Exodus 3:14-- God said to Moses, "I AM who I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'"
Wow, what a powerful passage that speaks to the depths of who we are in Christ and the nature of God.
Last week we talked about the language of Christianity and how we refer to others. Our conversation often creates a polarizing "us" verses "them" relationship with those we deem different from us, even though God has proclaimed "them" to be quite the same. This mindset becomes a problem not only because it's hurtful, but also because, on a much deeper, theological level, it undermines the truth of God we say we're standing upon.
The postmodernist movement insists (and that word is ironic, isn't it, considering the movement's rejection of truth) that there is no such thing as absolute truth. There is no such thing as God or reliable morality, really, outside of the ever-shifting perspective of the people in this world. That might sound convenient for avoiding hurting people's feelings, but the reality is, this is very scary. And not just from a Christian perspective. It's scary when you need solid footing for any kind of moral or humanitarian or environmental claim. It's scary if you're a woman in an abusive marriage, if you're a slave to human trafficking, if you're Buddist under the threat of terrorist bombings, or if you're just a Pit Bull, forced every day into dog fighting.
Postmodernism might seem convenient, but the rejection of truth ultimately breaks down any kind of compassionate cause. After all, who are we to insist what is right, what is moral for another person, another country, another society? Either we are extremely egotistical to assert our own feeble notions of the world over everyone else, or we simply let these situations be and do nothing. Because, like it or not, outside of God, you have no ground to make any kind of humanitarian claim. Yes, you can certainly be moral. But it's always a shifting ground. What is socially acceptable one minute may be rejected the next. Hello, Hunger Games.
Therein, we run into a problem: Where do we locate the source of morality? From what source do we arm ourselves with the tools needed to fight against the evils of the world? Rhetoric and conversation? That's always changing. Our own consciences? But what of the discrepancies?
Ultimately, the only satisfying answer to what it means to be human and to preserve human dignity is a theological one. Perhaps not necessarily Christian (which is where faith comes in), but theological, nonetheless. Without absolute truth, we have nothing when it comes to true compassion. Nothing but hearts that are breaking over the state of the world--of the hurting--with no reason why.
There is a reason why.
There is a reason why you were born, why you have lived, why you are living.
There is something you can do to change the world. Right where you are.
When Moses asks God to identify himself, wondering how he will ever explain this sudden appearance of the pure presence of the Almighty to the Israelites, how does God answer? How could He? What phrase or name or definition or description could He possibly give that would help Moses understand the fullness of His presence?
The answer? I AM.
This verse has always bothered me. I felt like God was using a cop-out, honestly. I wanted more detailed answers. I wanted more explanation. But as I began to study postmodernist thought, I began to understand. God's answer to Moses was the most powerful thing.
Often, because we live in a postmodern moment, we make the assumption that everything we know exists as the opposite of something else. Some examples (and I used a few of these last week) are hot versus cold, dark verses light, ugly versus pretty, Christian verses sinner, gay verses straight, male verses female, liberal verses conservative, and the list goes on and on...
This kind of thinking has leaked into popular Christian teaching. We consistently hear Biblical (and unBiblical, for that matter) concepts crafted as negatives, rather than a positive motivation toward which we should be striving. What if we changed our way of thinking to how we might love God more, rather than worrying over boundaries? What if instead of fearing the law, we feared the One who overcame it?
Do not have sex before you're married.
Do not commit adultery.
Do not gossip.
Do not steal, or cheat.
Do not watch or read anything compromising.
But what about...
Wait patiently and honor God, your spouse, and yourself. Live a life of purity.
Be faithful to the vows you have made.
Encourage one another as God has encouraged you.
In everything, live your life as unto the One who gave life to you.
Fill your mind with good things, for out of your heart comes your very being.
The problem here is that we begin to believe evil actually has some power over our lives and our identities. We believe the lie that our faith is just another thing that exists within a binary, but in this case, it's good versus evil. Even if "good" comes out on top of the equation, we still have a problem. A big one. Within this structure lies the assumption that evil has a pure presence that can in some way compete with God, with holiness. But this perspective is inconsistent with Biblical Christianity. Remember the verse from Exodus?
God is. He is pure presence. He is truth. He is living.
Evil is not.
There is truth, and there is the perversion of truth. There is no such entity as non-truth.
Next Wednesday, I'll get into more specifics about how this concept can shape the way we think about God-- and ourselves-- on a more personal, practical level. So be sure to come back for the next part of the series.
Have you ever caught yourself thinking in this good versus evil mentality? How can this be harmful?
Menu
 |
 |
 |
 |
Showing posts with label God's presence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label God's presence. Show all posts
Wednesday
The Language of Christianity
So, I have this deep interest in literary theory. Yes, I know, total nerd subject. I don't write about it much because I am aware that the general population is probably not as interested in linguistic graphs as I am. :) But today I thought I'd share something I've been thinking about this past week: the way we in the church use language.
Why is this an important topic? Well, I believe the way we use language says a lot about our perspective. It's that whole glass-half-empty/glass-half-full cliche in action. Have you ever thought about the implications of Christian lingo? How often do we drive people away from Christianity, alienating them, without even realizing it? So much depends on the way we use discourse that I think we ought to be cognizant of what we're really saying.
Think about how many "spiritual" or even "conservative" terms are polarizing.
But what are these phrases really doing? They are creating an "us" versus "them" approach that does not support the Biblical teachings of equality. We are also playing into postmodern philosophy (and theology, really), which argues that everything can be categorized into sets of opposites, and we only know one thing in terms of its difference from something else.
The problem here is that these kinds of phrases, intentionally or not, undercut the necessity of the true presence of God.
God has said in no unclear terms, "I AM that I AM." He doesn't just possess truth. He doesn't just have a presence. He is truth. He is pure presence. Eternally.
This is powerful, because when we are called by His name, when the Holy Spirit inscribes that eternal relationship upon our hearts, we too have access to His truth, His nature. We are drawn into the center of all meaning, and in that moment, our lives themselves take on the purpose God created them for. We become whole because we are His.
We are not "saved" because we're no longer "unsaved." We don't know God or truth in their differences from deception. We know God, because God eternally is.
Think of it this way. Darkness is not the opposite of light. It is the absence of light's presence. The same goes for heat and cold. What might seem like a slight variation is actually a very important theological principle.
Another example are the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life." Have you ever heard the term "anti-choice"? If you're pro-life, how did that make you feel? Did you respect the pro-choice position more or less for undercutting the heart of what you believe and forcing your political position into a binary? Does "anti-choice" not imply a very different thing from "pro-life"?
The same goes for often-accepted "Christian" terms. How easy is it to categorize someone as "unsaved," when there's so much more to their story. Maybe they don't know God, and they want to, but they're afraid to come to church because they were sexually abused as a child. Maybe they're mad at God, and seem vindictive, but their mother, who was a devoted Christian, just died of breast cancer. Maybe their child has a handicap, or they live with chronic pain. These are the realities of peoples' lives. These are the complexities of their situations. It's so much easier to just call them "lost" than to ever get involved, isn't it?
The Bible says that life and death are in the power of the tongue, and out of the heart the mouth speaks. It's oh, so important that we pay attention to what we say and to the assumptions we're making.
Next week I'll be talking about how these concepts affect our perspective of our calling as believers, and how a healthy view of truth and God's presence can lead us to greater levels of assurance in grace. But for now, let's talk. Have you ever been subjected to a polarizing term? What happened? How does the use of these terms turn people away from Christ and potentially affect our ministry?
Why is this an important topic? Well, I believe the way we use language says a lot about our perspective. It's that whole glass-half-empty/glass-half-full cliche in action. Have you ever thought about the implications of Christian lingo? How often do we drive people away from Christianity, alienating them, without even realizing it? So much depends on the way we use discourse that I think we ought to be cognizant of what we're really saying.
Think about how many "spiritual" or even "conservative" terms are polarizing.
- Saved versus unsaved.
- Christian versus non-Christian.
- Believer versus unbeliever.
- Baptized versus sinner.
- Spiritual versus secular.
But what are these phrases really doing? They are creating an "us" versus "them" approach that does not support the Biblical teachings of equality. We are also playing into postmodern philosophy (and theology, really), which argues that everything can be categorized into sets of opposites, and we only know one thing in terms of its difference from something else.
The problem here is that these kinds of phrases, intentionally or not, undercut the necessity of the true presence of God.
God has said in no unclear terms, "I AM that I AM." He doesn't just possess truth. He doesn't just have a presence. He is truth. He is pure presence. Eternally.
This is powerful, because when we are called by His name, when the Holy Spirit inscribes that eternal relationship upon our hearts, we too have access to His truth, His nature. We are drawn into the center of all meaning, and in that moment, our lives themselves take on the purpose God created them for. We become whole because we are His.
We are not "saved" because we're no longer "unsaved." We don't know God or truth in their differences from deception. We know God, because God eternally is.
Think of it this way. Darkness is not the opposite of light. It is the absence of light's presence. The same goes for heat and cold. What might seem like a slight variation is actually a very important theological principle.
Another example are the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life." Have you ever heard the term "anti-choice"? If you're pro-life, how did that make you feel? Did you respect the pro-choice position more or less for undercutting the heart of what you believe and forcing your political position into a binary? Does "anti-choice" not imply a very different thing from "pro-life"?
The same goes for often-accepted "Christian" terms. How easy is it to categorize someone as "unsaved," when there's so much more to their story. Maybe they don't know God, and they want to, but they're afraid to come to church because they were sexually abused as a child. Maybe they're mad at God, and seem vindictive, but their mother, who was a devoted Christian, just died of breast cancer. Maybe their child has a handicap, or they live with chronic pain. These are the realities of peoples' lives. These are the complexities of their situations. It's so much easier to just call them "lost" than to ever get involved, isn't it?
The Bible says that life and death are in the power of the tongue, and out of the heart the mouth speaks. It's oh, so important that we pay attention to what we say and to the assumptions we're making.
Next week I'll be talking about how these concepts affect our perspective of our calling as believers, and how a healthy view of truth and God's presence can lead us to greater levels of assurance in grace. But for now, let's talk. Have you ever been subjected to a polarizing term? What happened? How does the use of these terms turn people away from Christ and potentially affect our ministry?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)