Christians vs Falstians
Written by ED on November 12, 2007 – 8:23 pm - Posted in Christianity, Life |If Jeremiah invented a term like “Fan-sumer“, I came up with the term “Falstians” - the false Christians who are abusing His Words.
I had wanted to pen this long ago, but religious teachings can be such a sensitive topic. For almost an hour, I was speaking to an elder from the Presbyterian church I used to be from. He called to ask how was I and as usual, I began throwing scenarios at him and in return, he never fails to enlighten me. Sometimes, the enlightenment makes me unhappy when I realised I have made the wrong decision over an obstacle. At other times, it brings a smile on my face knowing I have made decisions that I can proudly walk before His Cross and tell Him I have finally abide by His Words.
For many years, I have seen and encountered so many people plucking verses from the Bible readily to defend their deeds. As most Christian friends got to know me by now, I care little about how well you can memorize the Bible. I have only one single doubt, are you living by His Words?
I am never a perfect Christian nor am I a biblical scholar, that is why you hardly see me quote verses from the Bible. Instead, I often find myself breaking down the biblical words into simpler English. The other thing is, I never believe in using the Bible to defend my crimes and sins. For every sin committed, there is always a “catch”. Such that forgiveness is only the first half of the entire Christian’s journey. Anyone who throws the first part of a verse in my face without continuing to the second part, are probably the group of people I classify as “Falstians”.
Take this set of verses for example;
Ephesians 5: 22-24
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and He is the saviour of the body. Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
For those who are not familiar with these (and I wonder why…), it appeared sexist and biased. Especially in modern times where women have begun to take a bigger role in the society and family structure, these 3 verses become their weapon to defeat any wrongdoings of their own. All in the argument that “the Bible is biased”.
Is the Bible really biased? Now read on the second part…
Ephesians 5: 25-30
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave Himself for it; That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.
The fact, isn’t really about men being governed by 5 verses compared to the women’s 3 verses. It is how wives should love and submit to their husbands while AT THE SAME TIME, husbands must love and treasure their wives too. It always puzzles me on how people would often jump to the conclusion by reading only the first 3 verses.
Let me cite you another example of a verse that is so commonly misused to cover up one’s crimes or sins;
John 8: 4-7
They say unto Him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned; but what sayest thou?This they said, tempting Him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with His finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
So when they continued asking, He lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Just like the above scenario, this set of verses often become the chosen wall of defence against criticism. While it’s true that all of us are sinners and need forgiveness, something is still missing from the equation. Simply, the story doesn’t stops there.
Read on…
John 8: 10-11
When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee; go, and sin no more.
What does the continuation implies then? Notice how it ended with 3 important words - SIN NO MORE? It is important to take note, nothing was mentioned that we are not allowed to identify crimes and sins. At the same time, these 3 words came right at the end not without a reason. If anyone feels it is acceptable to defend themselves of their sins using John 8: 7 or Ephesians 5: 22, it’s another sin on top of a previous sin.
This story is not only an example of how we should not condemn sinners, leading them to enlightenment; but also stipulates the condition of repentance and forgiveness. That is - to stop committing the same sin knowing that it’s wrong to do so. Never once, in this story of adultery that says we should not confess and admit to our sins or worst, using the Bible to defend our crimes.
Sometimes, I feel it’s such a disgrace when one starts using His Words to defend themselves for his own deeds. It’s like a police officer who uses the law to defend his bribery, isn’t it? It doesn’t matter if the sin was committed against me, but how can one go on his knees before His Cross and proclaim that they have tried their best to live by His Words of a “righteous life” and “salvation”? Not me certainly, maybe the “Falstians” can.
This is the first time I quote verses in my blog, and it’s unfortunate that the first time I do this would be - against my own fellow comrades. However, like I’ve said so many times… I will speak up against my own kind if I have to. I have no idea why I have always been afraid of speaking against my own kind, and I am not sure how many Christians feel the same as me. Perhaps, it’s that fear of one lone man against a group of “Falstians”. Afterall, I am not free of sins. Being equally guilty of sins, does that rule out the duty and responsibility to identify and spot sins?
I am thankful for such a call from an elder to come at such a time. Perhaps, it is God’s indication that I have made the right choice this time with that message coming through another beloved Son of His, my elder. Or perhaps, people should think twice about quoting verses in my face, especially quoting in parts and not the full story as related in the Bible. I am still learning… so join me please.
Like what Elder Heng said; It’s not a disgrace to mankind, but to himself and his Holy Father whom he calls - God. For now… Search Him, Know Him.
November 12th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
” Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and He is the saviour of the body. Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”
This verse reminds me of a story where this pastor or Father took advantage of his wife. I don’t remember what he did but I think he abused her. I think he made use of this verse to justify his crimes.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Great post. I remember once in church hearing the Pastor tell a story of a “Falstian” who decided he was going to open the bible at random and put his finger on a verse to do exactly whatever it said:
Then, thinking a second would be better it said:
The best thing one can do is read the Bible, but without context and study of how it was intended, the Bible can cause one a lot of trouble.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Damien: The thing is, alot of people are reading blindly so while I agree with the top half, I can’t agree that the Bible can cause alot of trouble. I think we are the one misusing it to create the problem. haha!
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I agree with you.
I once knew of a church where the women had to have their heads covered when they went to “assembly” (church as they called it).
I agree with you that we are interpreting it to cause ourselves trouble! There is so much wisdom that gets ignored while minor things become cults etc.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Damien: Oh, Sicarii was telling me some time back about some groups returning to the First Century Christianity and such. I haven’t had a chance to see such congregation yet.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
I wrote a post on John 8:7 in my main blog and as usual I get a healthy dose of debate. (something I cherish) I would have link my piece had I not have the teeny weeny fear I’ll offend you because I don’t know which church you are currently going. I do have beef with one popular Singapore pastor….. I won’t go into that.
I hate hate hate when non-CHristians too use this verse to say… DOn’t judge or be judged. That is taking the verse out of context.
Some of my church leaders encourage peeps to do memory verse. I totally disagree. You know why? All of God’s words should carry the same importance and most important of all, it should be viewed as a complete picture. Not just take a verse here and there to suit the occasion.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Helen: I think I will love to read that post. Care to share?
It’s good to be able to recall any verses at the back of our heads but like you said; it’s the complete picture that matters more. I hate such a situation as much as you do.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Sked lar… You from what church one? Mega churches? First let me know what you think about the gospel of good news .. without the bad?
I don’t want to offend you… in case that pastor in question is from your church. hehehehe
I will let you know later. When you mention Presbyterian, my current pastor’s brother is a pastor in the Singapore Presbyterian Church. No, no I’m not talking about this church.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
Helen: There’s nothing to offend me because I am not God. The Bible is not written by me either. In fact, I draw my teachings from a variety of churches even though I attend FCBC.
But I can understand what you are feeling because I am often “rejected” in several churches for debating on Sabbath Day and such. To me, nowhere in the Bible said and reinstated a change in the day. Like what I told you in your blog, Christianity is more of a principles of life to me rather than a mere religion as most called it.
[Reply]
November 13th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
http://allofhelen.blogspot.com/2007/09/gospel-of-good-news.html
Glad to hear your stand.
[Reply]
November 14th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I’m from NCC. -dun dun dunnn!- Since I joined Ping.sg I’ve had many opportunities to read so many religiously-themed blogs. And what I don’t understand is why there has to be bad news along with the good news. Have we been so conditioned by the world that we have to expect a minus to accompany any plus?
[Reply]
November 14th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
Farinelli: Such are humans. Given any opportunity, there will always be people who will exploit something good and use it to do something bad.
I always enjoy using a simple analogy. You have been given a gun, now will one choose to use the gun and protect the weak and defenceless? Or will one use the gun and rob the bank? Even if it’s the latter, we can’t blame the gun still. It’s the user at the end of the day.
In this sense, I can never understand how one attacks the Bible. It’s us, who are in use of it. How we use it, which is the right way to use it, I am sure it’s debatable. However, I am just disappointed at how His Words have been misused.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Correct. But we humans are preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. Why does THAT have to be accompanied by bad news?
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Perhaps this is what they say as… without the bad we don’t know what is good.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 7:02 am
That is not my question. The only reason why it is possible for man and God to come together is by the grace of the Lord and the supreme power of Jesus’s death for our sins. By saying that the gospel has to be accompanied by conditions and stipulations, are you not diluting the perfect work of Jesus on the cross?
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 7:06 am
Oh darnit I forgot to post my second part. Which is this… I learnt long ago that assumption can get you murdered in this world, so I want to reiterate again that I am not picking faults here, but trying to clear the basics up. If I am right, I hope to change your mind, and if I’m wrong I hope to clearly understand the error of my ways.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Farinelli: We have often been taught to share love, compassion, repentance and forgiveness. Afterall, these form up part of the grace in God. While God’s grace is beautiful, it must NOT be used to condone sins and crimes. If the Gospel is not accompanied with conditions, what are the Ten Commandments?
Many people have come to me, asking why are there conditions when God’s love is supposed to be unconditional. Take note again, that God’s love is directed at the people whom He loves, not the sins.
The Old Testament has said it very clearly;
2 Chronicles 7: 13-14
If I shut up heaven that there will be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
What does this tells us? It simply means to return to Him (and His ways) and turning away from the sins. Is that not a condition stipulated within itself?
In the story of Luke, we are also looking at the best example of a condition being used in real. When Luke repented and realised his sins, what did he has to do to seek forgiveness?
Luke 15: 17-19
And when he came to his senses, he said, How many hired servants of my father’s have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger.
I will arise and go to my father, and say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,
And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.
Again, what’s the condition here? The condition here is first - he has to repent. Then followed by actual actions taken to return to his father and seek forgiveness. Are all these possible, if Luke hadn’t repent and return to his father?
So as we can see, are there no conditions within the Gospel? There’s a lot more examples, but if I were to list everything here this will be longer than a post. Haha!
Understanding the Gospel, and the conditions does not dilute His good works, but clearly setting right what is acceptable and not acceptable in His Kingdom. It’s just like one of those days where I am “attacked” with the retorts such as; since God is always forgiving, why do I have to turn to him now? Why not wait til I’m dead and upon my judgement day - he will still be forgiving right? That’s a more direct form of abusing the Gospel to defend one’s sins, seeking to continue with the sins.
I leave you with the final verse of yet-another condition in which our Lord is against the sins and not his loved sons and daughters;
1 John 1: 9-10
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and His Word is not in us.
What’s the condition here?
I always feel the movie - Constantine - is the one of the best stories that a Christian should take note of. Why is it, that no matter how many demons he banished to hell he is still rejected from His Kingdom?
*No worries about scrutinizing anything - if it helps all of us to learn*
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Ed - Sorry to butt in, I’m one of those ppl who don’t believe the gospel of good news without the bad.
All I can say is, if the gospel is merely all good news and roses, how can we account for the pain and suffering the apostles went through?
If we adhere to the standard by some pastors who only preach the good news, then the apostles are the greatest testament of failure.
They were shunned and persecuted. Yeah, and none of them died rich.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Helen: It always take two hands to clap. If there’s a giver, there must be a receiver. Otherwise it is nothing but a broken link.
The only thing I advised friends to be wary of is; while saying the bad shows us what is good, that doesn’t mean we must worship Satan because Satan brings out the good in Jesus. There are indeed people who comes to me and tell me that.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
You know the line lar… People who hear these will want to believe. Afterall who don’t want to be blessed? Who don’t want to be healed?
I’m merely pointing out a foundation that is built from half-truth will never grow …
The truth is, blessing and healing are the sovereign choice of the LOrd.. not just some freebies handed out when you believe in Him.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Helen: I get what you mean here… but unfortunately that’s how many have learnt to believe in.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
What I think is that there has to be clear lines drawn between man and God. Persecution for your faith in Christ is definitely a clear warning in the Bible, but who persecutes? Not God, but men. How does it make sense for God to say “Drink My Water and never be thirsty again”, then throw you crap to deal with? Now the Lord does let challenges come before us sometimes, but that is because He loves us and hopes for us to emerge a better person, not because we believe in the Gospel. CHRISTIANITY is no bed of roses. But the GOSPEL in itself is pure and unadulterated with conditions and stipulations. And I believe that it is with the love and grace of this Gospel that we can bring ourselves through the persecution and challenges we are bound to face.
Also, I understand fully that God is for the sinner and not the sin. Ps. Prince doesn’t hesitate to reiterate and reiterate that point. But again, I think that the Gospel and repentance has a thin line between them. The Gospel is that there is a God waiting to embrace you, love you and bless you - that is unconditional. Repentance is coming to terms with your imperfection and accepting the Lord into your life to turn you around.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Farinelli: God’s love is unconditional, that’s beyond doubts. Now let’s change the question in another manner, what does one has to do before one receives this unconditional love?
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Repent your sins, correct. What I am stressing is that “What does one have to do before one receives this unconditional love?” is irrelevant when talking about the Gospel because “God’s love is unconditional” is all there is to the Gospel. All other things including repentance are outside of the Gospel, and so the Gospel itself is good news without condition.
Though come to think of it, why would you think of a condition as bad news? Is it bad news to repent your sins then? :S
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Farinelli: I’m afraid you are getting the wrong point here.
We are not on the topic of whether God’s unconditional love exist or not. Instead, I am questioning should this unconditional love be abused to defend one’s sins? You get what I’m saying?
I do not know how you get the impression that to me, repentance is bad news. In fact, I am trying to stress the complete opposite of what you are thinking here, that everything in it, there’s a condition attached. We should not pluck the first half of a set of verses without reading on and understanding the boundaries and conditions under which, leads us to repentance… and eventually to Salvation.
I’m sorry but I think you completely lost the point of the discussion here.
[Reply]
November 15th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
Really? Then that makes two of us… Because I have no doubt that unconditional love should NEVER be abused to defend one’s sins. In fact I agree with your whole comment.
Except maybe the last sentence. Guess it is just as I was beginning to suspect - we were running in pointless circles. -.-
[Reply]