S10: E:4 THE IDOLATRY OF IDENTITY
S10: The Idolatry of Identity
E4: Unequally Woked
“I don’t believe in God, but I miss Him.”[1]
Wow, what a statement!
In his fictional work A Sense of Ending, Julian Barnes describes the journey of a schoolboy all the way to retirement. The book left me with the impression of an honest reimagining of the nameless father who said to Jesus, “I believe but help my unbelief” (Mark 9:24). More importantly for this blog, the statement perfectly sums up the conundrum of our present reality. On every platform, virtual or in-person, there is an increased desire to be personally authentic. That desire, however, can go too far missing the One who encompasses all authenticity and originality.
When an overreach for authenticity goes too far, the need for God is greatly diminished. This is especially true in the development of a personal worldview – the collection of attitudes, values, stories and expectations about the world around us, which inform our every thought and action. However, I am not suggesting we regress back to a naïve theological view of “God of the gaps”[2] made popular by Friedrich Nietzsche: sarcastically, if science could not explain it – it must be God!
On the contrary, I applaud scientific explanations that fill in the gaps and inform our worldview to the point where we “are left without excuse” (Rom. 1:20) that God is the utmost and unavoidable reality. Scripture frequently points out that God made everyone as originals, not only in the way we look and our personalities, but also in the plans He has for each of us.
For example, you may be that person “born for such a time as this” (Esther 4:14); or you may have a strong sense of calling knowing “before you were born, I consecrated you” (Jer. 1:5); or at a certain threshold in your life looking to God to “instruct you and teach you in the way you should go” (Ps. 32:8); and if there is any doubt about authenticity, He promised that “no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor. 2:9).
Either way, the desire for authenticity must embrace the commodity of time because, “He has made everything beautiful in its time” (Eccl. 3:11). I think that is what Barnes portrays in his protagonist from schoolboy to retirement.
The equity of time is vital to knowing who we are and our place in the world. There will be times when we will succeed and fail, fall in love and have your heart broken, win and lose, know loyalty and betrayal, and even go through periods of time questioning our faith. We may even get to the point of not believing in God, yet really miss Him. That’s my point. God is inescapable regardless of whether we believe in Him or not.
So, how do we live a life of authenticity?
St. Paul tells us “Do not be unequally yoked” (2 Cor. 6:14). Undoubtedly, he is drawing on the agricultural image of oxen pulling a plow, “Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together” (Deut. 22:10). Why? An ox and donkey are unequal.[3] For my purposes, the ox represents orthodoxy, whereas the donkey represents wokism.
He explained this dilemma to the Corinthian people about 55AD. The multicultural population of Corinth were famous for mixing their religions to the point where a worshiper had to make sure they were not worshiping in the wrong place (1 Cor. 10:14-25). Religions merged to look like each other. Paul brings special attention to the Christian Eucharist that looked similar to other religions (1 Cor. 11:17-34). A quick read of his two letters to the Corinthian church shows religious pluralism (many religions) and religious syncretism (the mixing of religious beliefs) were commonplace.
Hence, “Do not be unequally yoked” (2 Cor. 6:14).
St. Paul presents rhetorical questions to the Corinthian people to help them think it through: what does righteousness and wickedness, light and darkness, Christ and Belial (Satan), the temple of God and temples dedicated to idols have in common? (2 Cor. 6:14-16). Put this way, the answer was obvious – nothing!
Quoting from the Books of Leviticus and Jeremiah, St. Paul states, “Come out from them and be separate” (2 Cor. 6:17). Let’s be clear, he is not contradicting the gospel. He is not painting the picture of a cult in isolation. Rather, he is giving clear instruction for the Christian not to share in lifestyles that are wicked, dark, and idolatrous. Like an ox and donkey, the Christian has nothing in common or agreeable with such lifestyles.
What is the pervading lifestyle today?
The idolatry of identity is undoubtedly an obsession today. As we look back over 2022, the idea of identity has moved from the spiritual to the physical, or to be more precise, the physical body. We see this especially in gender identity and its social implications. As such, a personal worldview is developed around identity as the individual sees it ignoring anything inherent or transcendent. Defying science, theology, and natural law, an idolatry of identity reverts to Nietzsche’s “God of the gaps” by reading into that gap personal identity as the individual sees it.
Let’s put this to the test.
There are two theological terms at play when we read Scripture. The first is eisegesis (to draw in), and the second exegesis (to draw out). Here are four passages in Scripture about the physical body. What do you read into them, and what do you draw out of them?
First, “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore, honor God with your bodies” (1 Cor. 6:19-20).
In what way is my body a temple?
In what way did I receive my body from God?
What was the price He paid for my body?
What does honor mean?
How can I honor God with my body?
Second, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20).
I am fully alive so in what way do I no longer live?
I understand that I live my life in and through my physical body, but how do I do that by faith?
In what way did Christ give Himself for me?
Third, “The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife” (1 Cor. 7:4).
In the wake of “my body my choice”[4] in its broadest sense, in what way do husband and wife belong to each other physically?
Is it just about sex or does it include something more?
Is physical and mental health implied in this text?
Fourth, “He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them ‘Mankind’ when they were created” (Gen. 5:2).
Before there was social science and all the accompanying language of isms and ologies, what were the natural distinctions of male and female?
In what way does God’s creation of male and female succinctly work in society, marriage, and family?
Is there a theological connection between male and female with Christ the Bridegroom and the Church as His Bride?
If a Christian worldview is not moored in these (and other) passages in Scripture as the basic premise for the human body, the journey from schoolboy to retirement, as Barnes describes, can be yoked with wicked, dark, and idolatrous lifestyles. It looks like an ox and donkey pulling a plow. It is unequally yoked, or as I propose for the sake of this blog, unequally woked.[5]
It is the proponents of the Christian faith that concern me who willfully hitch a donkey to their plow instead of another ox creating an unequal yoke – unequally woked. For example, the United Methodist Church have famously become divided on their biblical understanding of sexual identity.[6] Affirming Pentecostal Church International, US Presbyterian Church, US Evangelical Lutheran Church, American National Catholic Church, Alliance of Baptists, US Episcopal Church, and many more have become, what I’m calling, unequally woked.
Why?
It would be easy to say that St. Paul’s warned Timothy about the “why” ten years after he wrote to the Corinthian church, “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2 Tim. 4:3). I wholeheartedly agree St. Paul’s warning is an excellent explanation for unequally woked today.
But there is something more sinister at play than just a warning applied to today’s wokism.
Let’s go back to the Garden of Eden and the encounter Eve had with the serpent. She clearly understood what we might call “sound doctrine”, in that, “The woman said to the serpent, ‘We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die’” (Gen. 3:2-3).
Now listen to the serpent’s subtle response, “You will not certainly die,’ the serpent said to the woman. ‘For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God…” (Gen. 3:4-5).
Since the beginning of time, the perpetual lie that panders to the human ego is “you will be like God.” More so in today’s world, an overreach for personal authenticity amplifies the lie. Those who erase God must become God. Someone must be, right?
If we continue down the path of idolizing our identity by acting like God, it will inevitably create a huge social vacuum affirming “I don’t believe in God” but in the quietness of every soul the longing cry of “but I miss Him” because He is unavoidable.
It’s time, especially for those in the “household of faith” (Gal. 6:10) to stop playing around with sound doctrine for the sake of authenticity and unhitch the donkey of wokism. Hitch the oxen or orthodoxy to the plow.
Be equally yoked, not unequally woked.
[1] Julian Barnes, The Sense of Ending. New York, NY Vintage Books. 2011. Also made into a movie Directed by Ritesh Barta distributed through Lionsgate 2017.
[2] Friedrich Nietzsche, Translated R. J. Hollingdale, Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for Everyone and No One. New York, NY Penguin Classics. 1961.
[3] For my purposes, the ox represents orthodoxy, whereas the donkey represents wokism.
[4] A term originally used by feminists in Pakistan in support of women’s rights, now widely used in different contexts.
[5] I am using “woke” as an umbrella term for individuals who are engrossed by social justice thinking of themselves as saviors holding the moral high ground but remain willfully ignorant to the irrationality of their claims and the problems they create.
[6] Jeremy Steele, Christianity Today, “Methodists Agree on Compromise to Split Denomination”, January 3, 2020.