Archive for July 8th, 2009

Anti-cultural

Wednesday, July 08th, 2009 | Author: Skip Moen

Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself;  Philippians 2:3

Humility – Aristotle established the spirit of our age with his declaration that whatever prevents the development of virtue makes a person tapeinos (humble).  Just read that once more.   Aristotle is arguing that humility works against human development.  If we want to become someone, we need to get rid of tapeinophrosune (humility).  No wonder the gospel was cultural revolution.  It literally turned the world upside-down.  No educated Greek would ever imagine that God wanted people to become servants, slaves and lowly of heart.  By the way, neither do any of the icons of our contemporary culture.  We are the tail end of the Greek civilization, and the worldview hasn’t changed.  The world wants its day on the stage.  Fame and fortune are the most sought-after goals of the population.  The media saturates us with fame and fortune addiction.  If Christians are going to be salt and light, they will need to take large daily doses of humility.

It’s important to note that the LXX (the Septuagint – Greek translation of the Hebrew Scripture completed about 200 BC) uses the word tapeinos and related derivatives more often than the Greek literature itself.  Hundreds of times we find a Hebrew word translated by tapeinos or a related word.  Humility is at the very core of Hebrew thought while it is barely at the edge of Greek thinking.  If you really want an instant assessment of the difference between someone with a Greek-based worldview and someone with a Hebrew-based worldview, just ask yourself if tapeinophrosune (humility) is visibly present.  I said “visibly” because in Hebrew thought humility is not so much a state of mind as it is action.  Humility shows itself in the way we behave.  Claims of humility mean nothing unless there is visible demonstration.

Why is there such a disparity between the Greeks and the Hebrews on this characteristic?  It’s simple – and perhaps a bit surprising.  The Greeks believed that the goal of humanity was freedom.  Therefore, they despised anything that seemed to restrict freedom.  Since humility was associated with subjection, being made lowly and under authority, they rejected it.  So does the culture of this age.  Freedom for the Greeks, and for this age, means individual self-will.  Whatever restricts my freedom is abhorrent.  To put myself voluntarily under bondage to another is unthinkable.  This same revulsion is part of the post-modern culture and is one of the reasons why a return to Torah-obedience is so often rejected.  Even Christians refuse to accept the place of Torah-obedience, not because they are sinful but because they are really a product of the post-modern world.  They truly believe that freedom means making up my own mind about my life.

The Bible, on the other hand, places all humanity under God.  He is King of the Universe.  We are His subjects.  Therefore, humility before God sets us in proper relationship to Him.  This reversal of worldly values is to be a consistent, demonstrable characteristic of a follower of the Way.  It is almost an oxymoron of Christian existence.  We are to be active proponents of humility.  The only reason this isn’t self-contradictory is that our humility is not a personal showcase but rather a quality recognized by others.  In God’s upside-down Kingdom, the humble are hidden until someone else notices their display of God’s character.  The heroes of humility never wear “notice-me” name badges.

Topical Index:  humility, tapeinos, tapeinophrosune, post-modern, Philippians 2:3

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , ,  | 5 Comments

One More Look

Wednesday, July 08th, 2009 | Author: Skip Moen

There has been a lot of good discussion about the concept of the Kingdom as a world-dominating culture.  I thought I would add these remarks to the dialogue.

Perhaps the best way to articulate this change in perception is to refer to a book given to me by Dan S. Against Christianity by Peter Leithart is a penetrating examination of the difference between the post-modern view of the world and the biblical view. According to Leithart:

Modernity refers to the civilization of the West since about 1500. Culturally, modernity is characterized by “value pluralism,” which entails the privatization of religious institutions and religious claims. Every individual and every group chooses its own shared values, and civil society is the arena where those values enter into combat. Politically, modernity is shaped by “liberalism,” the political system dedicated to the one proposition that political systems must not be dedicated to one proposition.

Through its roots in the patristic period, Christianity in its more developed form is the Church’s adjustment of the gospel to modernity, and the Church’s consequent acceptance of the world’s definition of who we are and what we should be up to Christianity is biblical religion disemboweled and emasculated by (voluntary) intellectualization and/or privatization. Christianity is not merely haphazard embrace of the values and practices of the modern world. Worldliness in that sense has plagued the Church since Corinth and will be a temptation to the end of time. Christianity is institutionalized worldliness, worldliness accepted in principle, worldliness not at the margins but at the center, worldliness build into the foundation.

Leithart draws a needed distinction between Christianity (the “official” religion of the West) and the Church (God’s people in the world). Christianity is a part of the world culture, accommodated to the systems of the world through its organization, goals and operation. Just think about the scope and actions of the Roman Catholic Church. It is big business with a worldwide organized hierarchy. In fact, it is probably the first multi-national company. Of course, any of the mainline denominations fit the bill today. What this implies is that the members embrace a cultural orientation that is dictated by the religion and that religion is in cooperation with the state. So, state and religion work out a pact of mutual non-aggression. The state passes laws that endorse or protect certain religious freedoms and the religion endorses and supports certain activities of the state. Just consider the almost universal acceptance of democracy as the proper political system of Christianity. Nothing in the biblical record supports this idea. Where did it come from? From the Greeks. The Church is not a democracy. The Kingdom of God is not a democracy. But most Christians have accommodated to the state by accepting democracy as the correct political system.

This same shift can be seen in economic policy, social liberties, civic responsibilities, education, ethics and philosophy. The biblical worldview is an all-embracing reorientation of life to a radically different culture. It is Semitic, ancient, theocratic, without hierarchy, distributive economics and maximized personal responsibility. Its legal system is compassionate but without appeal (there is no supreme court that can overrule God’s law). Its educational system is focused nearly exclusively on Torah. It is exclusive (drawing careful distinctions between those who are followers and those who are not) and intolerant (demanding repentance). In fact, it is a lot more like the culture of Islam than it is like the culture of the West.

Most Christians today have absorbed the cultural values of post-modernity. They believe in tolerance, inner truth, private religion and the separation of State and Church. They just don’t realize that none of these are biblical. So, they act more like Greeks than followers of the King, but they aren’t aware that there is really a difference.

It’s time to open this discussion, to realize that living a “Christian” life is not the same as being a good, morally upright member of the nation. Everything must change if we are really going to embrace the teachings of the Messiah and make Him our King. How can “Your will be done on earth” be our motto if what we do is nothing more than proper ethical behavior as outlined by the laws of the land?

Category: Articles  | Tags: , , ,  | 6 Comments