Wed 18 Jan 2006
Let me start by giving my apologies to C.S. Lewis and his fabulous essay in “Mere Christianity” (synopsis here) — not to mention Josh MacDowell. These days, spiritually-minded people seem to want to lump Jesus into one of these three categories. Of the three, the Guru crowd is certainly growing by leaps and bounds. . .
I, like many folks interested in the “Emerging Church,” have watched as leaders have started growing up from within the ranks of their own indigenous organizations. Some leader’s names are even being spoken with a sort-of reverence once reserved for the likes of Billy Graham or even John Wesley. As these people become more and more influential, the ability for them to influence the course of spirituality in America also increases. So, what if they are wrong — or at least mis-understood or taken out of context?
The “guru crowd” I spoke of earlier is a good example of this. This is the growing spiritual trend to live as Christ, to love unconditionally, to give without expecting anything in return, to join together in like-minded community, and to seek to advance the cause of social reform and justice in the world.
So what is wrong with that? Well, nothing — that is, as long as the Jesus they are following is actually the exalted Christ, the true Son of the living God.
Why is it important to make that distinction? Because, I think (and so do others) that great harm can be committed in the name of “Jesus” if there is insufficient understanding of who Jesus is in the first place. For some, Jesus is nothing more than a guru — a wise teacher with radical ideas on social reform. As such, he differs little from Ghandi or Malcolm X. Should those ideas be pursued? Yes, of course they should. Especially by Christians. But beware of watering down Christ in the process.
After all, God is not inclusive. He is exclusive. He must exclude anything that is imperfect or unclean from His presence, or by definition not be god. Can this God love unconditionally? Yes. Does He lower his standard because of His love? Never.
Is Jesus a sacrificial giver? Duh — He died for our sins. But that was also His purpose from the start — to die. All that stuff about love and how to live, and how to pay taxes, and how to understand God’s kingdom — all that was secondary to his primary goal: to die so that we don’t have to. As followers of Jesus, we can never lose sight of this. It is in fact an insult, a blasphemy even, to suggest that following the example of Christ means to live a good life and to love others and to practice social justice. Following the example of Christ means to live a sinless life and offer yourself as a sacrifice for those who don’t deserve it. Except that you will fail, because you are not Jesus. Your “sacrifice” will be nothing more than self-destruction.
Beware making Jesus nothing more than a spiritual guru. He is the exalted King.
As for the “grapefruit” crowd, those who neither believe Jesus was God nor a guru, what can we say? They do not know because they have not heard? They do not believe because they have not tasted? They do not take root because they are trampled by the world and its evil? Weep for them — but never forget the height from which you yourself have fallen.
The “Jesus is God” crowd is the essence of The Church. Yes, we should love unconditionally as best we can. Yes, we should give without expecting anything in return. Yes, we should join together in like-minded community. And yes, we should seek to uphold the highest social values and care for our fellow man. But we should never forget for a second that we do all of this out of love and gratitude for our Savior, which is Christ the Lord. We should never forget to live as one redeemed from death. We should never cease to give praise to Jesus Christ as God and King for all eternity. We should never claim for ourselves that which is reserved for God alone.
*******
P.S. I debated whether to post a link to what seems to be the most dangerous “guru Jesus” movement out there, because I know that so many people are finding fulfillment in its ranks. The thing is, they are unaware of the lack of depth that is truly behind it. Please let the Spirit testify within you as to the truth you seek.
January 30th, 2006 at 6:09 pm
Without the life of Christ, the death of Christ would be unimportant; the death of a sales…I mean carpenter. His sinlessness under temptation and miracles for good made him Christ. If Jesus would have sinned, done miracles to injure people, and was ressurected after three days dead, he would most certainly not be worthy of praise or worship.
January 31st, 2006 at 9:12 am
True, but keep in mind that the body of scripture in the New Testament all points to the cross, the atonement of Christ for the sins of the world, and the return of Christ in glory. It is the simplest of ideas — that an entire religion would be based on this alone. But that is exactly what Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians chapter 2. We need to make certain that our compassion for the world does not result in us developing a “spirit of the world” (1 Cor. 2:12). There is a very thin line between saying that Christ is our example of how to live and saying that Christ is an example of how to live. I’ve known several people who lost sight of this simple fact.
One in particular has since renounced Christ altogether. He could not come to grips with the fact that although the friends he knew in a particular village were moral, unselfish, loving, caring — more so than any Christian he knew — that they were condemned without Christ. He went from being a leader of Christians to being an enemy of Christ (his own words, not mine) almost overnight. How then could a just God allow such injustice?
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because thay are spiritually discerned.” — 1 Corinthians 2:14
Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, states that the atonement of Christ will be the issue in the church in the coming years. It will be what separates those who see Jesus as just another guru from those who see him as the Exalted Christ. BUT, it does’t mean that we fail to hear the cry of the needy, to befriend the worldly, to love the unlovable, and to work toward righteous justice for the failings of the church past and present.
In essence, we need to know deep in our souls that we are no different than they. It is Christ that makes the difference in us, and we should not boast (1 Cor. 1:28-30) — but remember that we were bought with a price (1 Cor. 6:20).
January 31st, 2006 at 6:15 pm
True, the cross of Christ, the Atonement, or the Victory, is the point of the new testement. But I think more is written about relationships: with God, with other beleivers (the church) and with non-believers (the world). The point, is to be in relationship with God, and that can only be done with the cross. Then what? Let’s think practically. Jesus says to love, John says to love, Paul says to love (3rd gospel, 2nd John, 1 Cor. and there’s a great example of how and who to love in the 3rd gospel).
A knowledge of Christ or a belief in Christ or action in the name of Christ imparts no grace. There were people who claimed to know Jesus, did good works, and even preached in His name, but Jesus didn’t know who they were. They were of no relation to Christ.
Christ knew he would die, and thus reconnect himself to people. But what next? Jesus knew we would need help with stuff like prayer, like caring for people, like dealing with money and conflict. That’s what his life was about; teaching us to live in reconnection.
February 1st, 2006 at 8:56 pm
You bet. I think this is an area where we can have our cake AND eat it, too. We can strive for pure, undefiled love AND worship the exalted Christ. We can strive to live after the example of Christ in how he lived, loved, and ministered to mankind, AND be like John — that same apostle who casually reclined against Jesus’ breast in the upper room, and fell as though dead at the feet of the glorified Christ. But it has to be both. Too much of one or the other and it isn’t Christianity anymore. It is either a secular humanistic cult, or a dogmatic legalistic cult.
February 3rd, 2006 at 2:59 am
My conclusion on this idea of Jesus as Guru, God, or Grapefruit: He is my God and Guru. If he is my God, why should I reject or neglect or even downplay His teachings? Christianity is a waste of my mind (all of my right thinking) if He is only my God, and a waste time (all of my right practices) if He is only my Guru.
February 3rd, 2006 at 8:19 am
We fumble with words because there is no accurate way to really describe who Jesus is. My desire is to expand the concept of God to Jesus’ life and teachings — he is the “God become Guru” if you will. When we do it the other way around, we run the risk of forming God (a god) in our own image by elevating something that shouldn’t be elevated. If I look at something (or a person, or the qualities in a person) and say, “I like that. I’ll make that my god,” we are in the golden calf business.
The point of the original post is that this is a potential trap for the Church — emerging or whatnot. We need to have a sound theology about Jesus, or we are just inventing something that sounds good to our own ears.
June 25th, 2006 at 11:51 pm
It’s been a really long time since I’ve been here. You’re spot on. We’re there. Agreement on stuff, an idea, and it only took some six or seven months.