Do You have the Reflex of Love?

Mike Leake

It’s not a good decision to take off your 3D glasses while viewing a movie in 3D. It’ll really mess with your head. It’s disorienting. Everything is fuzzy and out of balance. You can sort of still follow the plot and make out a few of the characters but you’ll miss so many things. 2D eyes in a 3D world leaves you very limited. It makes the movie you paid for just a drab and blurry show.

“From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh.” –2 Corinthians 5:16

I think of those 3D glasses when I read that text. Paul was living and ministering in 3D but they didn’t have the glasses for it. or at least they weren’t wearing them. This is why when it came for picking which ministers they’d follow the chose the flash super-apostles. The humble and constantly suffering apostle didn’t stand a chance. They picked charisma over character, every time.

Until the gospel changes our way of seeing the world we’ll do the same thing. We’ll skip over the runt David and beg God to let us anoint the skilled and savvy. And it’ll bite us every single time. Because character won’t come simply because we thrust someone into a position. How many times do we have to see high-profile (and incredibly gifted) leaders fall before we realize these words of Craig Hamilton are true?

People can pick up skills relatively quickly, but character isn’t something you just pick up. Character is often forged over a long period of time and over multiple experiences, and it only changes with great and sustained effort. It can and does change, but it’s much harder to change your character than it is to learn skills. (Wisdom in Leadership, 48)

The Corinthians had determined that Paul was a loon. But he kept preaching the gospel to them because he knew that this would be the means by which they’d get a new set of eyes. Apart from grace, though, they’d put gospel men in the loser category every time. And they’d fall hard after super-apostles…even to the point of being abused by them. But seeing through a gospel lens would change all that.

The Gospel Changes the Way We View All People

We can also tell if we’ve embraced the gospel by the way we view every person. Philippians 3 gives us a clue as to what Paul means by regarding people “according to the flesh”. In that text we read a

When Paul speaks of viewing people according to the flesh we get a clue to his meaning in Philippians 3. There we see a list of identity-shaping accomplishments. These are not only the place for Paul to receive his identity but it’s also the lens by which he views the world. He’d use this to size people up when he met them. Are they Jews? Are they Pharisees? Are they zealous for the law?

The gospel gives Paul a new set of eyes. Now all of his previous questions are rubbish. Only one question matters, now. Is this person “in-Christ” or not? If this person is “in-Christ” then I’m engaging a brother or sister. If this person is not in-Christ then it’s someone I need to love and share Christ with. Either way it shaped the way he interacted with people. He no longer viewed them according to the flesh but all through the eyes of redemption.

So too may all our questions be considered rubbish. What lens do we use to classify people? Politics? Gender? Skin color? Denomination? Economic status? Family name? Level of Education? Titles?

How do these things impact the way you are going to listen to or deal with a person as a person?

What Paul is driving at here is that with a gospel lens the only category we use now is, “in Christ” or “not in Christ”. You have more in common with a liberal Democrat who has faith in Jesus than you do a dyed in the wool, social conservative, who goes to church every Sunday but doesn’t actually have a relationship with Jesus”. You have more in common with an Iraqi Christian than you do a US soldier who is rejecting Christ.

If you are still viewing people fundamentally through another lens, then you aren’t as shaped by the gospel as you think you are.

The Example of John Newton

I love the example of John Newton. He was so captivated by the gospel that it did indeed change the way he viewed everyone. Newton had this to say about the way we view one another:

Whoever . . . has tasted of the love Christ, and has known, by his own experience, the need and the worth of redemption, is enabled, Yea, he is constrained, to love his fellow creatures. He loves them at first sight; and, if the providence of God commits a dispensation of the gospel, and care of souls to him, he will feel the warmest emotions of friendship and tenderness, while he beseeches them by the tender mercies of God, and even while he warns them by his terrors.

Newton lived this. Newton’s “first reflex was to love lost people” (Piper). And it was his first reflex to love all people. Reflex is the right word. It’s what happens spontaneously. It’s not the happy face you put on at church. It’s not what you think you should do. It’s just what happens. Just as you really cannot control the twitch of the knee when the doctor hits that sweet spot, so also the gospel-shaped Christian cannot control the reflex of love when he meets another image-bearer.

May the same be said of us.

Lord, make my first reflex be to love.

—

Photo source: here

What’s the Most Interesting Thing About You?

Mike Leake

As usual, I haven’t been following much of the latest news. I did, however, happen to read a recent article by John McWhorter on the Jussie Smollett story. I’ve been reading and thinking a bit about our victimhood culture. I think this is spot on:

He has come of age in an era when nothing he could have done or said would have made him look more interesting than being attacked on the basis of his color and sexual orientation. –John McWhorter

I don’t know much of anything about Jussie Smollett but I do know about our victim culture. As I’ve written, it’s a fig leaf. But an attractive one for us millennials. It’s also an absolutely deadly cocktail when its combined with some of our great American heresies; foremost, our redefining of sin and guilt into psychological problems which afflict us.

Depression and the Appeal of Victimhood

I’ll use myself as an example here. I’ve stated in the past that I battle depression, anxiety, fear, and all those unhelpful things which blend together into a world of confusion. It’d be very easy for me to view myself as a victim of these things. And I can even share a few stories of things which have happened to me that on occasion leads to my turmoil. But I’m convinced that a good chunk of my issues comes from failing to truly believe that God loves me. That doesn’t make me a victim–that makes me just like Adam and Eve before they bit into that forbidden fruit.

So when I’m struggling with trust and my world becomes shaken because I’ve taken my eyes off God, it is quite tempting to blame the black dog of depression instead of my own faithlessness. I can pretend like the most interesting thing about me–that which defines me–is this battle. Stories are powerful. Stories sell. And stories of pervading doubt and a “this sucks” narrative have a greater appeal to our cynical culture than a story of actual self-redefining redemption. There is a certain draw to being beyond healing. So it’s quite tempting in our climate to major on the struggle.

It feels so wrong, so insensitive, so beneath Christ, to dare suggest to such a soul as mine that the root of most of my malady is a rebellious and untrusting heart. Sin…my own willful sin…has made ravage of my heart. Sin has made everything all twisted and confusing and cloudy. If I’m a victim, it’s a victim of my own self.**

I know, I know. It’s complex. Believe me, I’ve battled this thing for so long that I know it’s not as simple as “dig into Jesus” or “have more faith”. But it’s also not freeing or helpful to run head long into this deadly cocktail of being the helpless victim-hero. Consider these helpful words by Alfred Poirier. Poirier is commenting on the change we’ve made in redefining man’s greatest problem. Rather than viewing ourselves as sinners we see ourselves as “empty cups which need to be filled”. Now consider:

“Though initially this might not sound like such bad news, really it is the counsel of despair. Sin is a moral category, and a person’s morals can be changed. A sinner can be saved and sanctified. But a leaky cup is an ontological category, and ontological things cannot change. Once a dog, always a dog. Once a leaky cup, always a leaky cup. You can fill a cup, but a cup remains a cup—something always leaking and always needing to be filled. Thus the message implied is that we are broken and cannot be fixed. We are leaky cups. (The Peace-Making Pastor, 50)

I may always, this side of eternity, have emotions which get out of whack. I may always be more prone to being troubled in the midst of conflict. I may always be particularly prone to the temptation to be shaken and anxious. But that doesn’t define me. Ever. I’m not an anxious Christian. I’m not a depressed Christian. I’m a Christian. Period. My identity is firmly fixed in Christ. I am His. And by the grace of God, He is mine. It’s impossible to consider yourself a victim when you possess every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places. This isn’t to deny pain or difficulty. It’s simply to believe the gospel really is true. Maybe, by the grace of God, I really will see real healing even this side of glory.

The Most Interesting Thing About Me

The most interesting thing about Jussie Smollett is that he is made in the image of God. I don’t know his standing with Christ. But I can certainly tell you that the most interesting thing about me isn’t that I struggle with anxiety, depression, fear, doubt, worry, etc. but that I’m a rebel sinner whom God has chosen to set His affections upon.

In-Christ.

That’s the most interesting thing about me.

What about you?

Don’t answer what you believe is supposed to be true. Look to the stories you tell. What’s the most interesting thing about you?

—

Photo source: here 

**If you truly have been sinned against, I’d likely phrase much of this in a different way. Certainly, we are still responsible for our responses to sin against us. We do not get a free pass. And our own sin in the midst of being sinned against can compound our problems. But, there is a pastoral sensitivity that is necessary in such a time. I’m not speaking in that voice here because my rebellious heart needs grace–but a sharper type of grace. The grace of a kick in the rear.

Read This! 02.28.19

Mike Leake

How to Overlook an Offense

Have we lost this ability?

4 Ingredients of a Good Apology

Yes, there are rotten apologies.

I Was Hospitalized For Depression

A moving read.

7 Questions for Meaningful Conversations With Believers

Things like this are so helpful to me. I’m not very good at small talk.

Jonathan Edwards and His Support of Slavery: A Lament

I really appreciate the way Jason Meyer walks through this issue.

The SBC, Abuse, and the Need for a Better Response

Amen. I’m appalled at the way the EC Bylaw team responded to J.D. Greear’s bold charge.

Poll Finds ‘Dramatic and Sudden’ Shift in America Toward Pro-Life Label

This is very encouraging.

Stewarding the Skill of Writing

A helpful reminder for us writers.

Yeah, you don’t understand that burden until it’s yours:

The Wall Nobody is Talking About

Mike Leake

There is quite a bit of talk about walls these days. Frankly, I think we’ve been talking about the wrong wall.

I’m not much concerned with debating the merits of building a wall along the Southern border of the US. Frankly, I don’t have enough information to really declare a public opinion on the thing. But there is  a wall that I’d like to talk about today. This is a wall which, in my opinion, is far more important than one on our Southern border. And I would argue that this wall has already crumbled.

I’m not quite sure how to label this wall. Perhaps it’s the wall between the teacher and the student. But that doesn’t seem strong enough. It might be better to call it the wall between the expert and the novice. That wall has crumbled.

It’s not as if there really isn’t such a thing as an expert or a novice anymore. Rather, it is that the world has flattened in such a way that we all assume because we’ve been able to Google something that we’re now an expert on that particular topic. Just because you can watch a YouTube video on how to change the thermostat in your car it doesn’t mean you are now an expert in auto-mechanics. We are saturated with knowledge. But knowledge isn’t the same as understanding. Mortimer Adler spoke to this decades ago:

We do not have to know everything about something in order to understand it; too many facts are often as much of an obstacle to understanding as too few. There is a sense in which we moderns are inundated with facts to the detriment of understanding. (Adler, 4)

And that was written before the internet. When Adler goes on to describe where this problem came from you’d almost think he was talking about social media and blogging, if he didn’t give his era away by mentioning cassettes. Speaking of the packaging of truth he says this:

…the packaging is often done so effectively that the viewer, listener, or reader does not make up his own mind at all. Instead, he inserts a packaged opinion into his mind, somewhat like inserting a cassette into a cassette player. He then pushes a button and ‘plays back’ the opinion whenever it seems appropriate to do so. He has performed acceptably without having had to think. (Adler, 4)

And that’s the problem. We’re a nation of experts on everything but we’ve thought about nothing. There once was a bit of a wall between the expert and the novice. But now we have WebMD to tell us we have Ebola and help us challenge our doctor’s diagnosis of the common cold.

There’s an old joke about a nuclear engineer (or some such professional) who charged $100,000 to fix a specialized machine. When the company got the bill they were flabbergasted by the cost so they asked for an itemized bill. The engineer informed them that it took $1 to push the button and $99,999 to know which button to push. Now you can Google which button to push and save your $99,999. That’s what knowledge will do. But a lack of understanding will blow the place up—because you only thought you were asking the right questions.

In my opinion, this issue is where a good deal of our disunity and discontent comes from. We’ve all but lost our ability to be humble learners. When was the last time you heard someone humbly differ their opinion to another? When did you last hear someone say, “Person X likely knows better than me, so let’s ask them?” We don’t do this anymore because we can pretend to be experts by asking Siri all our pressing questions. But this is knowledge. It’s not understanding. Tearing down the wall between expert/novice has led to this.

So what do we do?

There is no rebuilding the wall. And I’m not even sure if that’s the best thing to do. There has been some good to the tearing down of the wall. I’ve personally benefited from it. I wouldn’t be blogging if I didn’t think there is benefit to a no-name like myself publishing his thoughts. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a darker side to this beast.

The best answer, in my limited understanding, is to pursue humility. Every last one of us. Stay in our lanes and acknowledge areas where we have knowledge but maybe not full understanding. Learn to defer. Humbly acknowledge that you’ll never be the smartest guy online. And go from there.

Pursue humility. That’s the answer. A wall won’t protect us from ourselves. But grace will.

—

Photo source: here