Morality Check: A Paradigm Shift

Myth: While postmodern ethics may embrace relative morality, Christian morals are clearly absolute and universal.

Wait a minute. Why is this a “myth?” Isn’t Christian morality as clearly defined as black and white? We’re not moral relativists. Sin isn’t based on what an individual person believes; a sin is a sin—period. Right?

Actually, most of us will find that Biblical morality is much more dynamic than thought. As a matter of fact, we have an interesting paradox on our hands:

Christian morality is both relative and absolute.
In other words, Christian morality is both subjective and objective; sin is relative in one sense (the morality of any certain behavior may vary situationally and from person to person) but absolute in another. This is because sin is a matter of the heart, and not simply deeds.

My Bleeding City, My Broken Heart

As news of another fatal shooting—this time by police in self-defense—struck the scroller at bottom of the T.V. screen, I knew it would hardly shock the west side community in which it took place. If it had occurred in the suburbs, where I’ve spent most of my life, it would be spoken about for months; however, in the urban community in which I currently live and go to school (just west of downtown Cincinnati), it seems like mere everyday (albeit unfortunate) news. In the 20 months I’ve lived and attended college here in Price Hill, I can recall far more than a few fatal shooting incidents that happened within a mile of my campus and dormitory (this latest one was over stolen ice cream). And while I may not be a veteran west-sider, it breaks my heart to see this community in such mayhem.

I don’t know the answer to all of this violence. In fact, part of the problem is that disconnected middle-class white guys like me are the ones making the decisions in regard to how this issue should be dealt with. Is it partially due to a lack of decent jobs? Probably. Is it caused in part by a lack of the father’s presence in most homes? Most likely. Is it going to get any better? I pray it will.

As a Christian, however, I feel I should be more active in trying to help the situation; there is an opportunity for the gospel to thrive amid all of this chaos. In fact, I encourage all Christians to get involved in helping their communities, whether it be through social justice, environmentalism, or simply recreation. While we must understand that this decaying world is not our home, we must also understand that this world is our mission field. Even the most minuscule things that reflect God’s grace can make a tremendous difference.

But here’s the thing: if Christians are going to promote social change and attempt to help their communities, they have to be willing to get their hands dirty. One of the problems with many Christians’ efforts to solve our society’s dilemmas is the fact that many of us are not actually willing to get deeply involved with the situation. Instead, we watch from afar, shaking our heads, cursing at the media for somehow causing the violence.

It’s easy to blame homicides on video games or movies, because video games and movies are fairly easy to control and regulate. In such a case, the enemy is clearly defined, and all we have to do is battle against it. But what about when we really take a look into the issues and the culture behind the situation? What about the fact that the only jobs in offered this neighborhood basically consist of fast food, groceries, and gas stations? And what happens when we compare these jobs to more-lucrative yet illegal alternatives such as drug dealing and prostitution? Is it really that surprising that so many young people choose the latter group over the former? How do we combat that? Suddenly, things become messy and difficult to handle. We don’t want to have to deal with something this complex. But unfortunately, it’s reality, and it seems that the best thing we’ve been able to do is come up with an easily-identifiable, simplistic scapegoat and perpetually wage war on it.

I exhort all of you as brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, to ask God to use you as his hands in this situation, or whatever situation you may find yourself in. We must believe, depend on Christ’s grace, and desire change. We must humbly allow Him to use us for His glory. And we must remember that it takes more than a turned back to make something happen.

Believe and be His.

“Seeker Sensitive” Shows Scant Sensibility

I’m using this highly alliterative title as a demonstration.

We, as humans, are oft-driven by an attraction to witty catchphrases. You probably noticed a superfluous repetition of the letter “S” in the title of this entry and immediately became relatively curious as to what I’m writing about.

In a way, you could say I’m marketing my blog to you by trying to “sell” it with a catchy title. In fact, we’re all bombarded by a fusillade of similar marketing pitches daily. Whether it be a product, a service, or an idea, someone’s always trying to sell you something. This marketing relies on the consumer-driven mindset of humans, which, in my opinion, is part natural and part cultural.

Human beings are naturally created, in a sense, to be consumer-minded. We’re created with reason and will and must inevitably make choices that will benefit us. This is part of the story of human survival; through a basic consumer’s attitude, we know not to eat poisonous mistletoe berries (which can be fatal), but instead enjoy blueberries and raspberries. This type of discrimination has remained with us to the present day, where it is brought out in very new situations.

Since the beginning, marketing has occurred to appeal to man’s consumer instinct. In the Garden of Eden, Satan craftily used marketing—in the form of temptation—to coax Adam and Eve into “buying in” to sin. Referring to the fruit of the forbidden tree, the serpent said, “in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Likewise, marketing today “tempts” people into buying into things by making lofty claims and promises or by appealing to a person’s insecurity and fear.

However, although marketing has persisted throughout the millennia as means of manipulating consumer-driven people, today’s culture is filled with an unprecedented level of propaganda and marketing. While humans have always been consumers, is is only in the present age that the “ism” morpheme has been attached to the word “consumer,” as our society becomes increasingly materialistic. Today, advertising has reached unbelievable heights as new media allows consumers to be reached and make purchases within the comfort of their own homes. There is an entire industry wholly dedicated to marketing; companies know how to sell things effectively.

But companies aren’t the only ones trying to sell something.

With a charge to be evangelistic, Christians are certainly trying to “sell” the gospel, to some extent. This is not necessarily a bad thing. After all, we bear witness and give testimony in order that others might come to know Christ. If we want people to know Jesus, we’re undoubtedly going to try to get people to “buy in” to the gospel. What makes this dangerous, however, is our method of doing so.

Atheism Isn’t Going Anywhere

In The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World (Doubleday, 2004), Allister McGrath argues that atheism, a characteristically Modern trend, is on the decline as we press on into the Postmodern Era. After all, a culture increasingly skeptical of any over-arching truth certainly seems to challenge the concrete, absolute truth sought in the Modern Age. However, I don’t think we’ll be holding a funeral for atheism anytime soon; while it undoubtedly rose during the Modern age of science, reason, and anti-clericalism, we shouldn’t expect atheism to vanish in the Postmodern Age.

Theology of the City (And Why I Love Mine)

I came across a stranger’s blog entry yesterday that intrigued me. In the post, the blogger argued that members of society—especially followers of God—should be very intentional in regard to where they live; he seemed frustrated with the fact that most Christians seek comfortable living over life in a less-desirable place where they could significantly impact and benefit the community. I began to think about my conviction to live in the city of Cincinnati—no, not in a suburb or on the outskirts, but right in the thick of it all—and wonder what I am truly doing to benefit my hometown.

The reason I would like to impact my city positively comes partially from God’s command to Adam to be fruitful and have dominion over the earth. I believe developing a civilization is a healthy, God-honoring thing, if done right. But even more, I believe that loving my city reflects the Gospel working inside of me; I have come to care deeply about this somewhat-sluggish urban town and desire wholeheartedly to be a part of God’s redemptive work in Cincinnati.

Today, I read an excellent article by Tim Keller entitled, “A Biblical Theology of the City.” Keller explores the significance of the city to God, man, and mission and certainly stirs up passionate enthusiasm in my heart to make a difference in Cincinnati (the article be found online here).

How Should I React to Falwell’s Death?

Perhaps this is old news by now, but I’m still pondering how I should react to the death of Rev. Jerry Falwell, founder of the so-called “Moral Majority.” I know many people—Christians included—are rejoicing over his death. And in some ways, deep down, perhaps I want to join them. That’s something I need to repent of. At the same time, however, I can’t help but feel that Falwell is responsible for reducing conservative Christianity to nothing more than a narrow set of moral values—generally nothing more than opposition to abortion and homosexuality. For more than a few members of the Religious Right, these two issues alone have become significant idols and thus a barrier to the Gospel. I’m not at all saying that Christians shouldn’t engage in politics, or that abortion and homosexuality are minor problems that need no attention. I believe there is a healthy way for Christians to participate in politics. I just haven’t figured it out yet. And I do believe abortion and homosexuality are heartbreakingly evil. But they’re not the only evils out there, and we cannot make them into ultimate things that take the place of Christ in our hearts.

A man’s faith in Jesus should dictate to him how to participate in politics; his political activities should reflect the Cross. However, when politics begin dictating what a man’s Christian faith should look like, there is a significant problem.

I fear that Rev. Falwell might have, like many moralistic Christians out there, failed to truly grasp the Gospel of grace. I understand that it’s part of human nature to want to be in “control,” and when one watches Christianity lose its dominance in culture, it must be quite unnerving. That’s why so many Christians pour their lives into getting the right politicians elected, getting the right bills passed, and brutally bashing the liberal culture that seems to be threatening the Christian way of life. But we must remember that God is sovereign, and that he has pre-orchestrated the events of the world to fit His plan. And, as I’ve said before, you can’t try to make non-Christians behave like Christians. Forcing a Christian system of values upon people simply doesn’t work if they don’t know Christ. Moreover, such an attempt is pointless and futile if they don’t know Christ—without faith in Jesus, “being good” means nothing. Why should we try so desperately to force them to conform to our Christian morality when we seem to have no problem letting them spend eternity in hell?

I think this is a sad failure to realize the Gospel in our own lives. And it’s quite easy to be angry at the Religious Right for turning so many ears away from the Good News of the Cross. But at the same time, my heart breaks for Rev. Falwell. I must repent of my attitude toward his death. I do sincerely hope that he trusted in Jesus Christ—not adherence to a moral code—as his savior. And if he did trust in Christ as Savior, that makes him a brother of mine—no matter how frustrated I might be with some of his actions.

In the name of Rev. Falwell, I’d like to work more on preaching the true Gospel of Christ crucified to professing Christians. It might seem unnecessary, but it distresses me to see so many people claiming to be followers of the Way actually living as terrified control-freaks, cold-hearted moralists, and stagnant, functional atheists.

This is not my stand against Revered Jerry Falwell. This is my cry to God for mercy; this is my plea for His Son to be proclaimed in all my life. Perhaps I must also preach this beautiful Gospel to myself. Rev. Falwell’s death is sobering when I realize that I, too, am quite flawed, and I begin to see how desperately I need Jesus.

Paul And The Law: The New Perspective

It is now generally accepted among the majority of scholars that the 1st Century Palestinian Jews of Jesus’ time did not actually believe in works-based salvation, an assumption mainstream Christianity has followed (and generally still holds to outside of academic circles) since the earliest days of the Reformation. Instead, the Jews viewed election and salvation as products of God’s grace, the Law being but a gift and a sign of the Covenant between Israel and YHWH. This is known as covenantal nomism. If you don’t know much about this idea or haven’t read my previous post, entitled, “Covenantal Nomism: Luther’s Misconception,” you might want to do so now.

At the end of my previous entry, I noted one of the most peculiar and aggravating problems with covenantal nomism: if the Apostle Paul was not combating a Jewish works-based view of Salvation, why then did he criticize the Law?

For example, Galatians 2.16 (NASB):

… nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

While scholars agree that the Jews were not as legalistic as once thought and embrace the idea of covenantal nomism, they still have not figured out why Paul includes such puzzling comments that seem to attack a works-based view of justification. If such a manner of thought did not exist among Jews, why does Paul seem to combat it?

Covenantal Nomism: Did Luther Miss Something?

Since the Reformation, sparked by Martin Luther’s 95 Theses in 1517, mainstream Christianity (particularly Protestantism) has operated under the assumption that the Jews of the Old Testament—as well as the Jews of Jesus’ time—believed in works-based righteousness; that is, the idea that one earned God’s favor or attained salvation through obeying the works of the Law. It is quite understandable how this assumption developed amid the legalistic corruption of the 16th Century Catholic Church. Luther believed (correctly, in my opinion) that salvation occurs by means of faith in Jesus and (specifically) not by works, yet the Catholic Church in his time was terribly infected with legalistic doctrines that proclaimed a man-made way to God through obedience and good deeds. One can certainly understand how Luther easily perceived there to be significant parallels between the Church and the Jews of Jesus’ time, especially since his assumption that Jews followed a system of works-based righteousness is most commonly accepted in Christian congregations today.

Still, even Martin Luther was biased by the circumstances of his time, and it is generally accepted among most modern scholars that Luther jumped to too many conclusions on this issue. In fact, most modern scholars challenge Luther’s assumption, holding that 1st Century Palestinian Jews followed the concept of covenantal nomism, under which obedience to the Law was simply a reflection of God’s grace in choosing Israel as His elect. In other words, these 1st Century Jews never believed that they were “saved” by or “made right” by the Law (as Luther assumed); instead, they were called to obey the Law as part of maintaining the Covenant already established by God (this is clearly evidenced in ancient Jewish and Christian writings). This new view on 1st Century Palestinian Judaism was popularized by New Testament theologian E.P. Sanders in the late 1970s, although it found its roots in the early 20th century teachings of such scholars as Claude Montefiore and George Foote Moore. Since then, it has become the predominant view among theologians.

The Sweeping Wind

The sweeping wind of senescence
Breathes putrefying innocence;
Within a fence my mind does fight
To struggle ‘gainst the falt’ring light.

The mangled branches of my deeds
Watch silent o’er their salty seeds.
What leads me from acuity
Toward gardens of fatuity?

Bereft of any gard’ner’s care,
Decaying in the curious air—
A rare and ever-painful breeze;
The zephyr of my own disease.