Beware the veneer of Christian Clichés
We've all been exposed to clichés in our time, be it from advertising to political propaganda. The little 30 second sound bites that tend be short and sweet and not very succinct. Social media is rampant with these instant snap chats, feeding our desire for something of substance. It seems inevitable that it's a part of life.
Clichés are used to influence by pulling on our heart strings. Some may be thought provoking. Some can be spiritual by sounding deep at first glance and feeding us an ideology we think we agree with. For the most part clichés have something in common, they use our emotions to portray a message we connect with, one that fits our nice little idea of what the world would be like if it was perfect. You would think that we wouldn't ever find these tools of coercion in the Christian church... would we?
So what is it that I am talking about? It was the use of two clichés I heard recently, both sounding very good on the surface, yet neither was backed up with anything of substance. They were "we should show people the gospel by how we live our life as you can't argue someone into heaven," on the surface this statement may sound very humble and very spiritual but when you examine it you will see it for what it is.
We should show people the" gospel by how we live" sounds like a beautiful ideology, conjuring up images of abounding love, great sacrifice, serving the needy etc, nowhere does it mean this, in fact we overlay these sentiments on top of the statement. So what is the truth of the claim?
Show me a Christian who is living life completely different. From what I see, they live no differently to the rest of the world. They just have a separate set of beliefs. They give to charity, they serve the community, they help the needy, they don't hold to abortion, they support traditional marriage just like other religious and non religious people do. So how is it that the Christian shows the Gospel, by how they live?
The scriptures have verses telling us to go and preach the word, spread the Gospel such as Mathew 28:19 the command to evangelize. I like what Apologist Lenny Esposito says about Evangelism:-
Evangelism at its core is changing a belief. It requires an individual to move from a state of non-belief in Jesus as savior and Lord to a state of belief. That is no small thing, since embracing that belief affects one's understanding of things like the nature of God, the nature of man, the nature of sin, and the nature of one's own eternity. Evangelism as seen in scripture, was through the usage of words to change the ideas of someone. Their views were challenged and corrected. Evangelism expresses an idea and it is either true or it is not. As Christianity evangelizes about an objective being the truth about this being itself will be objective. - Lenny Esposito
Scripturally we see that the gospel was preached with the use of words to convey the absolute truth. Nowhere do we see people showing the gospel by how they lived.
We can't argue someone into heaven. Can we? I think the best way here is to start with the definition of an argument. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition. It's probably how most of us were led to salvation, i.e. we were given a series of propositional statements that ended at the ultimate truth, we have fallen short and we need a savior.
If what is meant by an argument is that we can change people's hearts and minds, I can agree and disagree. For we know that we don't change hearts, God does. No one can come to Jesus lest the father draw him, John 6:44. But once those hearts have been changed, the heart of stone is replaced for a heart of flesh, and they have been enabled to see the truth of what we are arguing. But was that the intent of those that use this cliché? No it isn't, its intent is to avoid any debate at the cost of the gospel. So does arguing have a cost on the gospel? Let's have scripture speak on that note.
1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;
The word here for defense that can also be translated as argument or reason is Apologia, and it is where we get the name for the defense of Christianity commonly called Apologetics. We are instructed to ALWAYS be ready to defend our views. SO let's look into scripture to see how those giants of the faith before us did this.
Jesus Did Apologetics
Jesus gave evidence for His claims by His fulfillment of prophecy (Mk. 14:61-62; Lk. 24:44-45). He predicted His resurrection (Jn. 2:19-21; cf. Mt. 12:39-40) and it accomplishment (1 Cor. 15; Lk. 24:26-27). Jesus corrected false interpretations of Scripture (Mt. 4:1-11). When Jesus was questioned if He was the Messiah by John the Baptist, He gave evidences for His ministry "Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me.” Matt. 11:4-6; see also Luke 7:22. In Acts, Peter told the crowd that Jesus had been “accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him” (Acts 2:22).
We also see in Isaiah 1:18 and other verses in Isaiah that God was willing to argue with Isaiah, He was willing to reason with him.
18 “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.
Paul Did Apologetics
Act 28:23 When they had set a day for Paul, they came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God and trying to persuade them concerning Jesus, from both the Law of Moses and from the Prophets, from morning until evening.
Act 17:2 And according to Paul's custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
Act 17:3 explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ."
Act 17:4 And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, along with a large number of the God-fearing Greeks and a number of the leading women.
Paul reasoned with the Jews in Thessalonica and he reasoned with them, meaning he discussed and he disputed with them, as was his custom. Would you say Paul was arguing people into heaven here? The gospel is according to 1 cor 15:1-4 the death burial and resurrection of Jesus. It says in Acts 17:3 the gospel is what Paul was explaining, reasoning with the Jews, and we do that by presenting a connected set of sentences to establish a proposition, or in layman's terms, an argument.
Greeks at Mars Hill (Acts 17:22-34)
Paul in his other epistles talks about False teachers within the Church (Galatians, 1 Corinthians, etc.) and in Phillipians we see such verses as below:-
Php 1:7 For it is only right for me to feel this way about you all, because I have you in my heart, since both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers of grace with me.
Php 1:16 the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel;
Paul makes it quite plain that his mission was for the defense of the Gospel. We also see in Titus 1:9, “Holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict" this is Pauls requirements for an Elder, an Elder is to be able to defend, to give reasons and to be able to show what is the correct Doctrine and refute those who contradict it, which requires argumentation.
We can see John doing Apologetics against Gnosticism, and this trend carried on all the way through The Church Fathers up to present day. Some of the best argumentation we have against the cults is the argumentation we still use today. This debate, argumentation better helps us today to know our faith, it helps us to share it more effectively and to avoid doctrinal apostasy within our church
For the most part Christians shy away from arguments. They see arguing as hostile, divisive, causing malice in church when there should be unity. Especially if it is their own view that is being challenged. Having a disagreement in no way takes away from the essentials, it in no way stops us from being in unity. To be of one mind biblically, in no way means we have to all have the same opinion. It also does not mean abandoning all attempts at understanding our faith or going that little bit deeper than we have before, or dare I say it, than those we disagree with have gone before. True maturity would be where we disagree yet still maintain peace and order. We tend to be emotionally invested in our opinions, but through questions we can either fine tune that opinion or see the error in it and be humble enough to admit we could be wrong.
I myself came to faith through argumentation, obviously my foolish heart had to be renewed first, regenerated, and there are many who also come into the fold this way. You can find books by authors like Darrin Rasberry, who states the main reason for him to come to being a Christian was apologetic arguments.
There is a difference between an argument and being quarrelsome and I think the following verses summarize this well:-
2Ti 2:24 The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged,
2Ti 2:25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,
2Ti 2:26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.
Do not be ignorant of scripture that the only way to sound mature is to use clichés like the ones above, but to those who do use them I say, "We preach the word, we teach the truth, because we can't love people into heaven."
Sources:
Carm.org, http://carm.org/apologetics-outline
Tactics, chapter 2 - Greg Koukl
http://apologetics-notes.comereason.org/2013/11/retiring-cliche-if-you-can-talk-someone.html
