what we are NOT saying SAYS a lot

An interesting thing happened to me a little while ago. While talking on the phone with a friend, I noticed the television was on to the Inspirational Channel. Though the station was on mute, I observed this particular man as he walked around the stage, peaching to his audience, holding a Bible in his hand. And it reminded me, once again, how turned off I have been by traditional evangelical paradigms.

Please, don’t get me wrong. This man is probably a wonderful individual, and he is probably way more faithful to God than I am. It wouldn’t surprise me if the things he spoke were true and that they were a blessing to many. It’s just that a number of things seem, well, kind of . . . weird.

Then, I thought, what would an unchurched person think about such things. What thoughts would flow through the minds of most people under the age of, say, 35? Again, I cannot speak with any measure of certainty, but here is what I observed:

An authoritative type–this is the way it is, so fall in line.

A predictable type–this is the way the faithful act, look, and dress.

A sense of “We have the answers.”–this is my Bible, which God gave to me personally, telling me what I should preach to you.

An arrogance–we speak for the Lord, so you had better pay attention–again, look at the Bible that I’m waving around.

A disconnected, formulaic brand of faith–pay attention to the propositions that I lay out before you (I didn’t actually hear the man, but I noticed that immediatley behond was this large sign, which contained a myriad of names for God–e.g., Alpha and Omega, I Am, etc. There is absolutely nothing wrong with names, especially biblical terms that do indeed carry meaning. But this once again reminded me of how often the modern church goes around plucking words or phrases out of the Bible, stringing them together, and then allowing these terms to take on almost a life of their own. Often, the terms are used properly, though not always so. What’s most wrong is that these words are consistently seen in isolation from the texts from which they were derived. This can subtly mislead. And it also fails to allow the words to be seen within the larger, God-given context from which they are taken–Again, too modernistic, abstract, and lacking of the narrative or the personal.)

A well-groomed, “proper” religiosity–the holy ones always get dressed up. (Note: there is nothing wrong with suit coats and ties. But they are not somehow more holy than jeans and a t-shirt.)

An “I’m above you” mentality–this is where I stand, above you on a stage.

An “endorsed” spirituality–the imprimatur is listed nicely at the bottom, right side of the screen (i.e., INSP).

These and many other things stood out, and I have to say they are a real source of frustration for me. Whatever this guy believes or said, he appeared like a stereotypical, Bible-waving, formula-exclaiming, choir-supported, authoritative preacher. Though he may be speaking the truth, he is also “speaking” other things that, in my opinion, will get in the way of his words. Indeed, I have to wonder about the words of someone who appears to out of touch with the cultural realities that are all around him. I really do not think we should be enslaved to anything cultural, doing things just to appease the masses. But I do believe we have to live within a culture, absorbing (or at least being aware of) its ethos, and listening for what God may be saying to us today. Only as we listen to God and to his Word, allowing the two to intersect, will we be able to share the truth in meaningful ways in any era. That’s my opinion, anyway. :-)

P.S. Although a chose a picture that says A Pious Fraud, I am not at all assuming this of the person I observed on television. Indeed, as I've said, he is probably far better than I. This said, he may still appear to be a pious fraud, and this is the point.