... is to talk about sin too much.
I realize I could drive up traffic and comments with hard hitting posts exposing the pseudo-science of global warming, or predicting that intelligent design will overtake the teetering and rapidly sinking theory of evolution in the next 10 years, or how the queen of phony, Hillary Clinton, will be defeated by Gov. Mike Huckabee in one of the greatest upsets in American political history.
But rather than waste your time yammering about shallow stuff like that, I would rather post about something more relevant. Your pride. And mine.
"Spiritual pride often disposes persons to singularity in external appearance, to affect a singular way of speaking, to use a different sort of dialect from others, or to be singular in voice, countenance or behavior. But he that is an eminently humble Christian, though he will be firm to his duty, however singular - going in the way that leads to heaven alone, though all the world forsake him - yet he delights not in singularity for singularity's sake. He does not affect to set up himself to be viewed and observed as one distinguished, as desiring to be accounted better than others - despising their company, or conformity to them - but on the contrary is disposed to become all things to all men, to yield to others, and conform to them and please them, in every thing but sin."
~ Jonathan Edwards, Thoughts On Revivals
What in the world does Reverend Edwards mean by the term singularity?
Edwards 18th century language sounds klunky to us, but he is making an incredibly important point about one of the clearest indicators of spiritual pride in the human heart - the tendency to shun others because you want to be seen as righteous and holy.
I need to be careful here. There is clear Biblical teaching about the wisdom of choosing friends carefully and not becoming yoked with unbelievers (Proverbs 13:20, 2 Cor 6:14-16). Edwards is not advocating that we capitulate to sin by hanging out with sinners.
Edwards is teaching the truth of 1 Corinthians 9:19-23.
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
Spiritually proud people have a terrible time following this teaching. Why? Because they are concerned with appearances. They are terribly worried about how others view them. Their concern is not the lost. It is their image. It is protecting their reputation so that others will view them as highly as they view themselves.
The humble Christian, the one in union with Christ, is secure in the knowledge that it matters not so much what man thinks, but what God thinks. The humble Christian knows that it is what Christ did that makes him righteous and forgiven in the eyes of a holy God, not what he himself has accomplished. He knows it is not a matter of cleaning up his spiritual resume, but a matter of clinging to the finished work of Christ.
This is liberating. It allows us to associate with sinners *gasp*. Like Christ did. It allows us to not worry about protecting our reputation, but as the apostle Paul said, to be all things to all people that some might be saved. We can get out of our holy huddles and rub shoulders with people who won't darken the door of a church.
It also means we are free to love other Christians who we disagree with instead of looking down on them as inferior. There are all sorts of issues that cause Christians to look down on one another. One popular one today is educational choice. How do you view other Christian parents who have a different conviction about where to send their kids to school? Public versus private? Private versus homeschool? Classical versus non-classical? In your heart of hearts, do you view them as equals or inferiors? Another divider is music in worship. How do you view others who disagree with your preference of music in worship? Hymns versus contemporary? Piano versus guitar? How about apologetics? Presuppositional versus classical? The list goes on and on. You get the idea.
Spiritually proud people have an inner drive to be right and seen as right. It is a quest that often causes them to break fellowship and go it alone ... and delight in singularity for singularity's sake.
Hey - give us a break! Edwards is tough under the best of circumstances. But Edwards on pride is a tough slog. Not only the language issues, but also the unrelentingness of the man!
Sin is always a difficult topic; Edwards on sin is even more so. I would think that his 'appeal' would be to a rather limited audience, given the generally forbidding approach to his thought from the get-go. . . .
sorry.
At the same time, the question of "singularity" is an important one. Edwards gives me no peace on the matter, but does raise the question. I do not find that the condemnation of 'delighting in singularity for singularity's sake' adequately addresses the difficulty, either, though. We are inherently singular and unique, as created. And yet we are also members of humanity, expected to live together and love one another. This - due to our sin nature - is always going to be a tough balance. Edwards just sort of vaguely makes me feel guilty about it, rather than offering me any sort of encouragement or tools to strike the balance better, today.
Posted by: prophet | November 20, 2007 at 09:57
Thanks, Dawn Treader. I kind of think that being reminded of my sinfulness is a good check to keeping my pride at bay -- which is a constant struggle for me.
Isn't it also Edwards who said something to the effect of 'I cannot speak but sin, I cannot preach but I sin, I cannot even pray but I sin'... And yet it was his reliance upon God's grace that enabled him to continue do so - to the glory of God.
So, that makes me wonder.. how does one tell whether he or she is contributing to a conversation or topic in a way that God can bring honor and glory to Himself vs. in a way that merely seeks to vindicate ourselves and our pet opintions? Could that mean posting or commenting "anonymously?" (probably not.) Or does it mean clamming up and ceasing all dialogue? How do we find our 'place at the table' within public discourse, particularly in terms of blogging and commenting?
Posted by: deb | November 20, 2007 at 11:50
Deb, good questions.
I've read other Christians wrestling with the question of whether blogging publicly (or commenting on blogs) is inherently narcissistic rather than Christ-glorifying.
I've wondered very occasionally (typically only when I read such pieces) whether the blog only serves as a distraction from "real ministry" (my most immediate ministry being motherhood)--that maybe it's only a tool for self-promotion. I can come up with a lot of great, even unselfish, reasons to blog, but am I only kidding myself?
For some reason, I *really enjoy* blogging and reading blogs, even though I sense that sometimes my own veers into self-absorbed territory. I'm not the type to be immediately suspicious of enjoyment for enjoyment's sake.
I do it for distant friends and family, a chance for self-exhortation and self-expression, a sense of broadened "community"--and I fully admit, I thoroughly enjoyed the excitement of "investigative" citizen-journalist blogging during the 2004 election. What a fun thing to be a part of, even if only as an observer! I think the "journalist" part of me got jazzed by that.
I can't claim to be pride-free in my own case ("I cannot blog but I sin!"), but without doubt I have read some truly beautiful blogs that very much glorify God. I'm fond of Wittingshire, for example, but have come across other blogs with smaller readership that have brought deep conviction to me, and a greater thirst & hunger for God.
So, at least it's very *possible* to glorify God through blogging!
As for the OP, I honestly am not an opinionated person for the most part. I do have my personal convictions and political viewpoint, but I watch how I put things on my own blog because of a variety of opinion among my few readers. Esp. when other Christians follow their consciences about secondary matters of faith, I do not feel their decisions impinge on me in any way. Frankly it's none of my business how another family decides to educate, worship, eat, cover their hair or not, dress, etc. I spend more time discussing my own foibles, although I have been known to critique institutional biases or published opinions. In fact, infighting among believers about such matters really bothers me.
As for hanging out around unbelievers...I'll be honest. I live a quiet, insular life. The only "unbelievers" I am acquainted with in real life are the ones I (often unknowingly) come into brief, casual contact with in the local community, or via online forums. In my case SAHM really means SAH. My husband's employer, my next-door neighbors, even my obstetrician are all Christians.
Long enough for you? :)
Posted by: Susannah | November 20, 2007 at 21:39
A view from the other side...
I come to this site to discuss religion. Not for an argument, but for a discussion, and past discussions have been very illuminating for me. But discussions like this I have no part to play in, because our positions are so far apart. I don't believe there is such a thing as sin, so discussing its parameters and application is like discussing unicorn grooming techniques. So I rarely see any reason to visit such a post, let alone to contribute.
But just to throw in a little something this one time:
"It allows us to associate with sinners *gasp*"
Aren't we all sinners?
Posted by: Paul | November 21, 2007 at 02:41
Re: “I do not find that the condemnation of 'delighting in singularity for singularity's sake' adequately addresses the difficulty”
The gist of Edwards’ rant against singularity is in the context of a discussion on spiritual pride. It is not a treatise against our individuality. It is condemning the self-serving heart attitude of a separatist who withdraws from others because they are more sinful than he. The separatist prides himself on his withdrawal from others. He sees his action as holy and deserving praise. He thinks his isolationism is a form of godliness. In reality, it is not holiness. It is retreat. It is self-absorption. It is pride.
Posted by: Mr. Dawntreader | November 21, 2007 at 07:58
Deb,
Re: “how does one tell whether he or she is contributing to a conversation or topic in a way that way that God can bring honor and glory to Himself vs. in a way that merely seeks to vindicate ourselves and our pet opinions? Or does it mean clamming up and ceasing all dialogue? How do we find our 'place at the table' within public discourse, particularly in terms of blogging and commenting?”
Ceasing all dialogue is not the answer though I understand why you might say that. It is hard to not be deceived by our own heart when it comes to pride. The first step would be to pray and ask God to give you eyes to see your own motives in your blogging. Is it to make a name for yourself? Is it to gain significance? Is it to win (as in arguments)? Is it to rant and show that others are wrong (and you are right)? Other indicators of pride problems are the amount of time you spend blog spotting (seeing who is linking to your blog) … checking your statistics often … monitoring who is reading your blog … watching to see how many people subscribe to your feed. These are all tangible indicators that your motive in blogging is not God-centered but you-centered.
Does it mean you stop blogging if you have a pride issue? No. I would say you should confess, repent and ask God to change your heart and focus in your blogging. Become a redemptive blogger. Decide to make your posting more encouraging, thoughtful, edifying, informative, timeless, and humble. Use your blogging and commenting to push back darkness and spread the light and truth of the Revealed Word ... and do it about a variety of topics ... and do it with a humbleness rather than as a know-it-all.
Achieving a humble posture in writing takes more work than in speaking, in my opinion. A lot of communication is non-verbal. You lose that in blogging. So it is harder to make sure your writing does not come across the wrong way. That said, it can be done. Someone like David Wayne (Jollyblogger) comes to mind in terms of blending truth and humility.
Posted by: Mr. Dawntreader | November 21, 2007 at 08:02
"But just to throw in a little something this one time:
"It allows us to associate with sinners *gasp*"
Aren't we all sinners?"
True statement. My statement was done with tongue in cheek. There are some pride-filled Christians who look with disdain on unbelievers. They forget that we are all worms in terms of our own righteousness. Our righteous acts are like 'filthy rags' as the Apostle Paul wrote.
The ground in front of the cross of Christ is level. We are all sinners in desparate need of God's mercy. Sadly, some lose sight of this.
Posted by: Mr. Dawntreader | November 21, 2007 at 08:57
In one sense, I disagree with Paul. There is a sense in which "we are all sinners." Christians don't get sanctified by dint of divine "magic wand." It's a life-long, often painful, dying-to-self process. But, the fact is, scripturally our identity is no longer in ourselves, but in Christ. So, we don't self-identify as sinners anymore, but as those "in Christ." Of course, in recognizing our humble dependence on him for our righteousness, we put the knife to all pride or self-righteousness.
Aside: Billy Graham's most recent newsletter mentioned his late wife Ruth's epitaph: "End of construction. Thank you for your patience." The whole letter is worth a read; it touched me.
http://www.billygraham.org/Support_MonthlyLetter.asp
Posted by: Susannah | November 21, 2007 at 10:19
Susannah - an interesting response. If you don't self-identify as sinners, and part of the basic human condition is sin, does that mean that you feel yourself to be better than, or at least different to, humans?
(A different aside: I don't blog for narcissistic reasons, though perhaps if more people read my blog I would!)
Posted by: Paul | November 22, 2007 at 09:02
On the contrary, Paul. :) We all come to God with nothing to offer Him but filthy rags. But God can, and does, make a beautiful work out of the submitted Christian's life. The key, though, is total submission. Which doesn't allow room for pride. And having that pride worked out of you isn't exactly a pleasant experience. :)
Nothing humbles a person more than being continually amazed at the divine grace, compassion, and love extended to her, quite in spite of herself.
Self-righteousness in Christians is an expression of fleshliness, not true spirituality. All Christians still battle "the flesh" and give in to those temptations from time to time. They have to repent. But they are not, at base, "sinners" because "It's no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me." "Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. Old things are passed away. Behold, all things are become new." It's the miracle of God's life resurrecting our dead spirits, awakening our hearts to Him.
Posted by: Susannah | November 22, 2007 at 10:09
You say "On the contrary", but the rest of your post sounds like "Yes". And to be honest I can kind of see the logic in that - the only non-trivial way in which 'better' has meaning is being more right with God, so it would be internally consistent to say that you are better.
Posted by: Paul | November 24, 2007 at 02:47
Well, if the question is whether it's better to be spiritually alive than spiritually dead (as scripture describes it), then the answer is "yes." But that doesn't change the fact that:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."
Catch that? *God* prepares the works. God prepares *us* to *do* the works. It's our *privilege* to be allowed to do them by His mercy, when otherwise all we deserve is death, banishment, etc. In other words, it's all about Him and His unsurpassed goodness and love...not so much about how great we are. Although communing with unsurpassed goodness is pretty doggone great for the human soul, and produces a lot of joy, peace and righteousness. :)
Posted by: Susannah | November 27, 2007 at 02:49
I'm sorry, Susannah, it's still sounding a lot like 'yes'. Not that you're claiming credit for any of the effort that want into this (though I suppose that God's omnipotence means no effort went into it), but it does sound like you think you're better than people like me because you have the necessary faith.
Now I'm not clear if by thinking that you cease to have such faith, and hence become no better than me :)
Posted by: Paul | November 30, 2007 at 13:35
I think it is importarn to know these things,so that we can recognize when we are being prideful.
Posted by: cboy | December 08, 2007 at 16:56