kevingdrendel

Love Your Enemies Everyday

November 28, 2013June 8, 2016 kevingdrendel1 Comment

“Love your enemy” is a one of Jesus’ commands that may not seem like it has much application to us in our everyday lives. How many Taliban have you encountered today? For most of us in the United States, we don’t have real enemies like that.

At first blush, the tendency for most of us may be to gloss over the command to “love your enemy” because we don’t have “enemies”; however, I don’t think that Jesus gave us that option.

Jesus said in the same context, “If you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others?” Even the unbelievers do that.

The truth is that we gravitate toward people and people groups that are like us.

We see it in all facets of life. The tendency to associate with our “own kind” begins early in life. On the playground, kids form cliques. The classic “no girls allowed” sign under the tree-house is just one example. Athletes stick together; nerds stick together; fraternities and sororities stick together; Italians, Irish, Mexicans – people make up the current immigrant wave – stick together. The poor associate with the poor, and the rich associate with the rich.

Racial divides are just an extreme example. We all have our “own people”, the people with whom we identity. We gravitate toward people “like us.”

We don’t necessarily call others our enemies, but we sometimes act as if they are. The more the mentality is “us against them” the more like enemies others become. It could be Republicans and Democrats, unions and company management, people who love science and people who love religion, Muslims and Christians, Americans and Russians, haves and have-nots and the in-crowd and the “others”.

All of these classifications result from commonalities and differences, and they become reason that people separate themselves from other people. They become reasons that people do not associate with other people. They become lines in the sand, sometimes, that define friend and foe.

The application to everyday life is found in the contrast between enemies and our “own people”.

In that sense, Jesus suggested an expanded meaning of “enemies” just as he expanded the idea of fulfilling the law: it is not enough to fulfill most of the commands of the law; your righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees. It is not enough to refrain from murdering people; a person who is angry with or curses a brother might as well be guilty of murder. It is not enough to refrain from committing adultery; anyone who looks with lust on a woman has committed adultery in his heart.

Enemies, then, are not just the Taliban, terrorists, rapists. Enemies are the people with whom we do not associate because they are different. Enemies are people with whom we have had differences. Enemies include anyone with whom we maintain our distance. Enemies are persons we treat as something other than neighbors.

At different times, an enemy could be a spouse, a child, a parent, a next door neighbor, a co-worker, a fellow believer. An enemy could be anyone we intentionally ignore or fail to acknowledge.

Enemies include anyone with whom we have differences, and we are called to love them. Love breaks down the differences. Love makes enemies friends. And if enemies do not respond to love, we are to love them nevertheless.

Postscript

“Love your enemies” comes from the Sermon on the Mount. I generally picture Jesus standing on a mountain addressing a multitude in this passage. Indeed, there is reference to “the crowds” in Matthew 5:1, but it says Jesus “went up on a mountainside and sat down” and “His disciples came to him.” In other words, Jesus was not speaking to the crowds in the Sermon on the Mount; he was speaking to the disciples.

The entire presentation on loving your enemies was introduced by these statements: “You are the salt of the earth,” and “You are the light of the world.” Jesus was speaking to his followers, then, who are to be salt and light in the world by loving their enemies and breaking down those barriers between people.

That does not mean that we need to identify with and be like our enemies. We are to be in the World, but not of the World. Jesus showed us how to do it. He associated with tax collectors, harlots and sinners. He greeted them. He ignored the barriers. He interacted with them. He ate with them. He loved them. They were drawn to Jesus in turn.

The Good Samaritan went out of way to help the injured Jew on the road. It is not coincidence that Jesus chose a Samaritan to help the Jew in that parable. Jews saw Samaritans as inferior and did not associate with Samaritans. Jesus showed us that we should ignore those barriers, even if it means going out of our way to do it. When we do that, we make enemies our neighbors, and we become salt and light to the World.

Post Postscript

This post was not originally inspired not by the Sermon on the Mount. I have been “chewing” for days on a pretty remarkable story of a black musician who broke the race barrier by going out of his way to befriend a Ku Klux Klansmen and, in the process, inspired many to abandon their racist ways. (You can read the story here.) I don’t know if this man is a Christian, but he is certainly like the Samaritan in Jesus’ parable who went out of his way to help the injured Jew on the side of the road.

Racism (hatred) is injury to the human soul. It disables the one who hates. The racist sees himself as superior, and creates a barrier, draws a line in the sand, and makes others enemies.

What this black musician did is what I could see Jesus doing. He did not let the hatred of the racist incite hatred in his own heart. He confronted the hatred and the racist with love demonstrated by reaching out, breaking down the barrier and befriending an enemy. The salt and light of this action changed the Klansmen, and it is the kind of salt and light that changes the world. That is love.

The Joy of C.S. Lewis

November 25, 2013June 10, 2016 kevingdrendel7 Comments

The death of C.S. Lewis was eclipsed by the death of John F. Kennedy on the same date in history. Ironically, Aldous Huxley also died on that date in 1963. Unlike the overshadowing at his death, the life of C.S. (Jack) Lewis and the legacy of his writing and thinking endures. He is perhaps better known today than even during his life.

I have always been enamored of C.S. Lewis. He became a Christian in the secular environment of academic pursuit at Oxford. I became a believer in college in the same type of environment, though hardly of the same high academic and intellectual standard. His autobiographical book, “Surprised by Joy,” stands as a favorite book for me, and one which has become a waypost in my own life. It can be a tough read, not only for the enormous detail of classic and philosophical references, but for the somewhat self-indulgent inward looking preoccupation of the author – but, after all, it is an autobiography.

For me, the importance is not in what he did, but in his journey of thought. Lewis was an uncompromising thinker who diligently, methodically, and with integrity and brutal honesty, journeyed from childish religiosity, past the death of his mother, where the emptiness of religion without connection to the Living God is found to be wholly wanting. From there he careened to the opposite shore, finding comfort in the grim, cold world of materialism, exactly for the reason that no Cosmic Interferer dwells there to bother a fiercely independent soul.

Lewis was nothing if not driven to seek ultimate truth through the enormous volume of reading material that he devoured with relish. He traveled the path of logic and truth, tested by personal experience, through the various stages of his journey, which he described as a search for “Joy”. Lewis read the classics in the actual Latin and Greek and went from genre to genre and era to era tracing the breadcrumbs of literary history left by the greatest of the great writers. Through the cold air of atheistic materialism in his early twenties broke the warm sunlight of Christian thought from writers like G.K. Chesterton along with the fluorescence of the occult. From the unlikely combination of these sources, the possibility of the miraculous and magic pierced the hard shell of purely rational and materialistic thought. It was not long thereafter that Lewis abandoned the barren ground of atheism for the swampy soil of agnosticism.

Lewis says that he was tempted by the occult, but he was also fearful of it, like a person who does illicit drugs but has enough sense to know the line not to cross. He rejected that path even before finding his Destination in the same way he rejected physical lusts and other temptations. He found them ultimately to be counterfeit, substitutes for the real Joy of which he had gotten glimpses at different points in his life. This Joy became his measure for what he sought. He described it variously, but perhaps best, as a longing that in the longing was the most fulfilling of experiences one could know. It was for Lewis an inner compass pointing true North.

The new atheist has no prior claim to the ground Lewis Lewis already traversed with his academic mentors who were firmly and rigorously entrenched in rationalistic, materialistic thought. Peering through the prism of the greatest thinkers from every age, he found it ultimately one dimensional. Lewis trusted the “inner man”, the individual conscience and personal experience, guided as it were through the various veins of thought, testing each one in turn for dependability, harmony with the amalgam of ideas sifted through many ages and many thinkers and, not the least, as reflected through the natural world itself. Of this last strainer of thought, Lewis would echo the writer of Romans (1:20):

“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made….”

From the abandonment of atheism for the more plausible, but uncertain, reality that there lies behind the veneer of this material world a Source of that Joy that became his fixed pursuit, Lewis journeyed into the realm of belief again, much the wiser and.

He does not spend a great deal of time describing his examination of the gamut of religions before landing on the steps to the House of the God of Abraham, leaving the impression that his pace from atheist to agnostic to Christian accelerated along the way, as if he found the guideposts clearly marked and the compass firmly fixed as he emerged.

Lewis does not spare himself in the chronicle of this journey. In fact, he is almost surgical, in the most intimate way, in his analysis of the various stages of his thought life, not holding back any information, however self-deprecating. In this way, Lewis demonstrates well the wisdom he gained along path: that the worst of the attitudes, and the furthest from God – the Source of Joy – is human pride.

His conversion is almost anticlimactic. He simply gives in one day to the only proposition left at the end of this long journey. Like the Psalmist who said, “Where can I go from your presence? Where can I flee from your spirit?” (Psalm 139:7), Lewis had nowhere else to go; the trail led to one Place only and only one: the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Though some claim that Lewis never had a true conversion (and how would they know?), the rest of his life from this submission to God at the age of 31 bespeaks a man who came to rest solidly and squarely on the foundation of the Bible, the cornerstone of which is Jesus Christ. It became his defining Truth, the Compass for all future thought, and the filter through which the body of his written work clearly flows. That he wrote of fantastical creatures and magic and used imagery that is often accused of being occultist is a product of his enormous memory bank of all the great writings in history. He conjured up these things, like the classic and romantic writers – Milton and others, Christian or not – who borrowed from the same historic library of great writings.

These images are allegories, and Lewis was a master of allegory. For Lewis, the myths of all ages reflected truth, like shadows dancing on walls from the bright sunlight through prison bars, but the sunlight is Christ.

Of the fact that he brought all these images into submission to God, I have no doubt. This was the world Lewis knew, and this world of knowledge he used as a prism to show in radiant color the truth and the light of the Gospel – Jesus Christ, and him crucified, dead, buried and resurrected, the hope and salvation of all mankind to as many as will believe, offering grace for sin, life for death, having made the way for men to be made right and to have fellowship as sons and daughters with God the Father – the Source all Joy.

What Lewis learned early, and what led him on his journey, was not to settle for a false joy, which is merely a shadow of the real Thing. What he discovered is that the real Thing is not the joy, itself. The Joy he experienced resulted from close encounters with the Living God – catching glimpses of the Creator of heaven and earth – who reveals himself to the man who searches, who opens the door to the man who knocks, and who is found by the humble and submitted heart. The real Joy is found in God Himself. Joy, the experience, is only the shadow; God is the Source.

I recommend Surprised by Joy to anyone who likes C.S. Lewis or would like to follow his journey. Here is another take on this underrated classic by Dr. Bruce L. Edwards, English professor at Bowling Green: http://personal.bgsu.edu/~edwards/surprised.html; and for a collection of thoughts and essays on C.S. Lewis: http://personal.bgsu.edu/~edwards/lewisr.html.

The Idol of the Mind

November 9, 2013April 8, 2021 kevingdrendel3 Comments

I listened to a lecture on materialism yesterday. Materialism is a predominant worldview that informs many people who adopt a view of science that conflicts with faith. A materialist worldview sees no purposeful principles in nature, no designing influence, no God, no inherent moral or ethical laws and ultimately no meaning in life. The world, in essence, is arbitrary and capricious. It is “governed” by unguided processes and chance.

When I woke this morning, I began thinking about government. I am an attorney, and I represent local governmental bodies. One cardinal rule that applies to governmental bodies in the United States is this: they can never be arbitrary or capricious. Every law must have a rational basis and (at a minimum) an articulable reason for every law. If no rational basis exists for a law, it will be determined unconstitutional and void because it is arbitrary and capricious.

Ironic, is it not, that we would govern ourselves by such a standard and not believe in purpose, meaning, intelligent design, God or inherent ethical and moral laws. We govern ourselves by reason and design, but many of us believe we live in a world that has no reason or design.

Continue reading “The Idol of the Mind” →

The Science of Doubt

November 5, 2013November 7, 2015 kevingdrendel1 Comment

After a very compelling lecture in which Gary Habermas makes the case for the proof of the resurrection of Jesus, an interesting question was posed to him. He just finished using facts and suppositions accepted by atheists and skeptics to trace the message of the resurrection of Christ back to within one or two years of his death on the cross.

A common perception is that the New Testament writings were created many decades or even centuries after the death of Christ. Gary Habermas demonstrates with accepted scholarship that is not the case. The substance of the writings can be traced to within a year or so from Jesus’ death and resurrection. Yes – resurrection, which account even some atheists and skeptics now accept as historically accurate. Continue reading “The Science of Doubt” →

Inner Realities and Outer Reflections

November 2, 2013November 3, 2013 kevingdrendel1 Comment

Jesus looked past appearances everywhere he went. He ate with “tax collectors and sinners”; he rescued the prostitute being stoned; he answered people according to their thoughts, and not the questions that came from their lips. That inner focus was a common theme for his interactions with the Pharisees.

The Pharisees were religious leaders of the day. Though Rome governed the region, the Pharisees governed the everyday culture of the Jewish people. They were showy in their religious practice. It was a different culture than the culture we experience in the United States. Although the state was ruled by secular Rome, local cultural life was dominated by religious leaders, much like a modern day Syria or Egypt (until recently).

It was “fashionable” to be religious then, unlike modern life in the United States or most of Europe. People who were not sufficiently “religious” were ostracized and marginalized. Over many years, the Law passed down from Moses had been embellished with myriad intricate practices that people were expected to follow to show their adherence to the Jewish faith. Penalties for failing to follow the required religious practices were stiff. We would call it a very legalistic society today.

That was the context in which Jesus walked the earth, and He stood in sharp contrast to it. Jesus was most critical of the Jewish leaders. We do not see him criticizing the Roman leaders. In fact, he had little interaction with them. Jesus did not completely ignore the secular culture, as we see him interacting with the Roman centurion, and even praising him for his faith. Jesus did not focus on the outward reality; He was looked through the appearances at the inward reality.

The Old Testament is nothing, if it is not the story of God’s revelation of Himself to a particular people, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the descendants of David, the Jewish people of the day. It is no mistake that Jesus was born of the line of Abraham, and God became flesh and appeared to the people of Israel in keeping with the ancient promises to his Abraham and his lineage. That the Jewish nation was God’s “chosen” people, however, belied a larger plan for revealing Himself to the world through hHis interactions with that people group.

In Luke 11, a Pharisee invited Jesus to have lunch with him. Being a Pharisee observant in the ways of the law, it was not long before his attention was drawn to Jesus’ lack of deference to the religious legalities of the time. Jesus did not perform the expected ceremonial washing before reclining at the table. The Pharisee was quick to notice the deviation from the religious norms that all devout Jews were expected to follow and called it to Jesus’ attention. Jesus responded (Luke 11:37-44)

“[Y]ou Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and of the platter; but inside of you, you are full of robbery and wickedness.”

This reaction seems a bit harsh toward the Pharisees. It was visceral and seemingly extreme. He called the Pharisees foolish (Luke 11:40) followed by three statements that begin with the words “Woe to you Pharisees”! He criticized them for tithing while disregarding “justice and the love of God”; He criticized them for loving the front seats in the synagogues and “respectful greetings in the market places”. (Luke 11:42-43) He called the Pharisees “concealed tombs” that people walk over unaware of the lack of life in their religious show. (Luke 11:44)

The extreme response signals the gravity of the situation. Thinking themselves models of godliness, the Pharisees were in reality far from God.

We see Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees today with the benefit of hindsight vision. His reaction seems obvious as we read the text. We are tempted to cheer him on, but that might be a dangerous reaction. Jesus has a way of taking us where we least expect and to turn the tables on our way of thinking.

Today, we live in a different world. Legalistic practices are viewed by many as Neanderthal, superstitious and ignorant. People who espouse a belief in the literal meaning of scripture are marginalized as religious fanatics. We live in a very different culture, and that difference may cloud the significance of Jesus’ encounters with the Pharisees 2000 years ago.

We live in a largely secular world with secular leadership that marginalizes and minimizes the significance of religious practice in our modern lives. Our cultural leadership is irreligious. Outward signs of religious practice today are met with indifference or smirks or angry intolerance.

To be sure, the error of the Pharisees still exists. Self-righteous showy Christians may be as empty in their practices today as the Pharisees’ in Jesus day and as judgmental in their views of others. Some people live in a cloistered church environment, but most of us do not live such an insulated life.

The broader cultural norm displays a different kind of self-righteousness. The arrogance of intellect rules the discourse of the cultural leaders today. The hidden tombs are found on college campuses preaching a different kind of “faith”. They preach devotion to each their own, and anything goes and morality is relative. Political correctness and “tolerance” are practiced today with same zeal of the Pharisees’ rituals. They practice a kind of “tolerance” that makes no room for adherence to the Bible and biblical values. Against that back drop, hiding our religious convictions may invoke the charge that we are embarassed to be associated with Jesus.

Regardless of whether you live in a cloistered religious segment of society or the broader culture of secular society, or a combination of both (which is most likely the case for most people), there is no life in anything other than God. There is no life in religion or irreligion. Jesus instructed the Pharisee in Luke 11:41 to “give that which is within as charity” and to observe “justice and the love of God” without neglecting the outward things. Jesus wants you! He wants the sacrifice of your self, your heart, your values, your love. He wants the inner reality to be reflected in the outward actions of your life.

Jesus does not want us to be conformed to this world or to be conformed to any cultural norm. His message was to make sure the inner man is aligned with the outer man in devotion to God the Father. A person’s actions are not profitable toward God unless they flow from an inner reality of love for God. Embarassment to be associated with Christian believers may just be the other side of the Pharisaical coin.

Today we may be more inclined to err in our lack of outward acts of devotion due to the culture in which we live that tends to marginalize showy religious behavior. Consider the cultural fate of Tim Tebow. We should be careful not to become comfortable with our ability to line up with cultural norms, whatever they are, and neglect our inner orientation toward God.

I do not exclude myself from this reality. Pray that our inner reality reflects a love of God and that our actions are a reflection of that love. May we be real as Jesus was real. May we be conformed in our thoughts and desires by God to His reality, and not the emptiness of modern cultural observances in whatever form they take. May our outward actions flow from the inner reality of God’s love. Lights are not meant to be hidden; they are meant to reflect the Giver of Light; and actions do not reflect a life devoted to the love of God unless those acts are motivated by the Lover of all mankind.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: