Semantics or More?

I first wanted to say that the last several weeks have just been awesome. I have seen the start of God working in people's hearts, and it is wonderful to start to see some effect from the efforts of faith on post. My friend Jay gave his testimony to some guys at Christmas, I think between that and seeing our living testimonies the guys around us are connecting the dots and seeing how Christ really does change lives. In addition, by living in the barrack and being available to fellow soldiers to help them when they need something I am seeing God opening their hearts. I think I have mentioned this a bit before, but I think it also has much to do with the current topic.

For some reason, one which I do not understand, many people have gotten the idea that it is a bad thing to question Christianity when they are earnestly looking. Those who adamantly oppose our God question it without wanting to consider the answers. Those that seek the truth have an apprehension about questioning their beliefs and what they thought to be Christianity. That brings me to the most recent pondering.

Perhaps the most frequent question I receive about myself is "Are you religious?” usually time permitting I say "not really, but for what you mean, yes." This might be a form of churchese that has yet to be really addressed. Most of churchese is simply objects, activities that are church oriented like communion, pulpit, Pentecost, things of that nature. When we get into the adjectives though it becomes two languages that I think occurs more frequently then we realize. I have found when asking people if they want to attend something that has to do with Christ, usually church or bible study they say they are not religious. Religion as the Pharisees practiced it is still being practiced in what I have seen by the majority of churches throughout the nation. That is the best explanation I can come to why so many people from so many different walks of life think the same thing when I say religion. It is a belief system about rules and control. It has abused people and is responsible for thousands of deaths and horrible crimes. Religion is not something that people like to study, talk about or identify with others. So far, these attributes are about the opposite from Christ and his teachings.

I do not prefer to be referred to as a religious person for just these reasons. I think as I have been around the barracks these months and the conversation I have had others are starting to realize that I live the way I do because I want to. Many people initially think that I am a brain-washed churchie who has never seen the world outside the church or made a decision for myself. I think that is one of the mindsets people have that are synonymous with "religious" or someone who is devout.

The next important miscommunication/interpretation I think has happened both within the church and outside the church is "believe". When I say "I believe" something that can range from Christ rising from the dead, the literal six day creation account or that I believe Kobe Bryant is entirely too much of a ball hog. Beliefs are very subjective, after all what each person believes is validly can be different from every other person. Where it has gotten mixed up though is what it means to believe in reference to Christ.

As I recall from the Romans Road, we are to "confess with our mouths and believe in our hearts Jesus is Lord" and he will become our Savior. This is where I find my theology differs from several pastors I have heard speak at conferences throughout. My uncle first pointed this out to me. I have not seen a reference to scripture where people are able to make Christ their Savior without him being their Lord. I looked through the nifty mini-concordance of the words "savior, save, saved" and most of them were from prophecy, Psalms while it seemed all the New Testament references always phrased God as Lord and Savior. For example the introductions to all the epistles, I like to call the "Grace and Mercy Schpiels" because from face value they seem like they same the same thing in each letter. 1 Timothy is the first to include the savior portion in the introduction while all the others always mention Lord Jesus Christ. Titus and 2 Peter mention God as Savior in the greetings, yet every single other greeting mentions something about Jesus Christ as Lord. I tie this in that I think mainstream Christianity has greatly underestimated scripture's meaning of "believe".

This in turn reflects that when we see a Gallop poll or something of that nature most show 60-80% of the population believe themselves to be Christians. From a previous blog I would be overjoyed to see 60-80% of the church practicing Christianity as it is meant to be done. So why is it that I have heard so many sermons with the phrase "Accept Jesus as your Savior" or something along those lines? I recall a friend from high school that claimed for years that he was a Christian and when I asked him why he talked and acted the way he did he responded "I am ready to have Jesus as my Savior, but not as my Lord". I was speechless to think that, at first thought was "how can this be, scripture does not offer that option". Yet how many of us have attended how many services that invite Christ like that? As I noticed other mentions of "believe" through scripture it is far deeper than what many pastors preach it to be.

From my interpretation believe goes hand in hand with action, such as lifestyle. I suppose it is easy to mix up belief that requires works because that would appear to be working our way to heaven. I think sincere belief will overflow into one’s lifestyle. Take this example, if I believe that the Kings are the best basketball team in the league and I believe myself to be a basketball fan, then I would be talking about the Kings constantly. I would watch and try to attend every game, I would share with my friends how great the Kings did the night before, all of this seems reasonable and I know we have encountered sports fans like that. Now translate that kind of belief into something like Jesus... how many of can say we know more Jesus fans than sports fans?

Born Again or Christian?

One of my biggest pet peeves is the title or description of "Born Again". I don't get irritated when people say they are "Born Again." It is more the use and what I really think is the reason this description came about. Before you might antsy, I recognize the scripture origin of the term directly spoken of in John 3:1-15 when Jesus is talking to Nicodemus. One more thing, the encompassing of born again in this context does not seek to address the sacraments of baptism or communion. This is discussing being born again in the Spirit, so there is no act of distinction between a “born again” Christian and conventional Christian. This does include the rebirth of spirit which will compel different actions, but how is that change any different from when a person makes Christ their Lord? I think it is the same transformation prompted by the Holy Spirit.

So I ponder, “What is the deal with people that call themselves Born Again Christian vs. Christian". I think it has become a term that Christians used to say that they are a different kind of Christian, one that has changed from their old ways. I am excited when someone leaves the old life behind; I tend to think such a display is manifested through something like Baptism. I look at Baptism as it being a public declaration and statement of one's faith. The difference in use is that when a person has been baptized they don't describe themselves as “baptized Christians”, yet those who choose to describe themselves as “born again” tend to use that as a prefix to their religious identification. I do not think we should need to declare that we are changed people because all those that know us ought to see it pouring out our skin. So what is the deal, why did this term/title come about?

I think people started calling themselves "Born Again" Christians from Christians because they wanted to describe themselves in a manner different than just “Christian”. It was a counter to the Christian culture in which one could not differentiate between a cultural Christian from one who has a personal relationship with Christ. To say that I am a born again Christian is supposed to mean something differently than to say I am a Christian. Why is that? What kinds of circumstances have happened in society that it was necessary to add a new title? Was it because “Christian” had become such a general term throughout society that people wanted to try to be different from everyone else? From certain perspectives I find that approach commendable because they were different and did not want to be associated with being just “Christian”.

It is easy to see that motivation. This nation has been described as “a Christian nation” for much of its history. In this identity though, the term Christian has apparently lost any tangible meaning. We have come to a point in society if one inquires “what religion you are” and the reply is "Christian", it is seldom an adequate description. Is anyone else unsettled with this? What has happened with the identification of Christ that people don't even know what it means? I insist to say that I am simply a Christian, I am a member of Presbyterian USA but that was not the question sought when people inquire of my religion. I think religion has the connotation of the archaic belief system that appeared as rules, not a freeing life-giving relationship with Christ, which mine is. It is sad that through the decades, “Christian” in the public sphere almost wholly lost any meaning. Somewhere in our history people realized that and wanted to be set apart from the masses that claim the Cross without knowing what it meant. My suggestion of the counter culture: I am a Christian, no more no less. Instead of making new descriptions for whom and what we are, I think Christians ought to reinvigorate the title associated with the belief. The term “Christian” originated as a derogatory term literally meaning “little Christ”, we could be so privileged to be mocked for our faith that others see Christ in our life to a point of derision.

This hit me a couple years ago. I was reading a newspaper article about a person who was described as born again, being convicted of a crime. I thought what was the point of adding that title? We ought not to claim something we do not live. I was also reminded of a story from the campus pastor at Azusa Pacific, they had a third party organization conduct a survey based on observation the percentage of the college who appeared to be Christian. The results were in the neighborhood of about 40% of the college population from the organization's estimate. While that might sound sad, how true is it among our youth groups, churches, and every other Christian organization? I know going through the youth group I am most familiar there were people of whom, Christ’s presence was clearly evident. I would be generous to say at any one point in time that would consist of 30-50% of the group. I know there were constantly new people and outreach constantly going but that figure reflected the core group. A similar example is found in the manifestation of the 80/20 Rule in ministry. Should it be? By no means it should not.

Something to consider, of all the people you know, how many are committed Christians? I am not calling us all to perfection, merely dedication. I weep for our society where there are so many people that do not know what Christianity is because they have never seen an authentic Christian. I am reminded of the staff T-shirts at church we were given after the staff conference and the bold statement "Be Like Me" on the front and on the right sleeve further instructions state “stand here, take notes”. When we received those shirts, I do not recall a single person not being intimidated by the boldness of the shirt.

My final example, it shakes me to recall it still, at Basic Training while I was just having small talk with one of the guys in my platoon, and he asked me "What are you?" in reference to my faith. I responded with "I am a Christian" and further explained that was all. His response was "oh, so you mean like you actually practice what the Bible says? That's cool.” a conversation that I am sure he has since forgotten but it hit me. A bit of a pat on the back but at the same time, could it be possible that he went his 19 years and I was possibly the first Christian that practiced the faith he claimed?

I am very discerning when I encounter people, anyone can claim they are Christian, and when you call yourself that to me, I will observe and hope you live it out. It is more than apparent that we have all encountered people who claim it but do not realize what they have claimed. Even my own filtering process is evident in myself how I have seen "Christians" misrepresent the faith. From my experience, I want to know that I actually share my heart with someone who actually shares the hope we have. I have no problem being open to other Christians, accountability is vital to encouragement and holiness of the Body. There should be no limits to having it with every brother and sister if they are so inclined.

Epilogue:  I am also reminded of extended family who came to Christ during the Jesus Movement in which "born again" was proliferated. For that personal experience, the title was important to their conversion experience. It is important to be sensitive to such experiences concerning our journey to faith, but we ought to also consider "why" still use the term of differentiation between orthodox Christians?