Wednesday, March 15, 2006
WHAT'S WITH YUCKABUCK AND POLITICS LATELY?
REPLY TO THROWALL
See his comment here.
I do not think Jesus "changed his message or standards to avoid offending sinners or even religious leaders." But He was very clear on what His message was, and did not get bogged down in side issues. He was called the "scandalon," the "stumbling block," because His message itself was offensive to many and still is.
To use a current Christian cliche, I believe that we should be concentrating on offending people with "the offense of the gospel." Of course we cannot avoid offending people over various things, which is why the Spirit leads Christians to be full of "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control" (Galatians 5:22-23). But we should try to offend the most over the gospel, and the least over other things.
Sometimes there is a definite conflict. For example, some people may be offended at the anti-abortion stance of most Christians. Even though the pro-life issue is only tangentially related to the gospel, it is still a very important thing that I believe we must stand up for. But I believe some other things have been blown out of proportion by a modern day desire of some Christians to return to "Christendom," when Christians had all political power in Europe and the church ruled society.
To borrow and then twist Throwall's words, I am saying that, "If we are not careful, we will be responsible for sinners dying in sin because we" found too many ways "of offending them." To use a less controversial example (to the world but not to the church!!!), it is obvious that if certain people are turned off of the gospel because they attended a church service where people were singing songs in a style from the 1800's, then perhaps it would be wise to have another church service where the worship style is at least from the 1900's. I do not want to be responsible for people going to hell because I demanded they swallow "Here I raise mine Ebenezer; hither by thy help I'm come" and "Heavenly portals loud with hosannas ring!."
The gospel is crucial. Jesus did not say," Believe that I am the son of God, I died for you, and also believe that drums and guitars are evil; and you shall be saved." He also did not say. "Believe that I am the son of God, I died for you, and pass the Defense of Marriage Act; and you shall be saved." But I think many Christians are going about in a manner that is unwise, and giving exactly that idea to unbelievers. I am a conservative republican, but my politics are way, way less important than whether or not my neighbor meets Jesus.
My biblical basis for this is spelled out in the updates to the same-sex marriage post (here). In a nutshell, it seems to have been the apostle Paul's practice to place everything at the disposal of making the gospel "attractive" (Titus 2:10). For example, Paul engaged in a huge battle with people who said that gentiles should be circumcised in order to continue the christian walk that they had begun by faith alone (see Galatians). He even says that he hopes God damns to hell those who were spreading this idea (Galatians 1:9, what the greek literally means)! However, when Paul wants to take Timothy along with him, he circumcises him "because of the Jews who lived in that area" (Acts 16:3)! Paul did not change his personal beliefs or standards, but he saw that whether or not Timothy was circumcised was not very important in the light of whether or not the Jews in the area would accept the gospel.
Paul sums it up nicely in 2 Timothy 2:4, "No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs--he wants to please his commanding officer." In the marriage post, I tried to give a rationale for why I think many have gotten in too deep with politics. Paul opened a door for us to engage in changing injust social structures such as slavery, and so we went through it, but don't know when to stop. It is a simple fact that in today's polarized political atmosphere, many people see "Christian" as synonymous with "Republican." And responsibility for that lies at the feet of Christians in the church who have put politics ahead of the gospel.
Around 1993-1994, I thought that if Republicans could just take over the Congress and White House, then God would have His way in our country like we haven't seen in years. Well, they did. And not too much has changed! I am not removing myself from politics or voting. But I want my life to be an example of the gospel, not Republican ideals. I'm not perfect and I may offend somebody. Fine, I will humbly repent. But they might also be offended because they saw that I had given my life over to a crucified man who claimed to be the son of God dying to restore my standing before God. Now THAT'S something for them to be offended by! And I won't apologize or compromise on that.
See his comment here.
I do not think Jesus "changed his message or standards to avoid offending sinners or even religious leaders." But He was very clear on what His message was, and did not get bogged down in side issues. He was called the "scandalon," the "stumbling block," because His message itself was offensive to many and still is.
To use a current Christian cliche, I believe that we should be concentrating on offending people with "the offense of the gospel." Of course we cannot avoid offending people over various things, which is why the Spirit leads Christians to be full of "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control" (Galatians 5:22-23). But we should try to offend the most over the gospel, and the least over other things.
Sometimes there is a definite conflict. For example, some people may be offended at the anti-abortion stance of most Christians. Even though the pro-life issue is only tangentially related to the gospel, it is still a very important thing that I believe we must stand up for. But I believe some other things have been blown out of proportion by a modern day desire of some Christians to return to "Christendom," when Christians had all political power in Europe and the church ruled society.
To borrow and then twist Throwall's words, I am saying that, "If we are not careful, we will be responsible for sinners dying in sin because we" found too many ways "of offending them." To use a less controversial example (to the world but not to the church!!!), it is obvious that if certain people are turned off of the gospel because they attended a church service where people were singing songs in a style from the 1800's, then perhaps it would be wise to have another church service where the worship style is at least from the 1900's. I do not want to be responsible for people going to hell because I demanded they swallow "Here I raise mine Ebenezer; hither by thy help I'm come" and "Heavenly portals loud with hosannas ring!."
The gospel is crucial. Jesus did not say," Believe that I am the son of God, I died for you, and also believe that drums and guitars are evil; and you shall be saved." He also did not say. "Believe that I am the son of God, I died for you, and pass the Defense of Marriage Act; and you shall be saved." But I think many Christians are going about in a manner that is unwise, and giving exactly that idea to unbelievers. I am a conservative republican, but my politics are way, way less important than whether or not my neighbor meets Jesus.
My biblical basis for this is spelled out in the updates to the same-sex marriage post (here). In a nutshell, it seems to have been the apostle Paul's practice to place everything at the disposal of making the gospel "attractive" (Titus 2:10). For example, Paul engaged in a huge battle with people who said that gentiles should be circumcised in order to continue the christian walk that they had begun by faith alone (see Galatians). He even says that he hopes God damns to hell those who were spreading this idea (Galatians 1:9, what the greek literally means)! However, when Paul wants to take Timothy along with him, he circumcises him "because of the Jews who lived in that area" (Acts 16:3)! Paul did not change his personal beliefs or standards, but he saw that whether or not Timothy was circumcised was not very important in the light of whether or not the Jews in the area would accept the gospel.
Paul sums it up nicely in 2 Timothy 2:4, "No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs--he wants to please his commanding officer." In the marriage post, I tried to give a rationale for why I think many have gotten in too deep with politics. Paul opened a door for us to engage in changing injust social structures such as slavery, and so we went through it, but don't know when to stop. It is a simple fact that in today's polarized political atmosphere, many people see "Christian" as synonymous with "Republican." And responsibility for that lies at the feet of Christians in the church who have put politics ahead of the gospel.
Around 1993-1994, I thought that if Republicans could just take over the Congress and White House, then God would have His way in our country like we haven't seen in years. Well, they did. And not too much has changed! I am not removing myself from politics or voting. But I want my life to be an example of the gospel, not Republican ideals. I'm not perfect and I may offend somebody. Fine, I will humbly repent. But they might also be offended because they saw that I had given my life over to a crucified man who claimed to be the son of God dying to restore my standing before God. Now THAT'S something for them to be offended by! And I won't apologize or compromise on that.
