Christianity Without a Cross

What is Christianity?

The Purpose of Christianity

Two thousand years ago, a murderer traveled along a desert road with a mission. There was a rebel movement growing, and it was not going to spread on his watch; he was absolutely dedicated to stamping out the movement. We all know the story, and along that very road, Paul—who was then Saul—had an encounter with the Risen Lord. For all those Christians who encountered Christ, whether in Spirit or reality, the encounter motivated them. The understanding that Christ is real, his teachings are true, he died for the remission of sins, and was resurrected. That was the revelation given to Paul, that Christ was alive and his body was moving on the Earth and imbued with his power: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” It was the revelation of Christ that started his conversion. Just as Peter begins his ministry in earnest when he is asked by Christ, “Do you love ME?” (John 21:15-18). Peter also tells Jesus that he is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt. 16:16). My point is that people came to be Christian by an experience or revelation of Christ, “flesh and blood hath not revealed this to you, but my father in heaven.” The Early Church believed in Christ and his Cross.

Many of you will say, obviously… of course, that is the defining feature of Christianity, it’s actually in the name. However, this seems to be changing, and it has long been changing. To the point where we are coming to a “Christianity without a Cross.”

Alex O’Connor: If I went back in time with a Panasonic video camera and put that camera in front of the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, would the little LCD screen show a man walk out of that tomb?

Jordan Peterson: I would suspect Yes

Alex O’Connor: So that to me seems like a belief in the historical event of the Resurrection, or at least of Jesus leaving the tomb, which means that when somebody says you know “do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead” it doesn't seem clear to me why you're not able to just say, “it would seem to me yes.”

Jordan Peterson: Because I have no idea what that means and neither did the people who saw it.

I present to you, Christianity without a Cross, or at least, an element of it, a “Christianity” that denies certain fundamental requirements of Christianity, while trying to maintain certain “moral” elements of the faith. It is a “cultural Christianity” or more aptly a “culture-war Christianity.” However, before we get there, let us address Peterson’s claim.

Jesus Appears to the Disciples

On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews,c Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.”

…

The Purpose of This Book

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

— John 20:19-23; 30-31

Didn’t know what it meant? The purpose and the meaning of Christ’s resurrection are written expressly in the account of his resurrection. That he was the perfect sacrifice once for all upon the Cross; for the remission of our sins; for us and for our salvation, he came down and was crucified under Pontius Pilate. That is what the resurrection of Christ meant, and what his disciples understood almost immediately. Peterson should know this, especially after doing a whole series on the gospels, yet there is a hiccup in modern anthropology. How could Christ come down to forgive sins where there is no sin to forgive, where there is no original sin? Why, and how, would Christ come down, die upon a cross, and why would we be baptized for the remission of sins that are not there?

The notion of Original Sin, which stains the whole history of Mankind, is crucial to understanding Christ’s mission, his death and resurrection, and it is something missing from much of the culture-war Christianity. The kind of Christianity that people like Richard Dawkins care to endorse, because he “likes Christmas music.” The kind of Christianity that Douglas Murray enjoys, while claiming to be a “Christian atheist.” Or the sort of Christianity that Jordan Peterson exposits, or other popular figures, such as Tom Holland, in his book Dominion. The kind of Christianity that is great because it gave us “Western values,” but is not so great when it asks us to forsake our father and mother. A Christianity that is great because it gave us “rights” and “free speech,” but rather bothersome when it asks us to die to ourselves, as Christ died for us. Christianity is more than a set of values; it is more than a philosophy; it is a state of being, and it is a teleology. More on that later.

Dominion

Order it at Thrift Books

Let’s take a moment and speak about the book Dominion, which is a fabulous book that I thoroughly enjoyed. I highly recommend people go and buy it and read it, though fair warning, it’s quite the behemoth. It takes snippets of the entire history of the Church, from before Paul to the “woke” movement starting in the twenty-teens. It is in the twenty-teens that I think we find the origin of the moment we see ourselves in. Everyone recognizes that there is something peculiar about the anti-West sentiment that exploded during that time. The "woke" movement is seen by many intellectuals to be an issue because it seeks to uproot the Western value structure of education and speech; people's "rights" are at jeopardy. Pairing that with the rise of Islam in Europe in the last decade and the issue takes shape.

Tom Holland is not a Christian; as such, his book mostly deals with social issues and how Christianity has formed the framework of the modern value system found in the West. Similarly to how Jordan Peterson can get a group of public intellectuals into a room to discuss the bible, yet most of the conversations forms around how "wokism" is a mind virus that needs to be stamped to save the “West" while failing to discuss what Christ's death means, and that each one of us might find new life and the stain of sin can be cleansed from us. Justin Briarly has a very interesting podcast titled The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God, which chronicles this fascinating discussion rather well. He observes, much as I have, that young people are flocking to Christ because of nihilism and the "meaning crisis." While there are also those academics who see a disturbing rise of "wokism,” and Christianity has its utility in how effectively it can fight that rise. Tom Holland and his book Dominion feature heavily in the podcast, rightly so, many people have read the book and subsequently converted to Christianity, and praise the Lord for it! I am not the sort of person to disparage an intellectual conversion, CS Lewis is very famous for that; he is also famous for the slow walk towards Christianity. Perhaps it is the case that many of these people are on that slow walk towards true Christianity, the trouble is when they get themselves and others stuck half-way.

My issue is not with the realization that wokism is bad, but rather Christianity being used by fence-sitters who want a convenient tool; with the muddling of Christianity by turning it into a philosophy. Or, as is the conclusion of Dominion, Christianity has endured for so long, it will continue to do so with or without Christians. The book concludes on the note that society is so "Christian" that even the #MeToo movement and the "woke" revolution are born from Christian ideals, thus Christianity isn't really going anywhere anytime soon. Which is the sort of inverse side of the coin that says "woke" is evil, and to combat it, people must reinvigorate Western ideals by remembering Athens and Jerusalem, and that Christianity created the West. Now I could write an entire essay on "Athens and Jerusalem" and my developing thoughts on that phrase alone. However for now, suffice it say that many of the people warring with the phrase are more along the lines of culture-war Christians, who seem to be using Christianity more as a tool, a tool to preserve liberal-democratic rights for themselves, the Douglas Murrays and Tom Hollands who like cultural christiainty and see it as a useful fiction. Especially considering most would deny original sin, and would likely deny the central mystery of the Faith. The whole question comes down to What is Christianity? Is it the sort of thing used to respond to and fight a social movement, or is it something else?

Christianity as a Teleology

I am no theologian, I'm merely a layman, so here are my thoughts on the topic, receive with a grain of salt. Christianity is not a "lifestyle" nor is it a philosophy, but rather it is both an ontology and a teleology. It is a mode of being and a mode of purpose. One does not "practice” Christianity, one IS a Christian, yes, you can use the moniker "they are a practicing Christian," to indicate that they actually believe in Christianity, but I feel that is part of the problem. People have been misunderstanding what Christianity is, there is no Christianity outside of practicing it. Christianity is not a set of cultural norms, just as it is not a philosophy; one could technically be a "Christian Stoic" they aren't mutually exclusive, Christianity does not persribe a certain philosophical lens—although it sometimes can forbid them—because it is not the same sort of thing that philosophy is. If Philosophy is the mode of questioning, Christianity is the answer that one arrives at. Problems begin to arise when people take Christianity and try to use it as a form of moral philosophy, they use it as something it was never meant to be. There is no such thing as a "non-practicing Christian," in my opinion, to say such is to misunderstand Christianity.

Many popular and public intellectuals are taking Christianity and using it as a rod to measure actions, to identify the flaws that we see with public life today. Oftentimes, they do this with the addition of Western values, in so doing, they are combining the two things as if they are one and the same, saying--implicitly--Christianity is useful insofar as it continues to promote Western values. The Issue with this is not the Western Values, but rather that Christianity has now been turned into a philosophy, a lens for identifying patterns and issues, and helping interpret the flaws in a system, and Western values have been made the solution, the teleology. This fundamentally misunderstands the kind of thing that Religion is, especially the kind of thing that Christianity is.

I would venture to guess that part of the reason for this is because of the way that modern church services are run, and the emphasis that the churchgoers bring into the church. Many people come to Church to get something out of it, whether it be the word preached, or the songs sung, or perhaps they simply go for the absolution of sin, or some other reason. The emphasis has been switched through the millennia (and because of our consumerist economy) that people are attending church more for what they receive rather than for the sacrifice of themselves. In the traditional prayer at the end of the Anglican Liturgy, the congregation prays that God would accept our "humble sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving." There is an understanding that the life of the Christian is a sacrifice, and while yes, we come to Church and we do receive, we receive both the Bread and the Words of life, we also come as a sacrifice. That our lives are a sacrifice, redeemed and washed through the Blood of Christ. Church was not supposed to be an event that we go to, to get something out of it, but rather a moment where, gathered together with the body of Christ, we feed upon the Body of Christ, and remembering His sacrfice once for all, we offer up ourselves as a sacrfice, washed through his body and blood, a humble sacrifice. Thence, we go out changed and given grace to live the Christian life. In that way, Christianity is an ontology, it is a mode of existing, so too, when in church we recite the Creed, we remember that Christ is coming again, and so we wait expectantly for that moment. Thus, Christianity is also a teleology, a final answer, an end purpose. In that we wait for God, but as we wait, we become more like Christ, until we are finally reunited.

It is not that Christianity cannot battle wokeness, cannot bring about Western values, but rather that that is not its purpose, not its function. I grow concerned when I see people using it for that; I don't believe that 400 or 500 years ago, thelogians and priests sat around stewing on how they could use the Bible as a means of gaining the "right" of free speech. But rather, that through the living of the Christian faith, they realized that mankind has dignity, and one of those dignities is "freedom of speech" for example. So, when I look around today and see that people are coming to Christianity I rejoice, and I praise God, however with a touch of caution, because if the catalyst for conversion was to battle a certain movement, what happens when that movement goes away? Of course, the beauty of the Christianity is that The Holy Spirit pulls upon the heartstrings, always calling deeper and deeper. But what I am seeing is intellectuals who are not Christians using Christianity has a tool, simply another philosophy, and I fear it will not work that way.

I am encouraged when I see people flocking to Christianity because they realize that philosophy is not enough, that those tools cannot provide ultimate meaning. So people are coming back to Christianity, however I grow a bit concerned when those same people see public intellectuals quoting scripture and using Christianity just as they would cite Plato's Republic, or Aristotle's Ethics. Many try to use the story of Joseph just as they would use The Clouds by Aristophanes, and this greatly misunderstands and even destroys Christianity, because Christianity isn't, like a philosophy, concerned with our minds; rather, it is concerned with our souls. To make Christianity a Philosophy is to try and get a Christianity without a Cross, shallow and pointless.

For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

1 Corinthians 15:15-19

Philosophy is most concerned with the life of the Mind, but Christianity is not; it is for our souls that we might inherit eternal life. The life of the mind is important, philosophy is important, but we must guard ourselves from those who are false teachers. I think of Simon the Sorcerer, who tries to buy the Holy Spirit. The intellectuals who try to plumb the depth of Scripture without paying the cost of admission try to use reason to penetrate what was meant to be understood through the Spirit. (I'd like to caveat one thing, I am not saying that all these public intellectuals are doing so in bad faith. Rather, they are doing so unaware, which is more dangerous as it is less obvious; some might be bad actors, but many are simply mistaken.) Part of the reason they do so is because they reject all of the supernatural elements of the Bible; they are Thomas Jeffersons who refuse to go all the way and cut out the supernatural. So they find these strange, fairy-tale style interpretations of the Bible. Take, for example, Peterson discussing the story of Jonah with Bill Maher.

Bill Maher: Obviously, they were telling people something I mean whoever wrote this had a message in mind.

Jordan Peterson: Well, they were trying to… look, they were trying to figure out by telling stories how the state itself got corrupted. And this is one of those stories, so the story is here's how the state gets corrupted, you're called upon to tell your fellow man, enemy or not, when they're not behaving properly, when your conscience tells you to do that you're called upon to do that, if you don't do that the whole ship will start to rock.

Bill Maher: Do you think the Ancients who are reading this at the time and they read the story about getting swallowed by the big fish? Do you think they got this message? They were like, “Yeah, but what this really means is when you're called upon… excuse me, I'm talking, when you're called upon, then you step up and do it.”

Jordan Peterson: No, no I would say it's a step, and it's just, it's a… it's a dreamlike step in the developing of understanding…

I hate to pick on Jordan Peterson so much, but he is the perfect example of this phenomenon. As far as I am aware, he denies original sin, he denies much of the truly miraculous elements of Scripture, so he must adopt these strange Jungian archetypal stories, but then comes the question: why be a Christian?

Babylon Bee, really did perfectly encapsulate Jordan Peterson unfortunately.

That is the crux of the question when it comes to culture-war Christianity: why should I be a Christian at all? The answer is that there is no reason to if you deny original sin, if you deny the resurrection, or the supernatural elements of scripture, all it is is a “convenient lie.”

Conclusion

Christianity cannot exist without Christians, and Christians cannot exist without a Cross. Without A savior who died on that Cross for the remission of our sins. Ultimately, the culture-war Christianity is frail, it is weak, because it is the Faith stripped of its most powerful parts. All it is is one more philosophy, one more value system, and not a very good one. The Christianity that is used only for its moral lessons or good teachings, used as “that thing that gave us western values,” is the straw man of the New Atheists. Full of contradictions and nonsensical stories, much of the Old Testament has its purposes in the prefiguration of Christ. The Old Testament is the Story of God; it’s a character sketch of him, and the New Testament is about how God became incarnate to wipe away the sin of Adam. So, what is Christianity? Well, it is a story, the only really true story, but it’s more than that, more than history, it’s also poetry, the only really true poetry, it’s myth and its wisdom, but it’s also Truth. It is the story of God and how he so loved the world that he came down from heaven and died that we might have eternal life. Christianity is also the Life of the Church, the bride of Christ. Which is why I say it is so much more than any philosophy or set of values. It is so much more than its byproducts, it’s Western societies. Christianity is the life of the Church, which is the mystical body of Christ, and it is the Story of the Church, the greatest story ever told!

---

I hope you enjoyed this essay, if you did, please consider sharing this essay with friends and family. You can do so here!

Furthermore, please consider subscribing to the Abbey!

Finally, I am considering following this essay up with one on the Church, and what she is let me know if you would like to read/listen to that one!