Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

Home Archives for Commentary

Being right or being loving . . .

Posted on Written by Leave a Comment

rightIt seems to me that if we are forced to make a choice between being right (winning the argument) and being loving, we should always chose the latter. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case with the Christian Church.

John 13:35 records Jesus as telling us that love is to be the defining characteristic of his followers. But love is not the first characteristic that comes to mind when those outside the church think of those of us inside. They think of us as judgmental, argumentative and coercive. They think of us this way because too often we have been judgmental, argumentative and coercive. We need to be honest about our failings in this regard and seek to do better.

The point is that we may pretend that we are better than those outside the church, but that is not true. We may pretend that we have better understanding of the world than those outside the church, but that is also not true. We are fumbling through life like the rest of humanity.

This is not to say that we don’t have answers. But any answers we have are those that God has given to us. They were given to us because God loves us, not because we are any better or any more deserving. If we get a good grade on the test, it is only because the Teacher gave us the answers.

What would happen if believers did the following?

  • Spent more time listening to our neighbors’ and coworkers’ stories and less time pushing our agenda.
  • Served others rather than argue with them.
  • Admitted our own inability to live up to Scriptural standards and our tendency to become smug, judgmental and coercive.
  • Prayed for a proper sense of humility.
  • Invited non-Christians to critique how well we represent Jesus.
  • Got past our discomfort in being around people who come from a different point of view and tried to get to know and understand them.

It seems to me that if we did a better job of loving our neighbors, we would be better representatives of the Christ that we claim to follow.

My observation is that most people realize that they don’t have all the answers and distrust people who act as if they do. Christians don’t have all the answers. We only have one answer and that is Jesus himself. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6), we are fumbling along trying to follow that way and must admit that we often get it wrong.

So let’s stop focusing on being right and focus on being loving. The God we claim to worship is big enough to show others where they are wrong and he will do it in a far better and more healing way than we ever could.

Counterfeits and the real thing

Posted on Written by Leave a Comment

CounterfeitThe fact that evil deeds have been done by those who claim allegiance to Christ is a criticism that is sometimes raised against Christianity. In thinking about a response to this critique, it dawned on me that anything of value is likely to be counterfeited. The presence of the counterfeit is a backhanded compliment and speaks to the value of the original.

How does one spot a counterfeit? Set the counterfeit next to the original and the differences will then become obvious. I have been told that when federal agents are trained to spot counterfeit money, they spend a lot of time looking at and getting to know the real thing. Their intimate knowledge of what a real dollar bill looks like makes the fake stand out like a clown at a funeral.

If we look at the evil done in the name of Christ and compare it with how Christ interacted with people, we immediately see the contrast. Compare the Crusades with Jesus’ admonition to Peter to put away his sword. Compare the Inquisition with Jesus’ lament over Jerusalem and his willingness to die for his disciples.

The Jesus that we see in the Gospels looks nothing like the perpetrators of these atrocities. I ask you to not dismiss the value of the original because of the inferiority of the counterfeit.

The church is not the only army that shoots its wounded

Posted on Written by Leave a Comment

Judges GavelI have heard it said that the church is the only army that shoots its wounded. I now know that this statement is not true. It is not false because the church does not shoot her wounded. It is false because the church is not alone in this behavior.

What brought this to mind was all the discussion about Adrian Peterson and his discussions with the NFL. Even after Adrian’s case was resolved in the courts, the NFL commissioner felt pressured to come down hard on Mr. Peterson. The apparent reason for the commissioner to do so was to protect the brand and the image of the NFL in the court of public opinion.

All parties concerned, including Adrian Peterson, agree that his actions in disciplining his son were inappropriate. Also, it seems clear to me that Mr. Peterson did not intend to inflict permanent damage on his son. While his intent was not to harm his son, Adrian was wrong in his actions and it was appropriate for the state to step in and apply correction.

But the public wants more. Because some of the evidence in the case was so widely publicized, the pubic became outraged and lashed out at Mr. Peterson. As a result, the NFL became embroiled in an embarrassing situation because one of its star employees was receiving negative press. Therefore Mr. Goodell, the commissioner, felt pressured to act.

It is right to have the goal of protecting and nurturing the child in this case. My question is how does preventing the child’s father from gaining income help the child? Roger Goodell had suspended Adrian for the remainder of the season, thus denying him the income from playing. This is on top of the loss of income from product endorsements as advertisers dropped any association with Mr. Peterson.

Now, I don’t know the financial arrangements that Mr. Peterson has with the mother of his child. Perhaps Mr. Peterson’s loss of income has no impact upon the child at all. So Adrian not being able to play may not hurt the child, but the loss of income does nothing to help the child.

Should we hold Adrian Peterson to a standard with regard to his parenting style? Yes, we should. Is there a process in place for that standard to be held? Yes, there is. Did the process apply corrective action? Yes, it did. The courts did their job. The evidence was presented in the court system and we have to assume that a reasonable response to the evidence was enacted. The people who made the decision had all the evidence that they thought necessary to render the correct decision.

We need to resist the pressure to make instantaneous decisions based on incomplete information. We are angry and perhaps even hateful to Adrian Peterson based on one episode in his life. I know nothing else about Adrian other than the fact that he is a very talented football player. Yet, the media asks me make such decisions on the little bit of information they provide.

Rather than denunciation and anger, perhaps a better response would be one of empathy and support. I am reminded of Jesus’s statement in John 8, that the one without sin is the only one qualified to cast a stone. I have done and said things that I hope never get the level of scrutiny that Mr. Peterson’s case has gotten from the public. Why should I hold Adrian to a higher standard than I am willing to subject myself to?

It is likely that Adrian Peterson is neither more nor less flawed than the rest of us. We should resist the temptation to assess Mr. Peterson based on a few sound bites and a few pictures.

We should be concerned about the wellbeing of the child AND Mr. Peterson. They are both created in the image of God, the God who reaches out to all of us to bring us into relationship with himself.

On forced moral reform

Posted on Written by 3 Comments

CeasarWe were out for the evening and decided to stop into a local thrift store. I found six books that were worth taking home, especially at 3 for $5.00.

One of the books I brought home was Volume III of Will Durant’s History of Civilization set. I opened the book at random and began reading about Caesar Augustus. The first paragraph I read was this.

He destroyed his own happiness by trying to make people good as well as happy; it was an imposition that Rome never forgave him. Moral reform is the most difficult and delicate branch of statesmanship; few rulers have dared to attempt it; most rulers have left it to hypocrites and saints.

By hypocrites, I assume he means those who give the appearance of moral superiority that they do not actually possess. Saints, on the other hand, are presumably those who do have the moral superiority. But either way, these are two classes of people who think that they know a better way for humanity. They seek to elevate the people around them to their own ideals.

In these postmodern times, this almost seems laughable. In 21st Century America, we look with disdain on anyone who thinks he knows a better way. We offer our disdain unless he is spouting the patent nonsense of those who preach (but do not practice) tolerance. But is not politically correct tolerance a type of moral reform? Is it not an attempt to impose the absolute belief that no absolute belief should be held as applicable to society at large.

Yet there is something in man that is drawn toward absolutes. We have seen men throw off the yoke of the church only to be caught in the yoke of hedonism or totalitarianism. I quote Muggeridge here:

“If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner.”

But as Mr. Durant brings out in the quotation above, we can attempt to force people into conformity to a moral code, but when that morality bumps up against what they perceive makes them happy, that moral reform is an everlasting source of irritation and frustration. We cannot change people from the outside in. It did not work for Augustus and it has never worked for the church.

But isn’t this the whole point of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? We are in need of a savior precisely because we require change from the inside out. It is not what goes into a man that defiles him, Jesus told us. The defilement is within and only the grace of God has sufficient power to make the internal change that makes the external change a lasting one. One does not read of any of the New Testament writers seeking to impose the will of the minority on the majority.

Certainly the church needs to speak out on moral issues. We are called to live and preach what Scripture commends as the right way to live. Yet, we need to do so with the understanding that to impose compliance on the outside without providing for reform on the inside will not work better for the church than it did for Caesar.

The only thing that will bring lasting change to our country is a massive outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the form of revival. Let it begin with me.

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama