The Two Christianities

Standard

Sometime around 12:30 a.m. on Saturday morning, as I shut down the lights in our downstairs in anticipation of going to bed, it hit me. I finally understood something about the Church that I’d never realized before. Some may not see what follows as any great revelation, but it jumped out at me so strongly that I nearly couldn’t go to sleep for thinking about the ramifications.

I haven’t processed it all, but I’d like to share what I discovered. Like I said, it may be a big ho-hum to you, Two roads diverged...but I now see why the Church in this country fails to grow and meet the basic objectives of discipleship.

Consider two different Christianities at work, the Externally Motivated and the Internally Motivated…

Externally Motivated (EM) Christianity sees the Kingdom of God existing in systems and institutions “erected by God” or by Christians faithful to God. The essence of what it means to be a Christian dwells in hallowed monolithic icons, largely existing outside the believer. We see the expression of EM Christianity whenever we encounter Christian groups and individuals seeking to preserve or defend some aspect of the truth they see encapsulated in a system, institution, or organization.

By nature, EM Christianity is conservative in that it works to retain and preserve those creations because it equates an assault on them with an assault on the Kingdom of God. EM Christianity bases much of its credo on the Old Testament and Old Covenant because Israel invested its faith in God through the accoutrements of God in the Temple, in the Ark, in the Law, and in the evidences of God it erected in the faithful community.

But negatives within EM Christianity abound. By equating systems and institutions with the Kingdom, EM Christianity becomes a fear-based expression of the Faith. Not a day goes by without some perceived threat erupting that may be “the final blow” to the hallowed structures maintained by “good Christians.” Therefore, EM Christianity assumes a defensive position at the least provocation because EM Christians live their lives from the outside in.

Furthermore, EM Christianity’s defensive stance exists to defend the community within EM Christianity, rather than looking beyond the group. In other words, it loves its own and that’s as far as it goes. Blindness to causes that ask for a Christian response, but don’t enhance EM Christian strongholds, runs rampant. In the end, EM Christianity creates an insular community that resists the call of the Lord to go into the highways and byways to find those not initially invited to the party.

We see a practical expression of these negatives in the culture wars waged by American Evangelicalism. Leaders that follow the EM practice of the Faith resort to fear to marshal their followers against perceived threats against the systems and institutions that, in their eyes, represent the Kingdom. You can hear their mantra in the following battlecry:

The {opposition group} is going to destroy {pillar of External Christianity} by {sinful tactic}, which will lead to {fearful outcome}, and the end of {secondary pillar of External Christianity} as we know it!

Creating fear-based “Mad Libs” by filling in those brackets becomes an exercise in identifying EM Christianity:

The homosexual lobby is going to destroy our children by infiltrating our schools with pro-homosexual children’s books, which will lead to sexual identity confusion in our children, and the end of the family as we know it!

OR

The Democrats are going to destroy our legal system by failing to approve conservative judges, which will lead to godless special interest groups running the country, and the end of the United States of America as we know it!

You can go on an on with this formula.

What’s sobering for Christianity is the resemblance of that thinking to the following:

So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the Council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.”

—John 11:47-48

And we know exactly how that ended. The chief priests’ and the Pharisees’ cry sounds very much like the fearful lament of EM Christianity, based as it is in spending all its time and effort in propping up systems and institutions that are secondary (or possibly in opposition) to the expansion of the Kingdom.

Another troublesome issue within EM Christianity concerns its reliance on charismatic leaders to push its agenda forward. When such a leader stumbles, the flock who followed him scatter and the movement loses momentum or falls into public disgrace. We see this all the time and it hurts the cause of Christ in this country immeasurably.

Lastly, those who follow an EM Christianity find themselves subject to the whims of forces having nothing to do with the expansion of the Kingdom of God. Their emotional state shifts with whatever perceived “win” or “loss” follows their cause. Because their faith is so rooted in externalities that can suffer at the hands of the godless, they set themselves up as martyrs even though they may very well lack the proper grounding to be true martyrs for the Faith. Theirs becomes an angry expression of Christianity because of this dilemma.

Yet despite these lacks, EM Christianity is still Christianity. It’s the response of people who have had their eyes opened to the pernicious realities of sin, but have not yet developed an understanding of the Faith that goes beyond labeling others as sinners or saints. EM Christianity is not a seasoned expression of our faith in Christ, but a waypoint on the path to true maturity.

Internally Motivated Christianity, in sharp contrast, invests little time and energy in externalities. Its hope is not in systems and institutions because it understands that those succumb to entropic forces. To the IM Christian, the Kingdom of God cannot rest on externalities prone to decay:

And when [Jesus] was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

—Luke 17:20-21

The distinguishing mark of IM Christianity is the Holy Spirit, who dwells inside each believer. The Kingdom exists because the Spirit comes to live in each believer, that indwelling marking the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New. The externalities, the mere representations of the Kingdom of God, surrender at Pentecost. Therefore, the Kingdom of God cannot be destroyed from without because the Kingdom of God is within us. When attacked, IM Christianity responds with grace and love. It continues to offer Christ to all, even to those who oppose it.

For this reason, IM Christianity signals the mature Faith because nothing can diminish it. Its liberality comes from its freedom to give without fear of loss. IM Christians have considered ALL things lost, receiving in return what cannot be taken away. Though all the systems and institutions collapse and the heathens run amok, IM Christianity remains at peace because its adherents carry within them the fruit of the Kingdom. The Enemy cannot prevail against IM Christianity and cannot sway its adherents because they realize the Kingdom of God lives inside them. The power of God doesn’t come to them from the systems they create, but through the Holy Spirit working miracles in the absence of those systems. They live their faith from the inside out.

IM Christians…

…have humbly died to the externalities.

…don’t concentrate on defending external systems and institutions prone to decay.

…concentrate on the real mission of evangelism and disciple-making.

… comprehend that they are expendable for the Lord because their lives are hidden in Christ.

…work best under persecution.

…have nothing to fear because what they have cannot be taken away from them.

…are truly free.

When we examine the state of the Church in 2007, we find that EM Christianity predominates in the American Church, while IM Christianity marks most regions of the world undergoing revival. IM Christianity thrives in places like China, India, and South America. Those lands have no institutions or systems that support Christianity, anathema to an EM Christian. In fact, institutions and systems in those countries oppose Christianity. This forces the Church there to internalize the Faith. And so it flourishes.

If a warning exists for IM Christianity, it comes in the form of the giant step backward. As noted earlier, EM Christianity exists as a waypoint on the journey to mature faith. However, IM Christianity’s misguided tendency is to retreat by creating systems and institutions that must be defended at all cost. Persecution helps keep this in check, and may explain why the Chinese Church actively prays that the American Church will suffer like it does. When all the systems and institutions fall away, IM Christianity will be forced to take root or people will fall away.

Two Christianities: Externally Motivated and Internally Motivated.

Lord Jesus, make us Internally Motivated Christians.

The Holy Who?

Standard

How can it be that in a charismatic generation we’ve forgotten the Holy Spirit?
—Leonard Ravenhill

Love Ravenhill. No one cut to the chase better than he did. That’s the kind of thinking I pray gets exhibited on Cerulean Sanctum daily.

I wrote on the Holy Spirit last Thursday, but driving home from church today I got overwhelmed with a similar message, so I’d like to go into more detail.

Many people already know that I claim to be a charismatic, though I dislike the term immensely, and hate much of what the charismatic movement has transmogrified into in recent years. You can’t be around charismatics very long and not run into some—for want of a better phrase—serious wackos. Loyal readers will know that I routinely hold the spiritual feet of the charismatic movement to the fire. I simply possess no tolerance for charismania, as I call it.

On the other hand, this post addresses the other side of the issue.

A few questions:

1. Why is it that you can surf a hundred Christian blogs and not find a single mention of the Holy Spirit?

2. How is it possible that you can go to your average Christian bookstore and buy a dozen Christian books and find virtually no mention of the Holy Spirit?

3. Why is it that the institutional churches have either turned the Holy Spirit into a “fairy godmother” or gutted His power to do anything more than help us remember a few Bible verses?

4. In fact, how is it that some Christians routinely allow the Bible to replace the Holy Spirit in the Trinity?

5. How can it be that we can talk about eschatology, soteriology, epistemology, and a hundred other Christian -ologies, but someone casually asks to define pneumatology and entire swaths of mature Christians will scratch their heads?

How are any of these possible?

The inescapable truth is that every aspect of Church that we practice today existed before the Holy Spirit was given, yet we had no Church! The Church exists for one reason only, and that’s the Lord placed His Spirit inside us! Tiffany window - The Holy SpiritCommunity existed, religious practice existed, love existed, service existed, even the Scriptures existed, but the Holy Spirit did not make his dwelling place in human beings.

Folks, the mark of the Church must always be the Holy Spirit in us. Everything else can be copied by other religions. But they do not have the Holy Spirit. He’s the promise. He’s the seal. He’s the power!

How then can we talk about everything else BUT Him?

One of the most compelling reasons for the Western Church’s comatose state can be found in our non-existent pneumatology. We’ve reduced the Holy Spirit to some index cards with a few memorized Scriptures on them. We’ve taken the Holy Spirit and accepted His seal on us for salvation, but then we move on as if He’s done with us.

Consider this well-known verse:

…Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the LORD of hosts.
—Zechariah 4:6b

We’ll quote that till we’re blue in the face and then go right out and minister from the flesh.

I’m not a supporter of the Emerging Church, but I’m sympathetic to some of the reforms they’re calling for in the Church as a whole. Yet I’m utterly mystified that a reform movement could be so lacking in any concept of the Holy Spirit. Pneumatology in the Emerging Church? I’ve not heard one peep about it. As far as I’m concerned, any reform movement that perpetually leaves out the mention of the Holy Spirit is nothing but flesh-centered hogwash.

And you, the institutional church guys. Stop laughing, because you’re the ones who forgot what the Holy Spirit is all about. No wonder your spiritual offspring in the Emerging Church are clueless about the Holy Spirit. You gave them nothing to work with. You’re the one’s who shoved the Holy Spirit in a closet and forgot about Him!

Yeah, I’m a little peeved about this. I hear a lot of pointless talk on the Web about revival and how to rouse the sleeping Western Church, yet almost nothing about the Holy Spirit. I promise this: if we start preaching on the necessity of the Spirit to empower our lives to holiness, evangelism, and true manifestations of the Spirit’s power to a generation unimpressed with talk without walk, we’ll see revival.

Ask yourselves how the Church grew from a couple hundred disciples at Pentecost to around 20-25 million adherents by the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325. Most people couldn’t read, no NT canon existed, the Gentiles had passing references to the Scriptures, persecution of Christians flourished, Christians didn’t meet in megachurches, and yet Christianity flourished. How?

Not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit!

How is that we’ve forgotten this? Worse, how is it that we’ve forgotten the Third Person of the Trinity altogether?

A Lesson on the Spirit from the Three Little Pigs

Standard

My son and I were discussing the moral ramifications of “The Three Little Pigs,” when a thought struck me. A peculiarly theological thought.

Young pigs strike out from home to seek their fortunes in the world. Each encounters a man carrying a building material. Each builds a home from that building material. Depending on which version of the story you read, the first two pigs either wind up as so much meat sticking to the Big Bad Wolf’s ribs or they escape to the third pig’s impregnable fortress of brick wherein they turn the tables on the wolf and make soup out of HIM.

Being the curmudgeonly type, I prefer the more dire outcome for the two foolish pigs. I mean, the wolf was just being true to type. Why should HE suffer?

Anyway…

You can’t read that story and miss the appellation slathered on the first two pigs: foolish.

But do we ever think why?

In the story I read with my son, the pigs went their separate ways. The first one encounters a man selling straw. In some parts of the world straw makes for a perfectly legitimate building material. How smart of the pig to transact some business and build a house. A house is better than no house, right? I would think so. It rains on the just and the unjust—and on pigs, too. A roof overhead when it’s raining feels pretty darn good.

The second pig, having not heard of the misfortune that eventually caught up with his sibling, contracted with another man to buy wood for his house. Seeing as most of us live in houses made of wood, The one who endured to the end...we’re that second pig. Wood makes a fine house save for encounters with F5 tornadoes and wolves of unusual lung capacity. But that pig was still foolish.

The third pig bode his time and just so happened to come across a man selling bricks. The rest is fairy tale history.

“So, Dan,” you’re saying, “I’ve got 1,732 other blogs to read today. Get to the point.”

Some circles of Christianity, at least in my opinion, have a low view of the Holy Spirit. He seals us for salvation and helps us understand Scripture, but He’s sort of shy and quiet otherwise, kind of the introvert of the Trinity. At least as some would paint Him. He certainly doesn’t go around guiding people. We have all the guidance we need from the Scriptures and there’s no possible reason why we’d need the Holy Spirit to tell us anything apart from what any of us would find in the Book.

Tell that to Pig 1 and Pig 2.

So a man comes up to you with some straw. The pragmatist in your swinish self informs you that straw would make a decent house. The opportunity is right before you. You never know when that straw’s going to show up again. Being quite the religious pig, you consider that God makes straw, right? It’s good stuff. God said so. Plus, you hate being rained on.

Straw it is.

Or a man comes up to you with wood. Strong stuff that wood! Would make a fine house. God makes trees. Plenty of God’s little creatures live in trees. They do okay by God’s trees. And then there’s that Noah guy. Gotta love that wooden boat and all the protection it gave. You’ve been to Sunday School, so…

Wood it is.

Next thing you know, you and your brother’s little digested corpses are so much steaming wolf scat on the side of the road.

What went wrong?

I see this happen in the lives of a lot of Christians. Because they’ve chopped out the Spirit’s ability to speak to them, they make pragmatic choices rather than godly ones. Straw and wood may be perfectly good building material in all but the most bizarre cases. But what does the Spirit say? Would He tell us to hold out for something that might be coming down the road that we can’t see, but He can? Would He ask us to endure the rainstorm for a few more days until the man with bricks enters the scene and saves the day?

For all we know, straw and wood may be our only choices. The pragmatist says to strike while the iron’s hot, to make the most of the opportunities God affords us. But what does the Spirit say?

The storyteller deems the third pig wise. In the eyes of the first two, he’s a fool because he had the opportunity to buy decent building material, but he didn’t. Those first two pigs didn’t have the God’s-eye view, though.

For the truly Spirit-led Christian, of which there seems to be few in this age of pragmatic churchmen, heeding the Spirit occurs throughout the day. The kind of guidance received can’t always be traced back to the Book. Consider this disciple:

Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.” And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying, and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.”
—Acts 9:10-12

That’s some mighty fine guidance that disciple received, but he didn’t get it by reading the Book, did he? He took that guidance rather conventionally, too, since the next verse finds him arguing about it with the Lord. Perhaps he was used to the Lord speaking to him. I can’t see any of us in the same situation, the audible voice of God telling us to drive to Death Valley to change the tire of some couple who would be open to hearing the Gospel right there amid the rattlesnakes, and us saying, “But, Lord….” I suspect that the vast majority of us would keel over from fright, our hair bleached white, because it’s far too out-of-the-ordinary that the Holy Spirit should actually guide us like the Book says He will.

Straw was good. Wood was better. Brick was best. How often do we settle for straw because we weren’t listening to the Spirit’s call to hold out for something better? Because we’re so deaf to the sound of the Savior’s voice, we may never know the difference between the pragmatic solution and the one that’s spiritually discerned. But difference there is and the only way to know it is to have the Lord shout it right in our deaf ears until we hear it as a whisper.

Then we’re getting somewhere.