Over at Everyday Mommy there was a fascinating comment featured on a post. The comment was from a post that was submitted as a response to a commenter on this post, though (mercifully) was not published. The comment was this:
What if the Truth *is*, but God never intended for it to be something to be “hammered on” or “harped on” – and especially not at the expense of failing to show dignity and respect the children He created in His own image? Not at the expense of creating an “us”/”them” dichotomy which fails to express the *love* of Chris? Loving one another does not mean we advocate for each and every one of each other’s sins or faulty positions – and *all* of us have them! – rather it does mean we learn to sincerely grant everyone respect and dignity. Whether they agree with us or not. Whether they are even Believers or not.
This is a tragic comment that is reflective of more than an individual poster. Simply put, I will argue that this person is simply bold enough to say what too many professing believers already think, and worse — it is reflective of how an enormous number of Christians behave. The problems with what is expressed here are legion. Let me first get to the obvious thing — the premise of this comment is wholly self-defeating. The person opens by tepidly assenting that truth exists but posits the idea that maybe God doesn’t really care to see it defended. God, afterall, isn’t concerned with what’s right or good or true, right? We’re just supposed to be nice to everyone, yes?
Then why is this person opening their mouth (or typing on a keyboard, as it were)? They aren’t just writing letters down, this is offered as a correction… in the guise of an attitude of “we shouldn’t correct each other.” This is akin to the new liberal definition of tolerance: “We accept everyone and everything, except people that don’t. We hate them.” They obviously think some things are true… and by the nature of the post, they also think that some things (and some people) are wrong and need to be corrected, yet they’ve done it by suggesting that we should not advocate for truth. This philosophy is unlivable.
Now, I think there are two root causes (likely many more) that stand behind this hands-off, refusal to be combative, encouragement only attitude. The first is a desire for unity. This is healthy, at least in principle. We should desire and strive for unity. See Ephesians 4:1-16 and how high a value is placed on unity, and how important and necessary unity among the church is to foster security, growth, and maturity. Yet the unity the above comment strives for is fake, it’s contrived. The unity it produces is a veneer that is meant to hide the problems underneath like makeup covers up acne, yet runs off like water-based paint when the rains come. Real unity comes from resolving conflicts, not from running from them. That’s not to say that some battles are not worth fighting, or are the exact opposite of productive — many are not. But some things are worth arguing about (disagreeing, not screaming), and some ideas are worth standing up for. In fact, as a Christian it is obligatory.
The Scripture is a wash in advocacy for truth and for its defense. Consider 2 Corinthians 10:5-6, “We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ, 6 being ready to punish every disobedience, when your obedience is complete.” This is what we do, this is what we are commanded to do. Reflect on 1 Peter 3:15, as well. As Christians, we are obligated to strive for right thinking, and as implied by evangelism (also obligatory), we’re to address wrong thinking.
The second root cause is much less praiseworthy in motive. In no small numbers, many people that call themselves Christians have abandoned the Bible as a source of genuine authority, whether knowingly or unknowingly. If I can discern anything from a small comment made online by someone I’ve never met, the author of the comment above is in the latter group. I assume they would confess the Bible as an authority and even believe it, and yet their approach is very much the same as some of the people that like to call themselves believers but openly reject all but the portions of the Scripture they like.
As an aside, if you pull out from Scripture portions that you like, and then craft your arguments based on them while skipping those which you do like, you’re not accepting the Scripture as authoritative at all, much less in part. When you do this, you and Scripture just happen to agree on some points, but where the two depart, you side with yourself. If you agree with God, he can hang around, but when you do not, God’s a goner. This is idolitry of the worst kind. Such a person has made God in their own image. They’ve assumed the role as God.
For a real life example of this, consider the response I wrote to a professing Christian’s desire for “A Gay Awakening in the Church.” The entire presentation used Scripture this way, took parts that supported a view and ignored and belittled those which did not. The issue of homosexuality as sin is no small issue in the church, perhaps it’s one of the premier issues within the church. Consider the denominations that are literally crossing into apostasy over it (for reasons relating to root cause #2). Then consider how many of our churches flat-out refuse to address that elephant in the room (usually relating to root cause #1), though it is a massively growing force to be reckoned with… and the issue is not going away.
Christianity is a revelation from God. It teaches, through God’s words in Scripture, that the world is broken, there is something wrong with it; there is something wrong with us. By God’s grace we’ve been given access to this knowledge and the conviction to care about it. A person that says that Christ died for their sins yet is unwilling to care enough to tell people about it, or to even affirm that right and wrong exist is a walking contradiction. God’s primary message was not that we should just be nice to everyone. We are however to love each other. And genuine love, genuine friendship requires correction (with compassion) when error occurs. We don’t watch our children walk into traffic, we don’t (or shouldn’t) look the other way when friends travel down a path that will destroy their marriage, we don’t paint over problems. We work through them. Like a doctor that removes the infection before closing a wound with stitches is the friend that has concern enough to aid those around him. This is like a God who destroys sin and rebuilds creatures anew, not turning his head aside and pretending there is no problem.
