Heroes

I just read a good article on Jonathan Edwards by Dennis Haack of Ransom Fellowship. This is a plug for Ransom Fellowship, by the way, it's a great site you ought to check out. He was talking about two approaches to studying Edwards. He speaks of George Marsden's bio of Edwards as historiography and Ian Murray's as more hagiography. In other words, Marsden's book is more concerned with historical accuracy - he shows the flaws in Edwards life and character a little more than Murray does in his book. It's not that Murray is historically inaccurate, just that he passed over some of the flaws that Edwards highlighted. "Hagiography" comes from the Greek words "hagios" for "holy" or "saint." "Hagiography" makes the subject look like a saint and at its worst, completely overlooks the faults of the subjects, and in its less egregious forms, simply minimizes them.

Dennis Haack makes one comment that I want to use as a jumping off point for a few comments.

A common, but sad, stanza in the history of Christianity is that of the faithful believer raised to hero status and praised for his or her example of saintliness, only to be later toppled by the revelation of private sin.

Here's a couple of thoughts.

To say that the revelation of private sin in a hero's life is sad is true, because sin brings it's own sadness. However, if by saying that private sin is sad, we mean that it somehow seems out of character in the life of a Christian hero, then that is another matter.

There is nothing more "in character" for a human being, including a Christian, than to be involved in private sin. Further, the Bible gives us no reason to think otherwise. I recently heard Tim Keller compare biblical hero accounts to hero stories from other nations or persuasions. The biblical accounts stand in stark contrast to other hero accounts in that those other accounts always hold up their heroes as paragons of virtue, or embodiments of the ideals of their society. In contrast, the heroes of the bible more often than not are the antithesis of virtuous. Just for fun, take a stroll through the hall of fame of faith in Hebrews 11 sometime and look at the heroes there - all of them had some pretty glaring character flaws.

So, as Dennis says later in his article:

Therefore, when Protestant Christians look back over the history of the Church, they must be humble in the face of controversy and honest enough to consider that Martin Luther may have been filthy-mouthed, anti-Semitic and endorsed a case of bigamy. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, they must face the possibility that John Calvin could have cruelly violated Servetus’ freedom of conscience when he approved his execution, or that Billy Graham made ugly, blanket statements about Jewish people.

I would add that, not only should we be humble, but we ought not to act surprised.

So, the question is, do we abandon the notion of the heroic, or the virtuous? Not at all - The Ten Commandments are still the Ten Commandments, and are still a revelation of God's character and will and are still the standard for our character and behavior. The Ten Commandments hold forth a sterling vision of virtue.

But while seek to obey the Ten Commandments, we must never claim to have obeyed them. We live by grace. This is where we often get into the error of moralism. Moralism makes living virtuously the epitome of the Christian life. In some respects that is true, especially as you consider the qualifications for church leaders in the pastoral epistles.

But the true epitome of the Christian life is living by faith, depending on grace. It's not that we don't try to live virtuously, it's just that we acknowledge that, at our best, we will never do so. So, though virtue characterizes the Christian to some degree, it is faith that characterizes the Christian the most.

The biblical hero is not the one who has done something great for God (apologies to William Carey, here), the biblical hero is someone for whom God has done something great. This is what distinguishes the biblical heroes - not their great deeds on God's behalf, but His great deeds on theirs.

So what's the takeaway on this - by all means seek to live virtuously, but let us all humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God and realize that He is the hero, not us.

Comments

[Terry]

Welcome back to our geographic home and to the blogdom. The hero idea something talked about a the PCA zine site in the article about why we keep making movies about Spiderman, Harry Potter and a host of other heros. It is called Heros That Won't Go Away. http://www.byfaithonline.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID323422|CHID664018|CIID1840010,00.html

[Harris]

I might modify your thought slightly. Your wrote:
The biblical hero is not the one who has done something great for God (apologies to William Carey, here), the biblical hero is someone for whom God has done something great.

I would say that it is "in whom God has done something great. "For" always has these sense of possession about it. But really, becoming an instrument of God's purpose does mean that we are especially worthy of it, nor that we especially can be said to possess that work (as if it were our accomplishment).

On a related note, we love our heroes too often because they make us feel good about ourselves. They're on our team vs. THEIR team -- whomever that might be. There's spiritual mischief afoot in that one.

The mystery is that God is at work in each of us, and sometimes, like a spouting whale, or perhaps the uncovered boulder in the backyard, He lets us see that work...

[William Meisheid]

Christian heroes like all men, saved or not, have feet of clay, inhabited by, as Paul would say, the old man. For me it is not if they have fallen (well within reason), but the context and what they do about it and how they approach their redemption afterwards. I think the movie "The Apostle" illustrates this rather well, as does the failure of numerous "Evangelical leaders" to accept discipline for their "sinful indiscretions. After all, the Church did not abandon Peter after he had to be confronted by Paul.

[Terry]

I wrote up my own posting on heros to compliment your own thoughts.

http://pruittcommunications.blogspot.com/2004/08/mighty-in-word-and-deed.html

[Miss O'Hara]

Welcome home, and a wonderful post to come back with! I suppose the reason that Christians are so upset by sin - particularly the 'hidden sin' (yet how many people flaunt anything they consider bad?) - is that in a way, it means the rest of the world will write Christians off as hypocrites and failures. It's a little pang inside - "Darnit, now everyone will make fun of Jesus again."

[Rob]

One should never be casual about sin as though on cruise control with a heartless status quo and mindless Christian professionalism. Sin separates man from God.

True, none of can say we do not sin or we would be liars. It's necessary to keep a short account, confess, and repent.

We can't say, "I have the architectural masterpiece of His grace and therefore there's nothing for me to do." It's His grace to engage our endeavors. To follow, obey, and love is never antithetical to His Biblical program. "Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: Looking diligently lest any man[This includes believers] fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled" (Heb 12:14-15).

"Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" (Heb 10:29).

God flies His truth on two wings of a great confidence of God and a great caution due to self. Man has an enormous capacity for self-deception,and that's why James 1:16 says, "Do not err, my beloved brethren."

Jesus will not say "Thou good and faithful servant" unless you are a good and faithful servant. Neither will anyone go to heaven who has regeneration and justification, but not sanctification.