What Would Jesus...uh, Legislate?

I've researched the Indiana Religious Freedom law and am still unclear of its repercussions. I've read it and don't fully understand it. Getting unbiased information is nearly impossible and both sides are relatively convincing. On one hand, I become suspicious of most single interest groups. On the other, I don't trust what some people define as "religion".

If you've read my blog, you know that I am a follower of Jesus Christ. To that end, I am attempting to understand what Jesus' position would be on the matter. All I know for certain is that his choices for company look a lot different than that of many who purport to follow him. Even the Apostles weren't too good at recognizing who his followers were. For example, they thought the "rich young ruler" was a perfect fit for the group. They were wrong. Certainly, as he pointed out, the religious elite of Jesus' day didn't know how to follow him. So, who fits and doesn't fit, I'm always hesitant to say. One pattern I think continues to hold true...his choices sometimes aren't ours and he usually sides with the downtrodden. Similarly, I try to error on the side of inclusiveness and love for others.

So, does this legislation legalize the mistreatment of anyone based on religious conviction?  I don't know. I hope it doesn't. That would be wrong. I've seen that this law is already in place nationally since 1993 and passed with overwhelming support of both parties. Whether there have been negative repercussions of the law, I just don't know.

I do know that there are some credibility issues at stake. One side claims that blatant discrimination will occur here. Some within that group are acting with real aggression toward an entire state populated with many people who have no interest in this legislation. The other side is acting on the fear that their religious liberty is at stake. But, Jesus himself asked for no similar government protection even to the point of his execution.

I hope both sides are wrong. To some degree, I'm certain that they both are; neither side has a corner on the entire truth nor have they an impeccable track record of righteousness. I'm sure this will be read by some as support for the legislation - while others will guess that I'm against it. I tend to side with the great Christian Martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer that said "Politics are not the task of a Christian". Even more, I side with God and whatever bunch of misfits he chooses as his followers. But, I can't count entirely on my own judgment to determine who they are...or will be.

Making God Fit (How We Try to Recreate the Creator)

In an attempt to reconcile our standing with God and our living in the world, I think we've attempted to change and modify him.  In fact, we have a history of attempting to reduce God to a political platform, a few standard cultural norms, or even a figure who just doesn't like whomever we hold in contempt.  In other words, we try to recreate the Creator. 

Do we really believe God would be either a democrat or republican?  Certainly, he has a set of ideals (would we want the ruler of the universe to have none?).  But, try to imagine Jesus running for President.  First of all, he wouldn't.  He was explicit in saying that his kingdom is not of this world (John 18).  He also instructed his followers to give their hearts to God...and give Caesar what is Caesar's (Mark 12).  In other words, your most important possession belongs to God.  Secondly, his political platform would look a little unusual by the worlds standards, wouldn't it?  Try to make a political commercial out of the Beatitudes (Matthew 5). Blessed are the meek?  The response would certainly include how "impractical" Jesus' espoused values are in the modern world (author's note: by the way, Jesus meant that stuff).

Neither does God fit into our cultural norms.  Sure, God has blessed America.  But, I'm not entirely convinced that he recognizes our borders with Canada and Mexico and he has blessed many other nations besides the USA.  Kenya is desperately poor but has one of the most devout Christian populations in the world!  Why do we say God has blessed us only when we are prospering (or when we win the game - not when we get beat)?  Do we really think that our struggles and weaknesses contain no blessings as well?  What if our prosperity and/or strengths are only serving to distract us from our need for God? This was the case with the rich young ruler (Mark 10).  What if God has intentionally left us with a weakness in order to further demonstrate his power through us as was the case with Paul's thorn (2 Cor 12)?  Moses stuttered and was orphaned.  John the Baptist ate bugs.  Jesus himself was poor and despised by the majority.

Finally, we tend to justify ourselves to God by pretending that he is more accepting of our shortcomings as opposed to the shortcomings of those people around us.  In our minds, this makes us slightly better than "the bad guy" standing next to us thinking that God then holds us in higher esteem.  For instance, if we fail to recognize our pride and arrogance, but hold the drug addict in contempt, are we sounding a lot like the Pharisee who prayed "at least I'm not like this poor tax collector" (Luke 18)?  According to Jesus, it was that "heathen" tax collector who made it to heaven...

God is obviously too expansive to reduce and recreate but we try to do it anyway.  Anne Lamott said it nicely" You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do".  In this sentence, you could substitute the word "people" with: things, ideals, or shortcomings as well.  I pray to have continued faith that his word will hold true.  That he alone is sufficient.  That he will provide my needs just as he is ... and that I not attempt to reduce him to whatever I see as normal and/or acceptable. 

Encouraging the Inconceivable (Am I a Stumbling Block?)

While some people are blessed to find God early in life, others like Saul of Tarsus, can take many years consisting of twists and turns that no man could possibly conceive.

We know how the story ended with Saul (mostly known as Paul after his conversion).  So, it is easy for us to not be shocked by the complete transformation of the man who personally oversaw the murder of Christ followers.  In modern terms, prior to becoming an apostle, he was a terrorist that was involved in a horrendous genocide.  But, we now recognize him primarily for his zeal for Jesus Christ.

Apparently, the prayer of the apostle Stephen was heard by God when he prayed for the forgiveness of his attackers while he was being beaten to death.  That prayer was answered by God's deliverance of the gang's ringleader, Paul who wrote most of the New Testament books.  No man could write Pauls's story - nor could any man foresee his deliverance from an evil past.  In fact, when Paul was converted, Jesus' disciples were still initially afraid of Paul and skeptical of whether he had truly been changed.

At a minimum, this wildly radical story of deliverance should cause Christ followers to pause when attempting to determine another person's station in life.  Today, a person's journey to Jesus Christ can no more be determined by man than could Saul's path be comprehended nearly 2000 years ago.  The question is whether we can finally stand before God as one who provided encouragement, or conversely, a stumbling block toward their final destination.

A homeless man once told me that this story of Stephen's stoning has resonated with him his entire life.  Stephen's unearthly reaction to his execution has been an encouragement to a man that has no earthly hope.  I have no doubt that, when reflecting on that horrible day, Paul somehow found encouragement in Stephen as well.  Maybe this homeless man finds his way to finally have hope in Christ partly due to the God given grace of Stephen - or maybe he will simply be encouraged by a believer that is a source of love and care.  As a follower of Jesus Christ, I pray that I am able to be a source of encouragement, not to serve as a stumbling block, to those unknown pilgrims around me.  Like Paul's journey, the path they are on is sometimes impossible for me to see or even comprehend.    

Don't Blend In (Jesus meant what he said)

When I was a kid, I thought that being a follower of Christ meant that you were in the mainstream of society.  Christians were people who would dress nicely, smile a lot, and knew a few special words and phrases.  Certainly, their behavior was completely acceptable because they pretty much just blended in with everyone else.  They weren't really that different than everyone else.  That was the image that I had of a "typical" Christian.

During his earthly ministry, Jesus would have been difficult to classify as mainstream.  He combated the traditions of the religious elite, told his followers to lose their lives in order to follow him, and dined with people with whom most of us would be embarrassed to be seen.  Downtrodden people were honored by him and the people most honored by the rest of society (usually people in positions of authority / power) were most often challenged by him.  Jesus took man-made convention and stomped it into the sand like a scorpion.  The Jesus that I have come to know and love was a counter-culture radical that turned the values of the world on its head.  He continues to do that today.

What if Jesus actually meant what he said and did?  For example, Jesus kept company with some pretty rough characters; he really seemed to prefer the company of the least desirable people.  How might we treat someone who collected taxes for a hostile occupying foreign government and profited from these activities by skimming money from the top?  Would we be embarrassed if a prostitute barged into the room to wash our feet while we dined with the local pastor or priest?  Given the choice, would we choose to spend our time with those on the very lowest rung of our society? Would we try so hard to be first if we really believed him when he said that "the last will be first, and the first will be last"?  Do we really believe that we are loving Christ when we are loving the lost and forgotten - prisoners, homeless, addicted, and broken? Do we really believe the Sermon on the Mount? Or do we skip the hard stuff?  Questions like these make me wonder how accepting we Christians actually are of the One we profess to follow.

This message of Jesus' is as radical today as it was then: the values of this world have no place in a person's heart.  We are simply called to be different.  In his book "The Cost of Discipleship", Dietrich Bonhoeffer disposes of the myth that Jesus' messages were merely an ideal to be merely strived for and not practical to live by.  Executed in a martyr's death in Nazi Germany because of his faith, Bonhoeffer explained that Jesus meant exactly what he said and that we shouldn't skip past the hard stuff - perhaps especially when that means we won't blend in so much.

Religious People Hated Jesus

"Religious People Hated Jesus" was the name and theme of a sermon I was listening to while driving to work.  The preacher delivering the message was explaining that Jesus' ministry was entirely radical, extraordinarily controversial, and maligning to much of the prevailing religious community.  That assessment of Jesus and his message is correct.  Is it possible that he would receive the same reaction today?

During the time of Christ, the prevailing religious leaders thought that by maintaining the appearance of following God's law, they might inherit His promised blessings.  Jesus taught that, while we are absolutely expected to be obedient, the content of our hearts determines whether we are pure.  He taught that no matter how good the external appearances, the internal would finally determine whether we are truly obedient.  Jesus said: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness."  

While being internally corrupt, the religious leaders condemned those whom they felt unworthy of God's grace.  In the meantime, Jesus would dine with sinners and fraternize with the spiritually and physically unclean.  While those same leaders hypocritically preached of excommunication of sinners, Jesus' message was one of grace and forgiveness.  He taught that the poor in spirit were blessed and that the meek would inherit the earth...the last would be first.

Does our modern religious culture have any parallels to that which Christ preached against?  Do our outward religious practices belie our inward spiritual state?  Then, do we condemn the afflicted while we ourselves are also afflicted (we are all afflicted)?  Or do we act with grace in accepting the shortcomings of others...while duly recognizing our own? 

Are we like those proud teachers of the law, about to stone the woman to death for her transgressions, unable to see their own shortcomings?  Jesus - in his amazing way - offered to allow the stoning if someone, who hadn't sinned himself, would throw the first stone.  Even these Pharisees realized that they could not measure up to this standard and walked away.  Do we Christians realize that our own shortcomings should prevent us from this same condemnation of others?  That we are only justified through grace and not our own doing?  Should these passages make us uncomfortable?  With "fear and trembling", they should. 

Paul said: "...while we were still sinners, Christ died for us".  Being in an infinitely smaller state than God, we might challenge ourselves by asking whether we should feel [even remotely] justified when we self-righteously reject those for whom he died.

A New Command

I can be narrow-minded.  Sometimes when I say "in my faith", I am referring to the people that believe and worship the same way that I do.  I may be referring to those that belong to the same denomination or maybe a larger group of followers that are dispersed throughout the many denominations of Protestantism and within Catholicism that generally profess their faith in the same manner as do I.  If I make this reference (in this manner), I am narrowing what it means to be of a follower of Jesus to fit within my definition.  

Sometimes, I can be even more narrow-minded by referring to people that are "in my church".  Considering the fact that the biblical definition of church is the entire body of Christ's followers, I am incredibly negligent in excluding followers that attend other "churches" when making this particular reference.  

These two references don't usually offend other followers because they are not meant to be negative.  Plus, they are used so prevalently by other followers.  But, these references might point to a problem within our faith (OK, this time "within our faith" truly does mean everyone that is on the journey to/with Christ).  The problem?  A lack of love.

Jesus said:  “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.  By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” (John 13:34-35).  Note:  I chuckled as I copied-n-pasted this from Biblegateway.com because he repeated the command three times in this very short passage.  So, I think he meant it.

To our own chagrin, today's Christian isn't known for his/her adherence to this command - our tendency is to gravitate toward our differences and focus on those places of our disagreement.  The result is that we cast our judgement on others, disassociate ourselves from them and consequently, tend to shrink the church.  Let us open our hearts to all believers...yes, even to those that may be in a very different place within their journey than our own.  Perhaps by accident, we might be an attraction to those who do not yet believe.