I’ve been thinking about all of the rhetoric that has crept into church-speak or christianese – as a friend calls it, and quite frankly some of it is just really bad theology. Most of these are things that are assumed to be scriptural…. that is sooooo not the case! This is far from an exhaustive list, I welcome other contributions!
1. "Love the sinner hate the sin"
On the surface it doesn’t seem so harmful in and of itself, but it is all too often used as a weapon to legitimize hate or bigotry or racism or sexism or any number of sinful behaviours. It's a simple catch phrase that has a shallow meaning that all too often results in feelings of superiority on the part of the quoter. It's actually from St. Augustine. His letter 211 (c. 424) contains the phrase Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, which translates roughly as "With love for mankind and hatred of sins."
2. "God helps those who help themselves"
also not in the bible - it comes from Aesop and should read "The gods help those who help themselves" Great news for a capitalist market economy, not so great for any who have read the sermon on the mount.
Following on this theme we have:
3. "...money is the root or all...evil." Not scriptural, money certainly does complicate things – but the root of ALL evil? I wholeheartedly disagree. Not all evil is the same; Power and lack of compassion and many other things contribute to evil so to say the root of it is the same, is (in my opinion) reductio ad absurdum
4. “All you need to do to go to heaven is ask Jesus into your heart.”
This isn't scriptural either - nowhere does scripture tell you this is a requirement. While we’re on the subject I don’t think we have a “Jesus shaped hole in our hearts” either… gahhh!
5. "We are called to be IN the world but not OF the world."
The closest I can see is John 18:36 - but that one says that JESUS is not of this world... not us - we are not Jesus. We have to be OF the world. We don't have to accept all the crap, but we have to be willing to wade in and get dirty. It has airs of "this is good enough for you, but I'm better than all this". What a crock of crap.
6. "The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away".... sounds scriptural because the quote is in KJV language, but it’s yet another one not found in the bible! (*correction: See Fr Aaron's note below.... I still think it is not pastoral or helpful - but I appreciate the scripture reference correction!) I cringed the other week when I heard this (without the “eth’s”) told to someone at a funeral. How on earth is this to be comforting?
7. “God needed another angel in heaven” (as an explanation why someone died). Patronizing, horrible, hurtful and just trite. Never, ever ever EVER say this to someone whose loved one has died. I can’t stress that enough. Just say no.
Last and certainly least…..
8. "God Doesn't Give Us More Than We Can Handle"
This is probably one of my most hated sayings. It is utter crap. Some sources attribute it to Mother Tereasa, but others say that's not right either. Either way, this is a good one to get out of our lives too! I know I've been in way over my head and the only relief was to cry out and lean on God and those around me for support. I think God is with us in our trials, but certainly doesn’t give them to us to test our faith and this implies.
This could have originated from a misguided interpretation of 1 Corinthians 10:13.
3 comments:
Actually, some of these are indeed scriptural. Whether they're useful or appropriate to the situations in which they are used is another question.
Number 3 is from 1 Timothy 6:10. "For the love of money is the root of all evil." (KJV) The NRSV softened it to "a root", but the saying is based on scripture. The Greek seems to agree more with KJV than NRSV. You might want to argue with St. Paul, of course.
Number 4 certainly makes my skin crawl, more because of how it has been employed than its origin. While the term is not directly out of scripture, John 3:16 does state that "everyone who believes in him [Jesus] may not perish but may have eternal life." Belief, in faith terms, is not a mental exercise but one of commitment. The Greek for "believe in" would be more accurately translated "believe into", or to give one's self to. In common parlance, to give one's heart to. Hence the lingo.
Number 5 can be traced to John 17:16 - "They do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world." or, in KJV, "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world." While one can quibble about what being "of the world" means, this one is scriptural.
Number 6 is likewise scriptural. Job 1:21, "He [Job] said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there; the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord." Whether or not this is pastorally useful is, of course, another question. The story of Jephthah's daughter is perfectly scriptural, but not at all pastoral.
Number 8 is most certainly derived from 1 Cor. 10:13, so it is scriptural. It's the application that's the problem. Paul was writing of a particular circumstance - believers lead astray by their spiritual arrogance or sloth into false worship or doctrine. It's not about God never letting your house burn down the day after you lost your job.
It's not so much a case of using non-scriptural sayings as it is proof texting scriptural sayings, which is actually more harmful.
Aaron! Good to hear from you!
Per your note, I've changed the title. Perhaps my irritation over their use (and overuse) is a little over the top and prevented me from researching further, but the literal proof texting has been driving me crazy of late.
#3 - I can agree with the "love of money" being a huge problem - but that part is usually left out of the cliche that is quoted (mis-quoted). I often find myself arguing with St. Paul...
#4 - it would have to be loosely based on John 3:16, as the quote certainly reduces faith to a one time act.
#5 - I still find the current interpretation of "OF the world" to be the problem. As if being of special caliber, the problems of the world aren't "their" problems so let the proverbial "them" fix it.
Re: #5...Yes, John does wax agnostic now and then. Reading that gospel, I do get the sense that the evangelist was a late and reluctant convert to faith in the Word made flesh, and that he'd have preferred a "pure" and bloodless Word!
Re: #4...Indeed, the idea that Jesus would come into someone's heart but not expect to take up residence and redecorate is amusing. "Have you been saved?" is the one that bugs me, and I give the stock Anglican reply..."I have been saved, I am being saved, and I hope to be saved."
Arguing with John or Paul - both good practices. As Paul Gibson+ points out, the Bible is a dinner party full of guests with wildly differing opinions. Much like the church, really.
Good to hear from you, too. I have your blog on my reader, but you seem to be about as regular with it as I am with mine. Ah, well. An age of instant communication has left us all with nothing to say.
Post a Comment