Is the World’s Hatred a Guarantee That We Are Following Jesus?

Too many Christians behave and speak obnoxiously at times, and then when the world responds with hatred, we automatically attribute that hatred to our faithfulness to Christ.
There seems to be a common misconception among many Christians that if the world hates them, it’s incontrovertible proof that they must be doing something right. They must be faithfully following Jesus.
It is true that the world hates those whom Christ has chosen out of this world (John 15:18–25). It is true that the world hates Christians because it hates Christ.
What is the logical fallacy known as “affirming the consequent”?
The problem is that many Christians commit a logical fallacy when thinking about this issue. They assume that if the world hates them, then it must be the case that they are faithfully following Jesus. Let me lay out the statements to make this easier to see.
True Conditional Statement:
If you faithfully follow Jesus, then the world will hate you. (If P, therefore Q).
Logically Fallacious Conclusion:
The world hates me, therefore I must be faithfully following Jesus (Q, therefore P).
You Might also like
-
Finding Christ in All of Scripture
John 5:39 is one of the most important verses in all of Scripture since it provides us with this crucial interpretive insight. This one verse helps us to see that the Bible isn’t a self-help manual, but instead should be seen as a compelling drama in which Jesus is presented as the central character. As John makes clear throughout his Gospel, he’s not merely a good teacher, but is the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14), the Lamb of God (Jn 1:29), Jacob’s ladder (Jn 1:51), the Temple of God’s presence (Jn 2:21), Israel’s bridegroom (Jn 3:29), the source of living water (Jn 4:10), the bread of life (Jn 6:48-50), the light of the world (Jn 8:12), and the good shepherd who came to give his life for wandering sheep (Jn 10:11).
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life, and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life…If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me (John 5:39, 46).
In the above passage from John chapter 5, Jesus told the religious leaders of his day that they had essentially missed the main point of the Bible. In their view, Scripture was seen almost exclusively as a rule of conduct, which is why in sources from the Second Temple period it was often referred to as “the way.” In one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, we find the statement: “If then the secret way is perfected among the men of the community, each will walk blamelessly with his fellow, guided by what has been revealed to them, that will be the time of ‘preparing the way in the desert.’” (1QS 9:18-22).
The problem with this approach is that no one has ever perfected his or her way, and no one has ever been able to walk blamelessly, just as David confessed in Psalm 143:2 when he wrote, “Enter not into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you.” What’s interesting is the fact that the author of the above Qumran scroll ended up citing a verse from Isaiah 40 related to Israel’s coming Messiah, but he ended up applying this passage to himself and members of his own community. In other words, he made the same mistake that Jesus spoke of in John 5—he missed the Bible’s main point.
Isaiah chapter 40 opens with a grand announcement of God’s solution to Israel’s problem. “Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned…” So, if David was correct when he said that no one living is righteous before God, then how could Isaiah proclaim such a message of good news and comfort? The answer is that God had graciously decided to intervene on behalf of his people. This is why the Bible, though it certainly does contain rules for conduct, shouldn’t be thought of primarily as a moral guidebook for life. Instead, we need to see it as a dramatic rescue story.
This becomes clear in verse 3, “A voice cries: ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.’” First of all, we should notice immediately the “way” spoken of here is not “our way” but the way of the LORD. Yahweh is the one who is coming to rescue and redeem his people in the midst of their sin. As you may recall, Jesus specifically applied this verse to the role of John the Baptist who prepared the people for his arrival (Mt 11:10, Lk 3:4).
But if John is the fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3, then what does this imply about the identity of Jesus himself? John’s role was to prepare the way for the LORD, and to make a highway for God himself. According to Isaiah, when God would eventually arrive on the scene to rescue his people, “the glory of the LORD” would be revealed. This is precisely what we find in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory…” (Jn 1:14). In no uncertain terms, Jesus is being presented as Yahweh incarnate. Though “all we like sheep have each gone astray” (Is 53:6), “his way is perfect” (Ps 18:30). Therefore, Jesus is the divine protagonist of this grand rescue story. He doesn’t merely show us the way, but he “is the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6).
I’m convinced that John 5:39 is one of the most important verses in all of Scripture since it provides us with this crucial interpretive insight. This one verse helps us to see that the Bible isn’t a self-help manual, but instead should be seen as a compelling drama in which Jesus is presented as the central character. As John makes clear throughout his Gospel, he’s not merely a good teacher, but is the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14), the Lamb of God (Jn 1:29), Jacob’s ladder (Jn 1:51), the Temple of God’s presence (Jn 2:21), Israel’s bridegroom (Jn 3:29), the source of living water (Jn 4:10), the bread of life (Jn 6:48-50), the light of the world (Jn 8:12), and the good shepherd who came to give his life for wandering sheep (Jn 10:11).
Read More
Related Posts: -
Irony & the PCA: The First Fifty Years
The conclusion of the 1982 Assembly marked the end of an era of expansion, optimism, and pioneering. Most of those initial leaders would pass on by the time of the half-century mark. Still, the Church had now absorbed an entire denomination with its various agencies, missions, presbyteries, and churches. Most realized that true union was not merely organizational and that large sub-cultures would need to continue in mutual trust for the PCA to grow as wished. The next decade would test those values and unity.
Below is another excerpt from TE David Hall’s new book, Irony and the Presbyterian Church in America. Dr. Hall has graciously provided a few samples of his latest volume to give the readers of Mid the Pines a fresh look at the first history published in conjunction with the PCA’s 50th Anniversary.
David Hall joins a long line of scholars to chart God’s faithfulness to His Church. The excerpt below details the efforts to build on the union between the PCA with the RPCES in joining and receiving. The now larger PCA experienced growth and growing pains as new questions regarding confessional subscription emerged. Read on below or purchase TE Hall’s volume available as kindle or hardcopy.
The 1982 (10th) Assembly: Union to Avoid Duplication
By David W. Hall
By the time that the 10th GA convened, returning to the campus of Calvin College with several other NAPARC partners, it was clear that enough PCA presbyteries had approved joining with the RPCES. Leading up to this Assembly, though, proponents on both sides of the issue were recruiting supporters to the very beginning of RPCES Synod. The new denomination had nearly quadrupled its membership in its first decade and doubled the number of presbyteries. Teaching elders, as had become the norm, had a nearly 2:1 ratio to ruling elders for these important debates.
When the Assembly began, Francis Schaeffer was invited to give a keynote address to this Assembly as part of the celebration of the J&R. Retiring Moderator Paul Settle announced that by more than a 3/4 margin the RPCES had approved the J&R with a 322-90 vote. Similarly, the PCA had obtained the requisite votes to effect union (25 presbyteries in favor, with none opposing); thus, the RPCES commissioners were soon included as registered commissioners of the 10th GA. Notwithstanding, by an 18-7[1] vote of the PCA presbyteries, the invitation to the OPC failed by one presbytery vote to receive the needed supermajority support and was discontinued for a time.[2]
Before Dr. Schaeffer spoke to the now-united churches, a few border disputes among presbyteries needed adjustment, and this was assigned to a sub-committee to reconcile as soon as possible. The other largely formal matters below (Min10GA, 320) were approved as this committee concluded its work and was dissolved.
The Committee requested the Committee on Administration also to appoint legal counsel to work with the general counsel of the RPCES to assure that wills, trusts, corporations, and property matters are properly cared for in the transition process.
Steps were taken to assure that trustees in the RPCES with fiduciary responsibilities will not be placed in jeopardy when their responsibilities are transferred to corresponding members in the PCA.
The Ad Interim Committee wishes to thank the Coordinators, staff members, committee chairmen and others in the PCA who cooperated so willingly and fully with the efforts to facilitate the transition procedures of the Joining and Receiving. Appreciation is also expressed to our brethren in the OPC and RPCES who have so graciously worked with us as we have explored the possibility of ‘effecting one church.’
Though we regret that the OPC will not at this time be participating in the Joining and Receiving process, we pray that our sovereign God will allow us to continue already successful joint efforts in ministry and to expand our common witnessunto a day when we may indeed realize the hope of organizational unity to His glory.
Read More
Related Posts: -
Praise Him, All Creatures Here Below
In 1674, Ken published A Manual of Prayers for the Use of the Scholars of Winchester College. In it, he gave instructions for the devotional use of a series of his new compositions of Morning and Evening Hymns, including “Awake, My Soul, and with the Sun” and “Glory to Thee, My God, this Night.” What we now commonly sing as the “Doxology,” was actually the closing stanza of each of these long hymn sequences. Interestingly, according to a long-held tradition, Ken may have first learned the text and the old Genevan tune setting from his adoptive father, Izaak Walton.
A doxology is a short chorus of praise to the Lord, often sung as a standalone piece or as a coda at the conclusion of psalms, hymns, or canticles. The word comes from the Greek doxa, meaning, “appearance” or “glory,” and logia, meaning, “study” or “declaration.” A doxology is thus a declaration of the glory of the Most High God; it is a joyous sung pronouncement of His praise.
Common doxologies include the Gloria in Excelsis Deo and the Gloria Patri. But of course, the most common of all is taken from Psalm 100 and sung to the tune of the Genevan Psalter’s “Old Hundredth.”
Praise God from whom all blessings flow;Praise Him, all creatures here below;Praise Him above, ye heavenly host:Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
This treasured doxology is sung every Sunday all around the globe in untold dozens of languages. It was composed by Thomas Ken, a fellow of Winchester College, a prebend of Winchester Cathedral, and later, the Bishop of Bath and Wells during the reigns of Charles II and James II.
Ken was tragically orphaned in childhood. So, his older sister, Ann, and her husband, Izaak Walton, brought him into their home raised him as their own. Walton was himself orphaned as a boy — his father died when he was just three, and he lost his mother when he was nine. Thanks to the beneficence of some distant relatives, he was able to train as a linen draper in the iron-mongers guild. Eventually, he set up a small shop in the busy neighborhood of Fleet Street near Chancery Lane in the London parish of St. Dunstan’s. It was there that he volunteered as a churchwarden and developed an enduring friendship with the pastor, John Donne — who of course would later gain renown as the dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral.
Read More
Related Posts: