The Value of Wasteful Living

One indicator of a successful Christian blog is a Comments section full of spirited discussion that includes non-Christian readers. Such is Joe Carter's Evangelical Outpost, whose frequent commenters range from well-spoken Christian apologists and non-Christian skeptics to flame-throwing infidels. There's a core of twenty or so of us who might even be considered faceless friends, although we'd probably have an easier time agreeing on Chinese carry-out than theology.

There are also trolls, lurkers who only surface to make the typed equivalent of ugly faces, growls, and curses.

This week, on one of my favorite sites, the trolls were out in force, hurling epithet after epithet at President Bush and his administration, or his "regime," as they call it, to give it a nice dictatorial ring. They're also ranting against his "supposed" Christianity. In fact, their constant barb since Hurricane Katrina is about evangelicals' "Christian charity," which either is always in quotes, prefaced by adjectives similar to "supposed," or at least downplayed by sprinkling in mentions of "Buddhist charity" and "Muslim charity" for parity's sake.

If you've ever witnessed the Left (think Howard Dean) railing against evangelicals (or right-wing extremists, as we're better known), you know that another favorite accusation against us is that we think we are "better" than non-Christians, somehow superior to people of other faiths.

This misses the point by a mile, of course. Christians do not believe in our own superiority. To the contrary, we were sinners and have been saved by God's sovereign grace. We are, however, utterly convinced of Christ's superiority, and are compelled to proclaim it. And therein lies the offense with non-Christians.

The popular beliefs today are pantheism and polytheism, both of which are merely flip sides of atheism. "There is no god we all are god," smiles the Maharishi--who could say it with a straight face?--in a run-on sentence fraught with run-on reasoning. "It doesn't matter what you believe as long as you're sincere." "We all have to find God within us."

Jesus left no room for such equality amongst gods. Indeed He was the One Who claimed the very exclusivity that makes the Gospel offensive to today's universalists. They are more than willing to accept a soft-spoken, socialist Jesus, a Jewish Gandhi of sorts, who smiles on lesbian unions and blesses misogynist rappers with Grammy awards. But the Self-proclaimed, one-and-only God in the flesh, before Whom they must stand to be judged, is utterly foreign and disagreeable to them. In fact they hate Him and anyone who follows Him. And that's where we come in.

I marvel at how frequently several of these non-Christian blog patrons, certainly more intelligent than I, completely fail to recognize a Christian worldview, while assuming the universal validity of their own. They've been wearing blinders for so long they don't even know there are other horses in the race, nor that there's a finish line drawn not by them. (A non-blog case in point: Maverick author Hunter S. Thompson blew his own brains out recently, and his friends are hailing him for leaving on his own terms.)

For a non-Christian, Man is always the measure of himself. He creates his gods in his own fallen image. (Remember "Be at peace with God whatever you conceive him to be" from Max Ehrmann's "Desiderata"?) Unbelievers cannot fathom our motives, so they assign their own to our actions. They see our confidence in Christ and call it conceit, because they do not understand redemption. They see a financially blessed minister and assume he's "in it for the money." An evangelist, since they cannot comprehend his compulsion, is either a con or a predator of some sort.

The aspect of Christianity which most baffles them is worship, not the guilt offerings and subservient groveling of pagans, nor the self-absorbed meditations of Eastern mystics, but extravagant, ecstatic expressions of joy in knowing the God "who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from the pit, who crowns you with steadfast love and mercy, who satisfies you with good so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's" (Psalm 103:3-5).

Their blindness is not new. Mark 14:3-5 records the story of a woman who, while Jesus reclined at supper, poured a vial of expensive perfume on his feet. This "spikenard" was, in fact, worth some three hundred denarii, about ten months' wages and a tidy sum in any era. Some of the disciples considered her act of extravagance wasteful, and in fact at least one of them (St. John's account says it was Judas) made the point that the perfume could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Seems like a valid point, at first, but it's no coincidence that it was made by Christ's betrayer, a man who knew market prices but could not value worship.

Here's a test for your more skeptical friends: Read them the passage from Mark, and then ask them if the disciples' criticism was valid. Would the perfume have been put to better use by selling it and helping the poor with the proceeds? Then let them read Jesus' response and watch while either conviction or consternation overtakes them.

We all either are or were Judas at one point in life; we all counted Him worth less than than our own trivial pursuits. We crucified Him, and our very lustful hearts justified us by frowning at true worth.

This is why skeptics discount "holy rollers" in their celebration. It is why liberal "theologians" diagnose mass hysteria when God's people love Him with tears or laughter. It's why millionaire reporters "investigate" preachers and pronounce them thieves if they dare wear a fine watch or drive anything fancier than a Honda.

I'm serious about the test. Conduct it with your willing non-Christian friends, and listen to their conclusions. They'll either wind up agreeing with Judas, or talk themselves a little closer to the Lord.

And don't forget to live a wasteful life at Jesus' feet, a life of extreme passion and extravagant praise.