Jesus Shaped Spirituality

on July 25, 2008 at 3:49 pm1 Caine

I’ve done some review of the usage of the term “Christian” and I think we have missed the import for quite some time. I don’t think those in the first century meant it as “little Christ” as is often told in sermons. I think the ‘ian” ending means more like it did for “Phillipian” or “Ephesian.” It meant point of national origin or residency. It was a misunderstanding of what being “in Christ” meant, either deliberate or unintentional.

National origin in the first century determined your general makeup and personality. It also determined your loyalties. In many ways, the “Jesusland” taunts come closest to what the “Christian” term meant–and are perhaps in the same spirit–in the first century. Yet it had a truth that the church took as their own. Jesus is where we reside and who resides in us.

Those interested can see my better prepared comments here.

on July 25, 2008 at 6:45 pm2 j. Michael Jones

This is a tough issue. I first came across the problem while living among Muslims. They would often ask, “Are you a Christian?†“Yes,†I would reply. But then I learned, the hard way, that the term “Christian†(at least to Egyptian Muslims, who mostly knew of their Coptic Christian neighbors) would pigeon-hole me in way that was totally different than what I really thought (about the same if I had said I was from Mars).

Then, after about a year dealing with this, I started answering the question, “No.†I felt a lot of guilt about that, like I was denying Christ or something. But it did allow me to start with a clean slate. They would then question if I was a Muslim. “No.†Then, through our relationship I would make it clear that I believed that Christ was the Messiah and I could describe what I believe without their assumptions. But I never found a name that would work in all situations. Sometimes I would say, “No, I’m not a Christian but I am a follower of Jesus.â€

Now, in the states we have a similar problem. The term “Christian” has so many connotations (especially by non-Christians) that to tell them that I am one (and allow them to assume that I’m a stereotypical Evangelical) does more dis-service than good. God’s gift of language is to communicate truth. By me saying I’m a “Christian†in some contexts communicates mis-truth (giving them the strong impressions that I believe certain things, which I certainly don’t).

Like the term “Post-Evangelical” to some of you, you know exactly what I mean. But to my Evangelical friends, it means that I’m a “liberal,” “Jesus was just a man,” “all roads leads to God (or gods),” “the Bible is just myths,” connotation. So I don’t use that label around them because it communicates almost the opposite of what I am.

If we are talking about communicating to the “World†then I don’t think the term “disciple†communicates much betterl. The first thing that pops into my mind is a Hare Krishna follower. If it can be a starting place for a discussion (e.g. “What do you mean by disciple”) then maybe it’s a good thing.

So what am I stuck with? I usually say I’m a “Mike.†You have to get to know me to know what I really believe and stand for because if you label me or put me in a box you will probably be wrong.

on July 25, 2008 at 7:26 pm3 Caine

In light of my previous comment, instead of “Christian” how about:

“Jesusite”

“Christophile”

or, with nods to a bad Sean Connery movie:

“Jesuslander”

Okay, my tongue is firmly in my cheek. Frankly, any label we give ourselves will ultimately be corrupted or so expanded as to be almost meaningless. We will always be trying to explain just what kind of “Jesusite” or whatever we are. Just see how “emergent” is being stretched so as to need qualifications.

I vote to stick with “Christian.” To do otherwise feels to me like I am denying our identity with those who have used that label through the centuries. They are “in Jesus” with us. They are our fellow citizens. Most of them at a greater cost than just having to explain “what kind of Christian they are.”

on July 25, 2008 at 7:35 pm4 Michael

Please note that Brian isn’t calling for a rejection or war on the word “Christian” as bad. Just advocating the better value of the word disciple (student, follower.)

on July 25, 2008 at 7:36 pm5 Josh

One of the things my pastor always says when responding to differing uses of the word, “Christian,” is to ask the person asking the question what they mean by that (which is often followed by words such as “narrow-minded” or “ignorant”). That clears the air about any initial miscommunication.

We can then respond, “Well, let me tell you what the term means to me.”

One of the best things this does is to open a friendly dialogue; it also provides a way to distance ourselves from those who’ve co-opted the word to their own political or social advantage.

I don’t necessarily think we have to defend the word “Christian” to our death (it’s all semantics, anyway), but I see no reason why we can’t try to take the word back.

on July 25, 2008 at 7:42 pm6 Michael

Read the book “UNChristian” or listen to the author’s interview at the Drew Marshall Show archive and see if you still think we can rescue the word. I work with students, and I assure you, it’s a goner. Just like the word “Muslim” with evangelicals.

on July 25, 2008 at 8:01 pm7 j. Michael Jones

I do realize that Brian was talking more about the process (our relationship with Christ) than label swapping and I hope I didn’t move things in a tangential direction. With that said, while “disciple†has a lot of merit, what works for me personally (and not the way I would present myself to others-due to confusion) would be a word like, “redeemed.â€

For me personally, having “grown up†in a discipling ministry, that word doesn’t mean to me what it should. When I hear the word “disciple†I flash back to a time that it meant obeying some fallen human (disciple maker) at all costs, pretending they had no flaws, while they used you or others for their own personal gain. It had little to do with Christ. But of course, in the real sense, speaking of a disciple of Christ (without the kind of baggage I carry) it would be a good word.

But now, I feel so dependent on the work of Christ and God’s righteousness bestowed upon me in Him, the word “redeemed†brings me a smile.

on July 25, 2008 at 8:49 pm8 Charley

Isn’t that how all descriptive words end up over time? Whether it’s “conservative,” “liberal,” or “Christian,” words start out being used by a certain definable group with specific values, then they get co-opted by others, next thing you know the word has become whatever anyone wants it to mean.

The word “disciple,” however, might end up differently because it implies the student/follower relationship. Instead of describing a certain set of beliefs, the term implies someone who wants to believe the right things, and is on a journey to find out what they are.

Of course, the term can also become unsalvageable fairly short order. I can see it now: The “Disciple’s Way,” an Olsteen book on positive thinking with the word “Jesus†occasionally thrown in, or the “Disciple’s Hour” a TBN hour long program where Disciple Benny Hin heals the faithful.

on July 25, 2008 at 9:22 pm9 Ed

Me?

I’m a southern, caucasian, male, middle-class, middle-age, college-educated, overweight, fiscally conservative, Libertarian, pro-life, tree-hugging, anti-war, Christian, empty-nester.

All these labels, collectively or individually, conjure up some image in the minds of others as to who I am or what I believe, and none of those images are entirely accurate.

My point is this: The label “Christian” has become diluted and terribly misunderstood, and I like the idea of adopting a term like “Disciple”, especially since it is vague enough to elicit more questions, allowing me to tell of my beliefs in more details beyond a single word.

on July 26, 2008 at 3:40 am10 K.W. Leslie

I prefer to tell people, “Jesus is my rabbi.” I suppose that’s a variation on “disciple.”

I don’t worry about the label Christian, nor the stereotypes attached to it, because apparently I don’t seem to fit them. People tell me all the time, “You don’t act like a Christian,” which is followed by the usual discussion of how they expect Christians to act, how Jesus acted, how everyone is supposed to act, and other such relevant Christ-centered topics.

I think if our lifestyles reflect Christ enough, people won’t care about the labels. Neither will we.

on July 26, 2008 at 11:27 am11 JoanieD

“Jesus is my rabbi.â€

I like that, K.W.

on July 26, 2008 at 1:16 pm12 Randy McRoberts

I like “disciple”, but I’m afraid it sounds culty or something. “Disciple” is really the best term, because it embodies following, learning, and on-the-job training. I wonder how it sounds to unbelievers, though.

I like “student”, but it almost sounds too passive, like sitting in a classroom and not doing anything.

Gordon MacDonald likes “Christ follower”; I’ve tried using that, but it is a bit clumsy.

I wish I could find a term that means “padawan learner” without the geekness of Star Wars.

on July 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm13 George

Naming is an issue that confounds me as well. I was tahught decades ago that no one is so transparently Christian that one can dispense with naming the One he follows. That truth was brought home to me recently when my boss died suddenly and his obit revealed his church activism — true, church activism does not make one a Christian, but it does indicate, I think, Who one cliams to follow. I realize that I probably am in a similar boat.

Personally, I struggle not only with what characteristics others often attribute to the self-identified “Christian,” but also with the meaning many who call themselves Christian assume: “I made a decision — actually an assertion — years ago and so I’m in for eternity.”

Perhaps alternatives are: “I started following Christ ….” and “I’m a practicing Christian.”

on July 27, 2008 at 6:00 pm14 lonelypilgrim

The only problem with calling oneself “a disciple of Jesus Christ” is that it sounds a bit arrogant. It’s as though one is saying “I’ve reached a higher level because I no longer call myself a Christian.” The word Christian on the other hand is way overused. It is only used 3 times in the New Testament and always as a noun. Today it is used as an adjective as often as a noun if not more so (Christian music, Christian band, Christian club, Christian school, Christian business, etc.).

I guess what I’m saying is that I do not have a good answer to this issue. One thing is to say that Jesus once asked a group why they called Him Lord but did not do what He said to do (Luke 6:46). Whatever we call ourselves (Christians, Disciples, Followers of Jesus, etc.) it is more important that our lives demonstrate it than it is that our lips say it.

on July 27, 2008 at 6:08 pm15 Michael

Lonelypilgrim: I worked at a grocery store for years with almost all non-Christians. I don’t think any of them would make the assumption that the word “disciple” is any more arrogant than “student.”

The fact is that we are fine with people “believing things,” but when they say they are “doing something” with Jesus, we’re suspicious. That’s how screwed up evangelicalism is. Nothing wrong with the word disciple.

on July 27, 2008 at 8:27 pm16 Michael

It would behoove some persons to read the “Comments” page before thinking I’m going to post their comment.

on July 29, 2008 at 11:05 am17 Scotty

Totally off subject, but thank you for using that picture to head up this post. I’m just back from Paris and only three days ago I was standing in front of the original….. will go and read the post now!