Rarely, if ever, do people see what is plainly before them. Rather, we take what is before us and interpret it through our experiences and expectations. Face value has become faceless, and the heart of the matter left beating unheeded and unheard.
I cannot say if this is true for all eras or all people, and I'm sure that some are able to see unclouded. I would like to think I am one of them, but I seriously doubt it. In fact, I know it to be untrue. I approach certain authors or topics with bias--sometimes in the extreme, and normally in the negative. I expect to disagree; therefore, I find much to disagree with, even when I must admit valid points and reasoning. However, when the author I oppose does appear convincing, I assume that I simply don't have the mental capacity to properly argue against him, maintaining my distaste and opposition to his message.
A case in point for my broader statement (and undoubtedly my personal one) is the response to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ from earlier this year. Having recently read a book about it, this example is on my mind. Showtime for the Sheep (SS, for the sake of ease from here out) addresses film as a jumping point for broader negative concepts within Evangelicalism, such as the apparent adoption of entertainment styles as normative in church services and the joining of many Evangelicals with the Roman Catholic Church.
I have not see The Passion, and with my strong distaste for gratuitous violence, I doubt I will. The author of SS converted from a devout Roman Catholic background and identifies many, if not all, of the RCC doctrines and legends presented in the movie. With that background, I can understand his offense and concern. As someone unfamiliar with specific RCC teachings, though, I have a feeling that I would never have noticed most of the Marianism and other problems (and yes, there are problems) he emphasizes.
In my overall analysis of the book, I think the author does have some very good warnings for us, cautioning the Christian public to check everything against the Bible. However, I also think that his true concern has little to do with The Passion and more to do with the absurd hyperbole Christian leaders attached to the movie. I would also caution against an unintended but creeping legalism or bias: all accusations (that I can recall) against using film as an evangelistic tool can be equally leveled at any other art form, including hymns and sermons. Taken to an extreme, his "written word" arguments fall apart, as much of a word's intended meaning, at least in modern English, is found in its inflection, and inflection has not been recorded for us in Scripture. However, the author is not alone in that difficulty: rarely can any thought hold up when taken to an extreme.
Back to the subject of understanding being a matter of an individual's interpretation of the material he or she sees, I mentioned the book to one of my roommates. He immediately began talking about his favorite scene in the movie, the extra-Biblical appearance of Satan and the snake in the Garden of Gethsemene. His understanding of the scene was nearly opposite the author's. As I understood it, SS disliked the scene not only for it's extra-Biblical nature (and the inherent unreality of film), but because the author felt that by introducing Satan to the garden, it made the Christ's internal battle to be an struggle not with obedience to the Father but with an outside force. My roommate's understanding of the scene, however, was that when Jesus finished praying and crushed the snake's head, it revealed that the prayer and struggle had nothing to do with Satan at all. He thought Jesus' action demonstrated that Satan's presence as an afterthought, the sort of near-mockery true authority can perform against a powerless pretender to the throne.
Where one found condemnation, another found understanding. Who is correct? Probably both, in some degree. Taken as literalism, I too would condemn the scene. Taken as symbolism, like the explanations and applications given in a sermon, I hope I should also find life and truth.
I find this applies to other areas as well. I truly enjoy the Harry Potter books, as many who know me will attest. I have actually prayed and thanked God for allowing me to live in an age with such enjoyable stories. Others oppose the stories as a living tool of Satan. (Some are not so extreme, simply wanting to avoid what could be offensive. Others simply aren't interested and don't care.) With imperfect knowledge, I too opposed the books (not that I claim "perfect" knowledge now). With understanding of the content rather than the surface, with thankfulness in my heart, I find goodness and happiness within their pages.
The same applies to music. Where one hears Hell, another sees Christ. Where another hears an antique obsession, another finds joy. We seem to be wired to find what we look for and see what we expect. Truly, the heart lives through the man.
I believe this explains much of the struggle within the Church today. We live subjectivism, yet we cannot see it in ourselves. So one calls another a libertarian or apostate as he himself is known as a legalist or a Pharisee. Both may have the same master, namely, Jesus Christ. Yet neither can claim the other as part of the same household. We forget that it is before our master that we each stand or fall. So long as the other is not opposing plain Scripture (which plainness in itself may be subjective), neither should condemn.
However, this leads to two great struggles. The first is the question of how much subjectivity Scripture can handle before it is too tainted with lies to maintain value. Either extreme (or even lack of extremity: the ubiquitous "moderate" who judges as much by intuition and inference as anyone else) can be guilty of both adding to and taking away from the words of God. How can we recognize untwisted truth when by nature we carry our own expectations and understanding into all that we do?
The only hope I can see for this dilemma is the doctrine of the Holy Spirit's illumination. As God is the source of all truth--indeed, he is truth itself--only by his work and revelation to the individual can each person know the truth.
The second struggle, as I see it, becomes the question of "openness." How much can or should I allow before reprimanding my brother? I have no easy answer, and for me, this is the far more difficult of the two problems. My practical answer is that we each seek to live honestly with one another, explaining our thoughts when others may be concerned and examining ourselves carefully when faced with questions or criticism. This too is an area of faith. We must do our best to trust one another. We must also trust God, knowing that he will separate the wheat and tares, the sheep and the goats. My knowledge of myself is imperfect. How then can I rightfully condemn my neighbor? I can disagree strongly, and when fruit ripens to reveal evil, I can condemn it and warn others of danger. But I must do so in knowledge, faith and love. I must know the Bible so that I can identify error. I must trust Jesus to keep me and cling to him in quiet desperation (as he holds me and proves that I need not be afraid). I must trust that he will truly work all things for ultimate good despite outward appearance and inward fear. And I must do my best to confront in love, intolerant of sinful error and actions while promoting what good I find.
Again I must return to faith. I cannot do any of this alone. I am but a blind and deaf goat, eyes full of splinters and ears made of wax, lying as close as I can figure to the foot of a bloody tree, needing Jesus to brighten my eyes, open my ears and cover me with a woolly coat.
"But you, dear friends, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, expecting the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life. Have mercy on some who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; on others have mercy in fear, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.
"Now to Him who is able to protect you from stumbling and to make you stand in the presence of His glory, blameless and with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, power, and authority before all time, now, and forever. Amen."
Posted by jonhanneman at November 26, 2004 8:23 PMI really like how you think, probably because your mind tends to runs along the same lines as mine. Thank you for your insights, I'm always glad when i see a new posting from you (which is most certianly not frequent enough!)
This was GOOD! I have thought similarly for years, but didn't have the words to explain it.
One thing, though. See "The Passion." The violence is not gratuitous. From what I have read, it depicted crucifixions the way they really happened. Jesus shed blood when He died. I think Protestants tend to gloss over that a bit (or in today's world, a lot).
I was profoundly moved by the movie and will never be the same about Easter or communion. Prior to this movie, I had a glimpse into the real meaning of Good Friday when the Cambridge churches worshipped together (Methodist, Moravian, 2 Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Catholic--who could join the community worship only if it was held in their church). So here we all were in the Catholic church in town. All the pastors participated and our Methodist church choir gave the anthem. We were staring at Jesus' tortured body hanging on the cross before us as we sang, "He Could Have Called 10,000 Angels....but He died alone for you and me." Snuffles were heard and tears fell, including some of mine.
Protestants celebrate the empty cross of the risen Christ, but sometimes we forget what Jesus really went through. We make things too cerebral and not enough emotional; that is, not enough connection through gut-level spiritual response.
Although this scripture is meant to caution the skeptics who think their salvation is in their brains or the atheists who think anyone with smarts can see that God doesn't exist, it also can apply to believers who have to have everything explained logically:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." (Isa. 29:14, I Cor. 1:19)
It can be enough just to feel the Truth in one's heart. In fact, John Wesley after being a parish minister and a missionary to America, realized that he never had truly believed at all, until his "heart was strangely warmed."
As you say, the Holy Spirit illumines in ways unique to each seeker.
The great thing is that reprimand isn’t the only option. (Possibly it’s not an option at all.) Jude presents two sides of confrontation. Here are the verses…
22-23 And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
Reprimand is an official type warning—like, ‘don’t do this again.’ It’s more focused on the person doing the reprimanding or the group for whom that person is spokesman. Both of Jude’s solutions are focused on the person who needs the direction. Once the focus is on your friend, you can either compassionately work alongside them, allowing your personal testimony in word and action to help the see a better path. This might be diversion, getting a friend involved in a better project or cause than the one they are headed toward. (Jude was, in part addressing people who were being led into all sorts of wasted time and energy by teachers who manipulated men just to get personal power.) Or you can, when you see that your friend is headed toward something that could put them in peril, you can pull them back with more force. This should be equally as loving and it cannot be conditional. Judicial type warning says do this or you won’t be part of ‘us.’ It’s more, ‘you’re part of us so we don’t want you to get hurt by this crazy direction.’
The next two verses are a great comfort to anyone who has to confront.
24-25 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
There is an implicit promise that, as we rely on God, he will keep us from falling ourselves so that we won’t be misleading our friends. Even given some subjectivism in life, God still places specific people around us to help us see where we need to go.