Skip to main content

How the Doctrine of Man Leads to Mercy


See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8

I appreciate the above verse which the Apostle Paul has just dropped into a much larger section about the supreme status of Jesus Christ, the salvation he has accomplished for the people of God, and the charge to walk in Christ with obedient and grateful hearts.  It is a helpful corrective and warning for all of us, no less so today than for the Colossians Paul has written to.  

There is a steady pull we all feel while on planet earth from various philosophies and worldviews.  These varying perspectives on life really do form and shape our opinions about everything that IS:  God, people, nature, good vs. evil, justice, goodness/righteousness, etc.  Whatever worldview we adopt really does shape and form us as people, and how we are being formed tells us more about our functioning worldview than what we profess with our lips.  

And when one particular belief within this worldview is strongly held, it necessarily begins to alter and shape other aspects of one’s worldview…typically in harmful ways.  

It is my experience that some Christians have a functionally unbiblical worldview which has led them away from compassion and mercy.  Particularly faulty, as the title of this essay suggestions, is a their doctrine of man (though perhaps it starts with one’s doctrine of God…I am not sure which doctrine shapes which, but both end up “bent” as a result).  A healthy Christian worldview is full of tensions, and a healthy doctrine of man is no different.  

Man is made in the image of God and has uncancelable worth and value because of the value ascribed to him by his Maker.  And yet, man is a child of wrath because of sin.  We are spiritually dead and live in a constant state of rebellion against God.  

Worldly philosophies, if they have God in the picture, tend to eliminate the tension and put undo weight on one of these two realities.  If people are inherently good and nice and just need some help back to their feet, we will downplay evil and sin and wrongdoing and not hold folks accountable for their actions.  This is a major criticism of Conservatives towards Liberals who are thought to not hold people accountable for their actions.  

What is more grievous to me, however, is the other side of things.  When we overemphasize the sinfulness of man, we harden our hearts towards people made in the image of God…we dehumanize those who are also incredibly valuable to God.  Sin is very real.  It is very harmful both on an individual level and cultural level.  It is always wrong.  And yet, there is always more to consider than the individual sinner.  How has his/her upbringing shaped the current mindset and behaviors?  How might a pent up feeling of injustice produce an anger that, though wrongly expressed, is perhaps closer to the anger God feels toward injustice than we are willing to admit?  
We must not snip the tension wire in overreaction to those who overemphasize a particular side of the tension.  We uphold both sides.  That is Christian.  That is Christlike.  The worldly philosophies of political parties have a bent doctrine of man.  As Christians, we must do better.  And because Scripture speaks clearly to these things, we can.  

If we close our hearts to compassion, we have adopted a worldly philosophy, because Jesus was always compassionate while on earth.  Sure, he spoke with sharp-tongued woes to the Pharisees and religious leaders, but it was an opportunity to repent.  He found an adulterous woman in Samaria and gave her living water.  He transformed the hearts of tax collectors who were robbing their own people.  He wept over the devastating results of sin.  He looked upon whole regions full of sinners and had compassion on them because they were like sheep without a shepherd.  

One of the things I love most about God is that he did not sit on his heavenly throne outside of the mess and issue his opinion of it in some holier-than-thou way…even though he would have been just to do so.  He entered into the mess, sending Jesus to redeem and reconcile the mess we humans had made by willfully violating God’s good laws.  

How can we then justify ourselves to speak into the mess of others as if we are the judge and jury of their lives…especially when we don’t have a real inkling of what they’ve gone through, how they are feeling, or what they are searching for in their responses?  Is that really the best response we can formulate towards image bearers of the Almighty?  I hope not.  

We need to listen to Jesus and remove the growing plank of self-righteousness and enter into the messiness of others’ lives.  And I don’t mean to enter, speak some truth bomb, and then bail!  We enter as humble listeners wanting to really hear what is going on in the hearts of fellow human beings.  Yes, we want to be able to speak against the present sin.  We want people to repent.  We want them to stop harming themselves and others.  

But we will never see those results by sitting on judgment seats, aloof and far off, speaking our cold-hearted truth while feeling justified.  

When Jesus looks at miserable sinners, He simultaneously sees image bearers of God who are valuable and worth the risk of entering in.  

This is what I believe to be a healthy doctrine of man…one that will shape a biblical worldview for the glory of God that passionately pleads for us to enter into the mess of others so that they might experience the compassion of a gentle and lowly in heart Savior.  


Heavenly Father, by your Spirit, transform our hearts to align with the compassionate and merciful heart of King Jesus.  Be glad to do so for your glory on earth as it is in heaven.  Amen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Convicting And Compelling Gospel

Which adjective in the title more closely aligns with your predisposed way of thinking about and speaking the gospel to yourself and others?   Are you more likely to present a gospel that is heavy on the convicting realities of sin, righteousness and judgment?   Or do you find yourself more readily appealing to the benefits of following Jesus?   If you think about it, neither adjective fully encapsulates the message of Jesus.   It’s right to compel people using the promises of God and the joy filled benefits of a life submitted to Jesus.   But it’s also right to warn of the consequences of rejecting Him.   Since we’re all naturally inclined to emphasize one, we need to allow the other to constrain us, to balance us from taking our natural disposition to the extreme, which may confuse the gospel and the Jesus we wish to present.   Let me attempt to illustrate one example of an unconstrained leaning toward each in turn.   A compelling gospel that is...
  “Where grace exists, it reigns.”   C. H. Spurgeon I’m scared of grace.   And this realization comes in the midst of a journey I’ve been on that has the fingerprints of God all over it.   If we were to gather 50 Christians in the same room and invite people to share adjectives that come to mind when trying to describe “grace,” I doubt “scary” would be anyone’s answer.   (It probably wouldn’t be mine either, in case anyone is thinking I’m exalting this term in some sort of holier-than-thou way.)   We’d hear things like amazing, undeserved, free, kind, love.   Of course, it’s inevitable that the crucifixion of Jesus is vocalized in some way.   Essentially, we’d have a huge list of very positive and affirming adjectives that rightly depict the wonderful activity and riches of God’s grace.   What if we asked a slightly different question?   How would we answer, “how does a person obtain grace?”   I’m guessing we’d start throwing out an...

Why Plant A Multiethnic Church? Biblical Foundations

In the first post, I tried to answer the question, “why plant a church?” by speaking of the necessity of the Church as the possessor and proclaimer of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.   It’s worth reading my initial thoughts on that question before diving into what follows.   My aim in this writing is to answer the title question: Why plant a multiethnic church? Church planting itself seems daunting to begin with.   Strategically, launching a new church with as few obstacles for growth as possible seems wise.   We want to fast track to self-sustainability after all, don’t we?   We want the new church to succeed for the sake of the gospel.   Besides that, a multiethnic church requires a very narrow range of potential locations.   Typically, the place where multiple ethnicities reside in close proximity is the city, and more specifically, in economically diverse (and challenged) areas of the city.   This creates an even greater burden and po...