Slick and Worldly

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

(1 John 2:15-17, KJV)

 

To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak:

I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 

(1 Cor. 9:22, KJV)

Yes, Uncle Bob is emphasizing the King James Version a bit more in celebration of its 400th anniversary year.

First of all, what does it mean to "love the world" or to be "worldly"? It is not a command that we are to hate the planet that God gave us, the beauty of nature and other people. That should be obvious, but you never know with some people...

So, what is "loving the world" and "worldliness"? Do you ever have those times when you know something, but cannot put it into words? I had to get help. Good thing I have theWord Bible software.

Albert Barnes wrote, "The meaning is, that we are not to fix our affections on worldly objects - on what the world can furnish - as our portion, with the spirit with which they do who live only for this world, regardless of the life to come. We are not to make this world the object of our chief affection; we are not to be influenced by the maxims and feelings which prevail among those who do...we are not to love the things which are sought merely to pamper the appetite, to please the eye, or to promote pride in living. These are the objects sought by the people of the world; these are not the objects to be sought by the Christian."

So, loving the world means to have our affections on things that bring pleasure, status, money and the like. The follower of Jesus should put aside those things that interfere with growing in Christ (Titus 2.11-14) and walking in the Spirit (Galatians 5.16). Further, reading more than just 1 John 2.15 helps clarify the concept.

Unfortunately, some Christians put an emphasis on appearance rather than affections. A woman cannot wear makeup or earrings because she is being "worldly". A man cannot play a game of Rummy for the same reason. If the woman has questionable motives in her adornment, and if the man is playing to win big money, then we have a problem with affections that distract us from God, however. If you think that you should not play cards or wear makeup because it may be a problem in your spiritual life, or if God told you stop, that is a different matter. Otherwise, arbitrary distinctions based on what I consider a catch-all excuse of "that is worldly" stems from legalism as well as misunderstanding the concept.

I have to add something here that I think is a reasonable extension of reasoning. Pastor Persimmons tells you, "No, brotherrrrrr, that is worldly!" But the pastor is wearing a suit and tie, looking quite like a banker or stockbroker. You know, looking like the kind of people who are likely to be putting their affections on money, power, success and the like. The ones with worldly affections. Betcha he didn't think of that, huh?

"Fine, Cowboy Bob, we have that nailed down. So what's with the 'be all things to all men' bit?"

This has been horribly misused, especially with today's circus churches. (I learned that phrase today, and I think it's great!) It is not an excuse to put aside the gospel message for the sake of filling our churches with people. We are not called to entertain the lost, but to show them that they are, indeed, lost. Then we preach the gospel and help them grow in Christ once they have committed their lives to him.

Paul was not talking about being stand-offish or aloof. He would meet people where they are, how they are. However, he would not compromise his integrity or the Word of God; he would not sin to win sinners, for instance. And I suspect that he acted within reason.

Matthew Henry puts it this way (read slowly, this was written about 300 years ago): "This I do for the gospel's sake, and that I may be partaker thereof with you; that is, for the honour of Christ, whose the gospel is, and for the salvation of souls, for which it was designed, and that he and they might communicate in the privileges of it, or partake together of them. For these ends did he thus condescend, deny himself as to his liberty, and accommodate himself to the capacities and usages of those with whom he had to do, where he lawfully might. Note, A heart warmed with zeal for God, and breathing after the salvation of men, will not plead and insist upon rights and privileges in bar to this design. Those manifestly abuse their power in the gospel who employ it not to edification but destruction, and therefore breathe nothing of its spirit."

It's all about the gospel message!

My first point is about where we put our primary affections as Christians. The second point was about doing what we need to do for the sake of spreading the gospel.

Now, about my clever title for this article. I heard a call to Matt Slick's radio show on CARM, "Faith and Reason", about a fellow who was playing in a bar band. That is the first clip. The second clip is my call to Matt. Somehow, I have a knack for getting him going. We discussed being "all things to all men" as well as "worldliness". The second call is about twelve minutes, and I thought it was very enlightening.

For reference, the full-length broadcasts are here and here.