Our identity, as we all know and understand, must be defined by our relationship with Jesus Christ. Not a denomination, sect, fellowship, individual church, gathering of believers, set of convictions, or fill-in-the-blank.

I attend and work at a congregation of the churches of Christ. I disagree with my minister that the story of Nadab and Abihu has anything whatsoever to do with instrumental music in worship. I disagree with my elders, individually and as a group, on a number of items. I’m a member and staffer there – and have been a member there for a total of twenty years, staffer for almost five – because I love and respect them, and the entire body of the saints there, and the folks who drop by to visit and see Whom we’re all about. It is my church home.

But it’s not my identity. My identity is disciple; follower of Christ. My allegiance is to Him. My home is His kingdom, and it is far larger than one gathering, fellowship, alliance, denomination or set of convictions. Trying to live the life of Christ – among those whom I love and sometimes disagree and among others who have never really known Him – is my identity.

Nothing less is acceptable.

i’m not sure identity is so centralized. i’m thinking of an ethnic identity and what it consists of. There may be a plethora of customs, cuisines, clothing, daily rituals etc. all of which constitute an ethnic identity. i suppose that person can say their ethnic identity consists mainly in having been born in their particular country of origin. But really i think their identity is constituted more or less by all the parts, perhaps some more than others, but all nonetheless. If you start removing the little customs or peculiar clothing or whatever, you’re still wearing away at an identity.

Matt,
i was also thinking that there’s an important distinction between being embarassed of the markers themselves, and being embarassed over how people have treated each other on account of those markers. i think there are “liberals” who are not at all embarassed to sing a capella or have male elderships etc. i think there are plenty who are ashamed of how brethren have treated each other over those issues though. And there are even some i think that confuse feeling embarassed over the latter with feeling embarassed over the former (throw the baby out with the bath water).

–Guy

What I don’t want to do is say that we are Christians because we hold to such practices. Instead, we are Christians because of what God has done for us in Christ -grace- through faith (cf. Eph 2.8). The former roots our identity in our practice while the later roots our identity in God’s gift of grace to us in Christ.

I hope that explains the difference I am trying to point out. I am certainly for churches upholding practices that our biblical but I don’t want to root my identity in such practices because that, it seems, would be unbiblical.

Grace and peace,

Rex

Hey–hope you’re doing well. i’m mostly with you i think. i do get annoyed when people start sounding embarassed of their own church for the various “markers.”

But i do think we should probably focus more of our time and energy on distinguishing ourselves from the world rather than from other denominations.

Best,

Guy

Just so you know that even though I occasionally disagree, I appreciate your blog and ministry. Further, I know there are many people who are being blessed by God because of your willingness to be God’s servant.

Grace and peace,

Rex