Friday, July 20, 2007

The Gospel of Baseball: When Full Effort is Too Much

On May 24, 1952, before a game with the New York Yankees, young and promising Red Sox outfielder Jimmy Piersall engaged in a fistfight with Yankee’s infielder Billy Martin. Afterward the game, Piersall fought with a teammate in the clubhouse. With weeks, after several other incidents, Piersall was demoted to the AA Birmingham Barons. Shortly thereafter, Piersall was sent to Westboro State Hospital in Massachusetts for "nervous exhaustion." Although Piersall returned to the Red Sox the following year—starting in the outfield with Ted Williams and Jackie Jensen through 1958 and playing in the majors through 1967—he continued to struggle with inappropriate and bizarre behavior, e.g.:

  • permanently hurting his arm in a throwing contest with Willie Mays,
  • running back and forth in the outfield during a Ted Williams at bat,
  • running around the backs backwards (albeit in the correct order) to celebrate his 100th home run, and
  • fighting with managers, players, and fans.

In his autobiography, Fear Strikes Out, Piersall blamed much of his condition on his father, who pressured him to excel as a ballplayer when he was a young boy. This is not a diatribe against fathers; rather, it is counsel against all those voices in our heads that urge us to work 110% at life, at marriage, at work, at church, and even with God. We have taken verses like, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength" (Mark 12:30) and, "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door" (Luke 13:24) and made them into a false gospel whereby salvation is earned by our hard work. [1]

Matthew 7:15-23

Commentary

The parallel accounts are Luke 6:43-46 plus Luke 13:22-27. I strongly encourage you to read these in their full context because Luke & Matthew have slightly different arrangements and emphases. [2]

v15 Only in Matthew does Jesus warn of false prophets. We tend to think of a false prophet in terms of the Antichrist (Rev. 16:13; 19:20; 20:10). However, false prophets were considered a past and present danger as well (Luke 6:26; Acts 13:6; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 4:1). An earmark of a false prophet is lying. The false prophet may advocate idolatry, or may presume to speak on behalf of God without being authorized by God to speak. In either case, preaching a false salvation is more a mark of a false prophet than falsely preaching of calamity (Jeremiah 28).

v17-19 A better translation might be: "In the same way, a good tree makes beautiful fruit, but a rotten tree bears evil fruit. A good tree does not make evil fruit, not a rotten tree beautiful fruit. Each tree not making beautiful fruit is cut down and into the fire it is thrown."

v20 By the pronoun references (them & their), we conclude that the false prophets (v15) bear noticeable fruit (v16, 20), i.e. evil fruit.

v21 If a false prophet presumes to speak for God without authority, then a false believer may be one who presumes to speak to God without being in a bona fide relationship to God.

v22 Spectacular works are deceptive. A false prophet may perform miracles and claim authority, yet was never commissioned by God. A false believer may claim the name of Jesus (the phrase "in your name" being emphasized repeatedly) and yet not have the mark of Jesus, i.e. the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13-14).

v23 The vocabulary in the Greek is different than v19, but the implication is nevertheless clear. The producers of evil fruit in v19 are the evildoers in v23.

Application

The temptation is to read these verses as an apocalyptic warning—watch out for the Antichrist and the false prophet! However the verses before & after this section—in fact, the whole Sermon on the Mount—are concerned with the present-day reality of the kingdom of God. Where is God at work in your life? Where is God yet to enter into your life? Since v15-23 is preceded by an exhortation to enter through the narrow gate (v13-14) and is followed by an exhortation to take Jesus’ words and put them into practice (v24-27), it is a mistake to think that v15-23 is simply a futuristic warning.

Rather, v15-23 is primarily a warning that not every good work, not even good work done in the name of Jesus, is inspired and approved of by God. False teachings come in many different flavors, but today let’s talk about pragmatism. American pragmatism has trained us to believe that we are defined by what we do. Get introduced to somebody, and when they ask, "What do you do?" (a telling statement itself) we usually respond with an occupational description. "I’m a teacher, a nurse, a mason, a pastor, etc.," or, "I’m retired," or, "I’m a stay-at-home mom." (Why do we allow ourselves to be defined like this?)

We have been trained to believe that better means doing more. By this logic, working 50 hours is better than working 40 hours. Taking a promotion (with more responsibility) is better than the status quo. Double-tithing at church is better than tithing.

Conversely, we struggle with doing less. We are willing to accept more responsibility, but we are loathe to give up responsibilities. Giving up responsibilities feels like failing.

Defining ourselves by what we do is a false gospel; it is a rotten tree and will bear evil fruit. Where have your reaped evil fruit in your own life from this false gospel? Deep in our hearts, we know that it pragmatism is a lie—it does not work, & it does not even satisfy. So why do you keep trying to perform?

What if, instead of doing, you focused on being?

In our panic to define ourselves by what we do, we rush out to act. Frequently we end up trying to work in Jesus’ name when God has never called us to go. When you rush to act, do you end up painting God out of the picture? Is there not place left for God to do some new, unexpected thing?

In reaction, we fear to act, afraid to be outside of God’s will. We wait to know God’s will perfectly. Do you end up playing guessing games with God? Are you so afraid to guess wrong that you end up doing nothing?

Both of these reactions—rushing to act & being fearful to act—and the false gospel of pragmatism behind them deny the sovereignty of God, i.e. the power of God to enter into our lives, to command of the good and the evil in our lives, and to re-create us into some new thing.

"Be still, and know that I am God" (Ps 46:10)

Instead of rushing out to act, can you give control to God and ask him to act?

Instead of being fearful to act, can you ask God to put you where you need to be and to give you passion for what he would have you do?

Can you believe that God is in control and will put you where you need to be, with whom you need to be, and will give you the passion to work in his name ... if you step out of the way & give him the chance?

Points to Ponder

Relax! Living in the kingdom of God is fun once you stop trying to do it all yourself. Thomas Boswell, sports columnist for The Washington Post, says of the balance between effort and relaxation:

Assume everybody is trying reasonably hard.

Of all the factors at work in baseball, effort is the last to consider. In the majors, you seldom try your hardest; giving 110 percent, as a general mode of operation, would be counterproductive for most players. The issue in baseball is finding the proper balance between effort and relaxation. Usually, something on the order of 80 percent effort is about right. Few players have trouble revving that high. Many can’t get down that low. (Why Time Begins on Opening Day, p 292)

Relax doesn’t mean don’t try! All those verses that talk about making every effort (see endnote #1) tend to focus on taking the work of the Spirit in your life—especially purity, peace, and unity—seriously. Sin in our lives should not be ignored, and it should be dealt with seriously (Romans 6). However, ask God, through his Spirit guide you. You know how it works when you try to deal with personal sin on your own (it doesn’t work, does it?) so let God Spirit work on you—especially by re-directing your thoughts & passions.

Ever wonder why the Yankees don’t win the World Series every year with the best talent money can buy? Some blame goes to owner George Steinbrenner, who infamously interferes with the team, trying to "psyche up" the players. The players say Steinbrenner’s tactics work for football, where nerves and intensity are important, but not for baseball. (By the logic of this sermon, I just called Steinbrenner a false prophet, but in your disdain for the Yankees I ask you to remember them as a parable of trying too hard.)

Rick McKinley, pastor at Imago Dei Community in Portland Oregon (and Donald Miller’s pastor) says:

When I first became a Christ follower, I was invited to a Bible study. I worked with a great guy who loved on me and taught me the Bible as we worked through a little study book. I ate it up. I wanted to show him how seriously I was really taking this. When we finished the first book, he mentioned that there was a second one in the series that we should go through.

Bring it on, I thought. I was all for it. I devoured that one and soon moved on to the next, then the next one after that, and the next one after that.

One day I got tired of the little study books. I wondered what number I would be working on in ten years. I had thought that getting to the next level would get me to a deeper spiritual life. I wanted to get the "deeper spiritual life" thing done and taken care of, then move on to new business. But there was no end to it. All I ever arrived at was a new level that needed reaching.

Now, you might recognize yourself in my spiritual striving, or you might not. But I see that kind of striving and competitiveness everywhere [even] in our churches. (p 56)

End Notes:

1 - There are eight verses in the NIV containing the phrase "make every effort;" however, there are three distinct Greek verbs which are translated as "make every effort" in the NIV. In the verses below, I’ve replaced "make every effort" with a more literal translation.

Luke 13:24 "strive to enter through the narrow door" ("agonize" might be the more literal translation)
Romans 14:19 "pursue what leads to peace" (the word is elsewhere translated as "persecute")
Ephesians 4:3 "be diligent to keep the unity of the Spirit"
Hebrews 4:11 "be diligent to enter that rest"
Hebrews 12:14 "pursue living in peace with all men and being holy"
2 Peter 1:5-7 "be diligent to add to your faith goodness ..."
2 Peter 1:12-15 "... I will be diligent to see ... that you will always remember"
2 Peter 3:10-15 "... be diligent to be found spotless, blames, and at peace with him"

What are we supposed to be making every effort to do?

2 - For those who like to read the parallel accounts for greater insight—and I very much encourage you to read the parallel accounts—the sermon text today is a bit of a mess. The larger context for Matthew is the Sermon on the Mount (which is called the Sermon on the Plain in Luke). Although there are many topics in common between Matthew’s account and Luke’s account, the arrangement is frequently different—e.g. today’s text.

The immediate context for Matthew is the parable of the narrow & wide gates. This is the context for Luke 13:22-27 (which is not part of the Sermon on the Plain!) but not for the portion in Luke 6. For Luke 6:43-46, the immediate context is "Judge not" (i.e. last week’s sermon) which is also in Matthew 7; however, the wide/narrow gate parable is stuck in between! Both Matthew’s account and the Luke 6 section of the account conclude with the parable of the wise and foolish builders and the exhortation to put Jesus’ words into action.

As far as comparing Matthew and Luke:

Matthew 7:16-20 parallels Luke 6:43-44 and Matthew 12:33);
Luke 6:45 parallels Matt. 12:34-35 only (unless you see these two as a different spin on Matt. 7:22-23);
Matt. 7:21 parallels Luke 6:46; but at the same time,
Matt. 7:21-23 parallels Luke 13:25-27.

Looking at parallel passages in the gospels is part of what’s called synoptic criticism (criticism here just meaning analysis). What does Matthew’s account emphasize? What does Luke’s account emphasize? Frequently parallel accounts are identical, or nearly so. For something like today, where the parallels are not so straightforward, one might conclude that these were common topics for Jesus that appeared in several teachings in various contexts.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I went to a psychic reading with my mother recently and I couldn't help but wonder if people with this ability are considered to be false prophets? A few people have told me that the Bible does not support this ability. I just wonder how people can be given a talent such as this and it be wrong. Please clarify for me. Thank you, Beth

Pastor Chip said...

What a good question, and certainly it's something that lots of people ponder nowadays. I do a fair number of funerals--a long story for another day--and frequently people will ask something like, "I'm thinking about going to see a psychic to try contacting the person who died. What do you think about that?" Another thing that's common is for psychics to claim to be talking to angels. I guess the conventional wisdom is, "If somebody claims to be an angel, they must be good ... right?"

The short answer would be that the Bible does talk, a little, about mediums, and it says have nothing to do with them. (Most Bible translations use a term like, "medium" instead of "psychic", although the New Living Translation and The Message both use the word "psychic" ocassionally.)

I could give you verses to back up what I say, but I don't think that would really satisfy you. (If you want, go to http://www.biblegateway.com and search for "medium", or "psychic", or "divination", or something like that)

I think your real question is something more like, "Why could something seemingly so helpful be wrong--so wrong that the Bible says have nothing to do with it?" The best example I can think of is in Acts 16:16-18, where Paul, the Billy Graham super-duper preacher / evangelist / missionary of his time, is in Philippi preaching and runs across a psychic:

One day, on our way to the place of prayer, a slave girl ran into us. She was a psychic and, with her fortunetelling, made a lot of money for the people who owned her. She started following Paul around, calling everyone's attention to us by yelling out, "These men are working for the Most High God. They're laying out the road of salvation for you!" She did this for a number of days until Paul, finally fed up with her, turned and commanded the spirit that possessed her, "Out! In the name of Jesus Christ, get out of her!" And it was gone, just like that. (The Message, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2016:16-18;&version=65)

This would appear to be a psychic doing a good thing, right? She's telling everybody, "Hey, this guy Paul is the real deal, and you need to listen to what he has to say!" So why would Paul silence her? Was she a distraction? Was she making so much noise that nobody could hear Paul? Was she drawing attention to herself? (I think of fans at football games who strip half-naked, paint themselves team colors, hold up huge signs, etc. They would say that they try to rally other fans, that they enhance the experience of the game, etc. But I don't watch a fooball game to watch the fans! I want to see the game--and if I was in the stands sitting behind them and couldn't see because of the huge signs, fans hopping up & down, etc., I'd be torqued.)

I'm inclined to think that some psychic phenomena are real. I can't explain it; it doesn't fit cleanly into any cosmology of God/angels/demons/etc. that I subscribe to; but it seems real ... like the psychics that help the police find dead bodies--that's wild stuff!

I guess I'd say, "Let's change the question a bit. Instead of focusing on psychic abilities, how about any great gifts--sheer genius, great artistic abilities, awesome athletic talent, etc.? How could any talents like this be wrong?"

A couple of possibilities suggest themselves (and I invite you, and others, I hope, to weigh in on these or others):

1 - For what purpose is the gift used? Does it build up, or inspire people, or is it self-serving, or distracting from greater issues? (e.g. I love composers who are able to inspire through their words and music; on the other hand, much as I might like a particular tune, I think musicians who get no farther than stuff like, "Do a little dance, make a little love, get down tonight," have wasted their talent. PS: That's KC & The Sunshine Band.)

2 - Is a gift used to help other people grow, or to keep them in dependency? For example, I think that I've got gifts as a pastor, but my job is not so much to solve people's problems as it is to teach them to look to God, talk with God, understand God, and work with God on their problems.

Applying this to your case. Let's say, hypothetically, you & your mom went to a psychic to have the psychic channel your grandmother. "Grandma was so smart and so wise--she always knew what to do!" So you keep going back to the psychic and the psychic keeps channeling your grandmother, year after year. Is this really how Grandma would want you to live your life--always dependent on her? Or would she want you to develop wisdom, self-confidence, and maturity in dealing with life?

Therein is the potential for psychics to be false prophets, I think, if they aren't pointing you back to God as your creator and the one (ultimately) with all the answers. When my dad died, for example, I didn't go to a psychic to know if my dad was OK--I simply prayed. Our prayer life develops best when we take big, hairy, God-sized problems and talk them over with God. Now that can be a slow process--psychics can have the advantage of being quick and to the point--but I think in the long run we're better off developing our own "psychic ability to talk with God" directly. When my dad died and I prayed, I got the comfort that my dad was fine ... and later I had the serendipitous blessing of having a distant cousin approach me later and tell me about her conversations with my dad a month before his death that assured me that my dad was fully at peace when he died. For me, to have my cousin tell me this was an answer to prayer, and it worked to increase my trust in God and my confidence to go to God in prayer. To have gone to a psychic would have taken me in a wrong direction.

That being said, I don't scold people who go to psychics once after the death of a loved one. They're trying to cope the best they can. I think they'd be better off in the long run taking their cares directly to God, but they're trying to cope, and it's not the time or place for me to beat them up. (Go to a psychic repeatedly, and I'm likely to tell you that you'd be better off cultivating your conversational skills with God!)

So ... I've given you a lot to process. Where am I on target for you, where have I missed the mark, and where are there things still to hash out?