Questions Christians Aren't Supposed to Ask

James V. Brownson

• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Year: 2021
• eBook ISBN: 9781467462327
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

Why should anyone believe in God in a world with so much pain?  

Why should I become a Christian when I find the public agenda of many Christians so offensive?  

I have been hurt by the church in the past. Why should I bother with it now? 

Most Christians have found themselves in conversations with nonbelieving friends and family where these kinds of questions have come up. In fact, most Christians have probably found  themselves asking these questions too. But everyone who has ever wondered about such complicated things knows that this is dangerous territory—after all, what if there's no easy answer? 

This book welcomes and encourages these questions that Christians "aren't supposed to ask." In each chapter, James Brownson introduces a particular question and then reframes it with a relevant passage from the Bible, bringing to bear his expertise as a biblical scholar. Rather than providing dogmatic (and ultimately unsatisfying) "Sunday school answers," he explores the questions in provocative ways that often challenge the status quo of American Christianity. Fittingly, each chapter closes with discussion questions and suggestions for further reading, so that the conversations begun here can continue among the book's readers in fruitful ways.

1

Hypocrisy

If there is so much hypocrisy in the church, why should I believe and join it?

Matthew 6:1–6

It doesn’t take detailed analysis to recognize the various forms of hypocrisy that permeate Christian religious organizations today. Christians from many different walks of life are concerned about some issues but tend to be oblivious to (or at least less sensitive to) other issues. Conservative Christians radically oppose gay marriage, but sometimes they don’t seem nearly as worried about the sexual misconduct of the straight people in their own churches (including such obvious problems as divorce and remarriage, addressed explicitly in a variety of texts) or sometimes even the misbehavior of their own leaders. Progressive Christians often work hard to oppose the death penalty but can sometimes seem far less concerned about the death of babies through abortion. In these cases, public positions easily seen by others are clearly in view—exactly what Jesus addresses in Matthew. Lots of people in our culture worry about these issues. This chapter will explore Matthew 6:1–6, to see how it addresses the question at the beginning of the chapter.

¹ “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven.

² “So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. ³ But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, ⁴ so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

⁵ “And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. ⁶ But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.”

If we are to make sense of Matthew 6 and its particular focus on hypocrisy, we need to begin by looking at the original meaning of the word “hypocrite.” In early Greek usage (long before the time of Jesus), this word was used neutrally of an “orator,” or even more commonly, of an “actor.” By the time the New Testament was written, however, the meaning of the word had turned decidedly negative. A “hypocrite” was still an actor, as in earlier literature, but now more particularly in the sense of a pretender, or dissembler. The word was rarely used during the New Testament period in an explicitly theatrical sense but almost always in a general, more negative sense. Its focus falls on the gap between someone’s true identity and the identity the person is projecting at any particular moment. The central problem for hypocrites in the New Testament period was thus the loss of a coherent identity, and an increase in behavior directed to specific people in search of specific sorts of praise or commendation, rather than the pursuit of an authentic identity.

This is the understanding of hypocrisy that dominates the New Testament and, to a large extent, contemporary thinking as well. Religion becomes hypocritical particularly when certain religious behaviors can be used to increase one’s public status. We see this pattern clearly in a text such as Matthew 6:1–6. Twice in this passage, Jesus warns against acting like “the hypocrites” (vv. 2 and 5). He speaks of hypocrisy in conjunction with specific religious practices: almsgiving and praying. In each case, Jesus emphasizes that the primary concern of hypocrites is really the attempt to win the favor of others. In each case, he says, “Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.” One might translate more literally, “Truly I tell you, they get their pay.” The reward/pay, of course, is the approval of others (rather than the claimed religious motive of divine approval).

So here is the heart of hypocrisy, for Jesus. People engage in ostensibly religious behaviors such as almsgiving and prayer that appear to have God as their object and goal. However, in reality, the object and goal is public status. As Jesus sees it, people engage in the public exercise of religious practices in order to gain public status. According to Jesus, when people do this, “they get their pay”; they receive the public status they are pursuing, and any further soliciting of divine approval is essentially irrelevant. A religious practice is engaged, but the real reasons for the practice are not at all religious; the focus is instead on public approval.

One might question whether, particularly in a Western, postreligious culture like ours, this would continue to be a problem. Religious behaviors do not grant persons the same broad public status today that they did in previous eras. But Western, postreligious culture does consist of interest groups that do have specifically religious interests and values. Thus, whereas some religious practices may not gain a person broad social status within the culture as a whole, they may enhance social status within a specific, more religiously oriented group. This is not unlike the situation faced by Jesus himself. The Roman occupiers of Judea and Galilee would have had little interest in the religious behaviors Jesus was talking about, and those behaviors would have gained their practitioners no status in the eyes of the Roman occupiers. But among the religious leadership, such religious behaviors were clearly valued, and enacting them would cause one to be held in high regard, reinforcing the temptation to hypocrisy that Jesus spoke about.

Thus, for Jesus, the core problem with hypocrisy focuses upon motives. Explicitly religious behaviors such as prayer and almsgiving may proceed from nonreligious motives; those doing them seek approval from particular groups rather than divine sanction or blessing. In such cases, people “get their pay” quite apart from any divine response at all.

Finally, the problem of religious hypocrisy arises in a more pronounced way, particularly when religious groups lose focus on clear and coherent motives, when public approval replaces deeper religious motives for behavior. Jesus saw this happening in his day, and we see similar dynamics operating in many religious groups today. It’s not that the motives for various groups engaging in public advocacy are wrong, in their view. Pro-life groups genuinely believe that babies should not be killed in the womb. Groups opposing gay marriage genuinely believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Social justice advocacy groups genuinely believe in their cause.

The problem arises when those motives are not coherently and consistently lived out. Pro-life groups don’t seem, particularly to their opponents, to be as worried about the death of criminals and other marginalized populations. Groups opposing gay marriage seem to pick and choose which issues in sexual ethics to focus on. Social justice advocates seem, again to outsiders, to decide, at least sometimes in a seemingly arbitrary way, which issues are important. This loss of coherence and consistency of practice is one of the surest signs that hypocrisy is a problem, and people need to recognize and acknowledge these problems.

Another sign of this loss of coherent and consistent motives is when public approval looms large. According to Jesus, public approval is almost always the sign of incoherent or corrupted motives, particularly in the religious sphere. In fact, Jesus urges his followers to adopt religious practices where public approval is not even an option, where praying and almsgiving occur only in secret and are rewarded only by the God who sees in secret. Twice Jesus repeats, “and your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Matt. 6:4b, 6b).

What is at stake here is the difference between human approval and divine approval. When human approval appears as a motive for religious actions, hypocrisy is almost always present, regardless of how worthy the apparently divinely directed practice may be. What this means, of course, is that religious groups, if they want to follow Jesus, must steadfastly avoid postures of public approval or disapproval for religiously motivated behaviors. For if they engage in such approaches, they almost invariably subject their participants to the potential of conflicted motives and hypocrisy, implicitly encouraging them to seek human approval under the guise of behaviors that ostensibly seek divine approval.

So, at least from the perspective of Jesus, the complaint about hypocrisy that this chapter focuses upon is an entirely legitimate one, and in fact, is a perennial danger of religious groups. If it was such a problem in Jesus’s day, it is not surprising that it continues to arise today. At the same time, if the founder of Christianity warns against the practice of hypocrisy, then those Christian groups that seek to follow him must confront their own tendencies to hypocrisy and attempt to root such tendencies out of their practices. Hence, ironically, those who object to hypocrisy in the church may be more sensitive to the founder of Christian faith than those who claim to be his followers.

One more point about this text needs to be underscored. Matthew 6 is concerned with religious practices that were common sources of hypocrisy in Jesus’s day: almsgiving and prayer. However, these are not the only places where hypocrisy becomes a problem. The NRSV translation of Matthew 6:1 states, “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them.” But the word rendered “piety” could just as readily be translated “righteousness.” This is clearly not a negative word in Matthew. In Matthew 3:15, Jesus himself states that he must be baptized “to fulfill all righteousness.” In 5:6 he pronounces a blessing on those who “hunger and thirst for righteousness.” In 5:20 he declares that the righteousness of his followers must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. In 6:33, the disciples are instructed to seek God’s kingdom and God’s righteousness.

Righteousness for Matthew is clearly a good thing. But even a good thing can be corrupted, and this is what is in view in Matthew 6:1–6. Behaviors and practices that were originally divinely oriented for human beings can become a focus for public approval rather than divine approval. When that happens, even specifically religious practices and concerns quickly lose their meaning. So the question of motives is a persistently urgent one, and the problem of hypocrisy is often evident, particularly when we see inconsistency between public behavior and private behavior, or excessive subgroup affirmation of certain public behaviors, leaving out other, more private behaviors from the picture.

So, if there is so much hypocrisy in the church, why should I and those I may love believe and join it? We are not the first ones to ask this question. It goes back to Jesus himself and is a perennial problem for religious groups. But the answer is not found in the avoidance of religion but rather in a deeper embrace of the teaching of Jesus himself, who warns against the appeal of the hypocrites and invites us into a deeper and more coherent way of living.

Discussion Questions

• Do you agree with the perspective on hypocrisy presented here?
• Is the problem with “public positions” outlined in this essay part of your experience? In what ways?
• Is hypocrisy defined in the social/political way of this chapter more of a problem to you than hypocrisy defined as moral behavior in personal living that is preached but not practiced?
• How widely affirmed do behaviors need to be in order for them to be an incentive to hypocrisy?
• Do you agree with the author that “those who object to hypocrisy in the church may be more sensitive to the founder of Christian faith than those who claim to be his followers”?
• Is this a problem for the right and the left wings of the church, as this chapter attempts to argue?

For Further Exploration

Bruner, Frederick Dale. Matthew: A Commentary. Vol. 1, The Christbook: Matthew 1–12. Revised and expanded ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Pages 281–88.

Powery, Emerson. “Hypocrisy, Hypocrite.” In The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 2. Nashville: Abingdon, 2007.

2

Hope

If Christians, like me, want to see a better world, why aren’t they moving in the same direction?

Romans 8:19–25

In our American context, everyone wants to see a better world. To quote the Declaration of Independence, we all long for a deeper experience of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” However, there are profound disagreements about what that better world looks like, and how we should move toward it. Is it essentially free-market capitalism that moves us toward that better world, or is it the formulation of government policies and standards that shape and direct the interactions of citizens? Should the laws of the nation reflect specific moral frameworks on controversial topics such as abortion, prostitution, marriage, and marijuana usage, or should individuals be allowed to decide these issues on the basis of their own moral framework? How should the government determine the balance between the values of freedom, morality, and justice, or, to quote again from the Declaration of Independence, what is the best way to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”?

Unfortunately, disagreements on these topics are pervasive in American society, and these disagreements also occur among Christians. In this chapter, we will explore Romans 8:19–25, not so much for answers to this question but more to see how the biblical text reframes and refocuses the way we think about a question like this.

Here is the text from Romans 8:

¹⁹ For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God; ²⁰ for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope ²¹ that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. ²² We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now; ²³ and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. ²⁴ For in hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what is seen? ²⁵ But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

Observe how the passage speaks of “the creation.” The word “creation” occurs in each of the first five verses of our text. “Creation” is clearly a central component of Romans 8. In essence, then, to take this text seriously, we cannot fail to take seriously the creation, or more specifically, the material world. We cannot fail to look for its redemption. In Genesis 1, we see how God separates the various elements of creation—light and darkness, land and sea—and then populates land and sea with plants, animals, fish, birds, and people. God pronounces that all this was “good.” Of course, this is quickly followed in the narrative by the account of the Fall in Genesis 3, and the subsequent cursing of the ground in Genesis 3:17–18. Romans 8:20 picks up this language of the Fall when it declares that “the creation was subjected to futility.” The Romans text goes on to affirm the conviction that “the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” So, from a Christian perspective, the “better world” that our chapter’s question longs for is a material world—a redeemed creation.

Yet this is not always clearly seen in some Christian circles. Some circles emphasize so strongly the heavenly desti...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Introduction
• 1. Hypocrisy Matthew 6:1–6
• 2. Hope Romans 8:19–25
• 3. Pain Mark 8:31–38
• 4. Politics Matthew 22:15–22
• 5. Sexuality Romans 1:18–32
• 6. Other Religions John 1:1–18
• 7. Failures Matthew 23:1–12
• 8. Spirituality Romans 12:3–5
• 9. Fruitfulness 1 Peter 2:1–3, 9–10
• 10. Hurt Hebrews 12:14–29
• 11. Abuse Matthew 23:23–33
• 12. Church Hebrews 10:19–25
• 13. Women 1 Timothy 2:8–12
• 14. Doubt Matthew 14:22–33
• 15. Hell Matthew 25:31–46
• 16. Relevance Mark 7:1–13
• 17. Slavery 1 Corinthians 7:21–24
• Conclusion