The "New Normal" and the Future of Sound Judgment

There is currently war being waged against the practice of sound moral judgment in our society. Secular author and radio host, Tammy Bruce, in her book, The Death of Right and Wrong, puts it this way:

How best to change Americans’ fundamental values? How best to indoctrinate you into a culture that grows sicker and more corrupt by the minute?...The Left has had to restrict individual freedom of thought and deed in order to destroy the concept of judgment and undermine notions of right and wrong that have been held nearly universally for millennia.

She is right. Over recent years, cultural attacks on sound moral judgment and biblical thinking, have been lodged with alarming success and surprising rapidity. It's as if our society has undergone a Blitzkrieg of political correctness and moral relativism that has left the Judeo-Christian foundations of our country in shambles and turned absolute truth upside down...Bruce Jenner has been celebrated as a "hero" for adorning his body with breast implants and dressing like a woman. Female celebrities have been lauded as "brave" for donning t-shirts announcing in bold-print the abortion of their unborn children. Coldblooded cop-killer and death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal has been glorified by masses of young supporters for over a decade for his black activism and politically driven writing. And more young criminals have since been venerated, while cops have been unjustly vilified.

Our children are growing up in a new era in which Christianity is more counter-cultural than ever before in America. Sexual immorality is unabashedly exalted in our culture. Homosexuality is lionized on Emmy-awarded TV shows like Modern Family, for example, which received mass acclaim for airing an "historic" gay marriage proposal (how many "ground-breaking" or "historic" gay moments can there really be?). Promiscuity is promoted everywhere we look. Sexual sin is becoming so deeply embedded into the fabric of our society that it's hard to distinguish it anymore as we become increasingly desensitized to it. The shock-factor we felt back in the 80s when celebrities like Madonna first flaunted their sexuality so controversially has less impact now that an anything-goes mentality is so prevalent. We might have talked about the antics of Miley Cyrus for 5 minutes, but now we're getting used to the new Hannah Montana. She's just one of the many skin-baring, hip-gyrating young stars stooping to new moral lows in the name of "expressing themselves." These young women are selling their bodies, and people are buying in droves.

These few examples alone indicate that the normalization of wrong has become commonplace in our society. Are we still talked about the body parts of murdered babies being sold for profit by Planned Parenthood? Or is that already yesterday's news...?

In the midst of all this, the Great Accuser is ready and waiting to condemn all those who practice sound judgment. And our culture is proving an accommodating climate for him to do so. We are increasingly being dubbed as closed-minded—even as bigoted haters.

A widespread sickness has gripped our nation. And it often attacks where we least expect it. While more striking cases of moral corruption such as those above might be easier to detect, some attacks against sound judgment are far less overt and arguably all the more insidious as a result. For example, the practice of mindfulness—a meditation practice that finds its origin in Buddhism—is steeply on the rise in our society. Widely deemed a harmless stress-reliever, mindfulness is in fact a dangerous form of false teaching that unapologetically undermines the use of our God-given conscience, our ability to practice sound judgment, and discern right from wrong. Psychology Today describes mindfulness as, "a state of active, open attention on the present. When you're mindful, you observe your thoughts and feelings from a distance, without judging them good or bad. Instead of letting your life pass you by, mindfulness means living in the moment and awakening to experience." (Emphasis added).

As a form of therapy, mindlfulness is now a growing trend in psychology and psychotherapy, which has been strongly promoted through mainstream media outlets as an effective stress-relieving remedy. Mindfulness is now being implemented in the American workplace (in companies such as Google, Safeway, Target, General Mills, and Aetna), in the public school system, in the federal government, and even in the armed services. And Christians need to take heed.

Why? Because mindfulness, especially when practiced routinely over a prolonged period of time, places the mind in a mild hypnotic state and leaves one vulnerable to the power of suggestion. Think about the long-term implications of our public school students growing up with the practice of mindfulness. They might have better attendance records and test scores (as has already been reported by a number of schools). They might feel temporarily more relaxed. But they won't be at peace (just because it feels good for a moment, doesn't mean it is good). And if this practice continues to grow in popularity in our schools, it'll be like we're fostering a generation of zombies who are trained to be indifferent to sin and who are preconditioned to resist their consciences for fear of experiencing stress. Think this is an overstatement? Google the number of schools that have adopted the practice, some as a routine part of the school day, like Patterson High School in Baltimore, for example. It's a growing trend, and it's coming to a school near you.

The implications of this are quite frankly mind-boggling. For the less we exercise sound judgment as a culture, the more our nation will embrace sin and reject God.

Our post-modern culture already encourages us to live in the here-and-now and place subjective feelings and personal experience over universal and absolute truths. Moral relativism (what is true/good for me might be different from what is true/good for you) is barely talked about anymore; it has become so ingrained in our collective consciousness that it's difficult to stand back and observe it. But, like a cancer, it's working its way to the backbone of our society. And it's eating us away at the core.

The evidence of this is undeniable; you've probably noticed that exercising judgment of sin is widely frowned upon nowadays! It's often confused in people's minds with judgmentalism and is hurriedly passed off as a negative behavior—something to avoid. Yet, Scripture repeatedly teaches that sound judgment is essential for spiritual health. In Proverbs, we are urged to preserve "sound judgment and discretion." (Prov 3:21). Jesus consistently encourages us to exercise righteous judgment, to hold one another accountable and to watch out for false prophets in our midst, for example. And Paul tells us to "test everything" (1 Thess 5:21); We are to judge every teaching, holding it up against God's Word, like the "noble" Berean Jews were commended for in the Book of Acts. For Scripture warns us that, "the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths." (2 Timothy 4:3-4). It is crucial, then, that we cling to sound judgment in a world of deceit in which Satan masquerades as an angle of light (2 Cor 11:13-15).

Don't believe the lie that sound judgment is judgmental! Throughout Scripture, there is a clear distinction drawn between two contrasting natures of judgment; judgmentalism (being excessively critical) is decried, while sound judgment (exercising wise discernment) is strongly prescribed. While humility is at the essence of sound judgment, judgmentalism is motivated by pride. Sound judgment is permeated with an acute awareness that it is by God's grace that we are saved, so that we cannot boast in our own strength. We can exercise sound, righteous judgment purely because our righteousness is in Christ. Judgmentalism, however, is self-righteous—and is not, therefore, of God.

Secular culture, however, is rejecting the use of moral judgment altogether—just as it is rejecting God—to embrace a "new normal" and the pursuit of "self truth." Just because immorality is being normalized in our culture, however, does not mean Christians need to accept it and refrain from discerning right from wrong for fear of being condemned by the world as bigots. For it is indeed very possible that within the next decade or two, it will be illegal to practice certain aspects of biblical Christianity, especially within our public school system. Signs of this have already begun. Gender-neutralization, for one thing, is on the horizon. How are we going to respond? With courage and righteousness, or with fear and capitulation?

As believers, we must live with our eyes wide open, while not giving into fear (it's not about being fearful, it's about being awake). As Christians, we are called to go against the tide of our culture when it comes to morality, not to live in denial or to unwittingly go with the cultural flow. For now is the time to be vigilant and to watch (Mark 13:37). Now is the time to pray for, practice, and preach sound judgment with courage. We must pray for our children. Pray for our country. And pray for the lost. Before it's too late.

The Strange Dichotomy of the Anti-Christian Christian

There's a strange phenomenon going on in our all-about-me culture. It presents as a curious mix of self-loathing and self-adoration both of which prevail simultaneously in the collective conscious. On one hand, the self is idolized; many of us are on a frantic quest to "be who we are," to "self-actualize," and to tap into our "inner truth." But on the other hand, we're guilt-ridden; we're never really good enough no matter how hard we work, no matter how many self-help books we line our shelves with, no matter how many ah-ha moments we rack up. We're always going to be too fat, too disorganized, too busy, too glutenated, too stressed, too you-name-it.

And when you put us all together, our problems only multiply. On a societal level, we don't really like what we see; many of us self-identify as those boisterous, greedy Americans that have caused the world to hate us. And so we condemn ourselves, try to throw off the shameful shackles of the past, and reject the archaic dogmas of yesteryear (aka the Judeo-Christian foundations of our Western culture) to embrace new things like the spiritually enlightened teachings and practices of Eastern religions, for example. Slowly but surely, we're trading in our constitutionally protected freedoms for a politically correct culture in which anything goes (anything other than conservative Christianity, that is). But while the grass certainly looks greener on the other side of the fence, we're not quite ready to give up our white-picketed American dream just yet. After all, we are patriotic and all that. It's all very confusing...

But in actuality, our sense of confusion stems quite simply from the fact that our society is caught up in a love/hate relationship with the self. In other words, for better or for worse, we're suffering from a bad case of self-obsession.

And the same dualistic phenomenon is even emerging within [gasp!] our Christian community. Sure—you've heard of Anti-American Americans, but what about Anti-Christian Christians? Sadly, they do exist, and their numbers are increasing. For, as an unfortunate by-product of our worldly environment, the self-loathing/self-idolizing complex is indeed cropping up more and more among Christians. Like our secular counterparts, we too are guilt-ridden. In a society that's pegged us as bigoted, narrow-minded, judgmental, and unloving, we all-too-often find ourselves hanging our heads in shame. If you hear something bad about yourself enough times, maybe you'll start to actually believe it. 

Admittedly, there's a case to be made. We're aghast at the sinful behavior that so often creeps into our community. We're ashamed of our broken churches filled with broken people. We wince at the hateful behavior of Westboro Baptist Church types (who, despite their tiny numbers, get way more media coverage than the vast majority of compassionate Christians do). We squirm at the problematic—sometimes violent—history of the church. But instead of seeking the answer to the problem of our sinful nature in Christ, we have a habit of looking to ourselves for the solution. In keeping with the New Age mantra de jour, we tend to seek the answers from within...

...If we just strategize a little more, maybe we'll be better at outreach. If we just make ourselves more relevant to the secular world, maybe young people will stop leaving the church. If we just talk more about "love" and set aside the tough (biblical) stuff, maybe we'll stop offending people so much. And if we can just disassociate ourselves from "Christianity" maybe people will like us more...

So, it follows that for the last few years, there's been an increasing desire among believers to escape from the label, "Christian," that causes so many negative reactions in people. The term certainly carries with it some baggage. And there is plenty not to like about the Christian church, both past and present. Throughout the centuries, corruption has constantly permeated the church, leading many believers these days to cast off the negative association as a result.

For a quick and informative read, check out
Robert Spencer's book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam
(and the Crusades)

Take the infamous Crusades, for example, the problematic history of which certainly feeds into the Christian guilt-complex. While it should be noted that the Crusades were attempts in the 11th through 13th centuries A.D. to reclaim land in the Middle East that had been violently conquered by Muslims, it is true also that the name of Christ was abused, misused, and blasphemed by the actions of many crusaders. Certainly, the Crusades should not be considered an authentic outworking of the Christian faith. Yet the negative connotation is cemented in the minds of many, including certain Islamic terrorists who have claimed that their terrorist attacks are revenge for what the crusaders in the name of Christianity. No wonder some believers run from the term.

And so it's not surprising that there's been a push of late, to rescue the truth of the gospel from the religion of Christianity—for as the argument usually goes: Jesus didn't come to start a religion, but to save souls. In this vein, there has been a distinctive move away from traditionalism and orthodoxy in the church, to get back to the roots of Christ-centered faith. It has become common, for example, for people to refer to themselves as "Christ-followers" rather than "Christians," in an effort to distinguish themselves from "Chreasters" [those who attend church only on Christmas or Easter] or to express the sincerity of their faith as opposed to a nominal religious affiliation.

It's with this sentiment, that I have heard it said in sermons and elsewhere that the term, Christian, appears nowhere in the Bible. The problem is, this isn't actually true. We know from the book of Acts that the disciples were called Christians first at Antioch (Acts 11:25). Luke used the term again when he described Paul's interaction with Agrippa: "Then Agrippa said to Paul, 'Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?'" (Acts 26:28). This indicates that it was a contemporary term of the early believers in the Apostolic Age.

The term, Christian, from the Greek, Christianos, literally means, “belonging to the party of Christ” or a “follower of Christ.” Having been used by the Apostles themselves and having endured for centuries thereafter, the term has certainly stood the test of time. Moreover, the Apostle Peter urged believers, "if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name." (1 Peter 4:16). According to Scripture, then, we are to praise God for being called a Christian—whatever the worldly connotations of the term may be.

Certainly, the gospel message is what really matters and the Body of Christ should not be seen as synonymous with a religious institution. But while I share the desire to redeem the gospel message from the stagnated tenets of institutionalized Christianity, I think we need to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, however. Jesus didn't come to start a "religion" it is true, but He did come to establish His Church. And as members of His Church, we are responsible for upholding biblical doctrine in order to save both ourselves and others (1 Tim 4:16). Throwing out some of the stuffy vestiges of traditional Christianity shouldn't include letting go of sound biblical doctrine—but in many cases, this is exactly what ends up happening...

While the current shift away from traditionalism can be helpful in refocusing churches back on the basics (the gospel message, the Person of Jesus, etc.), there is a significantly widespread manifestation of this effort that involves a departure not only from the traditional aesthetic (pews and stained glasses windows, for example) but from key doctrinal "constraints" such as biblical inerrancy and salvation in Christ alone, by faith alone. In other words, a sweeping rejection of traditional Christianity has, in some cases, done away with the essentials of the Christian faith, which culminates in an insidious form of anti-Christian Christianity.

For example, consider the emerging churches movement, which generally-speaking embraces a "post-evangelical" approach to the Christian faith. To varying degrees, emergents endeavor to repackage the Christian message to generate mass-appeal in a post-modern context and to put a new spin on Christianity in response to the fact that the traditional model is failing to hold the attention of the younger generations. They endeavor to "do church" in an nontraditional way, which is more appealing to young people. But in the effort to throw off the orthodox constraints that limit the preferred touchy-feely approach to "experiencing" God that many of these churches promote, sound doctrine is all-too-often marginalized. In fact, "Revisionists" within this movement go as far as to question whether evangelical doctrine is appropriate for the postmodern world at all. A worrying number of emerging churches are not only doctrinally lax, therefore, but some go as far as to tout an inclusivistic soteriology (the belief that those outside of the Christian faith may be saved).

In an effort to be relevant in the secular world, therefore, emerging churches often tend to mirror secular culture rather than presenting a counter-cultural worldview. This, however, is to look to the world first, not Scripture first, for the answers on how best to live out the Christian faith. And so, polarizing and inconvenient biblical truths are glossed over in an effort to make everyone more comfortable, and to avoid alienating anyone. The resulting tendency in this type of "seeker-friendly" environment is to downplay the gravity of sin, which sadly detracts from the redemptive power of gospel message. And because this approach places people's needs over God's glory, the Lordship of Christ is deemphasized—and the salvific identity of Jesus is blurred.

A similar pattern has emerged in certain areas of Muslim ministry—in which anti-Christian Christianity is perhaps at its most pronounced. In recent years, a growing number of missionaries and evangelists have begun to place more emphasis on the person of Jesus in their messaging, and less emphasis on Christianity as a whole, for the purpose of "building bridges" to Muslims. There is some merit to this approach, considering Muslims already revere Jesus as a prophet of Islam and are open to talking about Him. But outspoken proponents of this method—a number of whom have been gaining significant influence in evangelical missions—attempt to extract Jesus from Christianity completely (the religion that they say lays unfair claim to Him) in order to make Him more "accessible" to Muslims. Thus the push to emphasize Jesus and deemphasize Christianity, has too often involved an unapologetic departure from Christian doctrine, and the unsettlingly widespread adoption of unbiblical practices within Muslim ministry.[1]

In the same way as emerging churches mirror secular culture, evangelistic strategies such as the C5 (or the high-spectrum contextualization) method, Muslims idiom translations of the Bible, and Jesus in the Qur'an trainings (CAMEL), attempt to incorporate Islamic culture into the gospel message. While contextualization of the gospel message is always necessary to a degree, many of these strategies go way too far. In some cases, Jesus is stripped completely of His "Christian" image and repackaged in a Muslim-friendly way that bares little resemblance to the true Son of God. The Jesus of Islam, it should be noted, is an entirely different person from the biblical Jesus. But without His rightful Christian context, there's no longer a clear definition of, or absolute truth about, who Jesus is. In other words, the figure of Jesus, when extracted—even partially—from Christianity, essentially becomes an abstract one.

The Abstract Jesus can certainly hold alluring appeal. He can be accommodating and flexible. He can blend more seamlessly into your preexisting worldview, political leaning, or religious background. The Abstract Jesus, then, might seem more "accessible" to a Muslim who fears losing his or her Islamic identity, just as he is more accessible to anyone who wants to cling to their former way of life. He won't ask you to drop your nets and leave everything for him, negating the need for rebirth and dying to self. In fact, he'll let you remain as you are, and it is he who will fit in with you.

While Jesus said, "For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it" (Mark 8:35), these words are irrelevant when you're following an Abstract Jesus. For, without doctrinal absolutes (like that of biblical inerrancy, for example), Jesus becomes, in effect, anyone you want him to be—and says anything you want him to say. Removing Jesus from Christianity, then, is essentially tantamount to creating your own counterfeit Christ.

Despite recent attempts by those from within the interfaith movement to amputate Jesus from His Body—the Christian Church—and recreate Him as a bridge for all peoples, a peacemaker, a uniter of faiths,[2] it cannot be denied that the biblical Jesus is, in contrast, polarizing. Jesus was open about this Himself when He said, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34). Jesus said He would even pit family members against each other. Indeed, the very Person of Christ—who He Himself claimed to be—offends and divides people. It is true that the Prince of Peace will one day bring about eternal justice and peace with God—His name is an everlasting source of hope! But for now, in this already-but-not-yet age we live in, the name of Jesus causes division and unsettles the fallen human heart precisely because of who He is. 

And it is biblical doctrine that defines who Jesus is. 

To cast off biblical doctrine as a bygone relic of outmoded evangelicalism—as is increasingly the case in today's emerging and liberalizing churches—is merely to replace one set of beliefs with another [less theologically sound] one. For the fact is, anyone who holds an opinion on who Jesus is, is subscribing to some sort of doctrine about Him, whether biblical or not. The delusion of the anti-Christian Christian is that they are freeing Jesus from the doctrinal constraints of Christianity. But in actual fact, it is they who are confining the figure of Jesus to an egocentric set of self-generated notions. They misunderstand that it is actually the transcendental truth about Jesus that sets us free as presented in His Word—or in other words, as defined by biblical doctrine.

The importance of this cannot be overstated. The early church recognized that “an understanding of Jesus’ identity is essential to genuine Christianity and a prerequisite for experiencing salvation and enjoying a relationship with God.”[2] And indeed Jesus made this clear when he said to Thomas, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well.” (John 16:6-7, emphasis added). 

But the fact is, many who use His name do not actually know the true Christ. Jesus said:

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one 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 in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ (Matt 7:21-23).

To know Him and to do His will involves understanding the truth about who He is, what He did for us on the cross, and what His Word teaches.

Anti-Christian Christians might stop for a second and consider who they are really fighting against. Hopefully, prayerful, honest, and humble introspection with reveal to their hearts and minds that they are actually attacking the Body of Christ—the very Body of the Jesus to whom they purport to belong. It's a true case of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

The tragic dichotomy of the anti-Christian Christian is a sad reflection of the perverse worldly culture around us. It is merely another manifestation of self-obsession: obsession with one's own guilt and obsession with one's own efforts to compensate for that guilt.

But ultimately, "Man must completely despair of himself in order to become fit to receive the gift of Christ,” as Martin Luther so aptly put it. When we position ourselves as the solution to our self-generated woes, we fail to receive the gift of redemption in Christ. We make it all about us, and less about God. Despairing of ourselves does not mean we should remain steeped in guilt—for those who are in Christ, there is no condemnation. And when we get so caught up in our failures or in the problems of our broken churches, we fail to glorify God. But despairing of ourselves is to realize that Christ—not any of us or any of our self-help strategies—is the only solution to the sin of the world, for He truly is the only way, the truth, and the life. And we can do all things through Him who strengthens us.

Christians must stand firm in our identity as members of the Body of Christ. This is not to be confused with clinging to the pews, stained glass windows, or other such hallmarks of the Westernized church—as certain anti-Christian Christian leaders like to claim.[3] It's about clinging to Jesus Christ, who is the Head of our Church. It is in His name we reject any perceived shame associated with the Christian faith. And we should humbly praise God that we bear the Christian name (1 Peter 4:16). 

It is a great honor to be called Christians—ones who by His grace, belong to the "party of Christ." Let's not squander the eternal gift we have in being members of His Body.

---

[1] For more information on unbiblical missiology within Muslim ministry, please refer to blog post: The Abstract Jesus.

[2] Andreas Kostenberger, Scott Kellum, Charles Quarles, The Cradle, the Cross and the Crown, Part II, chapter 3

[3] Carl Medearis, Tim Timmons, Mark Siljander, et al.

How in the World Should I Live?

The perennial question, how should I live out my faith as a Christian in a world that has rejected Christ? has occupied my thoughts for many years. Living in the Washington, DC area, I have been exposed to a wide variety of interpretations of what it means to live life as a Christian. I have asked other believers for their points of view and the answers I've received have varied quite a bit. I've asked questions like, are we to be counter-cultural or culturally sensitive? Are we to be relevant to the world or radically different from it? And how much in the world can we really be without being of it? These are issues that we all have to consider, not just for our own lives, but also in our churches at large. We need to ask ourselves: Are we to be radical or relevant, or somewhere in between? 

The term "relevant" in the Christian context refers to the widespread effort over the last decade or two to make Christianity more relatable to younger generations (who are leaving the church in droves) by speaking more directly to their lives. More often than not, trying to be relevant to young people has led churches to mirror secular culture as opposed to presenting a counter-cultural worldview. I've also noticed that Christians who are more culturally relevant in their lifestyle share more common ground with unbelievers than Christians who live out their faith in a more radical way. The same goes for "seeker-friendly" churches that attempt to be relevant over being radical. At times, I have wondered if Christians who are more entrenched in the ways of the world are better positioned to outreach to unbelievers because they can relate to them more easily and haven't alienated themselves as much as the more radical Christians have. 

When my husband and I had children, we began to discuss the topic of how to live in the world with a renewed sense of urgency. We asked ourselves, how can we best prepare our children for adult life in a secularizing culture? How much of the world should we expose them to and how much should we protect them from? I started to worry that we would turn them into Christian kooks in a hostile world if we were too radical, or sheltered them too much, in our parenting. I worried that if we acted "too Christian," we would turn people off, and alienate ourselves. But then I would also worry that if we compromised too much on our biblical convictions, we wouldn't be helping our children build a solid foundation for a faith that endures. 

It was when I actually turned to Scripture for the answers, however, that things started to become clear. The problem is, I had been getting lost down a confusing rabbit trail of thoughts and theories of my own mental construction. I was getting bogged down in the "buts," and the "what ifs," and the "on-the-other-hands." Instead of going to God's Word first, I had been looking to the world for the answers, focusing primarily on the conflicting opinions of other people. But God's Word has a funny way of turning human ideas upside down, doesn't it? It was one of those be-careful-what-you-ask-for kind of scenarios because going to Scripture with a surrendered heart will always provide answers...but the truth is not always easy to swallow! The Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart (Heb 4:12). God's Word certainly cuts to the chase.

The first thing that struck me when I went to Scripture was quite simply that this world is not our home. The beautiful, simple truth of this penetrated my heart more deeply than ever before. We are described in Scripture as sojourners in an alien world, as "foreigners and strangers" whose "days on earth are like a shadow, without hope." (1 Chron 29:15). Our hope is not rooted in this world. And our short lives on earth are like a vapor (James 4:14). The world will tell us to "live in the moment," but the beguiling pleasures it has to offer can entrap us into losing sight of the everlasting riches that await us in Glory. Peter reminds us of this when he writes, "Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul." (1 Peter 2:11). The world tells us to focus on the here-and-now, and to indulge the desires of the flesh, but Scripture tells us to live our lives in light of Eternity. This puts the temporary trials and fleeting pleasures of this world into perspective doesn't it? Rather than getting too cozy in the world, then, we are to be sojourners—wanderers—in the world until we are called home.

As I thought more about what it means to be "foreigners" in the world, I realized that foreigners look, act, and talk differently from the inhabitants of the alien environment around them. They stand out. They speak a different language. So then, as followers of Jesus Christ—whom the world has rejected—we should also stand out from the rest of the world, rather than seeking to blend in with it. Paul tells us not to conform to the patterns of this world, but be transformed by the renewal of our minds (Rom 12:2). And he further explains that we, "must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart." (Eph 4:17-18). Because unbelievers are alienated from God, we, as children of God, are consequently alienated from them. 

Rather than feeling pressure to fit in with contemporary culture or the worldly status quo, Paul says we should "come out and be separate from the world." (2 Cor 6:17). He explains that we should not be unequally yoked with unbelievers, for what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever and what fellowship can darkness have with lightness? Because God lives in us, and we are His temple, we should come out and be separate from those who worship idols in His place (2 Cor 6:14-18). The use of the analogy of lightness and darkness to show the incompatibility of righteousness and sin is also used by John when he writes, “If we claim to have fellowship with Him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.” (1 John 1:6). 

It is hard to break free from the deceitful patterns of this world, if we fellowship with darkness—if we live life in close partnership with those who worship the things of this world. This should not be misconstrued as an excuse to retreat into a holy huddle, however. We should wholeheartedly reach out in the love of Christ to unbelievers. We are called to go out into the world and make disciples (Matt 28:19), and this can't be achieved inside a Christian bubble. For my husband and I this means we enjoy friendships with those who don't share our faith and try to witness to unbelievers. However, we live life closely with fellow Christians because we share a deeper level of intimacy and spiritual understanding that is unique to the Body of Christ. 

For me, it's all about balance. I don't think my family and I have to be outright weirdos or something...In many ways, we are a pretty average family (with a few quirks here and there for sure!). Personally, I like to follow fashion and other cultural trends within reason. But it's important to try to keep our motives pure in these things, asking ourselves: are we loving God first or loving the world first? 

The reality is, even if we try to fit in with the world and conform to its patterns, the world may reject us all the same. How many celebrities have we seen rise and fall in popularity? How many people who were once idolized have we seen plummet from fame? The world is ruthless and fickle. But the love of God endures forever. In light of this, it dawned on me with renewed clarity that as followers of Christ, we should seek to please God first, not people first, in all we do. Doing this is not often likely to win us popularity or worldly status. On the contrary; Jesus said, "You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved." (Matt 10:22). Christians are called to believe a foolish message and live a foolish lifestyle. But, God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise (1 Cor 1:27). Through the Cross, God exposed the wisdom of the world to be a sham (1 Cor 1:19-21). And we can take heart because Jesus has overcome the world! (John 16:33).

As a natural born people-pleaser, this is a refreshing perspective for me. When I am focused on pleasing God first and foremost, I am released from the pressure to win popular approval or to manage other people's perceptions of me. Seeking my identity in Christ is a real confidence booster! After I gave up my career (and with it the pursuit of worldly status) to stay at home with my children, for example, I didn't give up my sense of significance. This is because my significance was no longer based on how I am viewed in the world's eyes, but it is rooted in the fact that God, the Almighty Creator of the universe—the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end—loves me and thinks I am important! 

In light of this, when my husband and I discuss decisions on how best to raise our kids, or how to live out our faith, we try to do so in a way that honors God first by being obedient to His Word and going to Him in prayer. We no longer base our decisions on the changeable, unreliable opinions of the world, but on God's perfect and unchanging will. So, instead of building our lives on the quick-sand surface of a relativistic world, we're building our lives on the solid rock of absolute truth. Sometimes, the decisions we make may not be the most popular choice, but we can have peace knowing that pleasing God is all that really matters.

Ultimately, I believe that living an authentic life as a Christian is the best witness. Instead of trying to be like the world in order to be accepted by it, I think it's important to keep our identity firmly rooted in Christ, remembering that it's the role of the Holy Spirit to convict hearts, not ours to finesse our faith and tweak the gospel to make it more culturally acceptable.

Stop Sharing Jesus!

Yes! You heard me right. I think we should stop sharing Jesus. Let me explain...

Christians are commissioned to share the good news about Jesus with those who do not know Him (Matt 28:19; Act 1:8). But with the rising tide of pluralism and political correctness in our society, the concept of "sharing" Jesus is taking on new meaning. A growing number of Christians are starting to feel guilty about claiming Jesus as theirs and theirs alone, when lots of people from other religious and cultural backgrounds lay claim to Him also. In this context, "sharing Jesus" means showing tolerance towards other viewpoints on who He is. Rather than hogging Him for our Christian selves, shouldn't we share Jesus with people from other faiths and cultures, and free Him from a Westernized strait-jacket? Why should He be confined to our Christian churches with stained-glass and rows of pews, anyway? Isn't it unreasonable and, quite frankly, arrogant to think that we have all the answers about who He is? I hear this type of sentiment expressed more frequently now that cultural sensitivity is beginning to trump Scriptural accuracy more often in our churches.

There are indeed many different perspectives on who Jesus is that exist throughout the world—we may even encounter differing ideas among our friends or in our own neighborhoods. Our Muslim neighbors may revere Him as a great prophet. Our Mormon friends may proclaim Him to be their Savior. Agnostics may admire His moral teachings, but deny any certainty of His divinity. Spiritualists and New Agers may believe Him to be divine, but reject His uniqueness. And Jehovah’s Witnesses may tell you He is an archangel. We may even find varying opinions about Jesus within the Christian community. Living in the DC-metro area, and having worked in international development and missions, I have been exposed to a diversity of opinion on who Jesus is.

The fact is, however, these conflicting views on who He is cannot all be right. While it might make us feel more comfortable to adopt a politically-correct attitude towards Jesus' identity, it makes no logical sense. He's either the Son of God or He isn't. The lunatic, liar or Lord trilemma[1] comes to mind! But in an era of cultural relativism, the idea that there is absolute truth about who Jesus is, is widely deemed intolerant, narrow-minded, offensive, even bigoted. Many Christians, therefore, shrink away from making absolute statements about Jesus these days.

Rooted in the rise of relativism and pluralism in our culture is the interfaith movement, which attempts to bring about unity between otherwise opposing believe systems through an exploration of the mystical elements in all religions and identifying the common ground between them. In this context, the Bible cannot be treated as the supreme authority on matters of faith. Today, various—seemingly benign—aspects of the interfaith movement have permeated the church. One of these is the practice of interfaith dialogue. Many churches engage in interfaith dialogue as a means to achieving deeper understanding, and seeking common ground, between religions. Within evangelicalism, the practice of interfaith dialogue for the purpose of "building bridges" between those of different faith-backgrounds has become increasingly popular. The ultimate motive for evangelical churches in reaching out this way, often begins as a starting point to sharing the gospel. Usually, however, the rules of engagement involve a prior agreement to refrain from attempting to convert one another, as with the Christian-Muslim dialogue sessions practiced at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church, for example. This can result in the gospel message being obscured, and relativistic compromises being made, in an effort to maintain the amicable relations that have been forged through such sessions. Moreover, the biblical Jesus is often watered down, even misrepresented, so as to be compatible with differing religious beliefs. In these dialogues, deal-breakers like the Trinity, for example, are almost always conveniently ignored or down-played.

A good example of this was when a slew of evangelical leaders (Wheaton College President Duane Litfin[2], National Association of Evangelicals President Leith Anderson, Saddleback Pastor Rick Warren[3], and former Fuller Theological Seminary President Richard Mouw, to name a few) signed what was to become a controversial document produced by the Yale Center for Faith and Culture titled, “Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to a Common Word Between Us and You.” The document was in response to an open letter in which 138 Muslim scholars, clerics, and intellectuals came together to declare that there is common ground between Christianity and Islam. The “Christian Response,” in agreement with the Muslim open letter states, “What is common between us lies not in something marginal nor in something merely important to each. It lies, rather, in something absolutely central to both: love of God and love of neighbor.”  Essentially, then, the “Christian Response” refers to the love of one shared God. It treats the God of the Qur’an and the God of the Bible as the same and makes no mention of the fact that the love of God, as represented in the Bible, is expressed most significantly through Christ’s death and resurrection. Christ Himself is the central component of Christianity, but is completely omitted in the Common Word documents, while “common ground” is declared “absolutely central” in His place. Patrick De Leon illustrates well the difficulties with the Common Word movement: “If we are to love our neighbors as ourselves, must we not be true to ourselves? Must we reject our own faith and deny the very persons we are in order to live in harmony? Such a peace is false from the beginning, and we would question if it is even possible to last. Can a peace founded upon falsehood be lasting?”[4]

Jesus Himself, however, demonstrated that understanding who He is, is of utmost importance. Jesus asked His disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” He asked. “Who do you say I am?” (Matt 16:13-15). Our answer to this question will be the most important one we will ever give. The Bible tells us that knowing the true Christ is a matter of critical, life-and-death importance. In this vein, Jesus said to Thomas, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well.” (John 16:6-7, emphasis added). A relationship with the authentic Son of God alone is upon which our salvation depends. The Bible is clear that “salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). But the fact is, many who use His name do not actually know the true Christ. Jesus said: "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one 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 in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’" (Matt 7:21-23) Jesus makes it clear, then, we must understand the truth about who He really is, and what He actually taught.

Jesus also taught us that being truthful with others about who He is, is paramount. He said,  "whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven." (Matt 10:33). The fact is, Jesus is polarizing and His work on the cross is pivotal. Because of this, the very nature of who Jesus is, is a "stumbling block" and a "rock of offense" to many (1 Tim 1:16). Jesus said, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.'" (Matt 10:34). Tragically, many will reject Jesus because of who the Bible says He is. 

But thankfully for those whose hearts truly seek Him, Jesus is not an elusive figure. We are told that we will find Him if we seek Him with all our heart and with all our soul (Deut 4:29). And we must seek to know Him better through studying the Word; Jesus said: “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32, emphasis added). The Word of God is the only dependable source of information about Jesus; the doctrines and beliefs of other faiths or philosophies that might use His name, should not be trusted or promoted in any way as a means to learning about Jesus. He Himself warned us to beware of false teaching (Matt 7:15; Matt 24:24). 

Despite this, there are missionaries today who use certain verses from the Qu'ran that shed Jesus in a positive light to teach Muslims about Him. The controversial Camel Method, for example, an evangelistic strategy that was promoted by the Southern Baptist Convention in 2010, does just that. The figure of Jesus also features prominently in New Age spiritualism. New agers often use Christian-sounding language, which can be confusing to new believers who might be more susceptible to being led astray by false teaching. For this, reason, we should be on guard against the insidious strains of New Age teaching that are seeping into our churches.[5] 

The Great Commission to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything Jesus commanded (Matt 28:19-20) was the last and, perhaps, the most important commandment given by Jesus right before His ascension. We can conclude from this that our mission as Christians is first and foremost to make disciples, which involves conversion and baptism, as well as the on-going teaching of Jesus' commands. Jesus said, "whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:27). Jesus made it clear that knowing the truth about who He is and responding in obedient submission to Him are what makes a disciple. We must encourage others, then, to study what the Bible teaches about Jesus, not confuse them with some type of kum-bah-yah notion that all religions can share Jesus and coexist happily.

So then, let's stop sharing Jesus with other religions, and stick to sharing the good news about Jesus as revealed in His word. 

--------------------------

[1] Famous CS Lewis argument, "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God." Lewis, C.S., Mere Christianity, London: Collins, 1952, p54-56

[2] Due to the unbiblical nature of the Common Word document, the evangelicals who signed it have come under criticism, after which Dr. Litfin, for one, felt the need to explain his decision: 
“I signed the statement because I am committed to the business of peace-making and neighbor-love,” Litfin wrote in The Record. ”I did not savor the document’s unnuanced apology section, but swallowed that in order to be a part of reaching out a hand to these Muslim leaders who had courageously taken the initiative. Though the statement was not written in the way I would have written it, it seemed to me that I could sign it without compromising any of my Christian convictions.” Eventually, Litfin chose to have his signature removed from the document, however. 

[3] Despite signing the document, Rick Warren, has since stated very clearly that he does not believe that Muslims and Christians worship the same God.  

[4] Patrcik De Leon, “Who You Gonna Serve? Theological Difficulties in A Common Word Between Us and You.”

[5] Please refer to future blog posts on the New Age Jesus and Jesus in Islam.