The Problem of Heresy
October 29, 2007 by Jonathan Brink
Can you feel it in the wind? It feels like we’re in this strange season where voices within the church are pulling the trump card called heresy. I guess this is to be expected with any movement. The old gives way to the new only through troubled means. But as I survey this territory, I find that it is not a road I want to traverse. Love still remains the better path.
Wikipedia has a really great dialog about heresy.
“The word “heresy” comes from the Greek αἵρεσις, hairesis (from αἱρέομαι, haireomai, “choose”), which means either a choice of beliefs or a faction of believers. It was given wide currency by Irenaeus in his tract Contra Haereses (Against Heresies) to describe and discredit his opponents in the early Christian Church. He described his own position as orthodox (from ortho- “right” + doxa “belief”) and his position eventually evolved into the position of the early Christian Church.
Used in this way, the term “heresy” has no purely objective meaning: the category exists only from the point of view of speakers within a group that has previously agreed about what counts as “orthodox”. Any nonconformist view within any field may be perceived as “heretical” by others within that field who are convinced that their view is “orthodox”; in the sciences this extension is made tongue-in-cheek.” (From Wikipedia, Etymology)
The fundamental problem with heresy is that its a judgment people make about other people’s belief, spoken, written, or whatever. And the power behind the word is the assumption that the person is in grave error, such that they may not be under grace anymore. Historically, heresy is used to imply to someone is out of grace. This is the underlying insinuation.
“Heretics usually do not define their own beliefs as heretical. Heresy is a value judgement and the expression of a view from within an established belief system. For instance, Roman Catholics held Protestantism as a heresy while some non-Catholics considered Catholicism the “Great Apostasy.”
Heresy is an extremely powerful word. Many in history have died for it. When we use it we set ourselves up as the authority. We are the ones who “know”. And to speak against the one who has called out the heresy is to question the authority, which puts that person in the spotlight they likely never desired. Who are we to question authority? We dont’ have PhDs and MDivs. Luther, although well educated took great risk in taking a stand and holding to his beliefs. Yet, those in the reformed camp sit on the edges of his coat and embrace what was once heresy.
My concern is when authority bases their understanding on right belief as the nature of our grace. Imagine the fear that causes people. This fear has historically produces so much that we are now ashamed of. Is His kingdom built on fear? Man, I’m in trouble because then I have to wonder if I’ve got everything in line. And baby, I don’t. Thankfully we have Scripture and freedom of dialog. And we do have love and grace.
I find it really interesting that someone could actually make a judgment of heresy. Especially when every those who are typically attacked (McLaren, Bell, Pagitt), do actively speak that Jesus is the Son of God.
All of this brouhaha got me asking a very serious question. Do the people who give the claim of heresy believe faith is by grace alone? I ask this because the fundamental issue at heart here is the question, “Is a heretic (defined as someone who believes something wrong about Scripture) still in grace?” I would argue yes, with one exception. The fundamental ascent of the heart, as revealed by the Holy Spirit is the question, “Who we say Jesus is.” The Apostle John even provided a very simple test. The call to guard against apostasy in Scripture was to guard against those who wanted to add something to the work of Jesus, to go back to the law and move away from grace alone. This was the fight Paul wishes to fight. Our intellectual understanding of Scripture does not establish our grace. Jesus did.
My concern is that when we make the judgment that when someone is in error they are no longer in grace, we’ve crossed back over into apostasy ourselves. We’ve practiced the one exception because we’ve added to grace. This is Galatians revisited. If grace were the sum total of our belief systems then no one would make it. Why, because we’ve stepped back into performance (the law) as the defining factor of salvation. Children would be out simply for the fact that they don’t know everything.
Performance, or the establishment of a doctrinal set of beliefs as a criteria has always been about control, which is opposite love. Control is the domain of the enemy. And to be honest, why would anyone want to become the judge? Why would we want to be the one to establish the box people have to live in. Because once we establish the box, we have now established our own ruleset. This is what I love about grace. It destroys the box.
And sometimes I get why people make the judgment. I would suggest that Mark Driscoll and Johnny Mac, and those who make these claims have good intentions. They clearly love the Gospel. But I would suggest that before we make judgments we listen to the words of Jesus not to step into that arena. When we do we are the ones fighting each other and the enemy is in the stands laughing at us. I would suggest that Jesus understood that to make ourselves the judge is to create the standard in which we are judged. JR Woodward has a post that captures this well. This was the curse of the law. If we try to fulfill it, we are then defined by it.
I love Jesus’ own words on the subject.
“As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it.” (John 12: 47)
Let’s hold on to love people, and discover why turning the other cheek is so much more powerful. Let’s allow the Holy Spirit to be the one to convict those who need it and in the process love our brother so that we can earn the right to be heard.
I’m ba-ack
I checked out the interview in whole and I’m wondering if you could answer the question that wasn’t answered by Doug Pagent (spelling?)… Does the emergent church believe that people who do not believe that Jesus Christ is God’s son and that He died so that we might be able to have access to God’s grace… will the ‘unbelievers’ spend eternity with God?
{I wish that Doug would have just answered the question. It honestly feel like he did himself a disservice by getting so hung up on labels (like you and I were talking about) rather than just answering the questions asked.}
Raquel, first I would ask why you need me to answer this question?
We often, proudly quote Paul, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” Yet, do we not believe and teach that “orthodox” Christian belief is required for salvation? Isn’t belief a work…all be it a mental one, not physical one? I also find it ironic that Paul’s next breath says that we were “created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” Yet we put so much more emphasis on right-belief than we do on right-works. My question is this: Would God prefer a person who believed rightly or acted rightly?
[...] expose the deep need within the larger church for grace, a long time coming. We’re tired of pointing fingers and the family squabbles that resemble a dysfunctional family at best. We’re tired of looking [...]
personally i feel we are all heretics to some degree, sometimes unknowingly and sometimes just by being selective.
Jonathan,
Just so I am more able to establish what ground that we’re standing on. Who am I talking to? What do YOU believe in regards to the question that was posed on the interview? But please, let’s not get on any rat trails because I sincerely am interested.
Jeromy,
BELIEVED! ‘Acting rightly’ can be done by anyone. But rightly believing was what led Jesus to his healings… it wasn’t their following of the law - it was their faith. And the beauty of Christ is that He can see directly into our hearts and judge rightly - not by what we appear to be but by our motives. Beautiful… just beautiful isn’t it?
And no, I don’t believe that belief is a work. I believe that it is a gift from God given to those that He chooses to bless us with.
John 15:9 says it better than I can -
“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.”
Jeromy,
P.S. And, just as a husband wants to do things for his wife out of love ~ this is how works should come about. Out of our love for Christ.
If someone walked up to me and told me that if I kiss some dude’s butt then I’d get into heaven, well my heart would be angry and rebellious towards that dude while I did his bidding.
BUT if I saw that my husband needed a glass of water, I would hop up and get him one because I love him and want to please him. Is that as clear as mud?
Raquel,
I appreciate your inquiry and trust that you are sincere. So in response I want to give you a two possibilities to hopefully get at what I was trying to communicate at in the post. If you are sincere, you’ll go with me on this.
1. The first possibility is that I disagreed with Doug. If this is true, what difference does that make?
2. The second possibility is that I agree with Doug. If this is true, what difference does that make?
Jonathan
Thank you for your thoughtful post. May I ask you several questions?
Is the word heresy for you the same as false teaching in the Bible?
I believe, as Paul commented above that “we are all heretics to some degree”. And I also believe that we do not need to understand everything correctly in order to go to heaven. But are you suggesting that there are no false gospels preached today? And should only those things that prevent people from receiving saving grace be called heresy? What about teaching which is destructive for someone’s spiritual life — like the “wealth-and-health-stuff”?
Is there really no such thing as biblical orthodoxy? May be I grossly misunderstood your post and if so then I apologize, but could I know your thoughts about this?
Thanks very much, with love,
Martin
Does it not matter whether we are loving people to hell or not? If we adhere to anything that sounds remotely like universalism, and we are wrong when we tell them they can add Jesus to Buddhism; does that not have eternal consequences for others? Christianity is The Way, and I think loving people is letting them know that….
And, I think there is irony in the EC wanting to only ever ask questions, and lots of them, but never provide answers….
Jermomy - both. It’s a false dichotomy - both “faith without works is dead” is true, and so is “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags.” Without a saving faith in Christ, our righteousness counts as nothing. Grace - it is all grace - our understanding, if it does not lead us to the cross is useless; as is all the good deeds in the world, without believing in Christ for the forgiveness of sins.
Martin,
Paul’s main concern for heresy in the Epistles is adding to grace, that people are adding something to the cross. And if they do they are back into the law. Jesus was VERY interested in heresy for the same reason. My concern in this post is that we in the church are doing much the same thing. We’re adding to grace.
When we ask people to clarify belief, for what reason are we doing it, the subtle message implied (whether we meant to or not) is that they are out of grace.
And no where did I imply or say that there are no false gospels preached. Is there Biblical orthodoxy? Absolutely, but as Paul and you both state we don’t have perfect orthodoxy. We’re human. History is littered with different lists. And when we hold someone to a standard of perfect orthodoxy or even a defined list as a prerequisite for grace, we’ve added to it.
The problem is that we don’t like to live in the tension of a competing viewpoint. When someone questions our faith, or states that hell is just as much a present state as a future reality (as example), we’re left wondering if what we believe is true. It sticks us in the gut because now we have to work through our faith a little harder. Its easier to discredit, bash, or call someone a heretic than it is to live in the tension of holding what we believe in spite of the opposition. I get this too. I am human.
But faith is living in that tension in spite of the opposition.
Verity, what’s the irony as you see it?
Martin, I forgot to answer what I saw as an important question in your comment. You asked what we should do with false doctrines.
It would seem overly simple to say that all we need is love. But to be honest it is true. Love was the orthodoxy that was so consistent with dignity and grace that it transcended boundaries. It spoke to someone of a different language. For Jesus, right belief was about releasing someone to love. It was about empowering them with a heart that is deeply connected to the father and knows love through His Spirit.
It wasn’t about constantly playing cop and finding the error, much like the Pharisees did. When we play cop we hold a role that is extremely dangerous and more about insecurity than truth. My concern has always been that we’ve spent way too much time finding the error rather than loving the person.
Jonathan,
A friend of mine recently gave me a visual regarding truth and grace. Truth is the skeleton of a body. Necessary for stability and structure but ugly to the eye and painful to embrace. The flesh is the grace of a body. Cozy to embrace and attractive to the eye. However, flesh without bones is a blubbery and unaccomplished mass on the floor. We need both. Christ was both.
I apologize if I implied that you were outta grace and I hope that you will forgive me as this certainly was/is not my intention. Please let me know if I have offended you in other way so that I can seek your forgiveness.
_____________________________________________
As for the 2 questions you posed:
“1. The first possibility is that I disagreed with Doug. If this is true, what difference does that make?
2. The second possibility is that I agree with Doug. If this is true, what difference does that make?”
I simply want to know who I’m talking to. You’re not an emotionless computer that has no beliefs. It just isn’t the way that we were created. .
I suppose that in the BIG picture, it doesn’t matter if you tell me squat about Jonathan. But if we magnify the picture down to this blog, it’s simple really… a part of getting to know the people around me… asking what they believe, who they are, that kinda thing. I want to know because I care.
Raquel, I didn’t hear that you said I was out of grace. No worries.
My problem is not with truth. I love your analogy and agree with it completely. My problem (which is not with you) has and always will be that we need to add to grace with a defined belief system. This is heresy to me. The use of heresy is much more about control than about fighting for truth, although I am not implying this is true in your case. Nor do I doubt the many father’s of the faith were well meaning in using it.
My questions were meant to address the fundamental problem with belief, not to disagree with you. We don’t like it when people hold a different viewpoint than us, especially when we’re good people. I’m not interested in converting anyone to the way I see truth. That’s the Holy Spirit’s role. I am interested in dialoguing. So I often ask questions instead of posit answers. I love these discussions.
But, if I disagreed with you, does that make a difference? Does it change your opinion of whether or not I am in grace. I don’t know, and I’m not implying you are. But there are a lot of people who would say yes. And again, this is heresy to me, because we’ve added to grace. It is the one exception.
Now having said that, I will answer your question. I don’t know if I agreed with Doug, for several reasons. One is that he was never given an opportunity to tell the audience why he believed what he said. Friel wasn’t looking for it either.
Two, I’m comfortable living in the tension. I’ve done a lot of study on hell and I’m okay with leaving it up to God what happens after death. I really couldn’t change it if I tried. There are a lot of verses that are suggest the redemption of all creation too. But regardless, Hell is not the reason I love. Nor is it the reason I share my faith. I will not change a life. Only the Holy Spirit will. But condemnation never worked for me. It produces fear more than anything. It’s the easy path. Love is the hard one (at least in the beginning). I love because it is the best expression of my humanity.
I hope this answers your question. You seem like a passionate person and I consider you my sister nonetheless. And hey, some of my best “discussions” were with my sister.
I think it is ironic to want to question everything, but answer nothing, because I do not understand the point of asking questions, if one is not looking for answers.
The NIV uses the word truth 224 times, and I do not think that God ever designed to leave us with questions only. I think it is great to question things, and dialogue, as we are doing (I love these discussions as well). My perceptions of things have definately changed over the last couple months, and while I will never say that I know it all, or can know it all, I believe that there are definately solid truths in the Bible.
Jonathan said: “I find it really interesting that someone could actually make a judgment of heresy.” and also: “My problem (which is not with you) has and always will be that we need to add to grace with a defined belief system. This is heresy to me.” I am confused - is it okay to make a judgement about heresy, or no?
There are so many who on the day of judgement will say “Lord, Lord” and He will say “I never knew you.” That scares me… I think that we ought to work out our salvation, in fear and trembling, and equip those around us to be fervent disciples, that we will not be surprised on the day of reckoning…. truth, and love are a marriage.
Verity,
I did answer her question. And I never implied or stated that we shouldn’t seek truth. This is the intent of the journey. But everyone is in a different place. And I said I absolutely believe in truth.
I actually love questions because they stimulate thinking and are part of the journey. And to be honest, are we really debating much of the truth. Not really. This is why I love grace. It’s meant to be simple. But it’s hard to accept.
My point in defining and even calling out heresy was to show how we have strayed from what it really means. Adding to grace was the original problem Paul was always fighting against it. It was the one exception. If we’re gonna call it, get it right.
ACK! Jonathan… (I’m glad that you consider me as a sister - it gives me room to joke around more) you didn’t answer my question!
If I remember right, the interviewer asked Doug where he believed that a ‘good’ Muslim would go when they died. So, I ask you: Where do you believe that a Muslim will go when they die?
(for the sake of argument, let’s not give Mr. Muslim a face. Let’s just say that Mr. Muslim doesn’t believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, rather a mere prophet.)
I did answer you. The answer is I don’t know. Scripture effectively suggests and points to a separation, which most people would define as hell. But it also leaves room for the redemption of all creation. But I don’t really need nor want to be the one to decide. Judgment is not my role. In fact I’m called not to judge.
The question of hell and the definitions we hold leave me wanting. I’ve lived in hell in my life. I didnt’ have to die to experience it. I see it in the faces of those around me. I already know that it is not some place I want to live. But I didn’t choose God because I wanted to avoid hell. I chose God because I wanted to know my Father. I wanted to live the live he created me for. I wanted to know love and to live love. I seek the positive for the positive, not just to avoid the negative.
I guess I just don’t understand the necessity or value of wanting to make that call. Maybe you can help me see.
That’s why I suggested not putting a face onto Mr. Muslim. So that the judgment wouldn’t be cast onto a person, but rather a set of beliefs. The Bible clearly states that Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. And because of this, I’m interested in dialogging with Mr. Muslim because I don’t want for them to live without Christ (and heaven, for that matter). Not to treat him as beneath me, but rather to encourage Him to seek Christ.
I agree that judging others (making an assumption and then treating the person either negatively or positively based on the assumption) is yucky. But, I do believe that we are called to judge beliefs. If we aren’t able to see the error in our beliefs, or those of our brothers, then how are we to come along side our brothers and pull them back on track (through prayer, invitation, information, relationship, etc.)? Why would we desire anything better for ourselves if no one was there to keep us accountable to what the Bible says? Can you see where I’m going with this?
My closest and dearest friends are the ones that tell me that I’m acting like an idiot/hypocrite/dork and lovingly set me straight. I NEED to be set onto the right path daily! Without someone there to remind me of THE standard, what on earth is the body for?
Raquel, I’m not panning your desire to speak with Mr. Muslim, nor am I suggesting that you shouldn’t. I’m just saying that you nor I will never change a life. The Holy Spirit will. We are God’s ambassadors but our primary call is to truth in love, but lets earn the right to be heard first.
I would suggest that right beliefs, other than who we say Jesus is, serve primarily to shape our humanity and experience on earth, not to define grace.
And please understand, I deeply hold that love seeks out the best for all of God’s creation. But it doesn’t seek control.
Raquel,
Sometimes their faith led to healing, sometimes it was their friend’s faith, sometimes they had no faith and their healing was simply based on Jesus’ mercy. As I read Jesus’ words and parables, I see a high value on fruit and works, not just faith or belief. In fact, there is much talk about fruitless trees being withered and cut down and thrown into the fire. Didn’t the religious leaders of Jesus’ day feel they were chosen too? Didn’t they feel as if they “believed rightly” based on scripture, correct doctrine, and tradition? Didn’t Jesus come and show them a higher paradigm? Are we too proud to consider the possibility that after 2,000 years of religiously following Jesus, that we might be off a little in our belief and practices?
I too feel that it is all about grace and because of His grace, it compels us (or at least should) to do good works. I fear though that there is a message of easy believe-ism being taught…that all you need to do is perform an mental task of believing that Jesus is God, ask him into your heart (whatever that means) and whamo!__entry into heaven is yours, of how you lived towards others from that point on. That you can literally get into heaven by the seat of your pants, simply because you believed in the correct doctrinal statement. It is almost like a barcode is adhered to your brain and Jesus is up in heaven with a scanner, scanning all humanity for this “belief” barcode…if you have it, you’re in; if not, you’re condemned––regardless if you loved and lived a more Christlike life that those with the correct mental barcodes.
Now obviously, I am overstating the case (though by not much, I fear). But I think that we have swung full-tilt in the other direction of the faith/works pendulum. This could be because of our Reformation roots. But as I read the words and look at the actions of Jesus––the one whom we call Lord and whom we follow, who offered grace, forgiveness, healing, restoration to sinners, and to whom I am forever indebted to with my life––I see a different picture and message than easy believe-ism or predestination. I see a God who is looking for people who will follow his ways, his teaching, and answer his call to discipleship and love-living.
As you mentioned in you analogy, It is because of our love for him that we love. But isn’t it also about our love for the one who asked you to kiss his butt? Is he alone not reason enough to love him?
At least love-works done towards others, regardless of “right believe”, loves others. But “right belief” that does nothing, does, well, nothing.
I fear we too easily condemn “wrong-belief-love” that at least does something. Perhaps by embracing and linking arms with those who are loving “wrongly” (if there’s such a thing) we can help them see why we love and, maybe, they too will fall in love with our husband, Jesus.
Verity,
I agree that faith without works is dead. I fear that most of our message is this: though it is dead faith, God will still accept it for entrance into heaven. That dead faith is OK, but dead works is condemned. With dead faith, you can enter by-the-skin-of-your-teeth–all be it with out much hope of heavenly rewards. But dead works (the thing that actually DOES something), sorry, you get to spend an eternity being tortured. This just doesn’t sit right with me or what I read about Jesus. I agree, we need both faith in Jesus (an undying trust and reliance) and loving works as we follow his teaching and example.
Regarding filthy rags…sure, compared to God’s perfection they are such. But goodness and love is still goodness and love, regardless who does them. When a child is saved from the ravages of starvation and adopted into a loving home, it matters not what that family believes to the child…love and goodness was still given. The Jesus I read in the gospels cared VERY deeply about what was actually DONE. I hope we can extend grace and even join arms with those who are loving and caring for others, regardless what they believe. The notion that a non-christian cannot do ANYTHING good doesn’t seem to align with what I observe in the world and see in Jesus’ life and teachings.
I hope we can accept ours and other’s “filthy rags” as good, though not as good as Gods.
To Jonathan: “I did answer her question. And I never implied or stated that we shouldn’t seek truth. This is the intent of the journey. But everyone is in a different place. And I said I absolutely believe in truth.”
You had asked me what I considered ironic about ECs asking questions, but not wanting to give answers (comment #12) - I was just trying to further explain what I thought - was not saying you were not answering Raquel’s question, since you did that after my initial response, but before my second…. hope that clarifies.
Romans 10:14 “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” I fear that saying the Holy Spirit convicts can sometimes negate our own responsibility…. Certainly, only God can change the hearts of man, but we are responsible to sow, and to reap, and God will get the glory, and the increase…..
To Jeromy: “I too feel that it is all about grace and because of His grace, it compels us (or at least should) to do good works. I fear though that there is a message of easy believe-ism being taught…that all you need to do is perform an mental task of believing that Jesus is God, ask him into your heart (whatever that means) and whamo!__entry into heaven is yours, of how you lived towards others from that point on.”
A good point. I just finished reading UnChristian - and found the staggering statistics - specifically the one that says 65% of all Americans, ages 18-41 have made a personal commitment to Christ that is still important to them, but only 3% (3%!!!) possess a Biblical worldview. I agree 100% with you - we offer, as Bonhoeffer says in The Cost of Discipleship, a cheap grace when we tell people all they need to do is say “the sinners prayer” and then let them walk away, unchanged.
I just wonder why I hear so much in the EC about loving others, but not a whole lot about loving God? And, I will be honest, I am nervous about our definition of love. It’s like the phrase “give a man a fish you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, you feed him for life”. If we are not lovingly leading those we touch to an eternity with God, then our love is useless.
We are born dead in our trespasses and sins. The unbeliever cannot do anything of merit….
I think we can love wrongly: “We never try to convert those who receive [aid from Missionaries of Charity] to Christianity but in our work we bear witness to the love of God’s presence and if Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, or agnostics become for this better men — simply better — we will be satisfied. It matters to the individual what church he belongs to. If that individual thinks and believes that this is the only way to God for her or him, this is the way God comes into their life — his life. If he does not know any other way and if he has no doubt so that he does not need to search then this is his way to salvation.” If Mother Teresa is wrong, and one must come to God through the Son, then she did love wrong - because she offered love for a life-time at the cost of eternity. “Hell on earth” has nothing to compare with an infinite hell….
And that was very long - you have a busy blog Jonathan! Thanks for the challenging discussion!
Thank you for sharing those stats and the quote from Mother Theresa. I really appreciate and hear your heart…it is encouraging. Three things.
First, I think part of the focus on loving others is to try to rediscover that perhaps Loving God and Loving Others isn’t as dualistic as we have thought…As Jesus said, what you do to them you do to me. Perhaps, when we are loving others––in the way and name of Jesus––we are loving God too. Then whatever we do, whether in word or deed, we do it all in the name of Jesus, and when they see our good works, we will shine like stars in the sky and they will praise our Father in heaven.
Second, I believe this shift is also due to the Word-Overdose the church has given the world. Preaching, signs, radio, books, lectures, education, tracts, tv…and on and on we speak. I think the power in Jesus’ life was that his words was equal to his actions. Our words have WAY out-weighed our love towards those not part of our camp. I don’t think the solution is to necessarily lessen our words, but to focus on increasing our love-actions. As it says, “love covers over a multitude of sins.” We have not done so great in the category of loving our brother, and so our multitude of sins has not been overlooked by a watching world. My hunch is that as we focus on loving, deeds, works…whatever the term is we use…that we might earn the right for our words (which are many…even mine right now) to be heard. They are watching and waiting to see an army of Jesus followers to start living out the love they see in Jesus. Until then, I really don’t think it matters to them whose name we are talking in, not too many people are listening.
Third, regarding judgement…I’ll leave that up to God to decide. His grace is way to big for me to comprehend and judgement is way to important for me to decide. God has called me to help form disciples (not win converts) and to learn to love myself, others, and Him…which all blend together at times. That is enough for my possible 80 years of life to grapple with and live out.
Thank you for your words.
LOVE this discussion! Seriously!
Jonathan,
I also take it as a blessed responsibility to be listening to where the Holy Spirit would have me take part in Gods plan for Mr.X’s life. The Holy Spirit lays the groundwork and then I get to join in where He’s working.
I agree you with that it is God who softens hearts. We may be agreeing here
And I assume (something about a donkey here…?) that you meant that we have to begin with relationships when you said, “lets earn the right to be heard first.” Which 99% of the time I agree with you but God has asked me to say some things to complete strangers a few times. It made no sense to me whatsoever, but I trust that the Holy Spirit had laid the groundwork for them before I entered into the picture.
Jeromy,
One of my favorite passages is in Romans 11 when Paul’s talking about how, because of Israel’s unbelief, branches were broken off of the olive tree (God) and Gentiles were then grafted in.
The fruit comes forth once we are grafted in. This is not something that the branch wills to happen by using the force - it just does when the branch is connected to the vine.
And I certainly don’t think that I’ve got God tacked down, by any means! I think that the religious leaders’ fault was that they could not accept that they didn’t know everything. The second that we claim to know it all is the second that everyone else knows we’re nuts (or fruitless, as it may be ;))
And I agree with you concerning a quick-ee gospel. But so, since we see error, should we not take up the responsibility to walk the baby Christians into maturity? I mean, it’s easy to sit back and find fault in what “the church” is doing but we need to face it! WE ARE THE CHURCH. What are we going to do to walk along side the quick-ee gospel receivers? Know what I’m saying?
My apologies. It was a bad analogy on my part (regarding kissing butt). I was reflecting on the ‘discussion’ last night and saw the error… A better one may have been how we treat our bosses for a paycheck as compared to how we treat our spouses out of love. My bad. Because, yes, He does deserve every ounce of my love.
My little brother is agnostic and he’s by far more “moral” than I am. He follows the nice rules that I tend to forget in haste… I don’t discredit his good works (like teaching english in a refugee camp in Namibia for a year) but his motive for those works is what Christ cares about. I want to care about what Christ cares about. Like in Matt 26:11, “The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.”
I gotta tell you that the analogy that you used with the adopting the starving kids (towards Verity) just about KILLED me. From experience, you’re right that the kids don’t care about whom they are adopted by nor what their beliefs are. As a matter of fact, they only care about themselves and their own needs to such a great extent that there are books, classes, camp, and therapists who are dedicated to helping adopted kids attach (a term used for children who are able to accept and give love appropriately) to those that adopt them. If you only knew how many disruptions (this is when the adoptive parents decide that they no longer want to parent the child) happen daily due to children not being able to attach, I think that you would see that you have actually proved Verity’s point. It does, in fact, matter who adopts that child and what their beliefs are. A very high percentage get into adoption and TOTALLY bail leaving the children even more messed up than they started. If the motive of the adoptive parent is wrong then it won’t last.
Think about Rwanda - which white guy didn’t bail? Like one? The few that didn’t went in with right motive - out of love for Christ and for the people. The ones that went in for the experience or the job were not willing to risk their lives.
Jonathan
Thank you again for your response. It makes perfect sense to me in many ways. May be it is my fault that I did not write openly that I was not thinking about the Driscol controversy. I am know thinking about people with whom we are interacting and who in our opinion hold some errors.
I completely agree with you that “we’ve spent way too much time finding the error rather than loving the person” but my point is that when the person in my opinion (knowing that I may be wrong because we all are fallen people after all) is wrong and it may be destructive for his spiritual life – well, life in general – is it loving not to tell him?
And yes I think telling someone they are wrong and calling them heretic that’s a big difference, but if in telling them for example that they believe something which is false teaching you will have to call it somehow – either directly false teaching or whatever, but you would be telling them they are wrong and in error. Is in not loving? F. Schaeffer in his book Great Evangelical Disaster insisted on telling the truth in love and that the evangelicals often do not want to stick to this principle so that we do not rock the boat. I think sometimes being loving means to take the courage to rock the boat even if it may be costly, but being loving to me is not necessarily telling only the nice thinks and keeping quiet about the errors.
And if people are adding to grace – this is exactly what I am thinking about – would you not lovingly try to correct their error? But in doing this you would have to call it error. Do I make any sense?
With love, Martin
Jonathan - I better understand where you are coming from - that you have a heart for others is so very evident!
My Dad once said he would take a warm arminian over a cold calvinist anyday (and I was raised very Calvinist) - the point being that talk without love is useless…
I don’t know if you finished UnChristian or not yet - but something that really struck me is just the total lack of discipleship and followthrough with those who profess Christ. The book pointed out how many Americans (80% of all teenagers spend a significant time in churches) know of Christianity, on a personal level. So many people that we would be witnessing to, have already heard the gospel, and rejected it - often because of the treatment of Christians. We have a different mission field than if we were walking into a tribe in the jungle…
I believe that the Church (the body of Christ) is failing - I think the problem is not that we are practicing either orthopraxy or orthodoxy but not the other; the problem is that we practice Neither. There are people in my church teaching Sunday School who do not even know who was transfigured on the mount - just a recent example that came up. I think we are often putting our actions against our words, when at a fundamental level, Christians add a devotional 15 minutes to their morning, cook a meal for someone in the church once a month, and think they are set. We are too busy to learn God, and too busy to bless and encourage others. We need revival - of our hearts and minds - that draws us into a deep love of God and His glory - and so deep a love of others to consider their needs greater than our own.
oops - that was Jeromy that wrote 25! oh well, I think it all applies anyways : )
Raquel,
I would offer that it was more than Israel’s unbelief, but also their lack of love towards those whom they were condemning (see http://jeromyj.blogspot.com/2007/10/living-outside-saltshaker.html for a deeper discussion of this).
I also agree that we need to really make disciples of Jesus and his way with the “baby-christians” - and that it begins with giving them a vision of a mission worth living for that goes beyond volunteering in the church nursery.
I personally know quite a few families (both xian and non-xian) who have adopted (both domestically and internationally) and they and the child both have attached to each other. You’re right that it doesn’t always happen. Love is messy and we all love imperfectly. Even with perfect love, like God’s, we cannot ultimately change people or force them to do anything. They must choose.
Thank you for sharing your heart. I wish we could sit down over a cup of coffee to be shaped by each other through true dialogue. I think we’d find ourselves agreeing on more than we might think. I hear your passion for Christ, the lost, and making disciples.
Blessings to you!
Jeromy,
I had to look up xian… is that in reference to someone from Shanghai? I honestly know little about Chinese adoption - a bit more about adopting ‘older’ African children.
I too would really enjoy some true dialog with everyone (and I love me some coffee).
Martin,
I appreciate what you are trying to say. What I hear you saying is this deep desire to help your brother. And I hold that too.
But Jesus let people walk away. And as Jeromy has stated, we’re in this period where we’re addressing the imbalances within the church. We’re really good at finding error, and fighting for truth. But in the process, we’ve often missed love. It’s grace and truth.
I typically tell people this. If the Holy Spirit is leading you to talk to someone, do it.
Verity,
I actually got to talk with David Kinnaman at a conference. What Gabe and David are trying to do with this book is really good. It’s not pretty but eye opening.
I appreciate your desire for discipleship. I’ve devoted my life to the process of discipleship through Thrive. It was actually this journey that completely changed the way I saw my faith and why Jesus was inviting us to follow him and love.
Raquel,
Too funny…Sorry for the confusion…I should have wrote it, X-ian (shorthand for Christian). I smiled picturing you looking up Chinese words online :-).
Raquel,
As I read through the comments, I am always aware that we typically agree more than we give ourselves credit for. The desire to run to the extreme seems so deep in us as humans.
I had a really strange but interesting thought this morning. I too have an adopted child and all that you talked about with adoption and the cost is true. We went through all of that. I have learned more from her life about my own relationship with my Heavenly Father than just about anyone else. But I asked myself what I would do if my daughter said she didn’t believe in hell, or had chosen some path that would traditionally be seen as in error. And then I asked myself, why would my response to her be different that Mr. Muslim. In love, they really wouldn’t be any different. Now I know I have a responsibility to her that I don’t have but with Mr. Muslim but they are both part of God’s creation. And this love for both is what I am trying to find on a daily basis.
The interesting thing about my daughter is that I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that I can’t change her mind. Her disconnect and lack of trust (she was homeless with her birth mom for the first 1 1/2 years of her life) is deep. We have wrestled with this for 9 years. But it is love, not the fight for truth that keeps me going. I want for her what I have found, what I believe she is designed for.
I guess in all of this I have just come to a conclusion that love is a more powerful force than the fight for truth.