Skip to main content

The new Jew

Christians tend to read the New Testament as though we are followers of Jesus, lapping up teaching at his feet then going out to live it fully. All things considered, however, oughtn't we be identifying with the Pharisees and the Jews?

Western evangelicals tend to see ourselves a bit like a chosen people, a bit like the law followers, a bit like we've got it all together. And we sure like to point out how others aren't meeting the mark. (We're unaccountably shocked when those who don't profess a particular commitment to Jesus don't act like "good Christians" [there's so much sex and swearing in Hollywood movies!!]. Yet often we're so busy being self-righteous, we fail to be properly ashamed by the true righteousness lived out by others of those who don't profess the right commitment to Christ.

The following passage from Romans feels uncomfortably accurate if we change "Jew" to "Christian", and "Gentile" to "non-Christian".

Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”--Romans 2:17-24

The characters most likely to be concerned with outward appearances, the right personal connections, and proper behaviour is the Pharisees in the Gospels, and the Judaizers in Acts and the epistles. Jesus condemned all that and went straight to the heart. He wasn't afraid to point out bad behaviour in anyone, but he did so redemptively, and on the basis of motivation, not laws. It's not that he preached a gospel of relativity, "if it feels good, do it." The higher standard he calls us to isn't easily codified in a set of rules and regulations. What is it then?

That's a journey of discovery...and I can't claim to be very far along the road yet.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Winnipeg Transit woes

  “We’ve increased support for municipalities year after year because we know strong communities depend on reliable, stable and predictable funding increases,” Municipal and Northern Relations Minister Glen Simard said in an emailed statement to the Free Press Tuesday. https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/2026/06/23/winnipeg-transit-needs-funding-boost-additional-staff-to-follow-new-provincial-accessibility-regulations-city-report This in answer to City of Winnipeg chair of Public Works Janice Lukes plea for the province to cough up money for the needed upgrades. Listen carefully because these are words I won't often say: I gotta agree with Lukes on this one. If the province is handing down new standards, given their higher capacity for raising revenues, they ought to help the city fund meeting said standards. What Simard fails to acknowledge is that those "year after year" funding increases started at the bottom basement after Conservative cuts and likely h...

more journalistic malpractice from Canada's national broadcaster

The government has just rammed through legislation to turn Canada into a police surveillance state where all the democratic and processed based guard-rails have been removed.  They used some legislative loophole to force a vote on amendments without debate at a committee meeting at midnight. But this is what the front page of our national broadcaster's news site looks like. Do you see any mention of Bill C-22? Do you see any word of a midnight SECU session with a forced vote? Do you see any mention of MPs in tears at how democracy is being shredded before their very eyes? Do you see anything removing about all legal protections against having your data intercepted, read and kept on file (in a word of hackers and data breaches)? Do you see anything about how experts in Australia (who have already gone partway down the path Canada has just widened, flatted, and turned into a racetrack) are warning Canadians not to do this? No. The CBC is spineless. Just a mouthpiece for whoever wield...

Carney's sound check

 The Liberals are advertising a summer survey. Let me Mr Carney know what you think! Of course, the multiple choice questions force you to give the answers Carney wants to hear, but fortunately, there's an open box for further comment at the end with a 2500 character limit.  I don't have all day to spend on this so it's a slightly in coherent rant, but I can't let this man think everything is fine while he turns this country into a totalitarian surveillance police state whose only industry is war-making.  https://action.liberal.ca/a-summer-sound-check/ Here's what I think, Mr Carney.  The things that "stand out" the most for me are the things that horrify the most. Every single thing Carney has done or championed since April 2025 is awful for ordinary Canadians (only good for Carney's investment portfolio). You can shove your AI. Yes, Canadians need protection from AI but your disgraced grifter of a "AI minister" is the last person to do that...