Join in Theoretical Humility

23 comments

By John Immel

All tyranny requires these elements to be successful.

******************

The next time you hear a church leader say, “I’m the greatest sinner I know…” the first thing you should ask him is to define his peer group. If he’s hanging around with Genghis Khan, Joseph Stalin, and Pol Pot, then maybe he’s got an interesting story to tell.

And if his peer group is Pope Benedict XVI, Billy Graham, and Mother Theresa, the finest advice is…run.

At BEST, the leader is afflicted with a case of the subjectives: a disease that creates hierarchies of evil–inexplicit ethics that turn natural tendencies into the greatest moral depravity and virtues to vice.  At BEST, the leader is parroting vain sophistry that he’s heard from those he admires, giving little thought to the true implications. On its face, “I am the greatest sinner I know…” is a comparative statement devoid of any real context or…substance. The lack of substance makes it more like air. At least that is what it must be, because we breathe it in just for oohhing and ahhhing at the leaders’ humility.

At WORST, the phrase is a deliberate moralistic slight of hand against intellectual scrutiny aided and abetted by our collective fraud. That is right, COLLECTIVE fraud.

In all varied forms and pretentious aspirations, the phrases below serve the same goal:

We are all fools before God…

We are all works in progress…

We are all sinners…

Of all sinners I am chief…

I am the greatest sinner I know…

The goal is to create a veneer of theoretical humility by forcing the acceptance of theoretical guilt.

For lots of reasons, Christian humility has been defined as self-effacing, anti-self commentary. The assumption is so embedded in most every expression of culture we accept the definition–and the corresponding actions that illustrate the definition–without scrutiny.

The loose logic goes like this: Adam’s sin sustains our theoretical guilty, therefore we should abase ourselves. Humility = self deprecation, anti-self commentary. Only truly humble people are qualified to spiritually lead. Spiritual leaders ascribe self-deprecating, self-effacing judgments to themselves to demonstrate their humility. We ooooh and ahhh when a “leader” demonstrates how we are to all act, fulfilling our assumptions and playing our part in the fraud.

We are sincere so the idea that our participation in a fraud catches us deep in our soul.  But hey, when you lay down your mind, you’ll believe anything you’re told you should.

Here is why it is a fraud. Humility cannot be about self-effacing, self-deprecating, self-denying, anti-self commentary because true humility requires a rigorous honest personal assessment. Guilt can only be ascribed to specific failings of ethic or law. Real guilt requires consequence: the cause and effect of justice and righteousness.   Everything else is mere pretense. We all know this. And we all act accordingly.

Notice: if someone TRULY is a great sinner. He TRULY is committing sin. And like our leader of “I’m the greatest sinner I know…” he confesses ACTUAL sin to demonstrate humility. Would this man of ACTUAL moral failing become the poster child for “Humble” leadership? Would we gleefully let him lead us to our own ACTUAL persistent sin so that we can demonstrate our glorious humility by honest self-deprecation?

By this definition, a homosexual pedophile priest who shoots his victims in the head would be the greatest spiritual leader amongst us as long as he demonstrates his humility by confessing his moral depravity.

Ehem….

Think Jimmy Swaggart. Think Jim Bakker. Think Todd Bentley. Todd Bentley has admitted (the last time I checked) to an “inappropriate emotional relationship”–whatever that is–and the cries of Heretic and False Prophet have filled the blogs, demanding that he cease his ministry. True guilt brings our outrage, the hue and cry goes abroad from the house tops. Real guilt requires consequence: the cause and effect of justice and righteousness.

If a leader confesses theoretical sin, theoretical guilt, we oooh and aaahhhh and applaud his manifest humility, and dive head-on into his moralistic slight of hand.

If a leader confesses actual sin, actual guilt, we put a scarlet letter around his neck and drive him from the pulpit soonest.

One we call humility. The other we call hypocrisy. What is the difference? One guy is being honest. Our reactions to REAL guilt reveal our fraud.

The only reason this schizophrenia exists is precisely because we lay down our minds and tolerate such absurdities–we willfully participate in the fraud.

Make no mistake. The reason the leader uttered the words had one goal: getting you to embrace theoretical guilt. He wanted you to accept utter personal fallibility so that you will overlook what he says next. As I said, his words are a calculated moralistic slight of hand against intellectual scrutiny. He wants a pass on his intellectual sloppiness because he cannot provide due diligence to advance his ideas. The words are platitudes and worse than lies because it is really moral exhibitionism designed to perpetrate a potent manipulation.

Remember at the beginning of the article I said run? I said that for a reason. This is just the beginning. The path he is leading you down is even more insidious. If the leader can get you to buy into your theoretical guilt, your implicit unworthiness, he will soon be holding out his hand…The word sacrifice will be on his lips.

And the sacrifice will only benefit one person–HIM.

John Immel


He's a generally ornery pot string iconoclast that loves to make people think. He's harmless (well, mostly harmless). And don't forget lovable in an affectionately blunt sort of way. Whatever your first feelings, read and listen long enough and you will come to agree with him.


  • God showed me a long time ago that self-hatred etc.. was really the flip side of pride, it is still focusing (( probably even more intensely than when conceited) on yourself.  I like that C.S Lewis said something to the effect that he was happiest when he was least aware of himself.  I too enjoy moments of self-forgetfulness.  Humility is knowing who you really are, it is choosing to identify with Jesus because we believe that his work on the cross was enough.  When we are truly humble we have no problem taking compliments and enjoying seeing our lives being transformed, of growing in our gifts.  That’s because we freely acknowledge that it’s Jesus behind it all!  It brings glory to him when we do well, that is, if we’re doing well because we’re depending on him and his grace and not our own fleshly disciplines and efforts. 

    By the way, if you want to know if a man is really that bad, just ask his wife haha, assuming she is an honest soul…

  • Hey Julie, I like to think of those moments of self-forgetfulness are the qualitative distinction between self-consciousness and self-awareness. 
     
    Self-consciousness is the kind of thing that makes you go grab fig leaves because you feel naked, afraid, and overly preoccupied with the failings of your own person, your own individuality. 
     
    Self-awareness is the place where you realize you need clothing, but feeling utterly capable of finding a T-shirt and a pair of shorts, or even be able and willing to make your own shirt and shorts.  You not only have the ability to identify what ails you but have a command of your resources to address those failings.  And your SELF does not paralyze you in the process of addressing what needs to be fixed. 
     
    Self-consciousness is the state of mind forever preoccupied, forever agitated, and filled with anxiety over self.  This preoccupation debilitates because it blinds a man or woman to individual action and individual responsibility to take hold of God’s grace and affirm by faith what he has done. 
     
    Self-awareness is a place of peace where you are freed from the need to focus on self, because you have internal assurance that the resources are available to address failings and needs as they arise.
     
    This is precisely what I believe the New Birth was designed to do, make you able to assess the content and conduct of your life while at the same time freeing you from the self-obsession, the self-hatred that captures human hearts and reduces them to inert masses of ineffective guilt.

  • John,

    I think all the CJ talk about being the worst sinner is a way of driving home the idea of total depravity. It is more to help people remember they are sinners rather than remember the abundance of Christ’s grace and love. Those comments are so out of place with other teaching. If they believe in total depravity – why tell anyone you are a sinner – of course you are! How can you say you are the worst sinner when others that sin get kicked out of church and you are not only still there but leading and preaching? True humility is not standing on a platform stating what a sinner you are. To me that is shameful. I am a sinner but I boast in the Lord and His grace. You read Luke 7 about the woman known as a “sinful woman”. The greatness of the story there is not her humility (although I deeply admire her courage),  in going to Christ – it is in Christ’s humility, love, kindness and forgiveness that is amazing. He freely forgave her. If you are spending anytime as a church leader talking about what a sinner you are – your focus better be on Christ and the greatness of what he did for you! Also according to scripture humility requires having the same attitude as Christ: Making himself nothing, being a servant, washing someone’s feet, etc. What does CJ do for the “little people”? When was the last time he helped in Children’s ministry, put a new roof on someone’s house, helped someone move, was a big brother to a single mom’s child..

  • I think all the CJ talk about being the worst sinner is a way of driving home the idea of total depravity.

     
    Of course, that is why CJ iterates this refrain at every opportunity … which is why it is so much fraud. He is making a doctrinal statement, not a profoundly introspective commentary.   He of all people would hue and cry the loudest if he were to actually observe true moral depravity in action.   He would never tolerate its continued presence in the pulpit… so his words serve the purpose of furthering the doctrine of theoretical guilt. 
     

    If they believe in total depravity, why tell anyone you are a sinner? Of course, you are! How can you say you are the worst sinner when others that sin get kicked out of church and you are not only still there but leading and preaching?

     
    Exactly the absurdity I am talking about.

  • For those readers familiar with Sovereign Grace Ministries, there is little doubt that CJ has made himself the poster child for this particular method of expression.  “I am the greatest sinner I know…”  
     
    But this article is designed to be much more than to highlight Vicar Charles Joseph’s chosen manner.  I am pointing out the trend among leaders across the face of Christianity who use the method of theoretical guilt to lay the foundation of pervasive guilt in all humans that remains even AFTER the Atonement. 
     
    I have lots more to say… just keep your eyes and ears open to the signs …  you will see the pattern emerge shortly. 

  • John

    Here is what someone shared on another blog about what might be going on when someone boasts about being the “worst of sinner.” 

    I kind of feel like it’s the story of the pharisee and the tax collector, only the pharisee in this case is saying “Oh Lord, I thank you that I am not like other men, who do not even realize how sinful their heart is,” going on and on about how aware he is of his own sinfulness, when all that is really needed is a simple “Lord, have mercy.”

    I thought this was an excellent observation. 

  • John

    I think it would be good for Mahaney and others who insist that Paul was talking present tense about his being “the worst sinner” to do some exegesis and consult someone knowledgeable in Greek to be sure that was what Paul truly meant when he wrote this passage.  Here is a little research I shared on another blog about this topic.

    I am baffled how Mahaney and others interpret this passage written by Paul. They interpret this passage to mean that Paul was saying he still was (present sense) the chief sinner. My interpretation of the passage is that Paul is stating he was (past tense) the chief sinner. Just before stating he was the “chief” he talked about his life before his conversion and how he persecute the church etc.
    If Paul after his conversion was still the worst sinner out there then one is saying that Christ has no ability to change a person. Paul even warned in another passage about those who hold to a form of religion but deny its power(2 Tim 3:5). Saying that Paul was still the worst sinner sure borders on doing this.
    I don’t see how the passage Mahaney quotes is telling us to consider ourselves the worst of sinners in the present sense. In that same passage Paul had just explained why he felt he was chief sinner including his persecution of the church. I don’t see where it commands us as Christians to see ourselves that way. I would balance that with recognizing that it is God’s grace that changes us.
    Mahaney’s view on this passage (that others in SGM seem to accept without questioning) appears to be IMO his not doing any kind of exegesis including studying the Greek for what the intent of the Scripture was.
    Here is what the UBS NT Handbook says about I Tim 1:15:
    1 Timothy 1:15
    An example of these sinners that Christ Jesus came to save is Paul himself. He describes himself as the foremost of sinners; this is literally “first,” but not in a chronological sense (that is, not the first one to commit sin) but in terms of seriousness of sin, hence foremost, “worst” (TEV), or even “greatest.” The focus here is not on Paul’s moral lapses or immoral conduct but on his rejection of Christ that led him to become one of the greatest persecutors of Christ’s followers. His description of himself as the worst of sinners expresses both his sense of helplessness because of his rejection of Christ, and the greatness of Christ’s act of bestowing on him new life that was completely undeserved and unexpected.
    Alternative translation models for this verse are:
    The following is (or, The words that follow are) a true saying that we can receive with no reservations and believe: Christ Jesus came into the world to free people who do sinful things from their evil condition. I am the worst (or, greatest) of such people.
    (from the UBS New Testament Handbook Series. Copyright © 1961-1997, by United Bible Societies.)
    That alternative translation model sure seems to clarify what Paul meant in this passage. It is quite evident that Paul was freed from his evil condition. It baffles me why the meaning of this

  • Well, Jim… I am always glad to take the lead for those who need it.  That is the value I bring via spiritual tyranny. For those of you who need to feel better about yourself … just take Jim’s path and get to know me. 
     
    : )-
     
    And Ellie, you posted at 1:00 am  … I think you were up past your bedtime.  LOL

  • The doctrine of indwelling sin and every person being the ‘worst sinner’ is a barely cloaked way of justifying people sitting around talking about and focusing endlessly on themselves.    Near the end of our time in SGM, we dreaded getting together with other people, I was plain tired of talking about ME and MY sin and Me and My weaknesses and ME and My struggles and ME ME ME ME ME ME.  Sounds so humble doesn’t it?   What about Jesus?

  • Steve…
     
    What I love about your post is that fact that it is the antithesis of laying down your mind. 
    The content of your commentary is the product of thinking and specifically, thinking based on the principles of the Bible science of higher critical methodology
     
    I contend that if leaders taught the principles of thinking and the fundamentals of Bible reading, at the very, very least, the questions that follow would open up worlds of understanding for most churchgoers.   
     

    Who is talking/writing?
    Who is the audience?
    What is the occasion?

     
    That silliness that is “I’m the greatest sinner I know…” would be seen for its implicit fraud.  And most importantly, people would no longer be tossed and blown by every wind of doctrine because they would have the tools and the confidence in their own ability to understand and measure truth.  They would have their own tools to successfully exploit what God gave them: their mind empowered with the mind of Christ. 

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}

    Get your copy here!

    >