In Christian settings, the question of how much individuals or institutions may be like the world around them, and how much they must reject the principles at work in the sinful world, is a question that has troubled many for centuries. Some favor extreme separation, like the Essenes in Jesus’ day. They were a sect of Jews who lived a monastic lifestyle, totally cut off from the rest of their society. Jesus never came in contact with them in the Scripture, but He certainly did not live their lifestyle. He was among the common people day by day. On the other side are such folks as the Jews in Judges, who completely assimilated with the world around them, serving a whole host of false gods, adapted from their neighbors. But God had commanded them to be separate. This was not only necessary for their national survival, as assimilation with the nations around them would bring God’s judgment, but also because a culture of holiness was necessary for the coming Messiah. Their separation was not total, as they were allowed to trade with foreign nations, lend them money, and even rule over them. They were allowed to interact, to some extent, but never to conform in any way. They were to be a set-apart culture.
Some today adopt a similar position of separation. They assert that Christianity is to be like Judaism, holy. This is provable and true. The question comes as to where to draw the line. Jesus’ example for us demonstrates that we are not to be like the Essenes, or the medieval monks, living completely cut off from the world. The Amish adapt a position somewhat less extreme than the Essenes or the monks, but still live separated from everyone else. The principle is the same: a convert to Christianity must abandon his old lifestyle and culture completely, and adopt a different lifestyle and join a new culture. Others who take this view to less of an extreme do not demand a separate colony, as it were, but rather try to live as a separate culture within the context of normal living situation. In other words, they will still live in regular houses and use electricity, but for all practical and social purposes they are separate. They have very little to do with lost folks in any way, and are thus like the Essenes in principle, though not as extreme in practice. The practice of others, with a slightly milder view, demand that certain barriers be set up to prevent sinners from corrupting the church. Left unchecked, these practices almost always lead to legalism of various degrees and styles, which harkens to the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. This is the most common corruption of separation: separation in station, principle, and lifestyle, while maintaining some amount of similarity with the outside culture. Essentially, it is aristocracy mixed with legalism. Jesus confronted this error very much in His day, and rebuked it soundly in several passages.
The other side of the spectrum is called accommodation. On this side are those who, to various degrees, assimilate into the culture around them. Rather than separating totally from the world, they stay in it. Some stay in it in every way, maintaining their old lifestyle, excusing the various sins that trip them up, in the name of the culture. Others compromise Biblical principles for the same reason. It is obvious to those who hold the Bible to be infallible and the only true standard that its principles are universal, and not to be compromised with the culture. Sin is sin, and some things are sinful to all mankind. Other things may be sinful depending on the situation. The New Testament epistles deal with both kinds, warning the early church about how to deal with both types. We inherit these principles, which carry with them the idea the culture will inevitably influence the way we act, and to some extent define what is right and wrong on fine points, which is allowed. Those who favor accommodation, and those who disagree with them, usually differ on where the line may be drawn among what principles and decisions are clearly defined by Scripture and thus universal, those that are left to the culture, and those that are left to the individual. In our present Western culture, which is based on the idea that ‘everything is relative,’ many in churches have compromised Scripture for the sake of accommodation. Biblically, this is obviously not acceptable. Jesus makes this clear by basing His teachings soundly and completely on Scripture. It is arrogant to an almost unthinkable degree to think that we are now so wise that we may depart from the example of our Savior and our God by not standing soundly on Biblical principles.
“I have given them Your Word, and the world hated them because they are not of the world, as I am not of the world. I do not pray that You take them out of the world, but that You keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in Your Truth; Your Word is Truth. As You have sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world, and I sanctify Myself for them, that they also may be sanctified in Truth.” -John 17:14-19 “Do not be equally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership does righteousness have with lawlessness? And what fellowship does light have with darkness? And what agreement does Christ have with Belial? Or what part does a believer have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does a temple of God have with idols? For you are a temple of the living God, even as God said, I will dwell in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. Because of this, come out from among them and be separated, says the Lord, and do not touch the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And I will be a Father to you, and you will be sons and daughters to Me, says the Lord Almighty.” -II Corinthians 6:14-18
The above Scripture passages demonstrate somewhat the tension that exists between those that favor extreme separation and those that favor extreme accommodation. Neither extreme is Biblical, based on the observable conduct of our Lord Jesus in the Gospels. He was neither totally separated from the culture, nor did He compromise with it. Therefore, the line must yet be drawn between what is acceptable to do along with the culture, and what we must separate ourselves from in the world. Where is that line?
Personally, I try to be balanced in my approach but usually tend to lean toward the separation side. I dislike the principle of modern Christian musicians adapting worldly styles with godly lyrics, though I have been ably challenged on this subject many times and have been thus forced to modify my position. I do not favor the so-called seeker-friendly movement in many American churches, which seem to be willing to do anything to be popular with the world. This cannot be done without compromising Christ, which is unacceptable. It is the world or Christ, not both. The way we do things ought, in my opinion, to be different from the way the world does things. How much, I don’t know.
The only light I have ever discovered on the subject has been from the conduct of our Savior Jesus, as recorded in the Gospels. This answers many of our questions about separation and accommodation, but not all of them. This is likely because some matters were not to be of importance. While I do not know where I stand on all issues, I do know that it is unbiblical to emphasize things that Jesus did not emphasize. We must imitate our Lord. Did He talk to sinners? Yes. He even ate with them, tax collectors, Pharisees, or fishermen alike. He had no respect of persons. Indeed, if He had no dealings with sinners, He would not have been born. The apostles qualify this doctrine, especially in II John, when he deals with the issue of false teachers. But this is a very limited audience. Sinners in general are acceptable, apparently, but not apostates who have openly denied the truth and refuse rebuke. Did Jesus have bad friends? Yes. Judas, obviously, but he may be arguably for one purpose only. Paul warns that, “bad company corrupts good behavior.” Of course, we cannot avoid them altogether. Did Jesus keep company with lower class sinners? Yes, and with higher class ones as well. The only difference is temporal station, not heart condition. The woman at the well was no more in danger of Hell than Simon the Pharisee. They both needed a Savior. It is also clear, however, that He spent a good chunk of His time with a few devoted followers, and still more of His time with fewer, more devoted followers. (The Twelve, and Peter, James and John, respectively.) The parables also reveal to us an interesting note about how He dealt with the lost masses. He did not tell them everything. He did not really open up to them in every way. They were not His close companions. In fact, He said many offensive things that caused the majority of those who may otherwise have followed Him to go home. Did Jesus ever have a harsh rebuke? Absolutely. He rebuked the scribes and Pharisees, and Peter, on various occasions. He was never afraid to confront the culture and the standards of the time. He thought nothing more of rebuking someone in power as He did rebuking a harlot or tax collector. But usually, He did not rebuke the outcast-type sinners. Usually His rebukes were for the religious hypocrites, not for the socially outcast sinners. In the lower class of society, the sinners seem to be far more sincere. This, of course, is not a saving quality, but Jesus did not have much to rebuke them about. They knew that they were sinners and they were thus quite ready to receive a message of salvation and forgiveness. It really worked new life in them. But the message of Christ to the Pharisees could not be the same, because in order for them to know that they needed saving, they needed to realize their sin. This was not something that they wanted to do, because they already thought that they were alive. Thus, the hope for the scum, and the rebuke for the hypocrite. Every society balks at such an idea. They laud the outwardly moral, despite their inward pride, because they look nice on the outside. They cast aside the ‘base sinners’ who have really done a less deadly type of sin (usually fleshly), than the pride of the legalist. It takes far more to overcome a proud heart than a fleshly-type of sin, because everyone can see a fleshly sin. Thus, in their sight comes knowledge of sin, and in that knowledge of sin, the promise of a Savior is extremely sweet. Of course, rest is sweet to the legalist also, but he must enter by a different sort of gate. Praise Jesus for the salvation of any man! Each one is a miracle of His grace!
I digress. At any rate, here are some practical things which are more or less my own opinion. I favor a dress code that has far higher standards than the world around. Without a dress code, lust is easily facilitated. At camp this is an especially harmful concept. Hidden Acres has done beautifully in this category. I favor Scripture study at youth groups over and against entertainment. The church’s job is not to keep kids entertained, it is to instruct them in the knowledge of our glorious Savior, Jesus. Some use youth groups as an evangelistic tool, and thus demand that the entertainment be in place to keep the lost kids coming so they can hear the Gospel. While this may be a noble end, I can recall being very frustrated with the concept in the past. Although I guess that was before I was saved. Oops. So here the line must be drawn at this: Jesus must be the center, He must be the focus. As soon as He ceases to be so, the battle is already lost. So, whatever means we choose to use, and may they ever be godly means, Jesus must be the center, the focus, the King. If not, we have compromised with the culture to an unacceptable degree. I think churches are in error that spend more energy on things that will entertain the lost under the guise of possibly sharing the Gospel with them than on encouraging and equipping the flock of Christ to go and make disciples. While I recognize that fruit has emerged from these attempts, I do not think it is because of the system.
Forgive me if I am more old-fashioned than most. I have much reading to do on this subject. In short, we must look to the example of our Savior if we are to know how far to go and how far to flee. He certainly lived in the world, but He did not love the things in it, nor was He ensnared by them. May God give us grace to be like Jesus, and to love Him first, and our neighbor second, and ourselves last. Hallelujah! Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment