Something I highly value is consistency. If you are a reader of mine and didn't know this, I thought I'd make it clear. For instance, when Peter Singer lays claim to Evolution as the origin of all things and then quite consistently goes on to conclude that to believe humans have a special value and calls it "speciesism," I appreciate his consistency ... even if I'm quite sure he's wrong. Or when Richard Dawkins argues for pure materialism and then concludes that there is no such thing as free will because nature determines everything, I appreciate his consistency even if I'm confident he's wrong. Conversely, when a Christian claims to be a follower of Christ and then knowingly and consciously refuses to follow Christ "there" or "here," I am disappointed even though I believe that following Christ is a good thing. I value consistency.
If you've read much of what I write, you've often seen me complain about a double standard. Double standards are the worst kind of inconsistency. Take, for instance, the signs I've been seeing this "Pride month" that boldly declare (with rainbow backing) "Love is love." Yeah, sure, patently obvious, right? And you know they're saying that in direct opposition to my position that marriage is the union of a man and a woman and that homosexual behavior is a sin. "Oh, yeah," they'll counter, "love is love." But they're not consistent. "What about polygamy?" I might ask and the vast majority will falter and hesitate. "Well, no, we don't favor that." "How about a father marrying his son?" "No, no," they'll assure me, "incest is wrong." "Why can't a girl marry her dog?" "That's just sick and wrong." Because "love is love" only as far as it takes them to what they want and not in any meaningful way. Love is not love if it is tough love that urges a loved one to avoid a harmful situation, is it? No, of course not. Complete inconsistency.
Here's the problem with inconsistency. It undercuts your argument. If you claim "X is true" and don't live like it's true, you prove what you really believe. If you claim, "We're killing the planet with our carbon production" and then you go out and drive SUVs and fly in personal jets, you're proving you don't really believe it. If you claim "love is love" and then tack on the caveat "except what we don't approve," you're merely making the point, "Love is not love; love has limits." And I ask, "But that's what we started the discussion with, wasn't it? So who gets to decide the limits? I choose God. Who is your champion?"
Mind you, I am quite confident that sin rots the brain. I'm not trying to point fingers at the views or people that disagree with me. It's to be expected. I'm just telling them a real problem. More importantly, I'm begging you Christians to watch yourself. Be Christians, yes, but be consistent Christians. Consistently follow God's instructions, to your own detriment when necessary. When you bob and weave through that stuff and then urge others to agree with you, you undercut your credibility and, ultimately, undercut their possibility of faith in God. Christians, be consistent.
2 comments:
Great post. Lack of consistency absolutely destroys so many philosophies built on materialism, naturalism, or Darwinian theory, and many more. There are plenty of folks who confidently assert that X,Y, or Z is absolutely True, but then don't live their daily lives consistent with their philosophy.
Kind of like saying that punishment must absolutely always be proportionate to the crime, and that a disproportionately harsh punishment is wrong, while advocating that disproportionate forgiveness is deserved.
Indeed. And inconsistency does a great deal of damage to the reputation of Christ and His followers.
Post a Comment