Blessed are You, O LORD our God, King of the universe, for the way my bathroom was designed, such that the towel is warmed by the afternoon sun to complement a cool shower. ------------------------------
I scare myself sometimes, O reader. Actually, make that often. This post will (hopefully) consist one of my fears and my best thought of its solution.
One of my greatest fears is how good of an actor I can be. Because of this, I wax post-modern in my thoughts of myself, and I even lose sight of my identity in Christ sometimes. It's almost like I need to remind myself periodically who I am, if I cannot define myself by my actions. Am I a good tree? Or am I just pretending?
[It's kind of gross, reader, but I've thought up a metaphor for sanctification. We're like dirty, dilapidated, pooped-in toilet seats. Justification is a jump-start in setting the toilet back to its pipes, and sanctification is leaving the bobber-thing up, so the reservoir never fills, thus slowly-but-surely refreshing and draining the gross water on the inside. Glorification is the whole shebang of wax and scrubbing and all.]
Anyways, acting. The teacher of that class (Land, Culture, Book) taught me many things, and one of them is that the Greek word for hypocrite is "actor," and that the Jews of Jesus's time (especially the Pharisees subjected to Jesus's condemnation), living in a Grecian culture in a Roman province, would have been quite familiar with the actors and plays of the time. When Jesus called the Pharisees "hypocrites," it was a pretty big deal. In fact, if archaeological findings are accurate, there probably was an amphitheatre in Jerusalem, close by Herod's palace. So Jesus possibly could have pointed at the Pharisees and then turned around and pointed at the theatre with His other hand.
"You see that
? That
is what you have turned My religion into!"This use of immanent objects was a fairly common practice, according to my teacher, among rabbis of Jesus's time. Jesus, the Master, follows the pattern of the style of teaching, which is why (I'm learning) it's oftentimes greatly important to note the geographical location given for certain places Jesus chooses to teach. After all, the authors of the gospels were pretty intentional. And so was/is Jesus!
"It's almost like the Guy wrote the book!" --
William SpragueThat being said, hypocrisy is bad. Really bad. Hypocrisy makes Jesus furiously angry.
Hypocrisy is a white-washed tomb, buried above ground on the march to Jerusalem, painted a fresh coat of white every year so that the pilgrims of the three "great" feasts would not touch the tombs accidentally, making themselves unclean for the feasting before God.
Hypocrisy is a blind man leading sheep, not knowing himself when many waters will overtake him, or when miry pits will cause him to stumble and fall, or where he may find shade. He does little help leading himself; he is more culpable for leading his flock astray.
[Acting has its benefits. As part of most VBS programs, a skit is often used to help demonstrate the biblical lessons and themes of the week. In addition, the medium of theatre is simply a 3-dimensional portrayal of a (usually fictitious) written story, complete with a meaningful thesis trying to make an observation or judgment of the human psyche. Also, here's a post-within-a-post. Blogception!
"
Add to your faith." -Mark Hamby, Lamplighter Publishing, Daily Moments Devotional
Actually, I got lazy. Hope the link works; that short devotional helped put my conscience to rest. After all, I'm not the actor in my small story within God's story. I'm one of the producers, using my gracious Father's allowance, (borrowed capital from a loving God), and I get to make a cameo appearance! Whee!]
One of the many topics Mark Nelson and I brought up amongst our High School kids last week was the theological argument of Pascal's Wager. Basically, Pascal says "Why not? You should be a Christian, because Christians will inevitably live "better" lives than non-Christians. Yes, admittedly, non-Christians can live "good" lives, but why are they good but to better themselves and bring themselves glory and power and wealth? Plus, there's the whole deal with the afterlife.
1. If Christianity is right, and you believe it, you go to heaven. AND you've lived a "good" life of productivity and compassion, without any sort of cognitive dissonance as to your motivation. You've got a clear conscience and a ticket to heaven.
2. If Christianity is wrong, and you believe it, you don't go to heaven/hell. BUT you've lived a "good" life of productivity and compassion, without any sort of cognitive dissonance as to your motivation. You've got a clear conscience.
3. If Christianity is right, and you don't believe it, you go to hell. AND you've not lived a "good" life, if you are logically true to your worldview. Even if you've been a "good" boy, you did it for the wrong reasons. You've either got a muddied conscience or bloodied hands.
4. If Christianity is wrong, and you don't believe it, you don't go to heaven/hell. BUT you've not lived a "good" life, if you are logically true to your worldview. Even if you've been a "good" boy, you did it for the wrong reasons. You've either got a muddied conscience or bloodied hands.
While I can appreciate what he meant (in that Christianity and the gospel of Christ is not just for one's afterlife destination, but also in the practical salvation of our temporary lives here on earth: the restoration and redemption of our "jars of clay" such that we can help the bringing of His kingdom), it's a poor argument, and we deconstructed it fairly rapidly at camp. [e.g.- A fallen man/woman may very well subscribe to an other worldview that either endorses paganism or that apes Christianity, like Mormonism or Islam or Hinduism, etc.] Why do I bring this up, you ask? Well, that's a good question. I've temporarily forgotten, myself.
Ah, yes. I was going to use the same paradigm for my best thoughts of behavior that doesn't quite give accurate depictions of our spirits' states. These could manifest as lying body language, a purposeful change in voice intonation, or a willful decision to not think of certain things in order to function in one's job at hand.
What then shall I say to this thing, the problem of integrity?
1. Hypocrisy, defined here as "any disparity of behavior with attitude," is always wrong, AND you believe this. Therefore, if you're upset, you ought to act consistent with your feelings. If you're sad, or tired, or gracious, or grateful, or in love, you should act thusly.
2. Hypocrisy, defined here as "any disparity of behavior with attitude," is most often wrong, AND you believe this. Therefore, if you're upset, then you probably will act consistent with your feelings. But this is not always the case.
3. Hypocrisy, defined here as "any disparity of behavior with attitude,"
is always right. Nah. That can't be.
So I judge that only two real options remain. Either hypocrisy is always wrong (in which case, lying to Nazis about hiding Jews or other vulnerable people is wrong, 100 times out of 100) or there are cases where such subterfuge should be employed. [I hope this doesn't seem like a dichotomy, though I am quite fond of them, fallacious or not. :)] Rahab's deception was counted as righteousness, because her deception was done in faith in the God of mercy, who "has given [the Israelites] the land [of Canaan]," and who "is God in heaven above and on earth beneath" (Joshua 2:9, 11). Or maybe she was just pretending, having taken a cost-benefit analysis of the situation of the Israelites marching towards Jericho and the hearts of the denizens thereof mysteriously quivering in fear like melted wax. Perhaps she was a Simon, who sought to purchase the fellowship and power of the Holy Spirit with coins, whose "heart is not right before God" (Acts 8:21). I doubt this, because she is listed among the "Hall of Faith" in Hebrews 11, and possibly is listed in Matthew's account of the genealogy of the Christ, on the side of Joseph. (I don't know if she's the right Rahab)
Alright! On with the rationalization of my lying, hypocritical self! (Not.)
I've thought up a few examples, but they all revolve around the story of Rahab and the theme of her actions: deception is permissible in the event of a dichotomous choice of 1) a TRUE action consistent with the law or one's feelings that produces a negative result or 2) a FALSE action inconsistent with the law or one's feelings that produces a positive result.
[More prefacing: I'm not an "ends-justify-means" sort of guy.]
Suppose Calvin or I had done wrong. Gasp! !Que posible! Or suppose I didn't do my chores. Or I'd stayed out past my curfew. Or I'd forgotten to call someone when I'd promised.
Therefore, I am reprimanded and disciplined accordingly by an authority or my conscience.
Therefore, assuming I am not laden in sin, I repent.
But what does that look like? I'm not a perfect person. Often that repentance comes with me immaturely sulking from a hurting "I-told-you-so," or the silent treatment. Maybe that "repentance" would prematurely manifest in anger, or mistrust, or sorrow. But these are not godly aspects of the giving and receiving of forgiveness.
So, the subterfuge.
1. Is it wrong then, as a positive example, to quell those natural feelings of anger after being wronged? I don't think so. Jesus says to forgive your brother seventy times seven, if he repents. But does that mean forgiveness is not sought by the wronged party? Is there such a thing as imputed forgiveness? Should a wrong be covered with love before it is purged with repentance and forgiveness? I sure think so. If not for this extraordinarily initiating love, sinful man would be without hope.
2. Here's another example. My mom (bless her life!), being legitimately upset at me for my foolishness, can pick up a ringing telephone and change her entire demeanor in the blink of an eye. (I secretly think this is a superpower parents develop around their firstborn's first birthday.) Is this wrong? I don't think so. It sure isn't consistent with my mom's agitated state of mind at that moment, but why should she transfer those thoughts to the caller?
I'm a good actor, but I'm not a hypocrite.
I got soul, but I'm not a soldier.
3. A friend of mine who served in the Czech Republic last summer was going through a really tough time in his prayer life, which was conflicting with his evangelism and joyful zeal for the gospel. We took a stroll one time, and he broke down and cried his heart out before our God. My only comfort to him besides my promises to pray was a suggestion to temper a spirit of strength even in the midst of sorrow, for his tears, however genuine they may be, were interfering with his short-term goal in doing real work for the kingdom of God. Does that sound cold? Or would our work have profited from this friend of mine demonstrating a consistent attitude of constant and debilitating sorrowing prayer?
4. Or what about a more simple, more common example of minor annoyances in my daily life? Should I let them get to me, "pet peeves" as I may call them, or should I quietly forgive people who cut me off on the freeway, interrupt my words, gossip, mistrust, or belittle me, or insult my precious Lord?
I confess and repent that I do not often abide with a gracious attitude in light of Your gracious patience with me, Father!Moral of my ramblings: Don't be a hypocrite! .... but don't be thoroughly consistent if your heart is troubled and you have a task at hand. Perfect love drives out fear, O reader. Love covers a multitude of sins, and love to an enemy heaps coals of fire upon his head. Furthermore, "the LORD shall reward thee" (Proverbs 25:22b). How much more ought we to intentionally pray for & cultivate a spirit of trembling and humility towards our neighbors and our brothers and sisters in the Lord, towards whom we act as "unto [the King Jesus]" (Matthew 25:40b).
--------------------------
Appendix
[Are my posts long enough to warrant an appendix? I think so. I just hope they don't warrant me an arrest ;)]
So.
There's this website called "The Art of Manliness" which has a lot of good stuff informing the hapless male of the twenty-first century (a la moi) in all things "manly," ranging from
How To Carve A Turkey to
How To Do More Than One Stinking Pull-Up to
How To Shave Like Your Grandpa. They even have a few nifty illustrations, like my favorites:
How To Tie A Bow Tie and
How To Kick Down A Door.
Anyways.
This same man who runs this excellent website wrote an article called
Living A Life Of Integrity, which sort of correlates with my thoughts above. His arguments for integritous living (I'm copyrighting that word "integritous") are fair, but weak because they lack biblical support.
[I'm fairly sure the author is a Christian, but that's besides the point.]
He says that living a life of integrity is superior to being crafty, broken, incomplete, conniving, and manipulative. His reasoning flows that such a life is easier on the mind and conscience than a life of deceit, that being integritous builds others' trust in you, and serves as a basis for value judgments.
These things are true, but when given without a super-human standard (a la Law of God), these apparent benefits are simply one man's opinion and judgment that lifestyle A is easier, more consistent, more liked, more trustworthy, and more stable that lifestyle B.
Two comments on this article shocked me: one expressed appreciation about receiving these standards "without religion attached," and the other expressed approval that these standards could have "come straight from the Catechism of the Catholic Church."
Meh. I think guys like the author of this blog and the men of Switchfoot should go ahead and label themselves properly. More on that later.
--------------------
"Men have as many different social selves as there are distinct groups of persons about whose opinion he cares." -William James, secular philosopher and psychologist of the late 19th century.
--How much more ought Christians, who primarily and truly only care about the "audience of One," the LORD Almighty, to act with solidarity of mind.
If there be therefore any comfort in Christ,
if any comfort of love,
if any fellowship of the Spirit,
if any affection and compassion,
fulfill ye me joy,
that ye be likeminded,
having the same love,
being of one accord,
of one mind.
Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory;
but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
but made Himself of no reputation,
and took upon Him the form of a servant,
and was made in the likeness of men:
and being found in fashion as a man,
He humbled Himself,
and became obedient unto death,
even the death of the cross.
Wherefore God also has highly exalted Him,
and given Him a name which is above every name:
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
of things in heaven,
and things in earth,
and things under the earth;
and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
