All Comments for: The Good Friday Life | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > April (Web-only)

Christianity Today, April (Web-only), 2007 |

SOULWORK

The Good Friday Life

We need something more than another moral imperative.

Mark Galli | posted 4/04/2007 10:10AM

Many years ago, my wife and I were having a marital "moral discourse," and I was becoming increasingly agitated. In my fury, I yelled at her and aimed my fist at a section of the dining room wall. Unfortunately, ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Jack	Posted: April 07, 2007 8:34 AM


In an era where moral relativism has swept from the culture and infected the church, one of your editors bemoans moral imperatives in favor of a hug. Please use your pen to encourage the church to a higher moral standard than the low level at which this article aims.

Fred Gazendam

Posted: April 06, 2007 10:31 PM

As a pensioner of 79 years I came to know the Lord in 1959 during Billy Graham when he was in Sydney. Since that time I gave my life to my Saviour Jesus Christ. The articles I received this morning when I opened my emails are so good to follow that I print them out and take it to the local doctor's waiting room for people to read. The doctor, Hendrik Smit and his wife are born again believers. They are happy to distribute all Christian literature to the waiting patients. A wonderful ministry to reach out. Praise the Lord for making it possible.

Tesfatadelle

Posted: April 06, 2007 5:21 PM

To say that moral prouncements can only be done by the faultless is almost to say that the Good News can only be declare by the holy angels. We are so swamped by filth and dirt that hearing once a while liberating truth and righteousness by courageous people may do wonders to our stance. I am for General Pace. He should not apologize or retract his statement (Of course like many of us public opinion did sway him a bit). I say sound the alarm, God's people and let's take heed by examining what is said.

PA	Posted: April 06, 2007 7:42 AM

I thank Mr. Galli for his openness about his own human frailties. Some have reacted in a brutally critical manner and I think that is taking the article for way more than it was intended. But one aspect of the article did strike me as weak. To assume, as Mr. Galli does, that moral imperatives are automatically from higher authorities is a mistake. In our pluralistic society, without clearly stating that we intend to surrender to the God who comes down to us, the best we can do is to say that we have tried to go up to God of our own efforts. In other words, we force our agendas to become God's agendas. That has never been so and can never be so. Consequently, to assume that that what is moral is somehow godly in this article or in the responses has yet to be proved. In this respect, neither the article nor the responses get off the ground. We are still earth-bound and talking amongst ourselves as God watches and wonders if we will ever get the point.

H. D. Schmidt

Posted: April 06, 2007 4:18 AM

Does America in its decaying moral condition, have the God given right and mandate to moralize the world at gun point with the excuse to free people, when in reality America itself, is the mass grave of 40 to 50 million unborn babies murdered in the wombs of American mothers, of which, many of these mothers claim to be Christians; since Roe v Wade, give or take a few millions, while the butchers shops remain active, and the word abortion, is a common word in the political discourse? Yes, it seems tome that when George W., the avowed self-proclaimed Christian President aks God to bless America, when he finishes his speeches about his war in Iraq etc., I consider that like adding insult to injury! While someone may blame the liberals for such moral decay, nevertheless, liberals + conservatives = America. Right? Is it really hard to guess what God may think of America, the nation which claims to be one nation under God, whose money reads: "In God we Trust"? America trying to fool God?

Mike	Posted: April 05, 2007 1:55 PM

Thank Jesus ... and then thank Him again and again ... that He did not protect Himself from relentless abuse by playing the safe boundary card. God help us. The essential issues of safety and boundaries in abusive relationships are diminished, and the needed voice of those who have suffered in these relationships is muted, when every situation thereafter is viewed through this grid. Jesus was abused. Horribly abused. Verbally, Physically and in every other way. Every boundary he had was ignored, and he never experienced safety in a group before practicing raw honesty and vulnerability. We posess an amazing ability to "tie Scripture to a chair and torture a meaning out of it." Not surprisingly, we make it mean what we need it mean in order to justify ourselves and our views and positions. We've turned "take up your cross" into "endure your back pain and your spouse" instead of "die to everything you." We wonder why Evangelicalism is on life support?

Dan	Posted: April 05, 2007 12:54 PM


Great article, Mark. I was touched by how, in the writing of your piece, and your "confession" about your momentary lapse, you illustrated your point and literally demonstrated it to us, your readers. I hope all of us that read your article will go out and do likewise. And, in response to an April 4 comment by "Recovering S. A....." : Where can I get some of that "Jesus Soup"? :-)

Sherry

Posted: April 05, 2007 12:45 PM

This is a very offensive article as if hitting the wall to make a moral point is okay as long as forgiveness and reconcilation happens. As April is Sexual Violence Awareness Month, I am very distressed with the ease of the writer in bookending abuse of power around the story of Jesus. I am not touting a moral imperative by any means, but the Gospel of Jesus which does indeed embrace the sinner, but with new boundaries...safe boundaries so that all parties can grow in Christ and experience the freedom of God's grace as well as the accountability to God the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. The Gospel message on Good Friday is not about saving ourselves or others...that isn't our job..but this Good Friday let us slow down, confess our sin and brokenness and seek help as God has given us through confession, and through repentence...into resurrection and new life...not the same old life...this article shows a pattern of control and violence in government and in the home.

cbjackson

Posted: April 05, 2007 10:12 AM


My answer to gkbrotz is the statement was an absolute facetious remark in its utter irony.

Mark Galli

Posted: April 05, 2007 8:19 AM

Regarding my line about Jesus "embracing" sin. Judy M is correct: it is meant as another way of saying he took our sin upon himself. That being said, in regard to this event, unless we use language that shocks us, we probably don't grasp the scandal of the Cross. If Jesus took our sin upons himself, did he not become a "sinner" in some way? While I recognize the theological risk in putting things this way (for indeed he was the perfect sacrifice), it does help me grasp the humiliation of the Son on the Cross, which in turn frees me up to acknowledge my own sin before God and others.

gkbrotz

Posted: April 05, 2007 7:52 AM

Mark, Was the following statement (in quotes) meant to be straightforward or of a facetious nature? More to the point, do you consider General Pace to be immoral because of his views regarding homosexual acts, or because he is a fallen human being. Or, is the sentence idicating that his views were immoral to the gay activists? Thank you for any response. "Eventually, Obama announced he found nothing immoral about homosexuals, and thus he was temporarily rehabilitated—redeemed politically by distancing himself from an immoral general."

George Van Kirk

Posted: April 05, 2007 5:23 AM

As Christians, I'd say collectively, our credibility with sinners and society is pretty low because we don't get out much. We're definitely on the outside looking in. Jesus didn't operate this way. It's simply a matter of where I spend my time and who I spend it with. I don't have much contact, let alone relationships, with sinners. So how can I possibly communicate the love of Christ with them, considering what love is really about? I think this is our own moral crisis as Christians, and we'll certainly be held accountable for it.

Recovering Sex-Addict

Posted: April 04, 2007 9:18 PM

Thanks for the article Mark G. I always felt the naming of a group called the "moral majority" was misguided and presumptuous. Most of the Christians I know who have their fair share of immorality to deal with would pay heed to the kind of posturing that Mark G is alerting us too. Even in the comments about "those pagans" and "pagan politician" shows me we still have a lot of work to help people get beyond using "Jesusy" language. By the way, I will give me regular plug for Dr. Doug Weiss and his 12 step program for recovery from Sexual Addiction. Some of us "immoral evangelicals" can get a good holy cleaning with this successful way of creating a men's group in your church. Let's get holy and wash our mouths with Jesus soup to boot!

Colleen

Posted: April 04, 2007 8:48 PM

Amen! What an excellent article! And what a timely and appropriate reminder. I agree with Pastor Mike's comments following the article. We must begin from--and proceed from...continuously--a place of humbleness (Mike referred to honesty, which is what humbleness requires) in our Christian walk and our Great Commission. And this article articulated that very point--as well as others--exceptionally well. Thank you!

Bert	Posted: April 04, 2007 8:30 PM


Excellent! How quick we are (I am) to pontificate. What a shame that a pagan politician in Vietnam should put to shame our "christian" ones in America! You say: "Our problem today is that we pull out the moral imperative card so often that we risk taking the Lord's name in vain." Touche! We Christians need to wake up.

Judy M

Posted: April 04, 2007 6:50 PM


"He did not as much distance himself from sin as embrace it in himself." Do you mean to say that Jesus embraced sin that dwelt within him? Because the Bible says He was without personal sin. (Hebrews 4:15, John 8:46, I Peter 2:22) Perhaps you are referring to Him taking our sin upon Him. In that case it was unclear to me, or I misunderstood your meaning. I appreciated your other points.

A different Barb-not the wife

Posted: April 04, 2007 6:40 PM


I think this was a well-written article that made its point.

Emily

Posted: April 04, 2007 6:37 PM

We so often enjoy pointing out that speck in our brother's eye...I know Jesus especially comes after the 'lost' sheep, the little ones who are shunned for 'not being good enough'. This article strengthened my conviction that I need to be close to Jesus first, trusting Him to be the Lord that He is. Our light will shine to the corners of our cities and streets when we keep our eyes on Him, and reach our hands out to the broken.

Truthteller

Posted: April 04, 2007 5:38 PM

The left always goes out of its way to smear conservatives and christians, and they will lie to do it. They always hide or undereport the failing of there own leftist cohorts. Senator Feinstein WAR PROFITEER. Why is she still in office? If she was conservative she would of been lynched and thrown out of office. You can be lost and conservative. You can be saved and conservative but you can not be a leftists SOCIALIST and christian. SOCIALISM is idolatry. They are antiwar which means they are for Radical Islam destroying Israel and blackmailing the west by withholding oil. This war with Islam is setting up the return of Christ. If you refuse to see that and that we the USA are called to fight Islam like we were called to fight the Nazi Germany then you are willfully blind or just evil. Thanks for listening.

m. fore

Posted: April 04, 2007 3:33 PM


Not for publication: on the next to the last line-did you mean to use Jesusy or is it an error? thanks.

Theodore H Voth Jr

Posted: April 04, 2007 2:56 PM

I didn't have the opportunity earlier to comment upon the article recently on the 'evangelicals' in the Justice Department, speaking about certain nethical behaviors as to government attorneys, which relate to certain unethical behaviors of CEOs like Sunday-school superintendent Ken Lay, who defrauded his employees and then bankrupted his company and made off with millions, or of certain legislators like Tom DeLay, or of certain lobbyists like Jack Abramoff… the list goes on. I don't know that Mr Abramoff professed 'evangelical' Christianity, but these others do. What has happened in 'evangelicalism that we have no morals/ethics where money or truthfulness are concerned? I quote 'evangelical' because so many of us are so tainted in the world's eyes; we are, that is, 'BAD news'!

Thom	Posted: April 04, 2007 2:43 PM

Your point is well taken, and a needed reminder that our example in how to relate to sinners was Jesus Himself, who ASSOCIATED with sinners but never identified Himself with them. However, I am concerned about the wording of one statement in your article: "[Jesus] did not distance himself from sin as much as embrace it in himself." God laid ON Jesus our sin at the cross, but there was never any sin IN Him. I don't know if this is what you meant to communicate - but your choice of words seem to convey an unbiblical idea.

Mike	Posted: April 04, 2007 2:30 PM

From my view as a Pastor, I am convinced the ever increasing population of pagans in our country would stand and take notice; perhaps ask a few questions; maybe even consider a life of faith; if they heard more Christians humbly admit they occasionally punch holes in walls, look at pornography, swear, take a drink to numb themselves and watch a steamy movie to feel alive. The given is that these things are sinful and wrong. The other given is that they are sins we routinely commit and even enjoy, at least in the moment. Raw honesty; publican like honesty, it seems to me, is an excellent starting point to engage a post-Christian world on the reality of Christ and the hope He offers. Without question, pretending to be something we aren't or responding with shock to the favorite sins of our day is a sure way to demonstrate we really don't understand the human condition, our condition or the power of the Gospel.

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment