Loving Our Neighbor, Neglecting Our God: Pleasing [Postmodern] People

Part I: When loving neighbor becomes pleasing [postmodern] people.

Sometimes, it's tempting to tell people what they want to hear. To make them feel better about themselves. To avoid potential conflict and to smooth things over. But seeking to please people isn't always to serve them—often, it is to serve ourselves. For its underlying motivation is to win their acceptance, affirmation, affection, or allegiance for our own self-gain. People-pleasing can attract an audience. Fill pews. Sell conference tickets. People-pleasing can keep the peace (albeit temporarily). It can result in popularity. It can lead to worldly status. But Jesus said, "If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you." (John 15:19). If a Christian finds widespread popularity and acceptance in a secular world that hates Christ, this begs the question, is he really fulfilling the first and greatest commandment?

Clearly, pleasing people in place of God violates the greatest commandment, as expedient or advantageous as it may be. People-pleasing is something the Apostle Paul vehemently rejected, as is reflected in his letter to the Thessalonians when he explained to them, "We are not trying to please people, but God, who tests our hearts." (1 Thess 2:4). Paul was acutely aware that people-pleasing perpetuates the human desire to remain in the flesh, gives rise to false teaching, and rejects the authority of God. Yet tragically, there is a people-pleasing epidemic spreading within the Christian community, which is producing more and more unbiblical behavior in our churches—behavior that's often misrepresented as "loving neighbor."

Nowadays, too many of our church communities are consumer-driven rather than servant-minded, catering to the needs, interests, and preferences of people rather than seeking to grow them as disciples of Jesus. In our commitment-phobic, consumeristic society, the problem of "convenience-store Christianity" in which our churches have become distributors of faith-based goods and services rather than manifestations of God's Kingdom, is on the rise. In this context, the focus is on what the church can do for us (good kids' programs, an accommodating facility, inspiring sermons, fun events, a social network), not what we can do for the church. When this happens, we're not thinking so much about serving and glorifying God as we are about Him meeting our own needs and desires. And when a particular church doesn't meet our expectations, we soon lose interest and go elsewhere.

A concerning example of this can be seen among Christians who often self-identify as post-evangelical or Emergent believers—a growing, broad, and typically quite vocal, group who have taken on the indomitable task of rescuing Christianity from the stagnated tenets of traditional evangelicalism into a more "loving," culturally relevant, and "accessible" church environment. Pioneers of this movement (although many of them dislike the term, "movement") long for what Sam Storms has called "'a kinder, gentler' version of evangelicalism that is devoid of the doctrinal dogmatism, moral certainty, and absolutist mindset that they are convinced is out of touch with so-called postmodern developments in our culture."[1] In other words, the primary concern is to cater to, and retain, a post-modern audience.

Indeed, Emergents place great emphasis on the evolution of Western culture from modern to post-modern in order to show how fundamental aspects of traditional evangelicalism have been outmoded. The traditional traits in question are not limited to stained-glass windows, pews, and a "stuffy" church atmosphere alone, but include other fundamentals such as absolute truth and sound doctrine, along with the importance of apologetics and biblical teaching. This bold move away from Christian "dogma" in the name of "loving neighbor" is in essence an unapologetic departure from the what the Bible teaches with a view to becoming accessible and relatable to a post-modern world.

Many of these churches publish vague or ambiguous statements of faith—if, indeed, they publish one at all. Instead, Emergents endeavor to meet the needs of the postmodern world, which demands touchy-feely faith: narrative rather than propositions (“tell me your story, don’t explain principles”); affections and feelings over and above rational, linear thought; experience over truth; inclusion rather than exclusion; the corporate over the individualistic, etc. In this context, "tolerance is the principal virtue, as nothing is more indicative of the mentality of modernism than telling someone they are wrong (either intellectually, doctrinally, or morally)," as Storms so aptly puts it.[2]

Emergents—keeping in step with a culture that touts "self-esteem" as the answer to the gamut of societal woes—focus on building up the self, through their trendy self-help teaching and an insipid form of quick-fix spirituality that demands no heart-change on part of their audience, and blatantly contradicts our biblical exhortation to die to self (Mark 8:35; Luke 9:23; Gal 2:20). The focus, then, remains squarely on the self, not on God. While the self-helpism of the Emergent Church may generate popular appeal for a time, it is hardly sustainable for the long haul, however, for a shinier, newer trend of thought will soon come along to take the limelight.

Undoubtedly, though, Emergents are responding to very real problems in the Church, which should not be ignored; the evangelical Church in the West has seen worrying decline over recent decades. And the rift between the Christian and secular communities is certainly widening. Many evangelicals have chosen to huddle together, remaining safely within their own conservative Christian comfort zone, cutting themselves off from an increasingly secularized and hostile society. This is the antithesis of going out into the world and making disciples (Matt 28:19), which could certainly be a major contributing factor to the diminishing numbers of evangelical Church-attendance in America. (In contrast, the Mormon Church—in which a two-year stint of missionary service is mandatory for all males—is growing with notable rapidity. Indeed, Mormonism has been dubbed the fastest growing religion in America[3]). This highlights an important deficiency within the Christian Church. And so, the Emergent effort to attract people to the Church by reaching out in love is understandable, while sorely misapplied.

The outreach-mindedness of the Emergent church certainly strikes a biblical cord; it is true that we're called to be salt and light in the world, not to shut ourselves off from it. Making disciples can't be achieved inside a Christian bubble. But the fact is, Christians, by all worldly accounts, are called to believe a foolish message and live a foolish lifestyle. We need to get to grips with the fact that being salt and light in the world won't always mean we will be liked by the world. In fact, it usually means the opposite. Jesus was clear about this when He warned us that we would be rejected by the world because of Him (John 15:19). Yet we can take courage because God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise (1 Cor 1:27).

But, Emergent concepts of cultural sensitivity and loving neighbor conform to worldly patterns rather than the counter-cultural Word of God. Emergent churches strive to be relevant in a rapidly evolving culture, but in doing so they attempt to surf the cultural tide, failing to go against it, as following a counter-cultural Christ necessitates. And so, rather than mirroring Christ, they end up mirroring worldly culture in an effort to draw people in and build bridges between secular and Christian communities. Essentially, these churches look to the world first (not the Bible first) for the answers on how to reach unbelievers in their attempt to tailor the church-experience to a post-modern audience. As a result, inconvenient truths are often brushed under the rug and the seriousness of sin is downplayed so as not to alienate anyone.

But as an old pastor of mine used to say, "we are in sales not management." In other words, it is the role of the Holy Spirit to convict hearts, not ours to finesse the gospel to make it more culturally appealing. We are to proclaim the gospel message, and let the gospel stand for itself. For seeking to ingratiate ourselves to, and merge ourselves with, a world that has rejected Christ is like trying to mix oil and water. Moreover, the truth of the gospel is often lost in the mix, with "tolerance" taking precedence over the Word of God.

In the following article, some concerning examples of this pattern of behavior among a growing number of leading evangelicals are discussed.

< Part II: Tolerance over Truth

------------------------------
1.  http://www.samstorms.com/all-articles/post/d--a--carson-critiques-the-emerging-church---part-i
2.  http://www.samstorms.com/all-articles/post/d--a--carson-critiques-the-emerging-church---part-i
3.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/02/mormonism-fastest-growing-religion_n_1469566.html

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.

Radical or Relevant?

Over the years, I've encountered many different interpretations of what it means to live life as a Christian. When confronted with the vast array of—often conflicting—opinions on how we as believers should live out our faith, I've often been left scratching my head, and asking myself: so, are we to be counter-cultural or culturally sensitive? How much in the world can we really be without being of it? Are we to be radical or relevant, or somewhere in between? 

The perennial question, how in the world should I live? is one which continues to occupy my mind even now in my thirties. Living in the culturally diverse DC area, I've observed a wide variety of takes on the Christian walk, many of which bear surprisingly little resemblance to one another. For example, here are two Christians I have known...

"Jim" is the first. He lives out his faith in an "out-there" kind of way, wearing his convictions unashamedly on his sleeve. Jim personifies what could be seen as radical. Everyone in the office at work knows he is a Christian. He talks openly about his relationship with the Lord, prays before eating his sandwich in the lunchroom and reads his bible on the metro. Everyone likes him well enough, but in all honesty, no one seems to take him all that seriously. He might be a little unrelatable.

On the flip-side, there's "Rob." You would never guess Rob was a Christian if you bumped into him at one of the heavy-drinking get-togethers he frequents. He doesn't use Christianese. He has swagger. He wears believably edgy clothes. He only listens to secular music. You might say that Rob is relevant. He's a fixture at the bars, but you'll often find him at church on Sunday as well (with a bit of a hangover sometimes, let's be honest). If you get to know him, he'll tell you what he believes. And you might say: wow, normal, fun people like you can be Christian? Maybe there's something to this Christianity thing after all.

Rob and Jim may seem like over-generalizations, but I think many of us have known some version of a Rob or Jim at one point in our lives or another. We may even identify certain characteristics of Rob or Jim in ourselves. Both Jim and Rob sincerely believe in Jesus, but they each have a different idea of what it means to live out their faith. 

I have been fascinated by people-watching in the Christian community for years. I noticed that those who are more like Rob often seem better positioned to reach out to unbelievers than the Jims seem to be. This is because the Jims—inadvertently perhaps—might operate in more of a Christian bubble than the Robs. The Robs tend to have a lot of friends (in some cases the majority of their friends) who are not Christians. Some of the Robs may even date unbelievers. But the Jims may struggle to relate to unbelievers on a personal level because they're so different from them, culturally as well as spiritually. So, which type of Christian is getting it right, and which one isn't...or are they both acceptable?

This is an important question. Jesus' last, and arguably His most important, commandment before His ascension was to go and make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:19). A friend once said to me, "the only thing we can't do in Heaven is evangelize." He was right. And we are each called to be witnesses (Acts 1:8). So how do we best do this? Many would argue that people like Jim aren't very effective in this endeavor. After all, how could unbelievers possibly relate to him? 

But I think one of the biggest mistakes we could make in discerning how best to live out our faith and witness to others, is to look to the world first for the answers. The reality is, even if we try to fit in with the world, 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, we should seek to please God first, not people first, in how we live—even if doing so might not win us popularity or make us more relatable.

Furthermore, if we base the way we live on worldly opinions, we will find ourselves being blown about by every wind of teaching. We'll find a lot of different theories, strategies, and lifestyles out there and many of them won't be consistent with Scripture. It's when we turn to God's Word, however, that things start to become clear.

Rather than feeling pressure to fit in with contemporary culture or the worldly status quo, then, Paul says we should "come out and be separate from the world" and not be unequally yoked with unbelievers (2 Cor 6:14-14-18). The bible says that believers are to live as foreigners in the world (1 Peter 2:11). Foreigners tend to stand out from the crowd, not blend in. Sometimes, they are rejected by people just as Jesus was rejected by the world. As Jesus said, "If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you." (John 15:19)

And so, Paul admonishes 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). In all honesty, it's 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.

Ultimately, living an authentic life as a Christian is the best witness to those around us. If we're disingenuous about how we live out our faith, we'll likely end up being exposed as hypocrites or fakes. 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.

The truth is, 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). Although Jim's faith may appear foolish at times to his colleagues at the office, after a time, they may come to respect him. They may notice that he is a man of his word and a man of integrity. Deep down, they may admire the fact that he turns down happy hour to go home to have dinner with his family and that he's conspicuously absent from the office drama or water-cooler gossip sessions. They may notice that he's quick to speak words of encouragement rather than criticism. Ultimately, they may see the light of Jesus in him.

So, in light of Scripture, who's got it right? Jim or Rob? I would say, actually, neither. Again, I think the answer lies in Christ, not in man.

The bottom line is this: each believer needs "to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in us to will and to act according to His purpose." (Phil 2:12-13) The Greek verb, "work out," means "to continually work to bring something to completion or fruition." We do this by actively pursuing obedience to God as part of our sanctification process toward the goal of becoming more like Christ. The “trembling” Paul describes is the attitude Christians are to have in pursuing this goal—a healthy fear of offending God and an awe and respect for His majesty and holiness. Basically, it's about living in reverence to a holy God.

The way this looks for you might be a little different from the way this looks for me. Each believer in the Body of Christ is spiritually wired in a unique way. Just as we each have a unique finger print, we each have our own gifts, our own part to play, our own personalities, and we each relate to God individually in our own personal relationship with Him. 

More importantly, however, we are one in Christ and we are each a new creation in Him. (2 Cor 4:17). It is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us. (Gal 2:20). Therefore, if our identity is rooted in Christ, we will begin to die to self and live in reverent submission to Him.

So is this radical Christianity? Living life as a radical Christian, like perhaps Jim intends to do, will hopefully involve a reverent faith. I liked much of what David Platt had to say in his hard-hitting book, Radical, for example. In it, he challenges Christians to live for the gospel—a gospel that not only saves us from our sins, but also compels us to lay down our lives gladly for God’s glory in a world of urgent spiritual and physical need. He unflinchingly calls out Christians on cheap grace, easy-believism, and consumer Christianity. It certainly convicted me in several areas of my own life.

But setting out to live life as a radical Christian can put us in danger of placing too much emphasis on what we are doing and how well we're doing it. Being a radical Christian is a good thing, but if it becomes an ultimate thing, then that's a bad thing. This can produce self-righteousness, pride, and an over-emphasis on works. If the focus becomes on how holy we are, as opposed to how holy God is, then we have a problem. Our identity is no longer in Christ, but in being "radical."

An extreme example of this recently unfolded in the highly publicized Bill Gothard sexual-misconduct scandal. Gothard's Advanced Training Institute (ATI) created a radical Christian culture of "quarantined Christianity" in which the sinful and demonic forces of the outside world were shut out in an effort to preserve an oasis of Christian perfection within their community. While the original aim was to live Gothard's interpretation of a radical Christian lifestyle, however, this soon morphed into an attempt to create an earthly utopia. The ATI culture was insular—not missional—and sin was treated as an external force, rather than an internal heart-problem. According to reports from insiders, self-righteousness was rife in the community, which distracted from the need for believers to seek their righteousness in Christ alone. As a result, the ATI community inevitably cracked under the weight of sin and scandal.

It's important, then, that not conforming to the world isn't confused with conforming instead to some type of conservative Christian subculture. To do so, would merely be exchanging one man-made system of living for another. The answer is not in a system, but in a Savior. And while it might be tempting to use the "unequally yoked" passage as an excuse to retreat into a holy huddle, this isn't what Christ calls us to. We're called to be salt and light in the world, not shut to ourselves off from the world. Making disciples can't be achieved inside a Christian bubble.

So what about relevant Christianity? At least this is outwardly focused, not insular. Again, however, I think it's missing the mark—and perhaps even more so.

A good example of the widespread effort over the last decade or two to make Christianity more relevant (i.e. more relatable) to younger generations can be seen in the Emerging Church movement—a broad, yet controversial, movement that seeks to use culturally sensitive approaches to reach the postmodern, un-churched population with the Christian message. Emerging churches often promote a feelings- and experience-based relationship with God, while downplaying the need for sound doctrine and a cognizant understanding of His word. Polarizing and inconvenient biblical truths are often glossed over in an effort to be "seeker-friendly" and to make everyone more comfortable.

Relevant Christianity is certainty outreach-minded. But if it leads churches to mirror secular culture as opposed to presenting a counter-cultural worldview, then it looks to the world first, not Scripture first, for the answers on how best to live out the Christian faith. As a result, the gospel message is marginalized in a church culture that primarily caters to human needs. It focuses on people first, not God first and thus de-emphasizes the Lordship of Christ. Relevant Christianity tends to downplay the gravity of sin to make everyone feel better about themselves, but as a result God's grace doesn't seem so amazing anymore.

So, then, striving to be either relevant or radical in our Christian faith can actually lead us away from being reverent. Living out our faith reverently, though, is what really matters. Living in submission to Christ and dying to ourselves daily, will keep our eyes fixed on Jesus—not on ourselves or on the world around us. Living in reverence takes the pressure off us and allows us to enjoy our true freedom in Christ. And living out our faith reverently will actually have greater impact on the world around us, because the gospel of Christ will remain our focus and our motivation.

We don't have to over-complicate things and confuse ourselves (and others) by trying to be radical, relevant, or somewhere in between. Instead, we can simply aim to be reverent, seeking to glorify God in how we live out our faith.

Are you having an identity crisis?

What defines you as a Christian? What characterizes your faith? Are you missions-minded? Are you Spirit-filled? Service-oriented? An altruist? A pro-lifer? A prayer warrior? A generous giver? A theologian? An evangelist? Or maybe a you identify yourself as a struggling believer? A doubter? A lost sheep? A failure?

Your answer to the question: what defines you as a Christian? is pivotal. And if your response doesn't flip the subject of this question from a what? to a who? you could potentially be experiencing an identity crisis...

I believe that many Christians today are losing their identity. It's a serious problem that isn't only reserved for Christians who are straying from their faith. Upstanding, well-reputed, practicing Christians can be the victim of an identity crisis. And it usually creeps in when we least expect it. 

When our identity is rooted in being a 5-point-Calvinist, an Arminian, a home-schooler, a Baptist, a Methodist, a Pentecostal, a missionary, a ministry leader, a helper of the poor, a Christian who's "in touch" with culture, ANYTHING other than in Christ, we are missing the mark. These may be good things. Some of them may indeed be crucial, biblically correct things. But they cannot replace Christ. And if they become our identity, we have a problem. We have an identity crisis.

In other words, if we define our identity by our theology, our spiritual gifts, or how we live out our faith, rather than finding it in Christ alone, we are inching down a treacherous path. This is not to say that these things are unimportant. Sound theology is an indispensable means to understanding God's Word (1 Tim 4:16). A God-honoring life should display the fruit of our faith as an essential outworking of our sanctification (Jam 2:14-26). And it is important that our spiritual gifts be used wisely for God's glory (1 Pet 4:10). But theological knowledge can become a source of pride if we get our identity wrapped up in it. We can become self-righteous and legalistic when our focus is on our own achievements rather than on God's grace to us as sinners. And we can become more self-centered—and less Christ-centered—if we get preoccupied with our spiritual gifts rather than being enthralled by the One who so graciously bestowed them on us in the first place. 

The fact is, we're all sinners and we all fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23). It is by grace we have been saved, not by works, so no one can boast (Eph 2:8-9). Seeking our identity in the life-choices we make, like how to dress, how to educate our kids, how to spend our money, what to eat and drink, etc., can too easily lead us to become judgmental of others or to think of ourselves more highly than than we ought. These things, many of which may be meaningful, shouldn't define us.  If they do, we'll end up with a life dominated by pride, insecurity, and eventually failure.

We are all vulnerable to having an identity crisis. I speak from experience, because I've had one myself. When I had my first baby seven years ago, I experienced a text-book case of identity crisis. I had recently left my job and with it, my sense of worldly significance. I felt purposeless. Rather than using my skills and education, I now spent my days at home with our baby who slept most of the time, leaving me alone to clean up a perpetual mess of misplaced sweet-potato spoonfuls and stray Cheerios. I was having an identity crisis because even though I had been a Christian for years, I had been seeking my identity in the wrong places—in how the world viewed me—not in Christ alone.

It is not only when we're struggling, but it's also when we're doing well in our Christian walk, that an identity crisis can occur; like when we've used our gifts to make a difference, when we've experienced a triumph over sin, or when we've made a remarkable accomplishment in ministry, for example. But we must be sure that we don't self-identify with our achievements—or our failures—too readily. If we continue to give all the glory to God in our high-points and seek refuge in Him during our low-points, we will be protected from losing sight of our true identity. This might seem like Christianity 101, but simple truths like these can easily elude us if we don't stay grounded. Scripture says, "let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall." (1 Cor 10:12). Paul is talking here about temptation. Have you ever noticed that it's often when you think you're doing pretty well in your Christian walk that you suddenly find yourself falling? You get complacent for a moment, maybe even a little arrogant, and before you know it—wham!—you're knocked off your feet. This isn't ultimately a bad thing. Being brought to our knees can be the most convicting reminder of our deep-seated need for God.

A hard-hitting example of this recently unfolded in the highly publicized Bill Gothard scandal. Gothard's Advanced Training Institute (ATI) conferences have been the subject of scrutiny since the many allegations of his sexual misconduct went public. ATI has been a popular gathering spot for thousands of Christian families, including the Duggar family from TLC’s “19 Kids and Counting,” and others from within the Quiverfull movement. But in a recent article, "Growing up Gothard," a former ATI family member, Derek, writes about the problems that come from a Christian culture that's caught up in the throws of what I believe to be a mass-identity crisis.

Derek describes how he grew up within a culture of "quarantined Christianity" in which the sinful and demonic forces of the outside world were shut out in an effort to preserve an oasis of Christian perfection within their community. The ATI culture was inwardly focused, and as a result, "the fatal flaw in the system (other than being completely contrary to the missional purpose to which we are called), is that sin was treated as an external force, rather than internal. The focus on the external resulted in a forced attempt at an appearance of godliness, while burying internal struggles." In other words, the ATI ministry promoted a cultural identity that was based on perfect Christian living. Without their identity being rooted firmly in Christ, it was possible for the ATI community to overlook Jesus' very last, and arguably His most important, commandment to go out into the world and make disciples (Matt 28:19; Mark 16:15). Furthermore, self-righteousness was rife in the community while the internal heart-problem of sin was glossed over, and in some cases completely hidden. 

To recognize that sin is an internal heart-problem necessitates our dependence on Christ and compels us to seek our identity in Him—not in any man-made system or Christian culture. Remembering that our righteousness is imparted to us in Christ, and is not achieved in our own strength, will cause us to doubt in the possibility of a man-made utopia on earth, Christian or not. However much we shut ourselves off from the sinful world outside, sin will still be rampant in our fallen hearts and will still permeate our families and community. Bill Gothard now faces the shameful reality of his own sin despite creating a false identity for himself and his followers, which concealed it for so long.

Another concerning case of sin being brushed under the rug can be seen in the touchy-feely culture of the emerging church movement—a broad, multifaceted movement that generally-speaking seeks to use culturally sensitive approaches to reach younger generations, who have been leaving the church in droves. Rather than an insular, conservative culture like ATI that shuts out the world, though, emerging churches are outreach-focused. Within the movement, there is a general sentiment that the traditional way of doing church has failed, and that the Christian message should be repackaged to be more relevant, and to generate wider appeal, in a post-modern context. 

But in their attempt to hold the fleeting attention of young people, emerging churches tend to mirror the worldly culture around them rather than presenting a counter-cultural message. In this vein, polarizing truths such as black-and-white issues of right and wrong are conveniently ignored so as not to turn people off or alienate them. The word, sin, is largely avoided in this context, sometimes being replaced with more benign terms such as "mistakes." This approach, however, often fails to address the root cause—the heart-problem—that is leading young people to walk away from their faith in the first place. Instead of addressing the heart-issue of sin, the tendency is to focus on emotional healing or behavior modification, which is like applying mere band-aids to expanding wounds in sinful hearts.

By glossing over the seriousness of sin in order to appeal to a worldly audience, our need for a Savior is marginalized—and a large-scale identity crisis is perpetuated. In fact, the unoffensive message preached in many emerging churches gives seekers the impression that their existing sense of identity can remain intact—because God loves them "just as they are." This conveniently by-passes the gospel-centered truth that God does love them, and is pursuing a relationship with them, but His love for them is exactly why He wants to make them new in Christ. This is why He doesn't want to leave them steeped in self-destructive lives of fleshly sin! Sadly, however, seekers are often encouraged, within the emerging church culture, to remain secure in their pre-existing state of identity crisis. And so, the opportunity to share the good news that they can be miraculously transformed in Christ is tragically missed.

An identity crisis is not to be taken lightly. It can have devastating, self-destructive results. For example, an identity crisis is arguably what led to Satan's downfall from Heaven. The Bible tells us that before his fall, Satan was the “anointed cherub” (Eze 28:14) and “the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.” (Eze 28:12b) It is likely that Satan was one of the highest of all angels because he had enough influence to convince one third of them to join him in his rebellion (Rev 12:4). There is speculation that Satan was the leader of worship in Heaven. But what we know for sure is that Satan found his identity in the wrong places. He didn't find his identity in being an angel of God. Instead, his identity was wrapped up in being the special one—one who was exalted above others. His identity was rooted in pride. And the effects of this were catastrophic. The fact is, Satan rebelled against God despite being anointed by, and in close relationship with, Him. This sends a chilling warning to us as Christians, doesn't it? Satan's story shows us how important it is that our identity be firmly anchored in Christ. And if it isn't, it is always rooted in some form of pride. 

Satan wants us to seek our identity in prideful things, just like he does. And our fallen hearts will likely succumb to this temptation if we don't keep our eyes off ourselves and fixed on Jesus. Jesus made it clear that following Him involves denying oneself and taking up one's cross daily (Luke 9:23). Ironically, denying ourselves isn't to become enslaved; It is to become free from enslavement to our fleshly desires. (God's truth often turns human logic upside-down doesn't it?) These desires lead to death, but those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Denying ourselves, then, actually serves to protect us from destroying ourselves.

This is a daily process. For me personally, it's a struggle to surrender my heart each day. I can easily get too busy with "immediately pressing" needs or get preoccupied with my own thoughts and activities. It's at these times that I quickly begin to lose myself to a myopic world that's all about me. It's when I'm not consciously seeking after Jesus that I find my true identity slipping away. And my thought-patterns start to reflect an internal monologue, a commentary on my self-absorbed worries and concerns, rather than a conversation with God about His will, His thoughts, and His ways. In these moments, it helps just to stop and take a deep breath. Sometimes, I do this while praying, "more of You (breathing in), less of me (breathing out)." It really works!

Paul's words are so powerful when he writes, "I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." (Gal 2:20). We can be encouraged to live by faith knowing that in Christ, we are a new creation. The old has passed away and behold, the new has come. (2 Cor 5:17). Praise Him that we have a new identity—a righteous identity—as children of the living God! We can put off the old self, and put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness (Eph 4:24).

I'd rather have an identity that reflects the likeness of God than my own sinful nature any day!