism.  

where thanks are due

When Paul says, "If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink," (1 Cor. 15:32) he does not mean "Let's all become lechers."  He means there is a normal, simple, comfortable ordinary life of human delights that we may enjoy with no troubling thoughts of heaven or hell or sin or holiness or God - if there is no resurrection from the dead.  And what stunned me about this thought is that many professing Christians seem to aim at just this - and call it Christianity ... Am I overstating this?  Judge for yourself.  How many Christians do you know who could say, "The lifestyle I have chosen as a Christian would be utterly foolish and pitiable if there is no resurrection?"

~ John Piper, Desiring God, p. 261

Reflection is healthy, and the Thanksgiving holiday provides a great lens.  What am I thankful for?  I think too often I am thankful for the "normal, simple, comfortable, ordinary" that Piper describes above.

This year, I'd instead like to honor (Romans 12:10) some close friends - men that I admire - whose lifestyles would be "utterly foolish" without the resurrection.  John Nehme, who is leveraging his talents to raise awareness about human trafficking at Trade in Hope.  Kevin Turner, probably the most talented musician I know, who has dedicated his talent to advancing the kingdom locally through the church.  Justin Miller, who is using his business-IQ to leverage the church's resources to Care for AIDS and spread the gospel in Kenya.  Will Killmer, a true scholar, who has traded a chance at an elite, niche professorship in linguistics for training to bring the gospel to all languages.

I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus.  
(1 Cor. 1:4) 

the local watering hole

'The neighborhood bar is possibly the best counterfeit there is to the fellowship Christ wants to give his church.  It’s an imitation, dispensing liquor instead of grace, escape rather than reality, but it is a permissive, accepting, and inclusive fellowship.  It is unshockable.  It is democratic.  You can tell people secrets and they usually don’t tell others or even want to.  The bar flourishes not because most people are alcoholics, but because God has put into the human heart the desire to know and be known, to love and be loved, and so many seek a counterfeit at the price of a few beers.  Christ wants his church to be a fellowship where people can come in and say, “I’m sunk!” “I’m beat!” “I’ve had it!”'

~ Keith Miller & Bruce Larson, The Edge of Adventure

 

HT: The chief form of zealotry

Taken from Ray Ortlund's blog, 15 September:

“The state was the great gainer of the twentieth century, and the central failure.  Up to 1914, it was rare for the public sector to embrace more than 10 per cent of the economy; by the 1970s, even in liberal countries, the state took up to 45 per cent of the GNP. . . . The state had proved itself an insatiable spender, an unrivalled waster. . . . By the turn of the century politics was replacing religion as the chief form of zealotry.  To archetypes of the new class, . . . politics — by which they meant the engineering of society for lofty purposes — was the one legitimate form of moral activity, the only sure means of improving humanity.  This view, which would have struck an earlier age as fantastic, became to some extent the orthodoxy everywhere.”
Paul Johnson, A History of the Modern World from 1917 to the 1980s (London, 1983), page 729.

Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.  Psalm 146:3

calvin in my classroom: consequence

To quote D. A. Carson, "Both God's love and God's wrath are racheted up in the move from the Old Testament to the New." ("God's Love and God's Wrath," Bibliotheca Sacra, 1999)  In the Old Testament, God's wrath manifests in worldly ways; in the New Testament, God's wrath manifests itself in Christ's teachings on Hell.  If in the Old Testament God seems more wrathful to us, it's because we either don't believe in or don't understand Hell.

~ Dane Ortlund, 13.Aug.11

Economics teaches the idea of the "rational man," who weighs options and always chooses the one in his best interest.  I have never seen this man in my classroom.  He's not even on my roster.

Let me give you an example.  My students are not allowed to have their cell phones out during class; when I explain this, many students are shocked to discover that it is not simply an extension of their hand and mind.  As students invariably struggle to cope with their concept of the world being so flipped, testing to see if this is real life, they are given a harsh pinch to confirm: any cell phone that is out is to be given to  the principal, and only returned when a parent comes up to school to retrieve it.  Within this context, I often try to play "good cop" and give students a choice, "give me your phone now (solving the problem), or give it to the principal later (after written referral).  If you give it to me now, you can come get it at the end of the day."  Easy choice, right?  Except that having to give the phone to the teacher feels much more real because it's tangible and immediate, and many students will refuse because they have no concept of administrative referral/suspension.  

I fear that I often view God the same way that my students view our administration.  I have no concept of the wrathfulness of the New Testament - of the hell Christ preached - or I would not think that the Old Testament seemed so much more harsh.  It's all about tangibility.  See, the "rational man" concept assumes that man is governed by rationality; in reality, I'd suggest that man is actually governed by self.  Thus, instead of acting based on what makes the most sense, we act based on what we can conceive or imagine. We need Christ, in his grace, to take away the blindness that limits us to our own experience and imagination.  Only he can soften our hearts to the intervention he's provided so that we don't face the consequences of the system.

And this is not simply a spiritual problem.  Nicholas Nassim Taleb identifies the same problem in his work: we have great difficulty thinking outside our pre-existing categories (The Bed of Proscrustes) and therefore we are Fooled by Randomness.

spiritual neurosurgery

"For weeks, for months, I had been fighting to control my temper, figuring I could handle it myself.  Now, in that small, hot bathroom, I knew the truth.  I could not handle my temper alone ... Already heavy into psychology (I had been reading Psychology Today for a year), I knew that temper was a personality trait.  Standard thinking in the field pointed out the difficulty, if not the impossibility of modifying personality traits. Even today, some experts believe that the best we can do is accept our limitations and adjust to them.

Tears streamed between my fingers. "Lord, despite what the experts tell me, you can change me. You have to take this temper from me.  If you don't, I'll never be free from it. I'll do things a lot worse than trying to stab one of my best friends. You can free me forever from this destructive personality trait." 

Ben Carson, M.D. (with Cecil Murphey), Gifted Hands, Chapter 6

Read this in class today with the kids.  A neurosurgeon talking about changing our mental wiring! Thoughts:

1)  I had students predict what would happen to someone who tried to stab his friend: "jail, insane asylum, suicide, depression, reform school."  Actual result: surrender/dependence, change, freedom.  What a beautiful illustration of grace - and how radically foreign it is to our minds & culture..

2) We can't change ourselves.  Dr. Ben Carson, one of the most brilliant minds of our time, knows this is true - experientially, psychologically, spiritually. 

3)  There is hope that we'll never again have to fear what we're capable of.  "If you don't, I'll never be free from it.  I'll do things a lot worse.."  We know ourselves best, and at some level are ashamed of our negative potential.  But we are already in part - and someday fully - rescued from this worry.