DISAPPOINTMENT WITH ATTEMPTS AT “RACIAL RECONCILIATION”

How do we build up our brethren? By sticking to the milk and meat of the Word – what is clearly taught and profitable:

·       As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions… For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking [and of quarreling over opinions] but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit…. So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. (Romans 14:1, 17, 19; ESV)

While everything that Scripture contains is profitable, some of its meaning is now uncertain. Therefore, elsewhere Paul warned against teaching myths and genealogies:

·       Which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions. (1 Timothy 1:4-7)

If our teachings and discussions do not promote “love…and a sincere faith” but dissension, we have to question whether we are going in the right direction. However, sometimes dissension is unavoidable. The Church cannot tolerate sin without the leaven of sin corrupting the entire loaf (Gal. 5:9).

However, other issues are not so critical or clear. I’m thinking about discussions over racial reconciliation. My experience is that these discussions upset the unity of the Church rather than bringing harmony. In this area, our politics, experiences, and the news we follow are so different that my experience with attempts to bridge the gulf has been disappointing.

Nevertheless, I must admit that the performance of the White Church during the years of segregation has been a great embarrassment to me and to other sincere Christians. I continue to hurt when I read the words of Martin Luther King’s “Letter from the Birmingham Jail”:

·       “In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churches stand on the sideline and merely mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard so many ministers say, ‘Those are social issues with which the gospel has no real concern.’”

Are we still confronted with the “blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro?” This is the critical issue. We cannot close our eyes to victimization without incurring the displeasure of our Lord. However, I think that the situation has been reversed. All of the laws that had supported segregation have now been struck down. From my perspective, laws that favor one race above another now serve to favor people-of-color through affirmative action initiatives.

However, this is where we will experience severe contention. Whites are told that this is still a racist society characterized by “White privilege” and “systemic racism.” However, many of us do not see this at all. Instead, we see the progress. Yes, we see divisions, suffering, and even racism, but these occur among all peoples.

Meanwhile, many Black people regard the White refusal to acknowledge “White privilege” as denial and a sinister attempt to hold on to this “privilege.”

To pursue this debate further seems to inevitably result in bad feelings and divisions. As Christians, I now think that we can make an end-run around these divisive issues. How? We have the resources to overcome these divisions without laboring in hope of reaching agreement. What resources?

·       Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. (Ephesians 4:29-32)

It is my prayer that we will fulfill Jesus’ prayer:

·       “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.” (John 17:20-23)

If we are Christian, we know that there is something greater in our lives than our ethnicity. As a Jew, I had wanted to even-the-score with Germans. However, my Lord has opened my heart to sincerely love my German brethren. All the praise belongs to Him.

I AM JEALOUS

As a farmer, I stood in admiration of mama hens. Anyone who threatened her chicks was in for a rude awakening. She would attack anything or anyone who posed a threat, even inadvertently, to her babies. Once I saw a hen soar suddenly into the air to take on a hawk who was plunging down to take one of her chicks. I was left profoundly moved.

I am just a typical male - not very giving, not very loving, but I am terribly jealous for the welfare of Christ's children, the Body of Christ. I ache when I see the disunity within this Body, and I am tormented when I am its cause.

Here's what I am getting at. I grieve to see the growing racial divisions in our society and perhaps also in our Church. I grieve to see race hucksters drawing my Black brethren into hatred, racism, and unforgiveness.

I was at the commemoration dinner at Union Theological Seminary to honor the admitted racist Professor James Cone, who had taught at Union for 46 years.

To justify his very obvious racist remarks, he claimed that "Black blood is crying out to me" [for revenge]. Cone didn't appeal to Scripture to justify his rage - he couldn't. But instead, he appealed to the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas:

·       VERSE 70-- Jesus said, "If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you."

In this, he found support for his racist agenda. Since bitterness was in him, it would save him if he brought it forth. And he did. He cried out for the Black church to rid themselves of White theologians like Calvin and Luther, and then adopt Black ones.

Meanwhile, the hundreds who had gathered to hear his racist diatribe included many Black pastors. They slow-pitched him a sea of encouraging "amens."

How could I sit still! Last year I experienced something similar. I went ballistic reading a favorable book review. A Messianic Jew who defended himself for no longer calling himself a Christian because of what "Christians" had done to the Jews.

I was angered that the author of the book would divide the Body of Christ over these past sins. The perpetrators were all gone, but still he retained his unforgiveness against them and also the present-day church.

I hastily wrote a protest and sent it around to all the Messianic Jewish ministers I knew. I burned some bridges in the process, but I needed to contest this unbiblical stance, this betrayal of the Gospel.

I felt the same way about James Cone. He had rejected Dr. King's dream to no longer judge by skin color but instead by character. Meanwhile, there was no end to the applause Cone was receiving.

Even worse, Cone was betraying Jesus' dream and prayer:

·       “That they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me...I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.” (John 17:21, 23; ESV)

Cone's dream was one of division and not oneness and love. During the question and answer session, I told him so and was booed down.

When I entered Germany for the first time - and I was not a Christian at the time - the blood of my Jewish brethren had been calling out to me. I thought seriously about settling the score.

However, now the blood of my Savior calls out to me, and my deepest desire is to honor Him who died for me. I now deeply cherish my German brethren.

I am jealous for you, my Black brethren, and will fight to expose the race-baiters who want to make you their own, children of hatred and bitterness. I will scream and cry out to our God. You might be offended by me. I will not always agree with you, but I pray you will still value me as your brother.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Unity, Disdain for Theology, and Bishop Tony Palmer

We are overflowing with words, ideas, arguments, worldviews, verbal self-revelations, and i-messages, and yet theology has become a dirty word. This disdain takes many forms, even among Christians. Here’s one Facebook example:

• I'm done debating theology… I trust in the mercy of The Lord, that he knows I call His name. I can't get caught up in the minutiae of everyone's different theology - everyone tugging in different directions. I have to go with what makes the most sense to me, where I see the most unity and continuity and what speaks to my soul.

This “theology” reflects the thoughts and feelings of many, and their disdain for theology. Okay, theology requires work and much of it is become culturally unacceptable. Besides, Christians disagree, but so do scientists, but nobody uses this as a rationale to reject science. Instead, it should be a reason to do more hard work!

Even more important than this, theology – the truths about God - are not optional. Jesus explained to a Samaritan woman He had encountered at a well that worship had to entail truth:

• “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, [and because of this] salvation is from the Jews [- the distinctive revelation given to them]. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” (John 4:21-24)

Truth (theology) is a necessary ingredient of salvation and worship. We are not at liberty to conjure up any understanding of God that might feel right to us. I can’t even do this with my wife. She wants to be loved and appreciated for who she is! If I love her because she reminds me of my first flame, our “relationship” is in jeopardy. Instead, love and relationship must be built upon a foundation of truth.

Paul had a similar concern about the Galatians. They were straying away from the truth of the Gospel:

• I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—  which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse! (Gal. 1:6-9)

Today, a growing number of people believe that they can have Jesus without the Gospel or theology of Jesus. However, Paul passionately argued against such an idea. Turning to a different Gospel is also turning to a different hope and Savior. If we turn to a different gospel, we turn to a different “Jesus” – one that cannot save. Therefore, to embrace Jesus was also a matter of embracing His Gospel – His theology (teachings).

We care about how others regard us. God too cares profoundly about our thought-life regarding Him. In a dream, He warned King Nebuchadnezzar how he had to think about God. The Prophet Daniel interpreted his dream:

• “This is the interpretation, Your Majesty, and this is the decree the Most High has issued against my lord the king:  You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like the ox and be drenched with the dew of heaven. Seven times [or “years”] will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over all kingdoms on earth and gives them to anyone he wishes.” (Daniel 4:24-25)

Evidently, the King didn’t take this warning to heart. After all, it was just a matter of theology! A year later, while standing on top of his palace overlooking Babylon, the King exulted:

• “Is not this the great Babylon I have built as the royal residence, by my mighty power and for the glory of my majesty?” (Dan. 4:30)

He was immediately struck down with insanity, and for the next seven years he thought he was a cow, until his mind was restored. Then Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the very theology that God had revealed to Him and was restored to power.

To reject the knowledge/theology of God is to reject God Himself. Therefore, Paul warned that when Jesus returns:

• He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thess. 1:8)

If we have rejected His Gospel, we have also rejected Him. We cannot separate the salvation of God from the truth of God; nor can I separate the love of my wife from knowing about my wife. As I have come to better know about her, our relationship has deepened.

Although we live in an age that pours forth words and communications of various sorts, it is also an anti-intellectual age. The immediacy of experience has trumped the contemplation and acquisition of wisdom and knowledge. In our postmodern age, what is “true” for me might not be “true” for you, but there is a high value placed on self-fulfilling experience – immediate gratification that doesn’t interfere with your lifestyle as doctrine would. Therefore, Peter’s words sound unbelievable to this generation:

• Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him. (2 Peter 1:2-3)

This is troubling for another reason. Knowledge makes demands and even issues personal rebukes (Prov. 1:29-30). Wisdom also requires work (Psalm 1) and it raises uncomfortable questions about “unity.”

While unity is something that is required (Eph. 4:1-5; John 17:20-23), we cannot create unity where none exists. Even the most skilled midwife cannot bring forth a baby where there is none! Fr. Tony Palmer is an Anglican Bishop, but he is also an official member of the Roman Catholic Ecumenical Delegation for Christian Unity and Reconciliation. In his work to bring about unity – a return to the RCC – he equates the Protestant emphasis on doctrine with “spiritual racism” that “divides what Christ had united.” In a UTube video, he condemned any “doctrine” that would cause division, claiming that in doing this, “we elevate doctrine higher than the cross itself.”

Palmer attempts to separate theology from the cross, as if they are two distinct things. However, the cross is doctrine/theology. When we embrace the cross, we do not embrace a literal tree but instead, the teachings of the cross – the Gospel.

Besides, Scripture often teaches division instead of unity, where there is no Gospel-basis for unity. Paul argued against being “unevenly yoked” and the need to be “separate” (2 Cor. 6:14-18).

Admittedly, Paul didn’t teach separation from other Christians (except in cases of church discipline), but it’s just hard to know where and how deeply to draw the line. Who are the true believers? Should we embrace all who claim Christ as Savior – the New Age Jesus, the mystical Jesus, the Prosperity Ministry, the Televangelists, the Mormons, the Jehovah Witnesses, the Catholics, the Postmodern, Emergent, Agnostic Church? Should we separate completely? When does their Jesus become another “Jesus” and another “gospel?” How do we know where there is a “unity” worth preserving and presenting to the world?

These can be perplexing questions. However, rather than allowing the quest for unity to reduce theology to the lowest common denominator, we have a Scriptural mandate to be faithful to what we already understand about God:

• So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin. (Rom. 14:22-23)

We must remain faithful to our theological beliefs. If we compromise them for the sake of “unity,” we sin. But we must also grow into the doctrines of the Bible, and God gave us teachers and pastors to provide us a theological foundation:

• Until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. (Eph. 4:13-15)

According to Paul, unity and stability could only be achieved through growth in “the knowledge of the Son of God.” Consequently, we are not at liberty to throw away doctrine and theology for the hope of “unity.” Instead, these are the foundations of unity.

The Zimmerman Trial and the Church

In the wake of the Zimmerman trial, I am grieving. For me, the main issue isn’t the outcome of the trial but what it reveals about us – the church. We are deeply divided, and our differing opinions are sincere and passionately held. The division is so deep that we find that we cannot even talk about them, but talk we must!

Our unity as brothers and sisters in our Lord must and do transcend our differences. We have to strive for this unity, as Paul insisted:

·        Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. (Ephes. 4:2-4)

How do we “keep [our] unity?” According to Paul, the emphasis must be on the Gospel:

·        It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephes. 4:11-13)

However, speaking the Gospel is not merely the work of the professionals:

·        Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. (Ephes. 4:15)

However, our growth and unity are stunted because we are not speaking to one another. We remain with our own kind and have allowed the media to co-opt the conversation.

Please pray with me that our Lord will pour out upon us a zeal for His concerns and that, above all else, we would seek – more than even our own welfare - that He would be glorified in the midst of His church.

True Religion must be Inclusive: Christ according to Doug Pagitt

My friend brought me to visit an artist in her studio. He assured me, based on a prior conversation with her, that she was interested in dialoguing about Christ. However, point-blank, she told us that she wasn’t interested in such a conversation: “Christianity is just too exclusive for me!”

What did she mean by this? Christianity demands belief in the Gospel, and any who don’t believe, who are unable to accept this revelation, are excluded.

This requirement opposes what people are looking for today. They want a religion that will unite all people, uphold our common humanity and eliminate any “us-them” distinctions. Emergent Church pastor, speaker and writer, Doug Pagitt, puts it this way:

• We are connected to each other as well. Christians like to talk about community, yet the dualistic [us-them] assumptions surrounding our theology make it almost impossible for us to experience true community. As long as we hold on to “us” and “them” categories of seeing the world, we live behind a barricade that prevents us from joining in with God and others in real and meaningful ways. And it doesn’t really matter who we decide “them” is – the non-Christians, the sinners, the liberals, the conservatives, the Jews, the Catholics, that weird church on the other side of town. Division is division, no matter how righteous we want to make it sound. (A Christianity Worth Believing, 91-92)

According to Pagitt, a Christianity that makes distinctions and excludes is not the true Christianity. Therefore, say “goodbye” to the initiation rite of baptism, church discipline, and  even confronting others about their sins – whether they be rape, infanticide, or domestic violence. (Following this logic, the Catholic Church was correct to not distinguish between the pedophile priests and the faithful ones!) Surrender distinctions between the just and the unjust, the resurrection of the righteous and the resurrection of the unrighteous, and the saved and unsaved! Perhaps also we will soon be required to foreswear such distinctions as “my wife” and “his wife,” “my son” and “my daughter,” and even “my son” and “my father!”

However, we must continue to make distinctions. If we believe in any truth, we have to distinguish it from what is not true. If we believe in justice, we have to oppose injustice and those who commit it. If we believe that God is love, we have to oppose those who teach that He is not love.

Truth, therefore, is exclusive. It excludes those ideas that are not truth. Goodness is also exclusive. It excludes those behaviors that tear people down.

Any conversation is impossible without making distinctions. Pagitt certainly engages in his own “dualistic assumptions,” even as he denies it. He opposes dualism with his own brand of dualism. He is very ready to distinguish his Emergent thinking from that of the traditional church. This too is dualistic!

Even his language implies those verbotten distinctions. He contrasts “true community” with community which is not true and makes those unacceptable distinctions – just as he is doing. There are those who “live behind a barricade” of judgmentalism and those who don’t. There are those who cause “division” and those who don’t, namely Pagitt and the Emergent Church.

How do we cause division? Pagitt cites this example:

• She’d been taught that unless her theology was right, unless her life and belief conformed to a model that would appease the unmovable God, she was a failure as a Christian. (107)

This is a gross misrepresentation. Instead, each of us is “a failure as a Christian.” That’s why we must live by confession and repentance. Consequently, we depend upon His mercy in everything!

But isn’t it a bit imperialistic, unreasonable and arbitrary of the Bible to insist that our “theology [be] right” for everyone else? Okay, we need to make distinctions, but it seems so unfair and unjust that God would require us to believe a certain way and then damn us to hell if we don’t or can’t.

Pagitt hits at the core of what he sees as the unreasonable exclusiveness of the Christian message:

• I’m not sure I would have been interested in the Christian faith if the story on the stage had been about a removed God who needed to be placated with a blood offering before he was willing to cross the chasm and participate with humanity. (98)

Clearly, Pagitt has little taste for the heart of the Gospel – sacrificial atonement. Therefore, he has affirmed a more popular brand of Jesus:

• Jesus was not sent as the selected one to appease the anger of the Greek blood god [his pejorative description of the God of the Bible]. Jesus was sent to fulfill the promise of the Hebrew love God by ending human hostility. It was not the anger of God that Jesus came to end but the anger of people. (194)

Interestingly, Pagitt’s new-found faith not only violates the New Testament but also the Old, from which he claims support. Even in the Old, our Lord always required a redemption or payment for sin (Psalm 130:8), even a human payment:

• But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all…and he will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:5-11)

Besides, we have to ask, “What does Pagitt’s god look like? One who does not require a pay-back for sin? Is humanity best served by a permissive god, one who does not guarantee ultimate justice, the just payment for man’s inhumanity to man?”

Pagitt claims that “It was not the anger of God that Jesus came to end but the anger of people.” However, if God is not angered by our inhumanity towards our fellow human, why then should we be? Isn’t God supposed to be our role model? If God is permissive towards sin, why should not we also be so!

Instead, we cannot separate God’s zeal for justice from our own. If God is above punishing, why then shouldn’t we be above it? Unless they go together, any coherent legal or moral system falters. Instead, perhaps we should tear down the prison walls?

However, we have to return to another question: “Is the requirement of faith in such a God an arbitrary and unjust requirement, especially if educated and thoughtful people are unable to believe it? Doesn’t this requirement also establish an unacceptable “us-them” distinction that illegitimately divides humanity?”

There is a pervasive misunderstanding about the nature of Biblical faith. It is often assumed that faith represents a blind leap into the darkness, one without any evidential support. However, if this is the case, God cannot blame anyone for not having such a faith. The world is filled with various belief systems – Hindu, Islamic, Secular… If there is no evidence or reason to choose one faith over the other, then there can be no blame assigned to someone who chooses the wrong faith. Besides, Biblically speaking, ignorance is an adequate defense (John 15:22, 24).

However, we are not ignorant. Instead, in many ways, we are wired to believe in God and His truths (Rom. 2:14-15). Besides this, the world has been designed in such a way that we can’t plead ignorance. It bears such a profound divine imprint that we are without any excuse (Rom. 1:18-20).

This particular revelation is not a New Testament invention. We find this very same message revealed throughout the landscape of the Hebrew Scriptures. The Proverbs tell us that God’s truths are so ubiquitous that it’s as if they are even crying out to us in the crowded and noisy marketplace:

• Wisdom calls aloud in the street, she raises her voice in the public squares; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out, in the gateways of the city she makes her speech. (Proverbs 1:20-21)

The truths about God are ubiquitous – found even in the streets and public squares. Consequently, we are without excuse if we fail to believe.

If this is so, why then don’t people hear wisdom’s voice? It is not a matter of their inability to conjure up enough faith. Instead, they don’t want to hear this persistent voice:

• "How long will you simple ones love your simple ways? How long will mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge? If you had responded to my rebuke, I would have poured out my heart to you and made my thoughts known to you. But since you rejected me when I called and no one gave heed when I stretched out my hand, since you ignored all my advice and would not accept my rebuke, I in turn will laugh at your disaster.” (Prov. 1:22-24)

Why are people unwilling to hear the Gospel? It is not that we are unable to hear. Instead, we delight in things contrary to God’s revelation. We therefore reject Him and His voice. There is also another reason. “We would not accept [His] rebuke.”

What is His rebuke? His indictment of us – our denials, justifications, and rationalizations! All wisdom must begin with the instrument - us. Seeing micro-organisms requires a microscope with a clean lens. Seeing other galaxies requires a telescope with a clean lens. Similarly, knowledge and wisdom must begin by exposing and addressing the filth on our lens.

Jesus explained our blindness in terms of a log in our eye (Mat. 7:1-5). The log blinds us and must be removed before we can see clearly.

Wisdom must first point the finger at us to expose our blindness and sinfulness. It is only after we see these and confess them that we can see others. However, wisdom is painful. It unmasks our self-presumptions. Therefore, we hate it:

• Since they hated knowledge and did not choose to fear the Lord, since they would not accept my advice and spurned my rebuke, they will eat the fruit of their ways and be filled with the fruit of their schemes. For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them. (Prov. 1:29-32)

Faith is not something that requires a blind leap of faith. Instead, it asks us to open our blinds to the light, which He has made so apparent – that we are sinners who need a Savior.

This is so abundantly obvious, not only from the Scriptures but also from our lives. We know that something is the matter with us. Our shame and guilt speak persuasively about this fact. Whenever we are accused of wrongdoing, we immediately attempt to justify ourselves.

In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis observed that even the atheists who don’t believe in any absolute laws, react as if they exist. Instead of merely responding, “Who cares about your non-existent moral laws,” he will respond by defending himself. He intuitively knows that he has violated a moral law, and knows that he has sinned. Nevertheless, he will suppress this knowledge and try to justify himself. He knows that he is morally culpable to the God in whom he does not believe.

Consequently, we always have to be right (Prov. 21:2), and we convince ourselves that we are right (Prov. 16:2; 24:12). I too had convinced myself that my conflicts were always the fault of the other. Consequently, my wife and I could never resolve any of our disagreements. However, in our beloved darkness, we stumble and fail to come to any reconciliation – either with man or with God. “The complacency of fools will destroy them” (Prov. 1:32).

Countless surveys and psychological experiments have confirmed this same finding – that we love the darkness of self-delusion rather than the light (John 3:19-21). We have the truth but hate and reject it.

Entire volumes have been written to demonstrate this fact. Psychologist Shelley Taylor writes:

• The evaluations people offer of themselves are also typically more favorable than judgments made by others about them. For example, when people’s descriptions are contrasted with the descriptions of them offered by their friends or acquaintances, the self-descriptions tend to be more positive. Typically, we see ourselves in more flattering terms than we are seen by others. (Positive Illusions, 11).

To demonstrate the ubiquity of this hatred of self-truth, she offers many other examples throughout her book:

• When two people have written a book together and are asked to estimate how much of the book they are personally responsible for, the estimates added together will typically exceed 100%. The same feature characterizes more mundane tasks. Asked to estimate how much of a contribution they make to the housework, adding together husbands’ and wives’ estimates of their own efforts produces a total that greatly exceeds 100 percent. (18)

We are willfully blind in the direction of self-promotion. We do not want to see our sins and failures and have assembled a variety of “self-protective” mechanisms.

Some have even attempted to defend self-delusion as a necessary psychological tool. The late novelist, Andre Gide remarked:

• Each one of us has his own way of deceiving himself. The important thing is to believe in one’s own importance.

However, believing in our self-importance requires that we filter out the counter-evidence. Nevertheless, we need to believe in something. Generally, it is in ourselves and our mastery over our lives. However, we cannot believe in ourselves and, at the same time, acknowledge that we are damnable sinners who need a Savior. Only one set of beliefs can reign.

However, the suppressed awareness of our inadequacy festers at the core of our being.

Consequently, our lives revolve around the futile and ongoing attempt to prove that we are okay. However, we find that we are never able to. However much money, success or approval we have accumulated, we remain dissatisfied. Why? Because these vain efforts fail to address the deeper problem – our alienation from God and self! Consequently, in order to gain some temporary relief from deep-seated shame and guilt, we may even attempt to punish and maim ourselves.

Intuitively, we know that a price must be paid for our sin. Intuitively, we demand punitive justice for not only others but also for ourselves. Not believing in the Savior, we attempt to pay justice’s price with our own lives.

For this perspective, faith isn’t an act of blindness but of courage to face the painful truth. It’s not a running from evidence, but a willingness to engage it!

In contrast, Pagitt denies that God’s has a holy character – one that He has also wired within us - that must be satisfied - propitiated. Instead, he has re-created Him in his own image to be tolerant of everything. Pagitt refuses to acknowledge the Creator-creation, the Sanctifier – sinner, distinction. In doing so, he refuses to acknowledge that our sins have alienated us from our God and that we must be reconciled through the sacrifice of the Messiah.

It is because of this distinction that the entire Old Testament cries out to Israel to confess their sins so that they can come to God and receive His mercy:

• And if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. (Proverbs 2:3-5)

The Gospel – the knowledge of God – is there for the taking. It is available to all who sincerely seek. The Gospel is inclusive of everyone (John 3:16), but not in every way or of everything. Our God has His standards, and we also have them.

In fact, the notion that God accepts everything and every idea is an absurdity. I am not free to treat others in any way I please. When I am invited to their home, I must respect their household rules. Why then should we expect that God is so vacuous, flat and insipid that any relational overture is okay with Him?

For years, I had been interested in God, but I demanded that He fit into my specifications. For one thing, since I am ethnically Jewish, He couldn’t have anything to do with Jesus Christ. Consequently, I wasn’t making contact. It never occurred to me that if God is God, the Creator and Sustainer of this universe, He might have something to say about the grounds for our relationship.

In fact, He has a lot to say about it. I was calling-the-shots. I failed to see myself as the beggar. This beggar was in effect saying, “I only receive 20 dollar bills.” The hubris! The hubris of the assumption that we can come to God in any manner we so choose! Instead, Jesus taught that we had to come to our Father as needy little children, willing to accept His grace in the form He offers it.

However, no one seeks for a cure who feels he lacks a disease. Pagitt doesn’t acknowledge his disease and consequently thinks that he can call-the-shots.

More seriously, we reject the idea of a holy and righteous God. Instead, according to our modern perversion, the marketplace now demands a god who will not only accept everyone but also everything – every excuse, denial, rationalization and every behavior, no matter how lethal.