wwjd

[ValleyGal]

While most of us might like to think we know what Jesus might do in a given situation, I wonder if maybe we can learn some wisdom from the son in this short story:
WWJD: What Would Jesus Do? Do You Really Want to Know? | Mick Mooney

It's easy to be a religious Pharisee, thinking we would know; it's quite another to know Jesus intimately enough to really know what he would do in the very situations Pharisaical Christians tend to judge. Which would you rather be?

 

[DZoolander]

Yep.

 

[mkgal1]

You don't agree with the way this article is written, right VG? I presume you're using it to make the point in your OP.

What Would A Pharisee Do?" She took the old WWJD? wristband and burned it.

Since her son has been wearing the new wristband, looking at it to help him make his decisions, he has become a dedicated tither, a public prayer warrior, an active condemner of 'sinners,' a passionate defender of the Old Covenant law, and has a great reputation as a godly young man amongst other religious people.

Needless to say, the mother is very happy now. She only wishes Jesus would take notice and follow her son's good example.

....except you have me confused with this statement in your OP:

I wonder if maybe we can learn some wisdom from the son in this short story

because there was both "good" and "bad" mixed in with his original behavior (IMO). What behavior did you think was wise?

 

[ValleyGal]

No. I mean there are several lessons. First, the son is influenced by his parent, so as parents, we need to be particularly careful of how we train our children in whether to be a Christ-follower or a Pharisee. Second, the son knew Jesus well enough that he started to behave like him when given that framework. Third, it is a mistake to "honour" a parent who is more after Pharisaical conformance rather than Christ-likeness.

Also, the article points out a huge stark reality highlighting the difference between numerous popular churches and what being a "real" Christ-like church is.

I don't like many bloggers, but this is one article that I find has a story worth sharing, leaving the reader to ponder "which one am I?" and "which one do I want to be?"

 

[mkgal1]

No. I mean there are several lessons. First, the son is influenced by his parent, so as parents, we need to be particularly careful of how we train our children in whether to be a Christ-follower or a Pharisee. Second, the son knew Jesus well enough that he started to behave like him when given that framework. Third, it is a mistake to "honour" a parent who is more after Pharisaical conformance rather than Christ-likeness.

Also, the article points out a huge stark reality highlighting the difference between numerous popular churches and what being a "real" Christ-like church is.

I don't like many bloggers, but this is one article that I find has a story worth sharing, leaving the reader to ponder "which one am I?" and "which one do I want to be?"

How did the son specifically behave like Jesus (in your opinion)?

To me.....the article almost seemed to mock Christ (and honor Pharisee-like behavior).....but maybe that's just how I'm interpreting it right now.

 

[ValleyGal]

From the article:

A week later she was shocked to see that her son had become friends with prostitutes, was hanging out with 'sinners' -- even buying people who were already drunk yet another round of beers!
Worse still, he had walked into their church the previous Sunday and tore down the book store, overturned the tables and threw the cash register through the window, he then made a whip and chased the pastor out of the building, declaring he was turning God's house into a den of thieves.
Most shocking was what happened when his mother went to picket the local abortion clinic. To her embarrassment, her son was also there, but he was standing with the women who just had an abortion, and yelled at the protesters: "You who are without sin, throw the first stone!"

Jesus did all those things, and I really do not read the article as a mockery of Jesus. Jesus was the best social worker ever - and set precedence in social change...



These days it is unheard of to be a "good" Christian and be friends with (gasp!) a gay person, or a prostitute, or a drug addict or a divorcee (although that one is becoming somewhat better). It seems the church is just as Pharisaical now as it was in Jesus' day. When was the last time you got arrested for feeding homeless people (like the retired pastor in Florida)? When was the last time you befriended a lifer just for the sake of reaching out rather than trying to "fix" them? When was the last time you wrapped your arms around someone who openly admitted to using abortion as a method of birth control, or prostituted herself to support her heroin habit, without trying to fix them? When was the last time you gave a month's wages to a person classified as the working poor, just so they could afford a few new clothes for their children?



When was the last time any of us did not judge a pastor with ssa who refuses to act on it and do what is right in the eyes of God, regardless of that ssa?

ETA - I would rather have a lousy reputation among the churched folk, and live to impress my Father rather than gain a good reputation according to man and have Jesus turn me away at Judgement for not knowing me, even if I cast out demons in his name.

 

[mkgal1]

From the article:

Jesus did all those things, and I really do not read the article as a mockery of Jesus. Jesus was the best social worker ever - and set precedence in social change...

I don't believe Jesus did ALL those things. Do you?

These days it is unheard of to be a "good" Christian and be friends with (gasp!) a gay person, or a prostitute, or a drug addict or a divorcee (although that one is becoming somewhat better). It seems the church is just as Pharisaical now as it was in Jesus' day. When was the last time you got arrested for feeding homeless people (like the retired pastor in Florida)? When was the last time you befriended a lifer just for the sake of reaching out rather than trying to "fix" them? When was the last time you wrapped your arms around someone who openly admitted to using abortion as a method of birth control, or prostituted herself to support her heroin habit, without trying to fix them? When was the last time you gave a month's wages to a person classified as the working poor, just so they could afford a few new clothes for their children?



When was the last time any of us did not judge a pastor with ssa who refuses to act on it and do what is right in the eyes of God, regardless of that ssa?

ETA - I would rather have a lousy reputation among the churched folk, and live to impress my Father rather than gain a good reputation according to man and have Jesus turn me away at Judgement for not knowing me, even if I cast out demons in his name.

This all sounds a lot like Jefferson Bethke's point about Jesus > Religion (and religion being used as a word to describe Pharisaical attitudes--since they were the religious leaders of the day) that you've vehemently disagreed with in the past. Pay close attention to his explanation around 1:12 minutes in--he doesn't mean community of believers when he says "religion":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIxW07Lxsh4

 

[ValleyGal]

I do not like him, no. He paints religion as pharisaical. But not all religion is pharisaical. You can have someone who is very Christ-like but yet still religiously recites their rosary. I think of people like Mother Teresa, who was very religious and yet did not have the pharisaical attitude that accompanies certain "religious" people. Your Jefferson paints them all with the same brush.

Jesus did hang out with the sinners, turn the tables, and confronted those who were judging others by saying "You who are without sin, throw the first stone!"

I think maybe you are nitpicking little semantics again, and will now disengage from the conversation because I think you are missing the gist of the point.

 

[mkgal1]

I think you completely miss his point then (or have a different idea of what "Pharisaical" is). He's not condemning tenants like reciting the rosary....nor is he "painting them all with the same brush"--he makes clear distinctions (maybe in other videos better).

Jesus did hang out with the sinners, turn the tables, and confronted those who were judging others by saying "You who are without sin, throw the first stone!"

Basically....yes, Jesus *did* hang with the sinners; turn the tables; confronted those who were judging others.....but there was a pure spirit there (and He was confronting within a careful framework). That doesn't mean all of this in the article was noble and good (like I said.....there's "bad" mixed in with this). Do you not see the bad in the following quote?

A week later she was shocked to see that her son had become friends with prostitutes, was hanging out with 'sinners' -- even buying people who were already drunk yet another round of beers!
Worse still, he had walked into their church the previous Sunday and tore down the book store, overturned the tables and threw the cash register through the window, he then made a whip and chased the pastor out of the building, declaring he was turning God's house into a den of thieves.
Most shocking was what happened when his mother went to picket the local abortion clinic. To her embarrassment, her son was also there, but he was standing with the women who just had an abortion, and yelled at the protesters: "You who are without sin, throw the first stone!"

********************************************************************************************************************

I think maybe you are nitpicking little semantics again, and will now disengage from the conversation because I think you are missing the gist of the point.

I don't see it as "nit-picking".....I think it's important that we not get too zealous and fanatical in the opposite direction. I get the gist of your point....but I believe you may be missing what I'm trying to point out.

 

[mkgal1]

Bethke's videos have a great point, "Jesus came to abolish religion" (partly--and he means "religion" as the Pharisees/Saducees believed and promoted) in order for us to embrace the good news of the Gospel. One author wrote: "Bethke sees religion as a man made attempt to earn God’s favor. Religion equals self-righteousness, moral preening, and hypocrisy. Religion is all law and no gospel. If that’s religion, then Jesus is certainly against it." But....what this article describes seems a bit different than that.

 

[ValleyGal]

Did you not see the distinctions I made when I clarified the lessons one can learn from reading the article?

 

[mkgal1]

Did you not see the distinctions I made when I clarified the lessons one can learn from reading the article?

No......I don't really see distinctions (other than you posting "the article points out a huge stark reality highlighting the difference between numerous popular churches and what being a "real" Christ-like church is."). I'd asked you earlier if you didn't see any "bad" in the son's original behavior (where he was following the "WWJD" thought process). You'd posted that "Jesus did ALL that"....but I disagree (I also disagree that He would even *do* all that or put His stamp of approval on all of it).

Can you clarify that (how specifically the stark reality is highlighted)?

 

[ImaginaryDay]

Distinctions between WWJD and WWTPD can be hard to make. I think the blogger went a little far in his examples, imagining that he knows what Jesus might do. It's true that many of our churches are becoming profit making ventures that lose sight of what they've been commissioned to do. But is the son being "Christ-like"? Yes, Christ overturned the tables of the money changers, but we need to know when to do it and when not to do it. The consequences of the money changers come in due time. A "WWJD" response might just be not to feed them, but instead give our resources to the hungry. Remember Mark Driscoll. The consequence came in due time.

 

[mkgal1]

I happen to think Bethke makes great distinctions (that's why I keep bringing it up).

I wrote this poem to highlight the difference between Jesus and false religion. In the scriptures Jesus received the most opposition from the most religious people of his day. At it's core Jesus' gospel and the good news of the Cross is in pure opposition
to self-righteousness/self-justification. [False]religion is man centered, Jesus is God-centered. This poem highlights my journey to discover this truth. Relgion either ends in pride or despair. Pride because you make a list and can do it and act better than everyone,
or despair because you can't do your own list of rules and feel not good enough for God. With Jesus though you have humble confident joy because He represents you, you don't represent yourself and His sacrifice is perfect putting us in perfect standing with
God!

[/QUOTE]

 

[mkgal1]

Dp

 

[BigDaddy4]

... It's true that many of our churches are becoming profit making ventures that lose sight of what they've been commissioned to do.

What number exactly is "many"? Those just in Canada, or the US, or worldwide? And how do you know this "many" are only focused on profit making ventures and have lost sight?

I strongly dislike generalizations like these.

But is the son being "Christ-like"? Yes, Christ overturned the tables of the money changers, but we need to know when to do it and when not to do it. The consequences of the money changers come in due time. A "WWJD" response might just be not to feed them, but instead give our resources to the hungry.

What resources do you believe Jesus would have us give the hungry? Just give them money? My Bible says Jesus would have us feed the hungry, not just give the hungry money. Remember the 5,000? They were fed by 5 loaves and 2 fish, not given 5 dollars and 2 quarters to go get their own food.

Remember Mark Driscoll. The consequence came in due time.

Is Mark Driscoll your representative of the "many"? What would you have us remember about him?

 

[Inkachu]

That's a preposterous and ridiculous article.

Jesus would not buy a drunk person another beer. He might "hang out" with the drunkards and prostitutes, but He'd be preaching repentance and salvation, not "here, buddy, let's do another round! Shake that money maker, girlfriend!" SPARE me.

Jesus would not scream at people who are standing outside an abortion clinic praying peacefully for those inside and offering abortion alternatives (which is what the VAST majority of pro-lifers at abortion clinics are doing).

And to suggest that ONLY "Pharisees" tithe and live godly lives that produce fruit visible from the outside... is just revolting and disgustingly false.

 

[ImaginaryDay]

What number exactly is "many"? Those just in Canada, or the US, or worldwide? And how do you know this "many" are only focused on profit making ventures and have lost sight?

I strongly dislike generalizations like these.

*sigh... When was the last time you remember going to church in a movie theater or strip mall and seeing a "Starbucks" (or something similar) as a kid? When we had coffee at church it was called "coffee hour" and you didn't have to pay or walk through the bookstore to see the Pastor's latest book to get there. And the Pastor still preached every Sunday, because he was, well, the Pastor. It is a generalisation; however, look in your community and gauge how many mega-churches get air time on your local Christian radio vs. your corner church.

What resources do you believe Jesus would have us give the hungry? Just give them money? My Bible says Jesus would have us feed the hungry, not just give the hungry money. Remember the 5,000? They were fed by 5 loaves and 2 fish, not given 5 dollars and 2 quarters to go get their own food.

That was my point. Sorry I didn't make it so well. But there are some who are legitimately hungry and if I don't have time to go to the drive-thru, I'm more than happy to give them the five bucks. I know who they are in my town.

Is Mark Driscoll your representative of the "many"? What would you have us remember about him?

It was an example. You can look it up. I don't respond to rudeness.

 

[BigDaddy4]

*sigh... When was the last time you remember going to church in a movie theater or strip mall and seeing a "Starbucks" (or something similar) as a kid? When we had coffee at church it was called "coffee hour" and you didn't have to pay or walk through the bookstore to see the Pastor's latest book to get there. And the Pastor still preached every Sunday, because he was, well, the Pastor. It is a generalisation; however, look in your community and gauge how many mega-churches get air time on your local Christian radio vs. your corner church.

Well, since I didn't go to church as a kid... Never! Did you forget that we are to take the Gospel to the whole world? Who are you to decide that whenever or wherever by whomever it is preached is wrong?

VERY few churches in my area (which, btw, is just down the road a couple of hours from you) have what you describe. I've attended a few of the so-called "mega churches" in my area and see nothing like you describe. Is using modern technology to spread the Word somehow a bad thing in your mind?

I think you seriously misunderstand the purpose and intent of the house of worship, large or small. I KNOW your overgeneralizations make you look foolish.

That was my point. Sorry I didn't make it so well. But there are some who are legitimately hungry and if I don't have time to go to the drive-thru, I'm more than happy to give them the five bucks. I know who they are in my town.

There is a difference between an individual choice to feed an individual and a church's mission to feed the hungry.

It was an example. You can look it up. I don't respond to rudeness.

An example of what? I have friends and acquaintences who attend or have attended Mars Hill or one of its satellites. I am very familiar with the controversies surrounding it. You made the statement to "Remember Mark Driscoll." What is it you would have us remember about him?

 

[mkgal1]

Another thing? About the comparison of Jesus turning tables (which fanatics LOVE to us as an endorsement for unlawful behavior).....that wasn't *only* about people making a profit. No one mandates that people buy the books in the church book stores (at least I HOPE not) as a means for spiritual purification.

In the time that Jesus overturned the table---it was Jewish law that every family bring an animal to the Temple to sacrifice. From what I understand.....what was originally a convenience (you can buy the animals here, at the temple, instead of traveling far with that animal) became a mandate (only animals purchased here are acceptable). It was spiritual extortion---not just profit. It was also speaking for God (implying that these Temple animals were the only animals God would accept as sacrifice). I believe that's what angered Christ the most---the religious leaders using God for their schemes to exploit people. That's not what's happening with church book stores.

Also......like Inka pointed out....I don't believe Jesus would be enabling a person's drunkenness. We can "hang out" with "sinners"......but that doesn't mean we have to engage in the same behavior (we ought to be gently encouraging a different path--but even that is a tightrope as people have to WANT that for themselves).

I stand by my original opinion (even a day later).....this article seems to make a mockery of what "Christ-like" behavior is.....and honors the Pharisee-like behavior (because it "looks good" on the outside and doesn't break any laws). I believe the truth is almost always in the middle. We *can* behave like Christ without breaking laws (in fact---that *should* be the indicator. If a civil law is broken.....we are probably not really behaving like Jesus).

It's dangerous reasoning to spread (that Jesus would condone behavior like in this article)......because people easily get influenced in "holy battles". But....like I posted earlier....I don't read this article to be an encouragement to "be like Jesus".....but more that's it's better to behave like a Pharisee.