Popular Christian Myths - Jesus is not Your "Friend"
This is one of the myths I believe cause harm to the church as a whole ranging from simple
cognitive dissonance in individuals to outright apostasy in those who cannot
reconcile the inconsistences.
God is my buddy, Jesus is my friend.
The modern hymn calls Jesus a "friend" and some may appeal to a verse in John where Jesus calls his disciples "friends". But the understanding of the word is decontextualized. People of the time of the Bible did not "get to know" each other as modern persons in the West do. A "friend" meant a person who looked out for your practical interests -- not someone you had beer and watched football with.
Even some preachers today (I am thinking of John MacArthur, but there are others) have lamented the modern view of God as a "buddy" as detracting from God's holiness. The result has been numerous corrupt theologies which see God as one who dispenses wealth like a gumball machine, and whose voice is constantly in one's head, sometimes defeating sound practice and doctrine but sometimes even just giving advice on what house to buy or what have you. This myth is a common one perpetrated by some persons of influence listed below.
But really, even a more common view can be misleading. Many evangelists speak of a "personal relationship with Jesus". The phrase is used to mean something not too far from the "God is my buddy" idea, in essence meaning we can talk to Jesus any time, and so on. If I had to correct this, I would say that what is required of us is a patronal relationship with Jesus. The New Testament explains our relationship with God in terms of a client-patron relationship, one in which God, patron, is remote; and Jesus, as a broker, mediates between ourselves and God. Then we do have the indwelling Holy Spirit as a broker as well; but though the Spirit supplies us with mediation and perhaps power, there is nothing to show that the Spirit is some sort of intimate conversation partner. And finally, since people of the ancient world seldom "got to know each other" personally (as is taken for granted in modern, Western society) there is no way that New Testament writers could have had an idea like a "personal relationship with Jesus" in mind in the first place -- not as we perceive it. The word "personal" is so broad in meaning that it could include a "patronal" relationship; but that is obviously not what most people have in mind when they use the word. They usually mean something like, God is approachable in the same way one of your sports buddies is. It is not the words that are so much the issue as the particulars of expression.
Ironically, the view of God as a remote patron is the one that is most conducive to the view concerned Christians like MacArthur wish to see us return to. Perhaps then we would see a greater respect for God and His holiness, and less obsession with self-fulfillment, ranging from best-selling books having titles like The Purpose-Driven Life to our most popular songs being titled, "I Can Only Imagine" (focus on experience, not on fact).
A reader recently noted a point related to this: The myth that "the purpose of coming to Christ is happiness, joy, all the feel good emotions we love (instead of forgiveness and atonement for sin)." This is tied in with such modern conceptions as use of personal testimony as the primary form of witnessing (when in the first century, it was the evidence for the resurrection and the life of Jesus that lay at the heart of evangelism) and the self-focus that makes people live as though God will not hold us accountable for our deeds.
POST YOUR COMMENTS BELOW
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
It could be argued that Jesus, as painted by many Christians , is friendly. However the hymn referred to could be read such that Jesus takes care of all our problems here on earth and will fix everything. This is manifestly not so.
People will die without having some of their problems fixed here on earth or their wishes fulfilled. That is simply life. If Jesus himself said that He would take care of all our needs, it does not follow as to when the need would be taken care of or how. In this way even some of the older hymns can be misleading to a nonbeliever.
It is a common myth that Jesus, God, Christianity, or for that matter any other religion will make us feel happy, joyous, and in general feeling good. Consider the Apostle Paul who was beaten nearly to death for his faith. Our feelings are not of primary concern to God; rather, our salvation is.
As far as God being remote, well, He is as remote as we make Him. Even so, He may decide to draw close to us when we do not wish to draw close to Him.
There are those, unfortunately, that take bits and pieces of the Bible out of context to use them for their own selfish means. This is nothing new. There are also those people who have and do call themselves Christian but are not.
In highschool my class and I were taught to read between the lines, look for the deeper meaning of things. Think of the bible as an unorganized encyclopedia book with an unimagineable amount of hidden wisdom and knowledge to unveil upon deep investigation .
Anyone who does not heed to the words and commandments of the true lord, god , and Jesus as contained in the bible is not a true Christian, and are not really going to christ. It is sad that no one realizes what it means to be a christian.
so i should kill suspected witches, kill my kids if they talk back, kill homosexuals , etc, etc?
the God of the Old Testament is not the God of the Gospels, which is not the God of the books after the Gospels.
so which God's commandments do we follow? or is God an MPD?
you're right, there is wisdom, and even a bit of religion , in the Bible, but the commandments given in the three sets of books are contradictory.
unfortunately, all too many people presently pay attention to the first and last set, calling themselves 'Christian', while ignoring the Gospels themselves. . .and they're very, very vocal about it.
"Reality ain't."
God is the same God through out the entire Bible. Jesus was a part of God. In Genesis it says Jesus was with him. You just need to read a little better. Jesus was a part of God, that God allowed to live amoung humans because God could not understand why we sin. God killed a part of himself so he would save us all. Jesus also said that he did not come to abolish the laws of the prophets but to fullfill what they said.
Christians believe that Jesus was fully a human when he died on the cross.
Christians believe that Jesus died for the sins of mankind.
Jesus was a Jew who died between 300 and 400 years before the Christian bible extension was written. Hence he would believe in the bible as it existed in his time.
Deuteronomy 24:16 says,
No father shall die for the sins of his children. No child shall die for the sins of his father. No person shall die for the sins of another.
You can bet that Jesus believed this. Thus, he would not believe in Christianity. He would rather have all people be Jewish.
then the God of the Bible is (1) schizophrenic, (2) heartlessly cruel, (3) manipulative and (4) bored. not to mention insecure.
the only alternative is that the humans who wrote the Bible included their own fears, hatreds and prejudices.
this is especially so, for instance, in the case of Saul of Tarsus, called 'saint'
by some. Jesus removed shackles through his teachings, and Saul immediately put others on top of the newfound faith: condonement of slavery, the divine right of kings, subjugation of women, abstinence, etc.
neither does the entire Bible apply to now. a set of rules meant to help a small group of nomads survive in a desert is hardly applicable to an entire planet some 3500 years later.
"Reality ain't."
Since the author's entire argument rises and falls on his assertion that "people of the ancient word seldom got to know each other personally," it would be helpful if he could provide some support for this important assertion. I, for one, have never seen anyone make the remarkable statement that people of the 'ancient world' did not have personal friends. To the contrary, much of history, ancient and modern, has turned on personal interactions and feuds. Moreover, the New Testament seems to be full of personal interactions, e.g., John leaning on Jesus' breast.
Also, I disagree with the premise that the concept of Jesus as a 'friend' inappropriately lowers Him, even in the (shocking) sense of Jesus being with us and loving us as a friend loves another friend. The concept of a personal friendship with Christ does not incorrectly bring what should be a "remote" God inappropriately close to those of us on earth. The Bible itself teaches us that it is because of God's character that Christ lowered Himself by coming to the earth in the first place, being born in a manger to a lowly carpenter, and dying on a cross surrounded by thieves. This was the natural expression of God's inexplicable love for us -- and a glimpse into God's unfathomable character, something that will surely keep the heads of theologians spinning for many more centuries to come.