Good-Christian. What does that even mean?

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not a fan of defining oneself with labels. For instance I am neither liberal nor conservative; neither Republican nor Democrat. To me Pro Life would have to mean anti abortion; anti capital punishment; anti euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. But that's not what it means to Pro Life movements. See what I mean? I just don't like labels, at least for myself.

Another label I don't care for is Christian. I know what it's supposed to mean, how it's supposed to define me and my world-view. But I also know how the semantics get played with in various regional colloquial and in the media. "Christian" seems to mean something quite different to many different peoples, which muddies and dilutes the definition completely.

Even so, and strangely enough last night I referred to a family member as trying to be a good-Christian in regard to a certain situation in their life. A non-believing friend immediately challenged what I had said, "Good Christian. What does that even mean? I know a lot of people for whom that means many different things." For some reason I became defensive about his inquiry. That's because I regarded it as a challenge instead of the critical insight that it was. I believe I responded (I hope I responded) tastefully and respectfully. But it wasn't until this morning that I realized the real truth: He's correct. "Good-Christian" doesn't really mean anything.

In order to be "good" at something, one must first have a clear definition of that state in which one desires to excel. And this is why I struggle so much with the label Christian. The whole premise of Biblical belief is that we are fundamentally incapable of achieving goodness outside of the grace of God through Christ. We can certainly try to be good by some definition thereof. And we probably should, but we could not succeed. And if I tried to offer some definition of what it means to be good or a good-Christian, I would only be successful at creating a new religion. And what the world needs now... ain't a new religion.

And that's okay, you know? Because I don't subscribe to a religion for myself or for my children. And I don't wear the moniker "Christian" as I'm unclear to what it means. If one must label me, I suppose I'm comfortable with "believer in the Way"; or "pilgrim"; or "disciple of Jesus of Nazareth." But those would only be for comical hubris more than social necessity. Because you see, we should be listening critically when someone is telling us that we need to believe this or that; or that we need to support their position; or that our behavior must model theirs. Instead, I have a Bible. I read it in its entirety for myself, both by myself and with others. I study with like-minded individuals as well as those who are other-minded, to include the occasional non-believer. I seek insight from knowledgeable scholars, and I pray for insight and inspiration. Then I model my behaviors and world-view accordingly. My core in its simplest definition includes reverence and awe for my Creator, love for my fellow man, respect for the world in which I live, and recognition that I do not have a soul but rather I am a soul. Certainly my creed and theology is much more complex, involving doctrines such as the Trinity, sola scriptura, and the sufficiency of grace. But none of this is relevant to this particular post.

So if this post was encouraging at all, I hope you've been encouraged to challenge your own self-awareness and the way you choose to be viewed by others. Do you want to be known as a Christian? There's nothing wrong with that. But examine all of the world's baggage that you are taking on when you do so, and whether or not all that baggage is really who you are and what you believe.