John: The Topless Prophet (part two)
The scandalmongers are
chatting away about her improper sex life and they are not just tossing
twaddle. The desert preacher accurately rebuked her husband in public over
ditching his previous wife for her and now the elite gossips are talking about
her as if she was a political whore.
Which she is. She just doesn’t
fancy being thought of as one.
She is angry and lays plans to
manipulate her husband, into getting what she wants. She has her hot daughter do
a striptease before the drunk ruler and
his buddies. Like most men in such situations, he just sits and stares like a dumbassador from the Republic of Stupid. With Herod’s
brain half dead on lust over his step-daughter, Herodias gets him to order
John’s execution and the Baptist goes topless
in the worst possible way. If John is an Elijah man, Herodias is certainly a
daughter of Jezebel.
We might then hear the pundits
of the day commenting, ‘If only John had
stuck to that nice, charitable “share what you have” sermon and left people’s
sex lives alone, he might’ve been ok. Why did have to go a start protesting
against sexual immorality?’ We might ask a similar question about the church
today: Is speaking out on sexual sin central to our mission? Are adultery,
fornication, homosexual acts, and pornography small issues that we should just sweep
under the rug, keep for closed room conversations, or agree to disagree on?
Some are now saying, ‘yes’.
They argue that people need a new heart more than a new sex life. They rightly
point out that huge amounts of social and political controversy have circled marriage and sex related issues over the last couple of
decades. ‘Surely’ they say, ‘wading into these waters will only distract
from the simple message of the cross and resurrection of Jesus. And we want to
be known for what we’re for rather than what we’re against. Right?’
The reasoning is coherent. We
do not want to distract from the Gospel. And yet, we must then ask, ‘what is our gospel?’ Jesus says in Luke
that the Gospel is one of ‘repentance and
forgiveness of sins.’ If that is the case, we must ask what exactly it is we
are to call people to repent of and seek forgiveness for?’
Trouble
And this is where prophets get
into holy trouble. They stop speaking in milquetoast platitudes. Prophets have backbones
made of something other than sweet pastry. They specific about sin. John gave
out specific advice to specific people about what they needed to repent of.
There was no, ‘everyone try to be less selfish and grumpy’ type
preaching.
John told the soldiers to
repent of abusing their authority. He told the rich to share and told the
non-rich to be content with their wages (leaving both capitalist and socialist
feeling stung). And to the ruler who was living openly and unrepentantly in the
tolerated sexual sin of his day? ‘Yes,
you too must repent sir―of your sexual sin in particular.’
The early church preached a
confrontational message to its surrounding culture. What was one of the chief
social sins of the day? It was Emperor worship. People were allowed to worship
other gods, as long as they also burned incense to Caesar and say, ‘Caesar is Lord’. But the early church
protested this. Their message was ‘Jesus
is Lord’. Now Jesus was also preached as Lord when the gospel spread
outside of the Roman Empire and he is still preached as Lord now that the reign
of the Caesars has ended. The early Christians did not invent theology just for
the sake of being difficult. The gospel isn’t anti-Empire any more than it is pro-Empire
in that political sense.
In the context of Roman
culture, the Lordship of Caesar was an idol that was particularly opposed to
the gospel. The apostles knew that if repentance were to be real in their
context, they must confront that idol. Yes, there were other cultural idols as
well. The other big damnables of Roman
culture were greed and sexual immorality―and
they are also addressed in the apostles’ letters.
Today
And what are the big cultural
idols of our day? We have more than one. Money is certainly up there. Politics
too. But they are not alone. The idol of unfettered orgasm drives us as well.
The perceived right to have sex with who I want and when I want―as long as it
is consensual―is taken for granted.
John’s Gospel (the other John)
tells us that ‘Light has come into the
world, but people loved darkness instead of light’. When light shines down
on that which is shameful in our culture, we hate it, and do all we can to
argue and reason against it. This is why Herodias wielded all her manipulative
trickery with Herod―even to the point of pimping out her own daughter. She
hated the light John was shining her way.
The result of John’s preaching
was his death. But very few sermons on Sunday in our day ever get near the
point of being dangerous. Why? Is our culture less wicked than that of the
Romans? Have we found a nicer way to present the gospel than John and the martyred apostles?
When preaching gets specific,
things get intense. People get butthurt, and prophets lose their heads.
(This is part two. See part one HERE.)
(This is part two. See part one HERE.)
_______________
This is an extract from Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform
Yes, people get defensive. And yes, sexual sin is a sin which is in need of repenting. But don't you agree that you have to get people to see the light BEFORE they turn away from darkness? If people are not focused on Christ (and everything that means) then the likelihood that they will repent in any real and long lasting fashion is nil. The recognition that Christ is the way and that this "way" is a lived experience is primary. Once this is in place, then the sins of wayward sexual desire, pride, mammon, the World, etc can be addressed. So I guess my point boils down to: How can you expect any resonance preaching abstinence or marriage to an atheist fornicator? Abstinence and the sexual virtue of marriage can only make sense in the Christian (and some other faiths) context. Even then, there are arguments.
ReplyDeleteMy second point is that the obsession with banging on about particular sins (sex being the most obvious example but there are others) is due to the fascination those sins hold. We must confess that at our most pious, we preach most fervently about this sin because it is perversely fascinating and our imaginations are attracted to it. We should only be preaching about this sin when we are absolutely sure we're preaching from the perspective of concern, REAL concern, for our fellow man and his soul.
Sorry but both need to happen at the same time bro!
Delete