Philosophical Musings of a Book Nerd

I thought I had already written a commentary on this book but when I checked Goodreads, and also the file where I keep a backup of all my commentaries (it is about 762 pages long) I couldn't find it. Anyway, this was one of those books that was being passed around the small group, and in turn the church, by one of the girls that seemed to always get her hands on some interesting things. I remember flicking through it at small group (okay, after the actual bible study because we always had to focus on the bible study at small group, not that there is anything wrong with that) and then putting my name onto the list to read it next.

I guess this is one of those books that make me uncomfortable, much like the Simpsons. The reason I say that is because the Simpsons has a way of showing us what society is like: they take some of the really bad aspects and turn them into a joke. This book does the same with Christians, mostly in the United States but much of what applies over there also applies here in Australia. However, the problem of laughing at some of these things is that while on the page they are funny, in reality they are not.

The church that Acuff seems to be looking at is pretty much the conservative, but not too funamentalist, church (the more fundamentalist a church becomes, the less you are allowed to laugh, criticise, or even poke fun at it) and in a way we simply look at how Christians really behave. Sort of like everybody wants to be a small group leader (because if you are a small group leader then you are obviously a Christian of some worth) but nobody actually wants to take the job of packing up the chairs after the service, or sweeping the floor, and of course there is the ubiquitous cleaning of the toilets.

It is also interesting some of the things that be brings out, such as the 'prayer block' - which happens when somebody is praying for something that they shouldn't be praying for (such as that relationship that they are in that they really shouldn't be in). It is interesting because in a way Christianity is about freedom, but freedom only too an extent. I do understand when they talk about the freedom of being able to say no (such as saying no to that tempting relationship) but I think the better way to look at it is to have to power to keep your emotions in check. At one stage I scoffed at that idea, but have since come to realise that this freedom comes down to not being ruled by your emotions, which is something that many of us do not realise.

I guess it come down to the book of Corinthians, in what one pastor described as a 'no-fall zone'. Personally, I thought what he was talking about was a little corny, but then they all have their own characteristics (at least in some areas, others the bible college pretty much churns out clones). The one passage in Corinthians which this idea turns on is the idea that everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial. The question is not so much whether we can do it or not, but whether by doing this we are benefiting ourselves and our church.

Another pastor once described it like walking near a cliff. We can either go up as close to a cliff as possible to see how far we can get without falling off, or we can turn around and walk the other way. By all means, getting into a relationship with a non-believer is permissible, but the question you must ask is whether it is beneficial. Who will end up having more influence over the relationship, because all it takes is for the unbelieving partner to begin to put pressure on you to stop going to church, and to stop hanging around with those obnoxious Christians to begin to draw you away from the salvation that has been given to you.