Skip to main content

Identity Crisis

Questions of identity dominate the headlines. The "hero" Bruce Jenner has redefined his identity as the heroine Caitlyn, while Rachel Dolezal identifies herself not as the race she was born as, but as a culturally black woman. Our parents told us, “You can be anything you want to be.” I don’t think they expected us to take them so literally.

The real question is, who has the right to determine our identity? Is it our society? Are we determined by whatever role we play in the larger community? This has been tried and retried, and always found wanting. Is it our families? In many cultures, children live to live up to their parents’ dreams and expectations. There is something truly noble, and yet simultaneously very base about this. Is it the self? Doubtless this has filled the vacuum for our culture.

William Ernest Henley’s poem has sadly become our battle cry, “I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.” I fear the moral bankruptcy of individualism will eventually come to repossess. Where will this lead us? My guess is to radical moral relativism, a scary and dark place if there ever was one: Lord of the Flies without the rescue, where everyone sets their own, often Orwellian rules.

I suggest a controversial, but valuable alternative. Actually, it is more of a reiteration of what has dominated Western Civilization for nearly two millennia. Our Creator determines our identity. God stamped his Image on human beings and endowed each of us with dignity, morality and intrinsic value. He’s the Captain of our souls. We are who He has made and declared us to be.

Does this belief make someone a cultural Neanderthal, a moral dinosaur, or an out of touch fundamentalist? Some might say so. Not to worry about labels, our identity has already been determined elsewhere.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The 'Greatest' Theologian/Preacher/Christian Philosopher

Here's a fun little discussion for us. Who is the greatest theologian since the apostle Paul? Sounds too subjective, but here are some criteria to evaluate by: 1) Personal life - Did this person's personal character reflect his convictions effectively? 2) Breadth of Influence - How wide and long has this person's influence effected the church and the world? 3) Depth of thought - How careful, biblical, and articulate were this persons's works? My vote to come...

Remember Miss Bates from Mere Christianity

C. S. Lewis imagines two people: one Miss Bates, a naturally cranky unkind woman who becomes a Christian and the other Dick Firkin, a naturally friendly kind person who has not yet become a Christian. “Christian Miss Bates may have an unkinder tongue than unbelieving Dick Firkin. That, by itself, does not tell us whether Christianity works. The question is what Jane’s tongue would be like if she were not a Christian and what Dick’s would be like if he became one. Miss Bates and Dick, as a result of natural causes and early upbringing, have certain temperaments: Christianity professes to put both temperaments under new management if they will allow it to do so. What you have a right to ask is whether that management, if allowed to take over, improves the concern. Everyone knows that what is being managed in Dick Firkin’s case is much ‘nicer’ than what is being managed in Miss Bates’. That is not the point. To judge the management of a factory, you must consider not only the

Does Church History Matter?

In a so called unprecedented age, where all of Christianity is re-inventing itself, and all of Christian doctrine is up for re-writing , one must ask the question "Does church history matter?" (Just to write this almost makes me cringe at how unbelievably near-sighted my generation has become!) If we say 'yes it matters' too emphatically, the response will be "Why are you Protestants then?" Didn't Luther radically depart from centuries of theological teaching. One common criticism against Luther (and the Reformation) was "Can you alone be right and the whole world be wrong?" And, when Luther talks about Sola Scriptura, isn't he saying Scripture is all that matters? A few things about Luther. First, his Sola Scriptura argument was not that Scripture is the only authority for the church, but that Scripture alone is the final authority for the church. According to Luther, there can be, indeed should be, lesser authorities, including pasto