Convenient Store Theology and Easy-Serve Gospel

A friend of mine (and co-worker at the time) once said to me, after I had just finished lamenting how hard my job was, “did you think it was going to be easy?” It was a poignant question. Of course on the spot, I said, “no, of course I knew it wasn’t going to be easy.” The more I thought about the situation however, the more I realized that in my heart of hearts that is exactly what I thought. My thinking was, however subtle, all I have to do is show up, teach, disciple, and invest in the people and all will be well. That may be the experience for some in ministry, but for the most part, that is simply not how it works. Many times since that day when I have lamented to myself or to God how hard my job is, I always go back to that conversation and realize that there is still much of that type of thinking in my approach to ministry. I still think often that because I am called, gifted, and actively doing the work of the gospel, it should be easy. I don’t think I am alone in this line of thinking however, as I look at the church in America, I see a Christianity that follows much of that same philosophy.

As thankful as I am to have grown up in the age of technological expansion, I must confess that I think it has clouded the thinking of my generation, including those after it and even those beyond it. Most everything is set up to be convenient these days. You don’t want to walk all the way into the gas station to pay for your gas? Simple, pay at the pump. You don’t want to get out of your car to go all the way into the hamburger place? Simple, go through the fast-n-easy (and we all know that it is typically neither fast nor easy) drive thru. Don’t feel like fighting the crowds for shopping? Shop online. Don’t feel like getting out to get groceries? Shop online and have them delivered. Don’t want to leave your home for college? Go to college online. Of course we could go on and on, but you get the point. I am not saying that these are necessarily bad things. In fact I personally have greatly benefited from many of these advances. The real issue here is not the advances themselves, but rather how we have responded to them, and how we have let them shape the rest of our thinking. Let me explain...

Much of the Christian life and/or gospel ministry is not convenient, and not much of it is fast-n-easy. In fact, I would say that the great majority of the Christian life and/or gospel ministry is inconvenient to us personally, and meticulously slow and hard. Often times we pray for strength, renewal, revival, etc...and we assume that it is supposed to appear right when we ask. When it doesn’t however, we become frustrated with God or we become discouraged that perhaps God is not hearing us. Despair will often times set in, and we lose sight all together and we become blinded by disappointment or disillusionment, or both. It seems to me, we have forgotten to consider much of what the Bible has to say to this very issue. Pick anyone of the Old Testament saints; lets pick Joseph. God gave Joseph dreams of being a great leader. The only problem was, Joseph was the 11th of 12 brothers. He was hated by his brothers. We know the story, he was sold as a slave, falsely accused and imprisoned, and made to live a life in absolute servitude and slavery for almost 15 years. It was neither convenient for Joseph nor fast-n-easy, but God not only made Joseph a great leader, God also saved 2 nations through His servant.

Certainly, we could mention Abraham, Moses, and David. None of those men had an ‘easy’ or convenient call or walk, yet God persevered through them to do something great. Love is often not convenient or easy, yet God set His love upon His people and even cursed Himself under the penalty of sin and pain of death to make us His beloved. Paul describes the transformation that takes place as a metamorphosis i.e. it takes a while for the change that Christ has wrought in us to be worked out. The gospel is not a “have it your way” gospel. It is not built around the mentality that “we are good so you don’t have to be.” The gospel is the hope of redemption and transformation, but it is redemption and transformation on God’s terms. If we let convenience and ease drive our theology, we will eventually turn away from Christ. Do a search in your Bible and see how many times we are told to wait on the Lord, or to be patient. So as we pray for transformation, or even revival itself, I think we must be careful not to assume that because it is taking a long time, or it is seemingly impossible, our cries have fallen on deaf ears. Paul reminds us that when we have done everything to stand, we must stand some more. Transformation is taking place, the question is, are we willing to wait through all the hardships and inconveniences to see its fruit?

A Nugget Worth Mining

There is a lot of baggage with the term "Calvinism". It actually pains me at times to hear what people are calling Calvinism. The more I grow as a Christian, and the more I grow as a reformed thinker, one thing is quite clear. Many of the people who claim "Calvinism" as their label, really have no idea exactly what Calvin stood for. The scope of Calvin's theology is not summed up in the doctrine of predestination, it is much broader and bigger than that. I am no expert on Calvin, but I have studied him quite a bit, and I think we really see Calvin's heart in his sermons, and in his systematic theology, "Institutes of the Christian Religion". Today I came across a quote that I wanted to share:

"Our Savior having shown, in the parable of the Samaritan, that the term neighbor comprehends the most remote stranger, there is no reason for limiting the precept of love to our own connections. I deny not that the closer our relation the more frequent our offices of kindness should be. For the condition of humanity requires that there be more duties in common between those who are more nearly connected by the ties of relationship, or friendship, or neighborhood. And this is done without any offense to God, by whose providence we are in a manner impelled to do it. But I say that the whole human race without exception are to be embraced with one feeling of charity: that here there is no distinction of Greek or barbarian, worthy or unworthy, friend or foe, since all are to viewed not in themselves, but in God. If we turn aside from this view, there is no wonder that we entangle ourselves in error. Wherefore, if we would hold the true course in love, our first step must be to turn our eyes not to man, the sight of whom might more often produce hatred than love, but to God, who requires that the love which we bear to him be diffused among all mankind so that our fundamental principle must ever be, let a man be what he may, he is still to be loved because God is loved."

This came from the pen of Calvin as he was commenting on the Moral Law (Ten Commandments). Contrary to popular thought, Calvin taught the universal nature of love as the clearest expression of man abiding by divine law. In other words, Christians don't get to pick and chose who they will love based on who is in the Body of Christ. We have clear instruction to love all because all are made in the image of God. And in so doing, we live faithfully to God's law.

Morality is NOT holiness!

This morning, while sitting on my couch doing some devotional reading, I had one of those Eureka! moments. For some reason my mind drifted while I was reading (sadly, a very common occurrence) to the New Testament, to two men in particular. I began thinking about the rich young ruler and Zacchaeus of all things. If you know those stories, and you see the title of the post, you can probably guess where I am going, but bear with me, making this connection was good (at least for me).

If you think about it, Zacchaeus is the antithesis of the rich young ruler. They are both notably wealthy as each respective story indicates. Zacchaeus is named however and the rich young ruler is left anonymous. The rich young ruler has a certain sense of nobility about him, Zacchaeus is a scoundrel. Both of the men have encounters with Jesus, yet these encounters end very differently. The interaction of both of these men with Jesus is very different. The rich young ruler asks what appears to be a very pious question, "Lord, what must I do to be saved?" We can all speculate why he asked, but any answer would be only that, speculation. Jesus answers the young ruler by telling him, keep the law. Now, the young ruler responds with, I have kept the law. That is a very bold claim! But Jesus exposes the hypocrisy of the young man's heart. Jesus instructs him to sell all his goods, give it to the poor, and follow Him. Of course we all know the ending of that story, he went away sad because he had great wealth. Can you see what Jesus did? In the face of the claim that this man had kept the law, Jesus challenged him on the sum of the law, namely loving the Lord with our whole being and our neighbor as ourself. The man would not sell all and give it to the poor i.e. he was not willing to love his neighbor. The man would not sell all and follow Jesus i.e. he was not willing to love God with his whole being. Essentially his morality was a facade, a thin veneer that covered a heart of idolatry.

Now let's consider Zacchaeus. We all know his story, he was a short, tax collector in Israel. He was one of the most despised persons of his day because he worked with the Roman government and extorted money from his fellow Israelites. Zacchaeus was rich off cheating his brethren. But his story is very different than that of the rich young ruler. Jesus doesn't prompt Zacchaeus concerning his wealth, as Zacchaeus stands in the presence of Christ, he becomes convicted and vows to give up to half of all he owns to the poor, but he doesn't stop there. He promises to pay back those he has cheated up to 4 times the amount. So Zacchaeus ends with rejoicing because rather than hang on to money, he gives it away because he has found a treasure that is greater than money. Zacchaeus had no facade of morality and yet, he is held out as a man of true virtue.

As I began this post I said that Zacchaeus is the antithesis to the rich young ruler. The rich young ruler embodied a man that was succesful, moral, and together. He probably looked like what many people would consider a good church leader. Often times we associate morality with holiness I think. As long as the outside looks good, we tend to make "exceptions" with the heart. The rich young man lived by the letter and missed the heart. Zacchaeus on the other hand is the man that we avoid if we can. Yet, he is the one whose name we have, he is the one who finds joy in Christ, and he is the one who is pronounced saved by Christ Himself. The key thing in Zacchaeus' life that makes him stand out is repentance. He was willing to turn from his life of greed to a life of giving. Morality is not the mark of a holy life, repentant living is. Morality is not bad however, it is just not all there is. The upright man is not necessarily the one who keeps the letter of the law, the upright man is the one who beats his chest and says have mercy on me, a sinner. These 2 men stand out to me and the one we are encouraged to remember is the sinner who came to Jesus.