Does The Cross Have A Place In Evangelical Christianity?

Zack —  February 25, 2013 — 8 Comments

crucifixion-golgotha-1912

We’re just a few weeks away from Easter.

Which means you’re going to be hearing a lot about Jesus, the cross, and the resurrection at church for the foreseeable future (not that you didn’t already….I hope).

You might even hear some talk about how scandalous the cross is or, at least, how scandalous it’s supposed to be.

Of course, when something has become a fashionable piece of jewelry, a tasteful decoration, and a trendy tattoo it becomes difficult to call it scandalous. But I think the scandal is still there, even if we do go out of our way to domesticate and ignore it.

After all, if you were to walk into some of the largest churches (and plenty of not so large ones) in the United States, chances are good that you’ll notice something missing – a cross.

Or if there is one, there’s a good chance it’s not the center of attention. Why? Because too much “churchy” stuff makes visitors uncomfortable and if they don’t return, our churches don’t “grow” and if our churches don’t “grow,” we can’t afford that new multi-million dollar addition we “built on faith” and if….well you know how the story goes.

But for as much as we’re concerned about the comfortability of outsiders in our midst, I think the truth is most of us don’t mind moving the cross to some place where we’re not forced to look at the entire time, forced to think about the horrors and humiliation that occurred so long ago on our behalf.

Sure, we love talking about and celebrating the fact that “Jesus died for our sins,” but we really don’t like thinking about what it means for God to die on a cross and we especially don’t like thinking about what the implications might be for us.

Because when we do begin to think about the implications of such an act by God, something becomes quite apparent quite fast.

The cross has no place in Evangelical Christianity.

Evangelical Christianity proudly proclaims a big, awesome, all powerful God, building its foundation on God’s greatness and might. The cross stands in stark contrast to such a God. On the cross we see God beaten, bruised, and dying. Without realizing it we often explain this away by talking about how God gave His Son to die as if, implicitly, the Son was somehow less than God and therefore able to perform such a lowly act. In doing so, we free ourselves from the scandal of a God who “though being in the form of God did not consider equality with God something to be exploited, rather he made himself nothing….[and] humbled himself by becoming obedient to death – even death on a cross.”

What we want is a God who goes to battle for us, who fights off our enemies, who conquers and destroys in one fell swoop, and then turns to us and says “Go and do likewise.”

But this God who so willing allows the weak to conquer the strong, who meets violence with peace, and who dies for His enemies rather than destroying them with weapons of war turns our understanding of power and might upside down.

Which means in a Evangelical world built around a big, awesome, all powerful God there is no place for the cross.

But make no mistake.

It was God who hung beaten, bruised, and dying on that cross.

It was also God who was stripped naked before being nailed to that cross.

We brush this away, quite literally, by painting a white cloth on Jesus to hide his “shame.” But victims of Roman crucifixion were not afforded such a luxury. Jesus, like the countless crucifixion victims before and after him, was stripped naked in order to maximize his humility.

Which means God hung fully exposed before His creation, His most intimate parts on display for all of creation to see.

In an Evangelical world profoundly uncomfortable with sexuality and the human body, this may be the most scandalous part of the crucifixion. We may be able to find a way to be okay with Jesus dying, but we will have nothing to do with such “shameful” nudity. And yet, there hangs a naked God on the cross, his damaged sexuality for all to see.

However, our evangelical sensibilities will not allow us to confront this raw display of the human body, which means the full reality of Jesus’ death on the cross has no place in evangelical Christianity

But Jesus wasn’t simply stripped of his clothes. The act of crucifixion was a stripping of everything he owned, everything he was, and everyone he every knew.

He was left to die alone and empty.

Perhaps nothing stands in such stark relief to Evangelical Christianity than this simple fact, this simple lack of prosperity. Most of us brush aside the blatant prosperity gospel preached by so many televangelists, that false gospel that proclaims God wants us all to be rich. But the truth is prosperity permeates all of evangelicalism.

The best churches, the best preachers, the best Christians are the ones who are the most prosperous, who live the most successful lives, who preach before the biggest congregations, who worship in the largest churches. We may not willing to just come out and say “God wants me to be rich,” but we have no problem crying out when that prosperity doesn’t come as if it were someone a debt God owed to us as part of our agreement to follow Him. And we certainly have no problem going out of our way to avoid anything and everything that might make us uncomfortable, or worse, cause us to part ways with the things, or people, we have worked so hard to get.

And yet there on the cross hung Jesus, left to die alone, broken and empty, stripped of everything he had and everyone he knew. Which, once again, means there is not place for a prosperity destroying cross in Evangelical Christianity.

You see, what is so scandalous about the cross, what makes it so off putting to visitors, and so uncomfortable for those of us who claim the title “Christian” is that it opposes the success, pride, prosperity, and comfort we are told by the world we should value most.

The scandal of the cross is that it is not a sign of pride and victory, but of humility and defeat.

Yes, there is hope and victory in the resurrection. But to get to Easter Sunday, we must pass through Good Friday.

Or, as Jesus once told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow him.”

That cross is about humility.

Taking it up means we take what comes with it. It means we must be prepared to be stripped of everything we have, to be exposed for all to see, and, ultimately, to be broken, to be bruised, and to die.

Only then will we find life.

But if there’s anything that doesn’t have a place in Evangelical Christianity, particularly American Evangelical Christianity, it’s humility.

Which means, in turn, there is no place for the cross in Evangelical Christianity.

What we are left with instead is a cross-less Christianity, a Christ-less Christianity, a Christianity that’s been domesticated to suit our own tastes, desires, and personal comfort.

Unfortunately, there is no easy solution for this calamity.

To become the Christ-like people we claim to be we must face the reality our own pride and find the courage to ask ourselves honestly….

Are we actually willing to pick up our crosses and be crucified with Christ or is the cross the place where our faith stops?

 

Grace and peace,

Zack Hunt

 

Zack

Posts

  • http://twitter.com/kevinwilliams07 Kevin Williams

    The cross is the unfortunate struggle on the way to success. As the “No Fear” shirt informs No pain, no gain. That is the triumphal message of the cross. As you argue we grab the “for our sins part,” the prosperity part for us, and move on.

    The cross is much more. We need to stop and understand the cross is God’s new vision for the world. The new way of the world is the self-giving, love of the crucified Messiah.

    • http://www.facebook.com/zlhunt Zack Hunt

      “The cross is the unfortunate struggle on the way to success. As the “No Fear” shirt informs No pain, no gain.”

      Love that image/critique!

  • http://nickssanctuary.com/ Nick Payne

    It’s all in marked contrast to Europe in the Middle Ages. The cross was shifted centre stage because as masses of people died from the sweeping horror of Black Death & plague, the image of a God who suffered and died in such a terrible way, who shared our humanity at its most bitter… carried the infirmities of pain and death, was something that drew those who were suffering in such a way to embrace him. So much art from that time displays Jesus in obvious pain and not really toned down at all… it meant something then and it should mean something now.

  • http://somuchshoutingsomuchlaughter.com/ suzannah | the smitten word

    YES. the evangelical conception of power more closely resembles Rome than the humility of the cross or the triumph (over empire) of resurrection.

  • Jon

    “Because too much “churchy” stuff makes visitors uncomfortable and if they don’t return, our churches don’t “grow” and if our churches don’t “grow,” we can’t afford that new multi-million dollar addition we “built on faith” and if….well you know how the story goes.”

    Unfortunately that statement resonates all too well with my experience. I remember not long before I left evangelicalism, there was a multi year push for about 150 million dollars, yes 150 million dollars….of which over 60 million was used on a parking structure and new building (campus is only 50 years old with 6 buildings to begin with). This money (which could have fed the poor in our entire region for years) was to be spent on a parking structure, a coffee bar, a new library, a new event center (which sits vacant 90% of the time), and theater seating in the church.

    Of course God revealed to the church to do this and the church was going to move on faith that God would provide these material pleasures. The pastor in his monthly push for more funds, made sure to remind us that we should give our gifts for these material luxuries to get our reward in heaven.

    Disgusting…

    This same church may as well have been a concert hall or theater, nothing in it revealed it as a church. Theater seats, a stage with a pulpit, 50 piece orchestra putting on a show with the occasional soloists rendition on whatever is in the top 10 on Christian Radio. Oh and of course the cutesie video that the staff made that had virtually no value other than comedic relief. The low point of the whole thing was the sermon, and of course there was no time for communion, or reflection, confession of sins, acknowledgement of sins, or recitation of beliefs. It was all about making money and putting on the best performance that would allow the most people to come and keep coming.

    Perhaps I am a bit cynical, and I will not deny that the church did have plenty of good things about it, and plenty of ministries and good they did for the believers as well as the community, but the underlying culture seemed to be plagued by this thought of “What do I get out of church” or “What entertainment does church provide me” rather than nurturing a contrite spirit and a heart to serve Christ in the very radical way that he served.

  • http://www.facebook.com/serloren Loren Sanders

    And why would you denigrate the image of Christ before others by using it as a banner mod of “Uncle Sam” – does expected shock value make it okay to debase Him so?

    American Christians of all stripes, types, and denoms are far too irreverent and disrespectful with Jesus in all things.

    • ZackHunt

      2 thoughts….

      1. Clearly the idea of satire is lost on you, as is, apparently, the ability to read an “About” page.

      2. Since your concern about “denigrating the image of Christ” is based on your belief that that image is actually of Christ and would, therefore, be a “graven image” (albeit a not very good one as that “Jesus” looks conspicuously like a 20th century white American), I would suggest it is not I who is the one guilty of denigrating the image of God.

  • Karen

    Unfortunately, some non-Evangelicals, too, are abandoning a Lord crucified in weakness for images of power:

    http://news.ca.msn.com/odd-news-week-ending-feb-22#image=8