I frequently find myself bothered by the fringes of Christianity, the radicals, the extremes, the fanatics. In a way, I admire their commitment and confidence, yet I am still repulsed by the imbalance that often dictates their actions and words. A very mild form of this is the inability to discuss anything aside from Jesus. Before I go into this any further, let me say that I think the discussion of scripture and our faith is extremely important. I think the fellowship of Christians extends beyond the church doors and that our daily conversations should often turn to Christ and the Bible. That's my disclaimer. I realize the margin for misinterpretation is large with this subject, so I hope I am clear enough.
My problem is when someone thinks that EVERY conversation must be about God. I am pro-God, please don't get me wrong. I appreciate and enjoy theological debates and discussions. That's really not what I am referring to. I am talking about those simple, every day conversations that are brought to an abrupt standstill by a "Chicken Soup for the Soul" comment. God gave us minds to think, and lives to live. He gave us more than a million words to form thoughts and ideas with. To limit ourselves to a single theme over and over seems a waste of the abundant blessing He has given us! I'm not advising you to get "worldy" or immerse yourself in the secular. I think that as Christians, we approach life with a perspective that is tuned with our faith and our tenents. But, that does not have to be vocalized at every opportunity. Before you get in a huff over that, I'm not saying to hide your faith, ashamed and pathetic. I'm saying, be able to carry on a conversation without that security blanket of Jesus catchphrases. Don't hide behind vague "churchy" language to avoid living in the here and now. It's not a sin if every third word doesn't come directly from a Bible verse.
This is what I mean about "imbalance". Focusing entirely on the spiritual aspect of living and avoiding the physical is an imbalance, as it is vice versa. If the conversation is about art, let it be about art! If it's about cars, wines, books, movies, politics, whatever - let your responses be appropriate to the subject matter. Of course, every subject in the life of a Christian is relative to Christ, and certainly we want the freedom to discuss and explore that. But my point is, that there is often more to the subject and we have the freedom to discuss that as well. If your standard response to every thing is "I love Jesus", I think you're missing some of the depth of this earthly life. Yes, you love Jesus. I do, too. But that's not what we were really talking about...
I welcome your thoughts on the matter. I hope I was clear and not offensive to anyone, but feel free to respond if I was.
Posted by Shannon at August 21, 2003 01:08 PM | TrackBackAmen, sister! Er, I mean... Right on.
Posted by: ron at August 21, 2003 06:29 PMSince I did speak to you today and learned that you are under the weather, I am going to assume that your bad physical disposition influenced this...rant. I do not personally know anyone who talks about nothing other than the Lord; I certainly hope that you do, which would shed some light as to why this is a topic. It surprises me that such a person would repulse you. If someone is talking about the Lord solely, why is that a bad thing?
Consider what Paul said to the Corinthian church:
"And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:1, 2)
I guess you would have had a problem with Paul because it seems pretty clear from that passage that he was only interested in knowing about Jesus and what He did for us on the cross. Am I misreading the passage? Further down, Paul goes on to say:
"And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." (1 Corinthians 2:4, 5)
It seems pretty clear to me that Paul placed primary importance on discussing the things of the Lord. Now, I doubt that Paul never discussed non-religious topics; but it's pretty clear what was (is) most important. Do you still doubt? How about this:
"Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:" (1 Corinthians 2:5, 6)
As if that wasn't enough, Paul nails it down:
"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." (1 Corinthians 2:12, 13)
At least one wise man wrote in the Bible about the pointlessness of what is here on Earth. Read what Solomon had to say:
"I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit." (Ecclesiastes 1:14)
There's nothing wrong with discussing things that are not religious; I do it all the time. However, isn't it all kind of pointless in the long run? So, again I ask: what's the problem with someone who only talks about the Lord? From where is this coming? Before you get too repulsed or think such people to be "imbalance," you should consider this:
"Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;" (Philippians 1:27)
Posted by: Joey Wolfe at August 21, 2003 11:42 PMYou enjoy the "homework" of posting, I do believe.
I said I was often "repulsed" by the fringes - by this I meant the worst cases- those who people who feel freedom to do anything in the name of Jesus (skinheads, murdering abortion doctors, etc.) I should have clarified that a bit more. I did say that the topic I was discussing was a very mild form of the fringe. I am not repulsed by them, merely irritated. Again, my fault for lack of clarification.
You know me well enough to know I am not being critical of people who love God and want to talk about Him, share their faith and enjoy discussing it. I am talking about people who wear the language as a badge of honor - and yes, I do know people that do this, which prompted the post. Speaking with them is frustrating because they won't let the conversation follow a natural course, as if to discuss any topic other than Jesus is a sin. Or it makes them look better somehow to steer things in that direction at every opportunity.
I don't agree that it's pointless to discuss things other than Christ. In those daily conversations, you make connections with people, bonds. The ability to communicate is a unifying condition, further adhering us as the body of Christ. Yes, what holds us together is the common denominator: Jesus. But why not go further than that if we can?
I did notice that this was a rather gripy post, and I think it was due to being ill. But, ginger ale goes a long way and I'm feeling better now. Can't separate the girl from her blog, so you get the good with the bad.
Posted by: Shannon at August 22, 2003 12:05 AMFirst of all- Jesus himself, doesn't only talk about Jesus. I would list a whole bunch of passages,but, I think we would all agree to that. Also, Paul talks about A LOT of stuff, not just Jesus or God.
We are supposed to be like "iron sharpening iron" (which, by the way- blogging is an excellent way to do that). But, what is the purpose of sharpening ourselves? So that we can argue better with our Christian brothers and sisters about things that we basically already agree on? NO! So that we can talk and influence the outside world. Are the non-believers going to want to talk to us if we have nothing to talk about than Jesus? NO! Of course, our faith in Christ will influence all that we say and do- but if it is every other word out of our mouths, then we have all doctrine and no application. Doctrine is important and you must have it- but faith without works is dead. We must be able to take what we learn about Christ and the gospel and apply it to our every day lives.
I'm not saying that you should put your children in public universities just so they can witness- but if that particular school has the best program for your child's area of study- send them there and thank God for the opportunity to spread the gospel. Sometimes people get so wrapped up in the "iron sharpening iron" motiff that they forget what it is all for. True, we aren't suppsoed to be "of the world", but we are supposed to be "in the world". So, I think it is fine to like books, music, and movies that don't necessarily have a Christian foundation. And, it's fine to talk about them- that is one of the ways we can be sharpened. Otherwise, what is the use in preparing for a battle that we never intend or try to fight?
There is a superficial, conversation-narrowing, religious language which is full of cliches and jargon. A friend of mine calls it "God-talk." It does not glorify God because those who tend to use it don't live with a consistent God-centered perspective. It narrows conversation because there seem to be entire dimensions of life which are not "worthy" of attention: the physical, the political, our popular culture, perhaps. But I am physical. And Christ's kingdom speaks to the political. And I should relate redemptively to popular culture. I suspect that if we could be as spiritual as St. Paul was, we would engage our world by bringing the light of the gospel to bear on it without engaging in "God-talk."
Posted by: LJL at August 22, 2003 12:46 PMWhat's most important? That's the point of my earlier response to Shannon's blog. Certainly, culture and politics and a whole host of other areas of life are worthy of discussion. However, what is most important? Anyone who knows me knows that one would be hard-pressed to find another person who reads more news and concerns himself with the current state of the world. I enjoy a good political discussion more than most, and I can gladly argue a conservative position easily. However, what is most important? Shannon talked about imbalance in the lives of those on the fringe who are consummed with Christ. Shouldn't we all be consummed with Christ? If one spends ten minutes reading the Bible and three hours reading political and cultural news, isn't that the real imbalance?
Posted by: Joey Wolfe at August 24, 2003 11:00 AMI don't remember saying anything about being consumed with Christ. I spoke about the inability (or refusal) to discuss things (politics, etc) for whatever reason, (it seems holier not to, etc). Certainly, I'm not going to criticize someone with zeal for the Lord - and you're right, in the end, there is nothing more important. We should all have passion for our faith. It does not mean, however, that there aren't other things in this life worthy of discussion also, and that was the angle I was shooting for.
Posted by: Shannon at August 24, 2003 05:03 PM