 |
| Talent + Hard Work |
There seems to be a continuum that exists in the world of athletics with respect to strength and conditioning. In the last year, I have been exposed to several different atmospheres that have made me aware of this.
In the collegiate strength and conditioning world, I constantly had to be hounding my athletes to put forth effort. Many of them had almost no work ethic, but had tons of natural talent. The challenge for me was getting them to realize that natural talent would only take them so far, and that without pushing themselves to the limit on a daily basis in training and in practice, they would never reach the next level. They simply could not rely on talent alone- it would require blood, sweat, and tears. It was frustrating for me as a coach to watch, and I couldn't help but think how many people would kill for the genetic giftings that many of these athletes had. By doing too little they are stunting their growth and preventing themselves from reaching their desired goals.
The crossfit world lies on the opposite end of the spectrum. One of the things I respect most about crossfitters of all abilities is their innate desire to "be better than yesterday". People always start crossfit with the desire to get "in shape" (whatever that means) or to get a six pack, or whatever else. But gradually you see a shift in them that occurs, usually about 4-6 weeks in to their crossfit journey. Instead of wanting to see physical results, they want to get their first pull-up without a band. Instead of a hotter bod, they want to snatch their body weight. I love it, but something tends to happen- people let these desires rule them, and in doing so they work themselves into the ground. I have had clients come in, do a crossfit class, stay after and do Smolov (notoriously the most feared squat program), then go run a mile, then come back in later that day for "skill work". I admire the dedication, but what they fail to realize is that they are completely overdoing it, and that their bodies simply cannot handle that kind of volume. By doing too much they are stunting their growth and preventing themselves from reaching their desired goals.
The line between too much vs. too little is a fine one, and one that I think many of us as Christians struggle with as well. I typically don't consider myself much of a theologian, but from time to time I do enjoy delving into the realm of higher thinking. This week, the topic in view was Legalism vs. Antinomianism. I will do my best to lay these out.
Legalism is "strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or moral code." It is simply the belief that by adhering to a set of laws or morals, that we can earn God's favor and simultaneously put Him in our debt. It is a life marked by joylessness, duty, and burden. The driving motive is fear, not affection for Christ.
Antinomianism, on the other hand, is the belief that under the gospel dispensation of grace, the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. It is simply the posture of the heart that says "I am already saved, so I can do whatever I want because God will and has already forgiven me." It is cheap grace, a grace without obligation, and oftentimes manifests itself as a life without concern for personal holiness.
The continuum is a difficult one. Our God is "not served by human hands" (Acts 17:5) and needs nothing from us, so it is foolish of us to think that we can earn our way to Him. The bible is clear that "all of our righteous acts are like filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6), and that even on our best day we still fall short. Paul completely eliminates the possibility for us to earn grace. In Romans 11:6, he reminds us that "grace cannot be based on works, for if it were, it would not be grace." Thats the whole idea of grace- it is given, not earned, and it is free. But free does not mean it is without cost. At the same time, our God does not simply call people to Himself so that they can be wayward and do whatever they want. His saving grace is also His sanctifying grace. In 1 Peter, we are called to "be holy in all our behavior; because it is written 'you shall be holy for I am holy.'" As a people who reflect the nature and character of the living God, we are called to a life of personal holiness. Paul also answers the question "are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace?" (Romans 6:15) with the resounding "By no means!" So how do we balance these two ideas? I am about to straight nerd out on y'all.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian, described what he calls "cheap" and "costly" grace in his book The Cost of Discipleship.
"Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.
Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will gladly go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble, it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows him.
Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must be asked for, the door at which a man must knock."
Whereas the legalist thinks "I obey, therefore I am accepted," the antinomian thinks "I am accepted, therefore I don't need to obey." Both, however, are wrong, for a true, gospel centered, Christ adoring view would be "I am accepted, therefore I obey." Our adoption as sons and daughters rolls up into worship through obedience, which leads us to ever increasing joy and Christ's ever increasing glory. So where should we strive to fall on the continuum of legalism vs. antinomianism? Nowhere, for those who truly love, adore, honor, and obey Christ are on a whole other level, a playing field that is completely separate. I am constantly reminded that the Lord is not after our begrudging submission, but our joy. We are not joyful, and He is not glorified, if we simply obey out of a sense of obligation. Neither will we find ultimate satisfaction, or will Christ be ultimately exalted, if we pursue our own fleshly passions and desires with no regard for Christ's desires. Our joy and His glory are inseparably linked to our delight in His law- as the Psalmist says in Psalm 119 "Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day."
I shall leave you with this quote:
"I want to call people to holiness, as the new creatures they are, by bringing them into deeper and deeper awareness of the gospel of grace. Some believe “effort and action [are] central to sanctification.” I believe the gospel is central to sanctification, and that effort and action are neither central nor optional (optional = antinomianism) but integral.
The rhythm of the New Testament is “walk in love as a response to how deeply you are loved in Christ.” “Be imitators of God, as beloved children” (Eph 5:1). In a nutshell: if the imperatives of Scripture are extracted in preaching without being self-consciously placed within their (heart-transforming) indicative framework, then such bald imperatives will invariably devolve into a counterproductive reinforcement of the Pharisee lurking in every human heart—even the regenerate human heart.
For the regenerate, holiness has taken on a strangely attractive hue, for God is now our loving Father, not our wrathful judge. We now delight in the law in a way we never did (never could) before. But the law itself remains impotent to generate this holiness. The law can guide us, but not propel us. It is a steering wheel, not an engine."
Hope I didn't blow too many minds... pretty sure I blew my own mind there. Blessings
No comments:
Post a Comment