If you have a background similar to mine, you'll have heard the idea of preaching against sin. It is a commonplace, "People are afraid to preach against sin these days." The charge is one of cowardism and accommodationism. "God hates sin," and we should preach against it.
The biblical model for this charge is the prophet, primarily the OT prophet, but also Jesus, Paul, and Acts. There is Elijah, who kills hundreds of prophets of Baal and anoints Jehu as king, who then slaughters 70 of Ahab's children. There's Jesus speaking out against the Pharisees in Matthew 23.
Preachers often invoke this model when they call out their churches on areas of sin or indict the broader culture for its sin. On the other hand, younger evangelicals seem quite averse to it. Their mantra is more Matthew 7:1--"Do not judge so that you are not judged." Accordingly, the current generation coming through the ranks is more accepting of its own sinfulness--and that of the culture around it--than ever before. Many of them seem to consider it a good sign if their non-believing friends don't perceive any difference between them at all.
We have to wonder if there are two opposite extremes going on here. But I only want to look at the prophetic model today. What is the place of the prophetic model today?
1. What kind of sin did the prophets do something about?
Elijah did something about a set of Baal worshippers--he killed them. We have to be careful about making him a model in this, however. The book of Hosea soundly criticizes Jehu, whom Elijah anointed, for killing the children of Ahab at Jezreel.
Also Elijah as far as we know never once set foot in the southern kingdom to visit the Jerusalem temple. According to Deuteronomy, this is a major issue, indeed the issue more than any other that guaranteed no king from the north would be considered a good king in 1 and 2 Kings.
My point is that Elijah was not a Christian, and we must be careful not to assume he is a model for us in everything he did.
It seems to me that the classic prophets most spoke out against what we would call social injustice today, about the oppressed of society like widows, the poor, and orphans. This was Jesus' major beef with the Pharisees in Matthew. This is what the classic prophets most speak out against. The intertextual echoes of Jesus in Jeremiah when he overthrows the tables of the moneychangers are in this area.
Yet when you here preachers talk about the need to speak out against sin, social injustice is not usually the topic they have in mind, although the issue of abortion would be an exception (preaching in defense of the rights of the unborn).
2. Prophets as foretellers of coming judgment
Jonah didn't go to Ninevah to enact legislation. He went to preach about impending judgment by God. He had no plans to enact the judgment himself. Similarly, Amos and Hosea preached against the sins of the northern kingdom and they preached that God was going to judge the nation.
Paul, in a position of disempowerment, says it is not his job to judge the world (1 Cor. 5). Rather, it is his job and the job of those in the church to judge those in the church. God will judge the world.
All this leads us to ask how Christians should speak out in contemporary culture today. Many operate with an unexamined model that says, "We should pass as many laws as we can to make the world act according to our understanding of Christian behavior." It seems to me, however, that there are some possible factors to this drive though that are unrecognized:
1. To what extent is this a collectivist construct? If you are in my group you must look like me. For my group to be intact, we must force people either to conform to our identity or force them out.
2. To what extent is this a function of repression? Speaking out against sin allows me to vent and to release my pent up repressed frustration. I could go running, but shouting at others is easier.
What do you think is the place for the prophetic model today? How if at all does the NT modify the Elijah prophetic model?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm probably not in a position, attitudenally to speak about this, but think that it is too important an issue to by-pass.
Christians should know that their eyes have been opened to understand that God is the giver of life (whether directly or indirectly). And because He has given life, it is sacred, whether that life is believing or not. Honoring life is not just about abortion, but how we treat our neighbor in all areas of life. Do we constantly condemn another because we are focused on their life and not our own? I believe that getting the log out of our own eye is imperative, before we can get the speck out of our brother's eye. Why is this so?
1.)We cannot see clearly because our perception is distorted. It is like trying to look through a glass that is curved and dirty. The glass distorts what we see. This problem is due to hurts in our lives that have not been resolved. Counselling is advisable.
2.)We cannot give advice in a proper attitude and motive if we are angry or defensive. Anger hides hurt and/or fear and even while defensiveness is wise in some cases, if it is combined with anger, there is no way to connect with the other person.
3.)Sin is defined from our own personal convictions, values, and commitments. Many times we judge others because they don't have the same values that we have. Group identity is maintained by the 'status quo" of keeping others in line, feeling important and feeling like we belong to something bigger than ourselves. But, the fact is, we are accountable for ourselves alone. That does not mean that we have no social responsibility, but that the social responsibility comes after we have maintained our own person and developed the things that are most important to ourself. We are then free to be who we were created to be and can act accordingly.
The prophetic model calls people to look inward because of the heart. The heart is the seat of our desire. The problem becomes in discerning where our hearts should be focused. Though the prophets used our love of God as the "standard" and missing that standard meant that we "sinned" in other areas. Our love of God cannot be seen apart from our love of neighbor, when we get to the NT. Personally, I am weary of the use of spiritual language when it comes to these "sins", as I see them as "ancient wisdom" and not specifically Christian and sometimes putting God in the picture only complicates the issue....It is in a certain sense, the social contract, because we cannot negotiate what the contract should entail, if we do not know our own values, convictions, and commitments. And we cannot negotiate if we demonize the other, either. This is the way of interantional relations, marriage counselling, parenting, and friendships...and it doesn't matter whether one is a person of faith or not, as we all have been made in God's image, naturally.
Much of what you wrote here puts into words the conclusions at which I've arrived in the past 3 years.
I keep running into people in the church who feel the need to remind people how sinful and terrible they are- then feel they need to justify themselves in their judgments by pointing to Biblical examples.
But, you know, I wonder if making someone feel evil will draw them to our Father or push them further away?
Yeah. We are sinners. Straight up. We fall waaaaaay short. How do I know that? Because somebody told me repeatedly from the pulpit on Sunday? Not necessarily (although two pastors have in the past two weeks!). I knew I was falling short when I realized I wanted to do better... when I envisioned a better me and a better world... And I did that when I was nine years old and was punished for talking back to my mother.
I don't really know where I'm going with this, except to say that most people know their shortcomings very well. If Jesus is preached and proclaimed as the answer - people can find the problem. Like jeopardy. :)
I mean, seriously, when He said it was finished, it wasn't just certain sins or problems... it was the whole darn system. Jesus took care of all of it and longs to usher in His kingdom... but so many get too caught up on the sin issue to be able to move into a place where any Kingdom work is possible.
Maybe the church has just defined terms too narrowly, which ushers in so much confusion. Terms like sin. Sin is not just lying. Or killing. Or breaking the levitical law. Sin is imperfect love.
...And love is not sex. :) Real love- perfect love- is the full completion of the law- the best- the good in practice toward all... everything our Father is and all He intended in the world! And it only comes from Him. We can't make ourselves love that way!
I've "blah-blahed" a lot. :)
Thank you, Jennie Joy. You said that you learned when you talked back to your mother when you were nine years old and were punished. That means that the "Gospel" is obeying authorities, submitting through "love, and putting your mind in neutral, as others will decide for you what you are to do and be, etc.
I used to believe what you suggest, but not longer think that love is the answer to the world's problems....because love is commitment to another and we can't get along with the fellow in the pew, much less someone with a vastly different understanding of life.
I recognize that you believe that "Jesus is the answer"...as moral model, yes, for some. but, not substitutionary death, no, we must pay for our own sins, as you said you learned at the age of nine. That is how sin is defined in some communities of faith, whatever is not submission to authority, for Lucifer's sin was wanting to be like God...etc. etc. I don't believe in Total depravity (man needs a "savior"), atonement for sin, as in substitution (for this is bringing justice with unjust means, which is unethical) nor that one has an exclusive claim on "god". It is not so much anymore about religion, as about politics.
Post a Comment