You're Damn Right

And that's not a good thing

Indeed, as per a conversation I was recently having with a friend, being “damn right,” does little good to convince anyone of anything.

If a man's heart is ever truly converted to a new mode of being or thinking, especially as it relates to God, I trust this will never happen by arguing him down about how wrong he is in his ideas and beliefs. No, he must, if at all possible, be shown where he is right, and then that must be expanded and clarified to point him to better or more accurate truth, so far as we can ascertain it.

It is interesting to me how religion in particular, has a peculiar way of causing folks to be so *right* that they think they can forgo basic relational realities in trying to change men’s hearts and minds. I have discussed this topic before, that is this “rightness” that religion tends to form in men that leads to arrogance and haughtiness such that they feel safe in pulling out the sword and striking down their every perceived foe—In God’s name of course.

I am *not* sorry to inform you, but no matter the topic, people don’t like to be attacked and told how wrong they are for things which they hold dear. Their beliefs and thoughts are a framework that helps them form some sanity in this world (these are critical substructures which should not be tinkered with without due respect), and no one likes being attacked. This is common sense right? In general terms, if you want to convince me why the brand of bread you buy at the store is better than mine, you’re not going to do it by telling me how wrong I am in the brand that I prefer. No. Maybe you should find out why I like my brand, acknowledge what is good there in my taste, as well what objectively good things there are in my brand, and then build from there to make the case for yours. Show me how it expands on the good things in my brand, and ultimately makes it even better. Maybe then I will consider trying what you are selling. But you won’t convince me to let go of what I like by convincing me of how much better you are than myself for having a better brand pick.

Let us consider the Apostle Paul in Athens. He is grieved (not mildly annoyed—the word is grieved-- denoting a deep moving of frustration, distress, and great sorrow within) indeed by the many idols he saw, so he did what? Does Paul in his grievance tell the people how they are stupid heathen bound for hell, who worship dumb idols and think stupid things? Not so.

He compliments them. He tells him that he can see how religious they are, how zealous for God, and then leverages an alter they made which reads “To The Unknown God” to proclaim Christ to them. Further, in his reasoning with them, he even leverages their own poets and logic to make his case; he does not tell them how anything other than what the Scripture says is wrong. He perceives the truths of God laying in their own words and philosophical reasoning and uses these.

Indeed Paul specifically quotes one of their poets, and also makes this statement: “in him we live and move and have our being” in his reasoning with them, which saying is attributed to a non-biblical source--some influential philosopher --according to my studies.

I recently learned this about C.S. Lewis. The thing that drove him away from the Christian faith in his early years, was the very thing I am discussing, that Christianity, or at least in his experience of its adherents and proclaimers in his circles (school, etc.), unequivocally condemned and judged every other religion as false, as wrong. Apparently Lewis, in his pursuit of truth, did not appreciate that notion --that simplistic and rather cut-and-dry and arrogant way of slamming everyone else in the world as wrong. I could relate to this, because I’ve been troubled by it for a long time; this whole “my camp is right, yours is not, and you’re all going to hell,” mentality—it has even driven me to the outer fields of my own faith and caused me to question what I was really believing, if I was any different from them, all those who make everyone else wrong so they can be right.

Instead, Lewis sought and found the truths contained in the myths of other religions, and came to understand that certain characteristics and notions of God were indeed adequately communicated and / or reflected in these traditions, but that the most clear expression of God, was found in Christ alone.

Who is God? What does He think? How does He feel about us? What are the rules and principles which He has set in order and which are governing over us? What will get us killed? What will give us life? Look to Christ. Read His words and note His actions and life. This is no more adequate expression of who and what God is, nor is there ultimate salvation in any other name but Christ. That is the core argument here, and nothing (or little) else am I interested really in arguing or being immovable on.

But that does not mean that other faiths do not adequately express some of the things which are true in and about God. And that is the essence of the issue which I am discussing. If you want to be effective: Change the approach from one of holistic and undiscerning condemnation to one of help and clarification and sharpening the focus on who God actually is and what He has done, as expressed in Christ.

Consider this. Even of those who perceive that Christ is the clear Word of God, they do not see clearly still—which includes myself. Paul himself says this, that we now see dimly, and do not as of yet fully understand or see. So none of us, though we possess the more clear truth of God in Christ, even having a promise of eternal salvation, have any right or justification to be “damn right” against our neighbors.