When Is a Name Not Necessarily an Accurate Name?

Maybe you recall the phrase, “A rose is a rose is a rose.” It was originated by writer Gertrude Stein as part of her 1913 poem, “Sacred Emily.” Many understand the phrase to mean, “things are what they are.” Ms. Stein explained she basically meant that the simple use of a name already invokes the imagery and emotions associated with it.

I mention this because of how use of the term “Christian” has changed through the years. When I first came to an understanding of what it meant to truly commit your life to Christ, more than four decades ago, I was proud to tell others that I was a Christian. In the years since then, however, I’d have to say this term has been hijacked, given a variety of different meanings – some of them used in negative, even derogatory ways.

 

So, depending on who’s speaking or writing, applying the “a rose is a rose is a rose” principle to the word “Christian” might not work very well. 

 

Rather than delving into uses and misuses of Christian, I’d like to point to a shift I’ve observed among those who profess to trust Jesus as their Savior and Lord. Some would now describe themselves as “followers of Jesus Christ,” while others choose to define themselves as “disciples of Christ.” If someone were to ask me, “Are you a Christian?” I probably would respond, “Yes, I am.” But, depending on the person and circumstances, I might also ask what they mean by the term. Because their meaning might not align with what I mean in expressing it.

 

Somewhat surprisingly, the Scriptures use the term Christian only three times in the original Greek writings, although some Bible paraphrases have added it to other passages. In 1 Peter 4:16, the apostle wrote, “…if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.” This is the one instance in the New Testament – again, in the original texts – of a believer using the term.

 

The other two instances of the earliest manuscripts using the word actually apply to non-believing persons. Acts 11:26 says, “…The disciples were called Christians in Antioch.” In essence, outsiders were calling them “Christ ones” – people uniquely related to Jesus Christ. 

 

Then in Acts 26:28, after the apostle Paul had explained to King Agrippa how his life had been transformed by Christ, the Roman official declared, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?” Again, the word is not used by a believer but rather, by a skeptic wanting to categorize what the apostle was proclaiming.

 

Bottom line, the Scriptures indicate that what matters most to the Lord is not which term we choose to use, but who we are – what is truly in our hearts? Paul summarized in Acts 17:28 what it means to be a genuine follower of Jesus: “For in him we live and move and have our being. As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’” As the apostle stated it, it’s our radical identity, not just on special days or at certain hours, but every minute of every day.

 

Recently I was reminded of what’s often called “St. Patrick’s Lorica,” a prayer of protection in the Old Irish language. The namesake of the boisterous annual St. Patrick’s Day celebrations, in real life he was a devout British missionary and bishop in fifth-century Ireland. His lorica, which literally means “breastplate,” includes these words: 

“Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ in me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me, Christ on my right, Christ on my left, Christ when I lie down, Christ when I sit down, Christ when I arise, Christ in the heart of every man who thinks of me, Christ in the mouth of everyone who speaks of me, Christ in every eye that sees me, Christ in every ear that hears me.”

 

Kind of reminds me of the office worker who was asked the “Are you a Christian?” question. She responded, “I’d put it this way: I’m a follower of Jesus, cleverly disguised as an administrative assistant.” Would that be true for you? Whether you’re a business executive, elected official, homemaker and mother of three, plumber, professional athlete, retail manager, IT person, or student, could you earnestly say, “I’m a follower of Christ, cleverly disguised as…”?

 

If you can, then it doesn’t matter whether you call yourself a Christian, a disciple of Jesus, or an “ambassador for Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:20). What matters is whether people can see “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:27).

Redundancy and Repetition: A Repeating Theme

Redundancy and repetition are good for reflections,
but not necessarily for effective communication.

Visiting a writers’ networking website, I was intrigued by a post about redundancy in communications. After all, I’ve told myself a million times, over and over, “Don’t repeat yourself. I say it again, do not repeat!”

Various writers chimed in, offering their pet peeves about redundant phrases. For instance, “past history.” Unless you own a time machine or dabble in quantum mechanics in your spare time, you’re not likely to encounter any “future history.” Another was “plan in advance.” When was the last time you did any planning after the fact?

One writer complained about “serious danger.” I’ve always had a preference for not-so-serious danger. Then there’s the ever-popular “total annihilation.” When can you remember worrying about the threat of “partial annihilation”? “Trained professional” is a term that stuck in someone’s craw. This might be debatable, but I’ve always found myself very suspicious of “untrained professionals.”

Someone wondered why describe things as “absolutely perfect,” unless somehow they could be “absolutely imperfect.” And then there’s the term we’ve probably all used at one time or another, “exactly right.” I suppose that’s better than being “inexactly right” or “exactly wrong.” Am I right? Of should I say, “perfectly correct”?

The news media are fond of informing us about the latest “terrible tragedy” – I think that’s so we don’t confuse it with a not-so-bad tragedy. A writer commented on the person that “sprinted fast,” obviously not someone prone to sprinting slowly. Another person, obviously in a cooperative mood, complained about “joint cooperation” and “mutual cooperation.” I’ve never seen “divided cooperation” accomplish much.

Have you ever been the target of an “unexpected surprise”? Obviously, if you had expected it, you wouldn’t have been surprised. Some people say, given the turmoil in society, it’s time to “rise up.” That does sound more effective than rising downward. Maybe what we need to do then is “revert back” – because reverting forward doesn’t seem to be working very well.

I put forth the redundant “general consensus,” unless you’re seeking to distinguish it from Admiral Consensus or Colonel Consensus or even Corporal Consensus. Generally speaking, that is.

But there is one commonly used term that many people fail to regard as redundant: “Born-again Christian.” As I understand it, you can’t be one without being the other.

It’s kind of like saying you’re a female woman, or that you have a canine dog, or you drive an automobile car. (Actually, NASCAR stands in part for Stock Car Auto Racing, but that’s another matter.)

In the original translations of the Bible, the term “Christian” is used only three times, and two of those were by people wondering what to call those “Christ ones” or, as some would term it today, “Jesus freaks.” In Acts 11:26 it says, “The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” Then in Acts 26:28, non-believing King Agrippa, interrogating the apostle Paul, observed, “Do you think in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?”

The apostle Peter does tell his fellow believers, “…if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed…” (1 Peter 4:16). But even then he was acknowledging the threat of enduring persecution for what they professed.

However, the term “born again” is integral to being a follower of Christ. In John 3:3, Jesus told Nicodemus, a Pharisee, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” Later in the passage Jesus explained this referred to “everyone born of the Spirit” (John 3:7).

Peter also used the term when he assured followers of Christ “you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God” (1 Peter 1:23).

Not to get theological, but the Bible teaches to be “born again” is to be a “Christian,” if you choose to use that term which, sadly, has been misused and abused by contemporary society. And to be a Christian, in the biblical sense, requires being born again.

So unless you’re fond of talking about insect bugs, feline cats or airplane jets, it might make sense to jettison the redundant term, “born-again Christian.”

Considering Brand ‘Ex’

Yesterday I read an article about a woman who claimed to be an “ex-Christian.” To me that sounded like someone deciding to become an “ex-human being” or a longtime pet becoming an “ex-dog.”

The woman, now an avowed atheist, said she had turned from beliefs and practices she had followed as a child and young person raised in a so-called “Christian home.” She no longer believed what she had been taught to believe. I get that.

But in reality, being a “Christian” isn’t about what you do, or even what you might think at a particular time. At its core, it’s about who you are.

Without question, foundational truths, beliefs and principles are central to being what I prefer to call a follower of Jesus. But what we think about such things can be influenced by feelings, moods, and doubts. Just as I might, in a crazy moment, question the constancy of gravity – that won’t stop me from falling if I decide to jump from a cliff.

Jesus Christ told inquisitive Nicodemus, “no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again” (John 3:3). Jesus wasn’t talking about changed philosophy, attitudes, or values, even those may be byproducts. He was talking about spiritual rebirth, new life through faith in Him.

In Galatians 2:20, the apostle Paul referred to this, stating, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me.”

The thought behind being “born again,” a term misused and abused ever since President Jimmy Carter brought it into public discourse back in the ‘70s, does not pertain to ideology. It involves a real, literal spiritual birth that dramatically – and permanently – affects anyone genuinely trusting in Jesus.

Therefore, being an “ex-Christian” would require becoming “un-born again,” and the Bible says this isn’t a matter of choice. Jesus declared, “You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleased. You hear its sounds but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit” (John 3:7-8).

If the woman interviewed is an “ex-Christian,” the Scriptures say she never was one.