on being different…
Biblical records are filled with God’s desire and appeals with his people to be different from the world. It has been understood to mean that Christians ought to be different from non-Christians. However this begs the question – what does it mean to be different?
Now before I delve into the discussion proper, I would like to make clear that what follows is by no means an exhaustive discussion on the topic – it is merely meant to address a few misconceptions that I find personally disturbing. I have tried to substantiate my points with bible verses wherever relevant.
The most obvious difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that the Christian has (or purports to have) a relationship with the God of the bible. This, according to the bible, is established when one comes to the understanding and realisation that he is a sinner (defined in the bible as breaking God’s moral law); that since he has been tainted by sin, he is unable to come into the presence of God (because sin places us in direct opposition to Him); the penalty of sin is death (defined in the bible as an eternal separation from God); that God loved him so much and desires to have a relationship with him that He provided a way to be reconciled with Him (through Jesus accepting the penalty on his behalf); and then he accepts and applies the ‘payment’ to himself.
A second difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that upon becoming a Christian, we are indwelled with the Holy Spirit. His role is to continue to teach, convince, guide, mould and empower Christians to fulfil God’s will in our lives. This does not, in any way, suggest that Christians will become perfect and sinless, or that it is even a possibility for this to happen within this lifetime – it isn’t. The bible itself is clear about that (I believe there is no argument on these points thus far and so I have omitted references to actual passages).
An outflow of these principles is that once we have become Christians, we are no longer under the dominion of our sinful nature. We are also free from its guilt. Romans 6 tells us that, “we know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin (v6)… Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions (v12)… For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law (its penalty and guilt) but under grace (v14)…”
Being different is a matter of degree or quality and not entirety
However, it is important to realise that the changes that we experience when we become Christians are largely in the area of our status and relationship with God. It does not mean that ‘everything’ in our lives changes or must necessarily change. It does not mean that our lives ought now to be filled with nothing but Christian influences.
The problem is that human beings do have a tendency towards extremism. In conservative or fundamentalist churches, this, unfortunately, often manifests itself with the imposed requirement of throwing out everything in our former lives (figuratively throwing the baby out with the bath water).
Many Christians today are of the mistaken belief that they must speak differently from before (now punctuating every sentence they utter with a ‘God willing’), do everything differently, and have completely difference activities as before (anything they enjoyed prior to their salvation experience had to go too). It is almost like there was nothing good in their lives prior to becoming a Christian – everything simply had to go. Salvation is more than establishing a relationship with God, it is a complete personality and character overhaul. Nowhere is such an approach warranted or encouraged in the bible.
‘Lone Rangers’ vs ‘Cookie-Cutter’ Christians
One of the events that prompted this entry is a sermon that I heard in my church in July of this year. The preacher devoted a substantial amount of time during his message to the issue of carnality or what he described to be the ‘Sunday Christian’. It not only disturbed me because I felt that the conclusions that he was coming to did not sit well with my understanding of the bible, but also because he did not make any attempt to substantiate these claims with the bible itself – no passages were referred to. Furthermore, it appeared that this particular message had caused a number of people within the church to become discouraged, disillusioned and one (that I’m aware of) to even question her salvation! This simply would not do, I thought.
He began this line of thinking by first suggesting that it is God’s will for every individual Christian to be three things: (1) a believer; (2) a brethren; and (3) a blessing (point (2) is relevant to this heading, while point (3) is a subject best left to another entry in the future). He then proceeded to introduce two separate concepts: (1) the ‘Sunday Morning Christian’ and (2) the ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’.
The Sunday Morning Christians are allegedly those who come to church only for the service on Sunday mornings. They give the entire morning in devotion to God. They come, they worship, they fellowshipped with other Christians, but after the Sunday is over, they proceed to live their own lives – without further interaction with Christians until the following Sunday comes and the cycle repeats itself. The Sunday Sermon Christian, however, is one who comes in only for the sermon. This is right after the worship portion of the service has concluded. He comes only for the message and then he runs off. He does not have any interaction with other Christians. He only wants to ‘puff up’ his mind. No prizes for guessing which one is worse.
The point that the preacher was trying to make was that a Christian has to become integrated into the church, the specific collective of Christians that form his local church, rather than being a ‘Lone Ranger’. The only way to do this, it is alleged, is to attend the various activities and/or ministries of the church. Furthermore, this not a mere option that one may consider adopting. The way it was framed, it was an obligation, a commandment from God himself. Failure to comply was tantamount to disobedience towards God and makes one deserving of the label a ‘Sunday Morning Christian’, ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’ or ‘Lone Ranger’.
While it is certainly true that the bible constantly refers to Christians as God’s children and consequently as brethren to one another, this in no way implies what this preacher has taken it to mean. In fact, when the bible uses the analogy of a part of the body to describe the relationship between Christians (Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12) – it is with the universal church, the entire body of Christ that it has in mind, not the members of a particular church or assembly. This, I believe, is of vital importance.
There is an undeniable and unfathomable bond between Christians. This is can be seen when Christians who have never met before come together for the first time. There is a special unity, which not only defies human understanding, but is also another distinguishing feature which sets a Christian apart from a non-Christian. In this sense, it can be said that a Christian can never be a ‘Lone Ranger’. It is simply impossible. It also follows that one cannot say that each individual Christian must interact with (fellowship), serve within and/or receive support from a particular community of Christians ie his ‘local’ church. It simply isn’t a necessity and failure to do so does not make one disobedient. It also follows that ministry is not necessarily restricted to official activities within a specific church group. Since the bible has never placed such restrictions on us, we shouldn’t impose it on ourselves or those around us.
Furthermore, it might be appropriate to point out that the concept of a ‘Sunday Morning Christian’ and/or ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’ is completely alien to the bible (it simply has no equivalent in the bible). The only thing that remotely resembles this concept is that of the ‘carnal Christian’ which is also best left to a future entry.
Quite apart from the misguided belief that there are ‘lone rangers’ in the church and that these individuals are in some way disobedient, is the real problem of the ‘cookie-cutter’ Christian in many conservative or fundamentalist churches today. As eluded to earlier, many Christians in such churches feel a need to change every aspect of their lives. But this doesn’t stop at an individual level. There is a tendency to, at a church-wide level, try to ‘fit’ everyone into a particular mould of what the predominant group thinks a Christian should look like. Many buckle under the pressure of social acceptance, while those who resist are either marginalised or made to feel unwanted and unworthy.
Not only is this approach not warranted in the bible, but it does seem to resemble the very type of attitudes that Paul sought to prevent his discourse on the body of Christ as contained in 1 Corinthians 12:14-25, which reads, “For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.”
It would seem that the very attitude and action in many churches today of expecting members to fit within a predetermined mould of accepted characteristics and behavior are the very things that Paul is speaking against in the above passage. They are in effect asking everyone to be an eye, a hand, a foot. The fact is that Christians are made up of diverse characters, personalities and functions; this is the very intention of God; and there is to be unity in the church along with this diversity; and this diversity is vital to the survival of the church.
Biblical records are filled with God’s desire and appeals with his people to be different from the world. It has been understood to mean that Christians ought to be different from non-Christians. However this begs the question – what does it mean to be different?
Now before I delve into the discussion proper, I would like to make clear that what follows is by no means an exhaustive discussion on the topic – it is merely meant to address a few misconceptions that I find personally disturbing. I have tried to substantiate my points with bible verses wherever relevant.
The most obvious difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that the Christian has (or purports to have) a relationship with the God of the bible. This, according to the bible, is established when one comes to the understanding and realisation that he is a sinner (defined in the bible as breaking God’s moral law); that since he has been tainted by sin, he is unable to come into the presence of God (because sin places us in direct opposition to Him); the penalty of sin is death (defined in the bible as an eternal separation from God); that God loved him so much and desires to have a relationship with him that He provided a way to be reconciled with Him (through Jesus accepting the penalty on his behalf); and then he accepts and applies the ‘payment’ to himself.
A second difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that upon becoming a Christian, we are indwelled with the Holy Spirit. His role is to continue to teach, convince, guide, mould and empower Christians to fulfil God’s will in our lives. This does not, in any way, suggest that Christians will become perfect and sinless, or that it is even a possibility for this to happen within this lifetime – it isn’t. The bible itself is clear about that (I believe there is no argument on these points thus far and so I have omitted references to actual passages).
An outflow of these principles is that once we have become Christians, we are no longer under the dominion of our sinful nature. We are also free from its guilt. Romans 6 tells us that, “we know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin (v6)… Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions (v12)… For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law (its penalty and guilt) but under grace (v14)…”
Being different is a matter of degree or quality and not entirety
However, it is important to realise that the changes that we experience when we become Christians are largely in the area of our status and relationship with God. It does not mean that ‘everything’ in our lives changes or must necessarily change. It does not mean that our lives ought now to be filled with nothing but Christian influences.
The problem is that human beings do have a tendency towards extremism. In conservative or fundamentalist churches, this, unfortunately, often manifests itself with the imposed requirement of throwing out everything in our former lives (figuratively throwing the baby out with the bath water).
Many Christians today are of the mistaken belief that they must speak differently from before (now punctuating every sentence they utter with a ‘God willing’), do everything differently, and have completely difference activities as before (anything they enjoyed prior to their salvation experience had to go too). It is almost like there was nothing good in their lives prior to becoming a Christian – everything simply had to go. Salvation is more than establishing a relationship with God, it is a complete personality and character overhaul. Nowhere is such an approach warranted or encouraged in the bible.
‘Lone Rangers’ vs ‘Cookie-Cutter’ Christians
One of the events that prompted this entry is a sermon that I heard in my church in July of this year. The preacher devoted a substantial amount of time during his message to the issue of carnality or what he described to be the ‘Sunday Christian’. It not only disturbed me because I felt that the conclusions that he was coming to did not sit well with my understanding of the bible, but also because he did not make any attempt to substantiate these claims with the bible itself – no passages were referred to. Furthermore, it appeared that this particular message had caused a number of people within the church to become discouraged, disillusioned and one (that I’m aware of) to even question her salvation! This simply would not do, I thought.
He began this line of thinking by first suggesting that it is God’s will for every individual Christian to be three things: (1) a believer; (2) a brethren; and (3) a blessing (point (2) is relevant to this heading, while point (3) is a subject best left to another entry in the future). He then proceeded to introduce two separate concepts: (1) the ‘Sunday Morning Christian’ and (2) the ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’.
The Sunday Morning Christians are allegedly those who come to church only for the service on Sunday mornings. They give the entire morning in devotion to God. They come, they worship, they fellowshipped with other Christians, but after the Sunday is over, they proceed to live their own lives – without further interaction with Christians until the following Sunday comes and the cycle repeats itself. The Sunday Sermon Christian, however, is one who comes in only for the sermon. This is right after the worship portion of the service has concluded. He comes only for the message and then he runs off. He does not have any interaction with other Christians. He only wants to ‘puff up’ his mind. No prizes for guessing which one is worse.
The point that the preacher was trying to make was that a Christian has to become integrated into the church, the specific collective of Christians that form his local church, rather than being a ‘Lone Ranger’. The only way to do this, it is alleged, is to attend the various activities and/or ministries of the church. Furthermore, this not a mere option that one may consider adopting. The way it was framed, it was an obligation, a commandment from God himself. Failure to comply was tantamount to disobedience towards God and makes one deserving of the label a ‘Sunday Morning Christian’, ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’ or ‘Lone Ranger’.
While it is certainly true that the bible constantly refers to Christians as God’s children and consequently as brethren to one another, this in no way implies what this preacher has taken it to mean. In fact, when the bible uses the analogy of a part of the body to describe the relationship between Christians (Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12) – it is with the universal church, the entire body of Christ that it has in mind, not the members of a particular church or assembly. This, I believe, is of vital importance.
There is an undeniable and unfathomable bond between Christians. This is can be seen when Christians who have never met before come together for the first time. There is a special unity, which not only defies human understanding, but is also another distinguishing feature which sets a Christian apart from a non-Christian. In this sense, it can be said that a Christian can never be a ‘Lone Ranger’. It is simply impossible. It also follows that one cannot say that each individual Christian must interact with (fellowship), serve within and/or receive support from a particular community of Christians ie his ‘local’ church. It simply isn’t a necessity and failure to do so does not make one disobedient. It also follows that ministry is not necessarily restricted to official activities within a specific church group. Since the bible has never placed such restrictions on us, we shouldn’t impose it on ourselves or those around us.
Furthermore, it might be appropriate to point out that the concept of a ‘Sunday Morning Christian’ and/or ‘Sunday Sermon Christian’ is completely alien to the bible (it simply has no equivalent in the bible). The only thing that remotely resembles this concept is that of the ‘carnal Christian’ which is also best left to a future entry.
Quite apart from the misguided belief that there are ‘lone rangers’ in the church and that these individuals are in some way disobedient, is the real problem of the ‘cookie-cutter’ Christian in many conservative or fundamentalist churches today. As eluded to earlier, many Christians in such churches feel a need to change every aspect of their lives. But this doesn’t stop at an individual level. There is a tendency to, at a church-wide level, try to ‘fit’ everyone into a particular mould of what the predominant group thinks a Christian should look like. Many buckle under the pressure of social acceptance, while those who resist are either marginalised or made to feel unwanted and unworthy.
Not only is this approach not warranted in the bible, but it does seem to resemble the very type of attitudes that Paul sought to prevent his discourse on the body of Christ as contained in 1 Corinthians 12:14-25, which reads, “For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.”
It would seem that the very attitude and action in many churches today of expecting members to fit within a predetermined mould of accepted characteristics and behavior are the very things that Paul is speaking against in the above passage. They are in effect asking everyone to be an eye, a hand, a foot. The fact is that Christians are made up of diverse characters, personalities and functions; this is the very intention of God; and there is to be unity in the church along with this diversity; and this diversity is vital to the survival of the church.
posted by Clem | 8:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home