Well, friends, I again disappoint those of you who may enjoy the reading of my blog for its poetry. There is a time for verse and a time for prose, I suppose. (I rhymed
prose and
suppose; does that count as poetry? Just trying to work with you guys.) Sadly, today's writing bears the distinctive marks of sterile,
a posteriori thought. My current struggles compel me to use the less impactful and artistic forms of speech for the sake of their precision. I hope you can bear with me because the following ideas are worthy of much revision to be sure, and I'd cherish all the feedback I can get. [As an important note, for the sake of expediency, I will use very narrowly descriptive language throughout the course of this essay as a matter of expediency of speech, and not as indication of my confidence on these matters. Everything from this paragraph on is easily open for discussion in my opinion.] With all of that out of the way, on to the thinking, then...
So, I've been formulating a diagram in my mind in the last few weeks to demonstrate graphically something that should probably never be demonstrated graphically...but which I produced nonetheless. I was reading from Jesus' sermon on the mount in Matthew 5-7, and I had an interesting thought about the placement within his sermon of the section regularly referred to as "The Narrow and Wide Gates." Here is the entire chapter for you to read, in case you'd like to peruse your way through it:
Matthew 7
Judging Others
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.
Ask, Seek, Knock
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. "Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
The Narrow and Wide Gates
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
A Tree and Its Fruit
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
The Wise and Foolish Builders
"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash." When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.
The diagram that follows this paragraph is by no means representative of any total picture of the criterion involved in crafting a life of spiritual richness or maturity. I have neither the wisdom nor the experience to be able to create such a thing, and surely if it were simple enough to render into two-dimensional imagery, the Bible would've been a collection of drawings instead of an overarching narrative written over 1,600 years by over 40 authors in multiple languages. However, this does distill in some meaningful way, one idea I've been processing about what that Narrow Gate might look like.
The Vertical Axis: Faith vs. Belief
Firstly, the vertical axis of the graph represents what we often think of when we recall much of modern evangelicalism's approach to salvation: the binary decision to "accept Christ as your Lord and Savior" or to face the penalty of not doing so. People who do not believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior find themselves on the lower half of this axis, and the simple decision to believe in him as such is the only criterion for passing above that midpoint, if one desires. This is nothing new to anyone who has been made aware of even the most caricatured versions of evangelism. This represents, in many ways, the Sinner's Prayer, or something of the sort. The overall aim of this diagram, however, seeks to incorporate other aspects of Christ's teaching into the determination of one's faith position, which may more fully explain what it means to become a follower of Christ.
In keeping with the nomenclature of the Revelation 3:14-22 concerning commitment to Christ, the extremes of passive belief are colored blue to indicate people who are "cold" in their faith, and the extremes of active faith are are colored red to indicate people who are "hot" in their faith. The darker middle section indicates people who might be considered "lukewarm" in their faith. I would also like to note that the proportions of this diagram make no estimation of a proportionate estimate concerning how many people are in any of these given groups, just to be clear.
The specific criterion of what the most colorful sections of the diagram represent will be more clearly defined in the forthcoming sections. However, it seems useful to define broadly what we might expect at either extreme of the vertical axis.
Cold Christians
On the lower half, we would expect to find the majority of people who do not affirm the basic tenets of Christianity, i.e., muslims, non-messianic jews, bhuddists, hindi, agnostics, athiests, secular humanists, etc. Perhaps more surprisingly, I would also percieve that the New Testament teaches that there are people who may call themselves Christians who actually live on the lower half of this diagram.
These people may include those who are "lukewarm" in their faith, as previously mentioned. Although the initial venture from the lower half to the upper half of the diagram is usually a dramatic or singular event, oftentimes the decline back to the lower half occurs in a more gradual fashion as the cares of life or the hardships of singular devotion slowly tug one's passion away from the focus of active faith in Jesus. Conversely, however, people may gradually cross above that line as earnest exploration for truth slowly draws them to Jesus. There are examples of both in the New Testament, and indeed, I've seen examples of both in my own life and interaction with people. Therefore, the bottom of the diagram could be just as easily described as
worldliness as it could be defined
satanism. Both are expressions of being on the lower half of the diagram.
Similarly, so-called "Christians" who are living on the bottom half may have an even higher profile than just the "lukewarm" Christians. These are whom Jesus refers to as
false prophets. Now, it may not necessarily be our role to make a blanket statement about which leaders in the church today are false prophets, or which movements are following false prophets, because we don't really know what is at work in most situations, do we? Suffice it to say, these people DO exist, and they may even have the power to work miracles or drive out demons, which means that we cannot rely on displays of power to determine the legitimacy of a prophets teaching. What we can observe is the fruit of their lives, but the methods of doing so are beyond the purview of this paper. Sorry. :)
Hot Christians
Those who live above the line live their lives not based on a mere intellectual assent to the idea of God. Instead, these are individuals who allow Jesus Christ to mold and bend the very shape of their lives. Of course, this can and
should be demonstrated in many various and diverse ways, as the Spirit leads each towards their calling. However, the most striking and unifying characteristic of this group is their willingness to submit both to the authority of Christ as they make their decisions, and often, to the authority of the healthy community that might surround them, even if it means major life adjustments. For a more extensive listing of examples, reference Hebrews 11 which is regularly referred to as the "Hall of Faith"--in other words, a passage which celebrates the great faith of many of the people who lived for God prior to the writing of the Book of Hebrews.
The Horizontal Axis: Polarizing Fundamentalism
This particular element of the diagram, perhaps more than any other, I'm sure will garner the most controversy. I hope, however, in a limited fashion, to enunciate my thoughts clearly enough that I will not be misunderstood, even if I am disagreed with.
Of course, the American culture and politics--and the English language--have offered us a number of different ideas that we could use to fill in the definitions of the words
liberal or
conservative. For instance, a candidate running for political office in America who opposes legalized abortion might be called
conservative, even if they run with the Democrats. Alternatively, a father who does not allow his 16 year old daughter to wear lipstick may be labeled (most likely by the aforementioned daughter and her peers) as being overly
conservative. On the other hand, suppose you run into a homosexual male on the street and strike up a conversation. It might be easy to assume, based on the single issue of gay rights, that your new acquaintance is
liberal in their political views. However, you might be surprised to find out that they are "fiscally conservative", and because of that, they vote Republican in many state and local elections. Similarly, you might come across a parent who never disciplines their child in any way, but instead gives them everything they want
liberally as they demand it. As you can see, there could be much room for confusion.
Make no mistake, however, that the function of this axis on my diagram is bi-partisan. As I eluded to above, the horizontal axis represents any sort of fundamentalist mindset that would draw us away from the teachings of Christ based upon our own senisibilites or discomforts. In this way, I welcome nearly all forms of equivocation that may occur with the words
conservative or
liberal as it relates to this discussion, for almost any form of these mindsets can be utilized to create distance between oneself and the Gospel.
It seems only right that I base this assertion upon rational evidences, so as not to become dogmatic in my own moderate assertions. For the sake of space and time, I will only discuss my thoughts concerning the left and right sides of the upper portion of the diagram, insasmuch as we are ultimately focused on trying to align our lives through The Narrow Gate (which, if you haven't concluded by now, is represented by proximity to the vertical axis as it continues into perpetuity).
Conservative Fundamentalism
Conservative ideology has become the prevailing view of most evangelical Chrstians today, and I myself grew up in an evangelical family at an evangelical church. I find great value in my heritage as a human being and as a Christian being raised in a conservative environment, for conservativism generaly propogates a number of biblically rooted principles that are most often learned best as a child. For instance, conservatives believe in the strength of the individual to earn their own way through the world. This is often referred to as the Protestant work ethic, and has much of its roots in the concept originally recorded by the Apostle Paul: "He who does not work, does not eat." This effects almost every area of the conservative ideology--from supply-side economics, to the prohibition of abortion, to welfare reform.
An extension of this ideology also very often makes conservatives more prone to war or violence for the sake of protection of property, family, or their way of life. The concept of earning that which they own often creates a smokescreen of attachment to their way of life which the teachings of Jesus absolutely mutilate. While Paul and Jesus would not seem to assert that "communism" in its institutionalized and governmentally enforced forms would be the righteous path, they do both teach a wholesale detachment from that which we should expect from the world around us as we walk through it. In fact, Jesus and Paul both mention suffering on the part of the Gospel for the sake of helping the weak, the poor, the prisoner, and the lonely even to the extent that it would significantly alter the affluent lifestyle of otherwise affluent Christ followers. This is a difficult teaching; which Christ himself acknowledged when saying that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God" (Mark 10:25).
Another common characteristic of conservative fundamentalists is an apparent over-emphasis of morality in their regular life expressions. Whereas the liberal fundamentalist often bears a penchant for ethical living, the primary concern of the conservative is living their lives pursuant to a particular moral standard. Many overly conservative groups will follow these standards long past they days when they could still interact with their current cultures and still keep their morality in line, i.e., amish communities on the East Coast who may still not use electricity or wear bright colors. This is an extreme example, to be sure, but it is not the most extreme example. Even more extreme manifestations of conservative fundamentalism include, but are not limited to, Nazism (in certain regards, i.e., the importance of racial purity for the preservation of a Christian nation), the Salem Witch Hunts, The Crusades (in terms of the means used to motivate the people to go to war, not necessarily the cause behind those who motivated the people to those ends), and the Spanish Inquisition. As evidenced here, great evil can be perpetuated at the hands of conservatives in the name of morality.
But there is more than a secular historical basis for my caveat against conservativism. The New Testament itself was written to a culture of 1st Century Judaism that was everything but liberal. Story after story in the Gospels finds Jesus rebuking the establishment of religion for their blind adherence to moral codes and their sense of what was right and wrong. He commonly chastises them for their moral pomposity and arrogance, denouncing them for their ignorance towards the poor and their ill treatment of the weak. In Jesus descriptions, those who were strongest among the religious conservatives of his day would have to live with the guilelessness of a child if they were to ever enter the Kingdom (a pronouncement from which we get the perhaps oveused saying "born again"). Jesus, in telling Nicodemus that he had to be born again, declared that salvation from sins was as much about destroying religious institutionalism that would oppress the weak or serve the strong as it was about making any kind of qualitative moral reforms.
Liberal Fundamentalism
Equally dangerous throughout the history of the human race is an over-realization of the liberal ideals. Again, despite the fact that institutionalized communism is by no means a Scripturally mandated form of government, there are aspects of that ideology that can be traced directly to the good teachings of Scripture and which can be formed upon firm foundations. For instance, Jesus cared for the poor. The early church almost made it a vendetta to care for the poor. And both the Old and New Testaments have no shortage of references to helping the poor. One thing we know without certainty from the Bible--God cares for the poor.
Socialism, in its laboratory forms, seeks to systematize that sentiment. In asking the approrpriate ethical questions necessary to discover how one might best address the government's interaction with the people, Karl Marx wrote a beautiful critique of the cruelty of the capitalist system in his
Communist Manifesto. He (perhaps) over-simplifies his division of society into two distinct, meaningful classes: the proletariot (i.e., Joe the Plumber) and the Borgeoise (i.e., the Rockefeller family). His writings pit these two classes against each other in constant struggle--the proletariot constantly trying to make ends meet so as to buy the necessary materials for living, and the borgeoise constantly trying to sell their goods to society (both proletariot and borgeoise) while trying to maintain the highest profit margin for themselves, often by neglecting the proper treatment of the proletariot employees. This tumultuous system, although based on principles of social justice and equality, often lead to violent riots and revolutions against the governments of the countries who adopted communist systems. And, just like the revolutions that brought them to power, these communist governments were often ruthless in their enforcement of these "just" ideals. Evil, evil, evil.
Jesus and Paul have an especially poignant way of addressing the evils of liberal fundamentalism. For this sort of evil, words were really not sufficient to demonstrate that you are not to murder--because we already know that. No, Jesus and Paul, and countless other Christ followers in the first 300 years of the church took their example of non-violent revolution to its extremes, even death. They constantly challenged the cruelty of the system and the (then) men who made it work, even though they knew it would eventually lead to their being crushed under its cruel hand. This was the first example of pacifism our world has ever known, and perhaps the longest-tried example of it. It was not a "passive" way of living, as conservatives often assume pacifism to be. Instead, it was a way of living that challenged people to treat others like people, even when those people will kill you for it. In this way, it is obvious to see the extreme evils that can abide in fundamentalism of ANY KIND. Whenever we divorce the teachings of Scripture from their roots in the lives of the Savior and martyrs who lived it, we have the opportunity to get comfortable with our surroundings and to want to start to defend our stay here.
I eluded earlier to a more nuanced exposition of the crossing above the midpoint, and here I make that plain. In my estimation, there are two ways which an individual might make the journey of intellectual assent beyond the midway point of belief to the area of faith. Before I discuss them individually however, I have a few general observations about them.
Firstly, a direct crossing over straight along the vertical axis--although theoretically possible, I suppose--seems most realistically unlikely. The idea that someone is carrying absolutely no personal background in moral or ethical thought as they approach the question of Christ with earnestness seems to me impossible, although I am open to dispute on this point, as on most of my points. :) Therefore, neither curve approaches the origin of the graph as a representation that this middle area is actually, purely theoretical.
Secondly, each of the four curves represents a mathematical limit. For those who are not familiar with this term, it refers to a curve which approaches infinitely closer to an axis of the graph, but never actually touches the axis. A common way to demonstrate this is by asking a person to destroy a cake by cutting it in half until no halves exist anymore. Although, in reality, it eventually becomes impractical to continue cutting any smaller, you can theoretically never fully complete the task according to the instructions, because there will always be another half. These types of mathematical phenomena are represented on cartesian graphs (like my diagram above) through limits.
That mathematical tangent (pardon the pun) was significant for this reason--the middle area of the graph is purely theoretical, even to the furthest limits of the curves. In more plain terms, while it is possible for someone to be extremely passive in the beliefs, for a human to be completely negligent of their own well-being to the point of allowing harm to come to them would take an either emotional or chemical debilitation of the survival instincts. The only other option would be for them to believe so strongly in their indifference that they would put up with the pain or threat of death, but that would require them not being passive in their beliefs--therefore distancing them yet further from the vertical axis.
The Blue Curve: Salvation Through Self-Reliance
It is from the point of near-perfect passive belief that we start the journey of salvation through self-reliance, which is the first of the two possible approaches to Christianity. Another way of referring to this is "works-based" salvation. In order to make sure we are tracking together, I will flesh out these impersonal curves with a story.
Conservative Self-Reliance
Timmy grew up in a terrible home. His father left his mom when he was 2 years old, but that didn't really stop the violence that had been occuring towards him and his mother as his dad would beat them. She went out right away and found a new boyfriend who was just as violent towards mom and Timmy. As Timmy grew older, he knew his only way out of this kind of horror was through doing well in school.
Timmy studied hard, forsaking many of the typical innocent pleasures of childhood, like girlfriends, hobbies, TV, and sports to prepare for law school. He wanted to be a lawyer so he could put guys like his dad and his mom's boyfriends behind bars when he got older. He desperately wanted justice.
Throughout the course of his studies, Timmy met a group of Christians that met on his high school campus. They often spoke of their experiences at home with two parents who loved each other and only fought every once in awhile, and never with violence. He heard that they had a dog and a trampoline and every night, when they would go to bed, their dads would wish them good night and tell them that he loved them. This sounded like a fairytale to Timmy, but somehow he knew, even at that age, that that was what he wanted for his kids. So he joined the youth group, prayed the prayer, and continued on in his studies.
Timmy cleaned up wonderfully, and the whole youth group was ecstatic about his conversion. The youth pastor would often have him address the youth group and tell them about where he came from and why he was there. Timmy didn't mind--after all, if he was going to stand up to criminals in a court of law, he should certainly be able to stand up in front of a room full of kids. He would talk about how his dad drank, and how alcohol was an absolute evil to him throughout his childhood, and how he would never drink the stuff. He would talk about how other kids in high school were doing drugs or getting girls pregnant, but he would take no part--he was on a mission of justice.
Fast-forwarding a couple dozen years, Tim (as he called himself now) is running for judge. He has the backing of his local church congregation--he's been a member for over 20 years now--and the endorsement of the police department because, of all the prosecutors this county'd ever seen, Tim put more bad guys behind bars than any other before him, and in a shorter amount of time. Tim married a nice woman and was well into the awkward phases of his daughters middle-school years. There was no question that Tim was a good man, a good husband, a good lawyer, and a good father.
But I would ask this question: do we have reason to believe that Tim is, perhaps, not actually Christ follower? This is not to say that he is evil or lazy or anything of the sort. On the contrary, he is actually the opposite of all of those. That's why he's such a stunning example to everyone. However, at what point along that journey did Jesus actually CHANGE his course? And how many men and women in the church are there today who have similar stories? How many people have never, in becoming a Chrstian, ever been lead to come in contact with Christ? Just a thought.
Liberal Self-Reliance
I
would tell you another story about liberal self-reliance, but based on our previous discussion of the matters, I'm sure you can figure out what it would look like--and surely it's as pervasive an issue as conservative self-reliance. My brevity on its mentioning is no statement of support for it. It is merely brevity for sanity's sake.
Blue-Curve Danger
The danger of self-reliance in any form is that it meets us at the point where we realize that we need something, and seems to gently tell us that we can do it ourselves. In the process, it keeps Jesus at a convenient distance, because we are free to pursue our lives, our ideologies, our dream jobs and white-picket fences, all without forcing us to count the cost. In Matthew, a rich young Jewish ruler came to him asking him what he must do to be saved. Jesus asked if he'd obeyed the commandments, and the young ruler assured him that he had since he was young. With the brevity of almost an afterthought, Jesus essentially says, "Perfect! Now, sell everything you have and give it to the poor and follow me." This salvation, although not based on works, came at a very high cost for this young man, and it appears by the conclusion of the story that it was too much to bear. This young man had built his entire future based on the presumption that being a "good" man was sufficient and that he could just add another thing to his list to be saved, but left sad realizing that it was precisely his plans for the future that was seperating him from the salvation that, all of the sudden, seemed much less attractive. This is the danger of the blue-curve approach. Although either side of the curve may get you over the midpoint, it won't ever take you any further than being lukewarm in your deeds and faith.
Red-Curve Approach: Salvation Through Faith in Christ
Now we arrive at the pay off. The red curve represents what I believe to be the only sustainable approach across the midway point. The red curves begin from even the extremes of liberalism or conservativism (and, in fact, could originate from almost any point in the lower half) but work their way into the red via only one road--complete reliance on God.
There are those who were fairly close to the vertical axis in the first place that might not feel much of a pinch in moving up this way. For instance, many who have nothing to lose like poor people, prostitutes, homosexuals dying of AIDS, or athiests dying alone in a hospital, find this route particularly easy. And I believe the bulk of Scripture would say, "YES!" It takes nothing to give everything when everything you have is nothing! And God wants US, not what we have to offer him.
Those, however, on either end of the fundamentalist spectrum who still have hope in their ideas or their governments, their rules or their laws, their own strength or their own reputation--these are people who have much to lose. For them, approaching Christ means that, in approaching the center, they are also approaching prostitutes, AIDS patients, and what's even worse: their political enemies.
Enemies. Why, perhaps, did Jesus make such a big deal about loving your enemies?
Was this for their good? Or for ours?
As we lay down all the injustice that we feel should be paid back to us, we can feel assured we join those whom injustice has absolutely destroyed unto death. And as we lay down all that we have earned towards our salvation or towards our comfortable way of life we can be assured, we join the company of Him who forsook the comforts of heaven that even one poor, blind, leperous, or sexually immoral human might know wholeness once again. And as we lay down our station in society and our rights to power in a democratic society, we remain confident in our citizenship in the eternal kingdom where the great king will one day judge the world.
Some he will judge based on what they were able to produce, and those will come up utterly short of the injustice for which they need to be held accountable. But some he will judge based on what they admitted they weren't able to produce. Some he will judge based on their willingness to become like a child though they were a wise leader. Some he will judge based on the way they accepted His Son's sacrifice--and that alone--as a worthy penance for their sin.
Make no mistake--Jesus changed the playing field of judgment day. Those who want to be judged based on what they can do for themselves should prepare for major disappointment. Because, though all will be recognized for the evil that they have committed against themselves, other people and God, we now will ALL ONLY be judged by our faith.
Sola fides. SOLUS CHRISTUS.
Posts
