the Parable of Jim

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

you decide...is he a Christian, or not...

The Parable of Jim

By Paul Coughlin

Jim is a thirty-something teacher to whom people are drawn. But Jim breaks all kinds of rules. He's confrontational, opinionated, filled with willpower.

He threatens to fight scoundrels who are making money off of religion, even grabbing their TV camera, a tool for this sordid gain, and smashing it to the ground, creating one long commercial break.

He has called his students dumb and dull, asking how much longer he'll have to endure their company.

In order to stem his influence, his enemies play word games and devise interview scenarios in which to embarrass him; he's so cunning and shrewd that he constantly shows them up instead. No one has the guts to talk the way he does. Others talk like they understand God; Jim talks like he knows God. Jim forcefully disrupts the order of things and disregards convention. Jim's inappropriate.

He calls people bad names that "respectable men" never say. He verbally confronts one of his most powerful government officials. When Jim has faced an authority figure who, because of manufactured charges, could actually invoke the death penalty, Jim's slow-to-come responses have been obscure, searing, and disrespectful.

Jim doesn't mind his manners around important persons. Jim causes problems for society's respectable people. No wonder they want to pull him down.

In one public speech, to illustrate a profound spiritual truth, Jim has spoken of excrement going into a drain. He's colorful, but some think his language is too coarse for a spiritual leader, and the press has a field day: PREACHER OR POTTYMOUTH? YOU DECIDE.

He has told reporters that his mission isn't to discover or promote a lifetime of warm and cozy. Au contraire: "I bring division and conflict! Live as I say you should," he tells morning news shows over coffee and crumpets, and it may "tear your families apart!" Then he states the obvious: "Those who don't find me offensive will be blessed." Who booked this guy? Regis wonders, glancing at security, hoping they're keeping a sharp eye. Who in the world does he think he is? muse countless others.

Jim is sarcastic, sometimes bitingly so; he doesn't apologize. Jim goes to parties and hangs out with others who do. At least once he has supplied the wine, for free, during a wedding where children were likely present. Drinks are on him, even though he knows he'll be accused of corrupting others and touting sinfulness. The bureaucrats and government workers with whom he spends time are the ones everybody else hates. Jim doesn't even shun mentally imbalanced devotees or politically leprous radicals.

Many murmur and complain that they don't understand him. His own students sometimes won't ask him questions because they fear his response.

Most religious leaders enjoy the attention of large crowds, but Jim's wary: He doesn't trust them, and he doesn't hide his distrust. He actually confronts empty compliments during public gatherings—not a seeker-friendly ministry approach. Even though he still takes students, Jim's been unemployed for at least three years and doesn't even look for a job. He lives off handouts, owns no property, doesn't even have his own cardboard box to return to at night.

One choice that led to further attacks was Jim's allowing a prostitute—in public—to anoint him with rare and expensive oil that could have been used to feed the poor, support missionaries, or pay for part of a child's life-saving surgery. While his students and his opponents boiled with anger over this wasteful extravagance, Jim would not hear it denounced and had the audacity to say that whenever God's liberating message is preached, this one event will be mentioned favorably. The woman wiped Jim's feet with her own hair, a lure she has used to draw men to her bed, but he has no care for his reputation. The scandal of it all! Hear the good folk gossip! Film at eleven!

He warns his students that people will despise them. Some will even be brought to court by blackmailers with unfair charges. Jim tells them to pay off the blackmailer before it goes that far. He instructs one student to sell some clothing in order to buy a weapon.

Jim, who's loving, kind, and compassionate, is not owned or influenced by fear and shame. Still, he does all the above and more, which begs the question: Do you think Jim's a "good Christian man"? Is he a Nice Guy?

* * *

This is part of the life of Christ as recorded in the Gospels, but are you surprised by how foreign some of it looks? If we compare these actions of Jesus to the behavior expected of the average guy in most churches today—and, if we were honest—we'd say, absurdly, that Christ is not a "Christian." We wouldn't pray to him; we'd issue prayer requests for him.

excerpt from No More Christian Nice Guy

[Gerr]

An overstatement of the truth, imho.

[Naomi]

An overstatement of the truth, imho.

agree!!

[Ted Oplinger]

Picked it up immediately this is Christ placed in our modern contemporary setting.

Yes, I do think many today - even in the Remnant - would reject Jesus because He is not what they make him out to be. He would not be the mighty war-Lord coming to overthrow the hated tyrannical government. He would not be the milquetoast, spineless bleeding heart. In cursing the fig tree and advocating devastation on a world-wide basis when He appears the Second time, He would not be the environmentalist's champion. While reaching out in tender mercies to those knowing they are trapped by circumstance with their sin, He would fearlessly call down condemnation on those who have the priviledge to know and do better - and in ribald language, if necessary (as was used throughout the prophets concerning Israel's and Judah's sins before God).

No, I dare say He would pass as unrecognized by much of professed Christianity today...who base decisions just on outside appearances alone.

Thanks for the food for thought, Pam

Blessings,

[LifeHiscost]

An overstatement of the truth, imho.

Demeaning to Jesus, in my estimation, placing Him as a person no more highly motivated than the average citizen of American society.

God cares!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

An overstatement of the truth, imho.

Gerry, what do you feel was an overstatement of the truth? I might be missing something...

[Bravus]

My reaction, perhaps unsurprisingly, is that it's a clever way of telling part of the story... but tells only part of the story.

I agree with Ted that Jesus wasn't and isn't a milquetoast 'nice guy'. He also wasn't an arrogant jerk: when he attacked it was in service of truth, not his own ego. These presentations worry me to the extent that they encourage and empower those who consider themselves to be forthright and truthful but are actually 'jerks for Jesus'...

What this leaves out is his incredible gentleness to the woman at the well, the woman caught in adultery, the people he healed, including the Samaritan woman, his teachings about turning the other cheek and going the second mile.

The problem, as ever, is that we turn the incredibly complex Son of God into a simple screen onto which to project our own preoccupations.

(And, as ever, as I point outward, three fingers point back at me.)

Attempting to simply, openly, without prejudices and assumptions, come to the Jesus of the Gospels and understand him as complex and apparently (without divine discernment) contradictory, and to seek in his teachings the underlying values that explain his behaviour, is difficult but very worthwhile.

[Naomi]

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

An overstatement of the truth, imho.

Gerry, what do you feel was an overstatement of the truth? I might be missing something...

The impression the author leaves me is that Jesus' colorful vocabulary includes the vocabulary of a sailor, rude and crude, thought nothing of getting people drunk, etc. Would the Jesus who warned that calling one's brother "Raca" or insulting him would be in danger of judgment have it in his own vocabulary?

""Behold," said Jesus, "I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." Christ Himself did not suppress one word of truth, but He spoke it always in love. He exercised the greatest tact, and thoughtful, kind attention in His intercourse with the people. He was never rude, never needlessly spoke a severe word, never gave needless pain to a sensitive soul. He did not censure human weakness. He fearlessly denounced hypocrisy, unbelief, and iniquity, but tears were in His voice as He uttered His scathing rebukes. He wept over Jerusalem, the city He loved, that refused to receive Him, the Way, the Truth, and the Life. They rejected Him, the Saviour, but He regarded them with pitying tenderness, and sorrow so deep that it broke His heart. Every soul was precious in His eyes. While He always bore Himself with divine dignity, He bowed with tenderest regard to every member of the family of God. In all men He saw fallen souls whom it was His mission to save." {DA 353.1}

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

Gerry, what do you feel was an overstatement of the truth? I might be missing something...

The impression the author leaves me is that Jesus' colorful vocabulary includes the vocabulary of a sailor, rude and crude, thought nothing of getting people drunk, etc. Would the Jesus who warned that calling one's brother "Raca" or insulting him would be in danger of judgment have it in his own vocabulary?

""Behold," said Jesus, "I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." Christ Himself did not suppress one word of truth, but He spoke it always in love. He exercised the greatest tact, and thoughtful, kind attention in His intercourse with the people. He was never rude, never needlessly spoke a severe word, never gave needless pain to a sensitive soul. He did not censure human weakness. He fearlessly denounced hypocrisy, unbelief, and iniquity, but tears were in His voice as He uttered His scathing rebukes. He wept over Jerusalem, the city He loved, that refused to receive Him, the Way, the Truth, and the Life. They rejected Him, the Saviour, but He regarded them with pitying tenderness, and sorrow so deep that it broke His heart. Every soul was precious in His eyes. While He always bore Himself with divine dignity, He bowed with tenderest regard to every member of the family of God. In all men He saw fallen souls whom it was His mission to save." {DA 353.1}

Yes, it is an overstatement, but the point I see is that it is written from the standpoint of someone who isn't necessarily a believer, isn't thinking in terms of character paradoxes, and is contrasting 'Jim's" actions with the "normalcy bias" in society. It reads just like what a journalist writing today would write of a contemporary Jesus in our times, doing the very same things He did ~1,985 years ago, and how it would be viewed by "official" faith leaders of today - just enough truth to give it relevancy, and quite a bit of sensationalism to make it sell.

The question would be - if Jesus had not already come (so that you would not have any prior knowledge to go by), would you accept Him based on such reporting? Would you want to go see for yourself about this man? or would what is portrayed by those with the public trust be enough to reject Him?

Would you seek His own testimony? or simply side with the reporter's?

Important point, as when the Latter Rain does start in earnest, that is precisely what many people will have to decide about the Remnant: go and hear the testimony for themselves - even as Matthew 24:23-26 is preached in the effort to stymie this...or simply accept the overstated hearsay.

Food for thought...

[olger]

Today, they would say Jim needs sensitivity training!

`g

[LifeHiscost]

Today, they would say Jim needs sensitivity training!`g

God cares!

[Gerr]

Sensational, yes, but it wouldn't be the truth.

[Bravus]

Jesus' vocabulary *was* colourful! But not crudely - imaginatively, creatively. Not bland.

Straining out gnats and swallowing camels, camels through the eye of a needle, a generation of vipers, whited sepulchers clean on the outside but full of decay - Jesus used language robustly, colourfully, powerfully, to make points.

Re-read the 'Parable of Jim', and just substitute in 'Jesus' for 'Jim' every time it occurs. If that is difficult, copy and paste to a word processing program and 'find' and 'replace'...

You'll find that it is a simple telling (albeit, as I noted before, a partial one) of the story of Jesus as his actions are reported in the Gospels. Nothing is added or taken away.

[Neil D]

iows, truth with a creative bent toward expression oneself results in the same coin, just a different side.....