(considering) 8:28

In the last 10 minutes of Good Friday, I felt I should actually put up some reflections on what I’ve been thinking about.

Many people comment on the death of Christ as for our sins, some even as an archetype of obedience to God; but my sins were not all that got nailed to that Cross on the first Good Friday. Remember, a week previous to this, we had crowds shouting Hosanna about the Jesus we see today on a cross. What also dies there were the false messainic hopes of Jesus’ followers. As if the riding of Jesus into Jerusalem would signal the beginning of the Rule of Jesus and the end to hardships. They had a false view of the messiah, as sometimes I do.

Often I bemoan the problems in my own life. I think about how I’m still single, and I go to a seminary that’s extremely liberal, and all that stuff. I wait for Jesus to come riding into the Jerusalem of my life and make everything grand in the way I think it should be.

Jesus does make all things right, but I forget that the call of Jesus is both one to suffering on a cross, and a call to defeat the powers of sin, death, and evil in my own life and in the world. In a world that seeks to kill God at every turn, what should be surprising me is that my adversities are so laughably light while I seek to follow the Lord.

So today, as the Lord says “it is finished”, I pray that I can remember to put to death all the false hopes that can get in the way of the one true hope, that will be revealed in glory on the third day.

Click on the title, it’ll bring you to what I think is a very good article.

It got me to thinking, though. Perhaps one of the difficulties with the Church is (surprise, surprise) me. I talk a good talk when it comes to the centrality of Christ in preaching and Christian discourse, but how often is my life discernibly centered on Christ? I don;t mean to those outside, but when I look in the mirror on my own life (the scriptures), do I see someone recognizably seized of the Lord of the universe?

If we are ever to silence the naysayers and skeptics about the truth of Jesus Christ, the reality of a loving, powerful and just God, and the need to repent and believe, people like me need to live with Christ as highest in our affections. The result will be that I would be so transformed by God that people would know the reality of it all.

The problem is that that transformation is an act of God. Into my life, to rule my life; Come Lord Jesus come!

Arrogance is a bad thing.

So when a friend of mine (if he is still a friend) accused me of it last evening, I have to say that I was, and remain, troubled. Arrogance keeps people from seeing the value of Jesus because they’re too wrapped up in the false gods they create for themselves (and may even name “Jesus”). It’s one of the ways by which people ignore God for the sake of their own intelligence, ability, good looks, or whatever. It can leave people looking not to Jesus, but to each other or themselves.

I need prayer on this one, though, as I still don’t honestly see the arrogance in what I said and did (I’ve reread the transcript). The problem comes down to my being “judgmental”. Now, I can go off on a rant here, but I’ll try not to, instead I’ll look at a few pertinent scriptures and try to come to an understanding of what judgment is.

Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor? James 4:11-12

This seems rather clear. Now, what I said to my friend was that he should probably agree with the definition of a given action of the Church he is performing an action in, or else he seems to be saying something he does not believe, and is thus lying. So for example, if I were to be ordained as an Anglican priest, I would be implicitly agreeing to the doctrine of the Church I am choosing to be ordained in. Thus I would be less than honest were I to teach against that doctrine immediately after getting ordained.

The accusation of lying is a major thing, and can easily be seen as fitting as “speaking evil” against my brother. Also, it seems that if this is the case, I am judging him, and thus speaking against the law. I do not think that this is the situation I was in, because I spoke directly to the person involved, with only the intention of dissuading the course of action if that was what he meant. Indeed, if my understanding was incorrect, or my reasoning about why this was a lie was wrong, I believe I’d simply back off. That said, if I begin to believe myself somehow superior to my friend due to this difference of understanding, I could see how I would be then arrogant and judgmental. After all, the most common way I, as a sinful person, make myself feel better is by thinking evil of those who are around me, thus puffing myself up. I think that is what James is here writing about.

What James is not writing about is the question of discernment, rebuke or correction, all of which are admonished on the Church, and on specific believers (see 1 Cor 5:11-6:8, Luke 17:3, Hebrews 3:13). I will readily admit that I am not in authority, so I do not have the right to demand a course of action (though I believe I have a duty to express concern about a course of action if it seems dangerous). This must be done carefully, however, as the temptation for me to sin is here very very great .

That said, there is a very important series of verses that may bear on the situation:

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life–to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death. 1 John 5:16-17

Here, I think is the point at which I may have been most in error. That said, I do think that willful lying with a church decision, may be close to a “sin that leads to death”. This is of a different order than say, a lie done in love for the benefit of another(still sin, still wrong, but probably not leading to death), or say failing to give money to someone who asks (which can show a lack of love, but still not leading to death in itself).

The difference is that the former willful sin seems to be primarily for the benefit of the person sinning, not for the benefit of anyone else. It seems designed to state acceptance of things they do not accept, and in so doing leave the door open for other similar actions. If it is not wrong to imply agreement to what you do not agree, you can continue parsing your own definitions with little or no reference to those who are outside of your parsing, to the end that you think you never lie, while you’re leading many others to think you believe things you do not believe.

This is especially pertinent as we are promised tribulations as believers in Jesus Christ. The world hated him, and if we follow Him, they will hate us. If we have a method of redefining things in our heads, we can avoid tribulation and suffering simply by choosing to redefine things. This does not give glory to Jesus. We can give the impression that the promises and practices we do as a Church are bereft of independent meaning, and thus cause others to ignore Jesus (who is the meaning of all we do in the Church).

Am I out to lunch here?