Get Thee Behind Me

In 1813, Commodore Oliver Perry said, "We have met the enemy and they are ours." In 1970, cartoonist Walt Kelly spoofed the phrase to encourage environmental awareness with his character, Pogo, who said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Kelly was concerned about environmentalism; I'm thinking about something more basic and more serious.

God was absolutely clear when He said, "You shall have no other gods before Me." (Exo 20:3). Of course, it's easy for us to misplace that "before." We think "in priority over" while the word actually means "in My presence." No other gods in His presence. Where is His presence? Everywhere. Therefore, no other gods ... period. And we nod and say, "We will do it" and promptly go out to our local neighborhood god -- "me." We can't get away from it. It is inherent, intrinsic, innate, built in. Our most common highest concern is "me." Maybe we can rise to the level philosophers call "enlightened self-interest" where we recognize that doing good for others is in our best interest, but at the core we are our own first god.

The problems this causes are legion. They are everywhere and all the time. Almost without exception the first cause of any conflict -- international, national, political, social, personal, whatever -- is "me." James wrote, "What is the source of conflict and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you?" (James 4:1). It seems as if this is the simple, constant truth. Two friends end up in an argument because one or both feels slighted. A parent disciplines a child in anger because the parent feels disrespected. Two people fight over a political or religious perspective not because of the perspective, but because of a gut response. "Righteous indignation" is rarely righteous indignation; it is more often self-righteous anger. We can hardly do anything without considering ourselves first.

When Scripture, then, says, "Count others more significant than yourselves," (Php 2:3), we're at a loss. When we read, "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others," (Php 2:4), we're baffled. When it says, "Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up" (Rom 15:2), we mitigate it with "What about me?" When we read, "But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires" (Rom 13:14), we are baffled. "What does that mean?" Because it is unnatural to not start with "me."

Imagine, then, what it could be like if "me" was not the first concern. What if I left "me" up to God and just followed what He said? How would that affect my life? How would it affect what I wear, what I do, where I go, how I get there? How would my priorities change? What would change in my value system -- the things I consider most valuable? How would my responses change to affronts or disagreements? How would I treat my friends and family who fail to meet my expectations for how they should treat "me"? I have to say, it would be freedom. It would allow release in so many areas if "I" was not my first concern. My priorities would be reordered, the things that please me would change (because it would be more about the things that please others). My relationship with God would be necessarily closer (because I'm clinging to Him now for all those things I thought I needed to struggle to obtain for me). I would have a new God, and it would not be me. I need to get Me behind me. Or, maybe better, behind Christ.