Jesus Loves Religion

Pictured: you when you read the title

Waitwaitwait, don’t stone me just yet! Hear me out. It’s not what you think.

Phew. That was close.

So, there is a super common phrase used in conversations about the Christian life that takes on several forms—“It’s not a religion, it’s a relationship,” “Jesus hates religion,” “Christianity isn’t a religion,” you know. This whole train of thought was popularized in the late 2000s and early 2010s. These phrases have great intentions behind them, and, when you get past the packaging, the message is great, and thoroughly Biblical: we aren’t made right with God by what we do for Him, but by what Jesus has done for us. There’s just one problem…

Jesus doesn’t hate religion.
Most of the lingo we’re talking about is not biblically founded, and the Bible actually says something quite different.
Let me explain.

Religion vs. Relationship?

First off, let’s talk about what we mean when we talk about “religion versus relationship” in our cultural context. When modern evangelicals give their definition of religion in these talks, this is usually the definition given: “A set of rules that gains me favor with God, or which I must keep in order to earn salvation.” Christianity—the Gospel—is then said not to be a religion by that definition because our righteous acts are motivated not by rewards and results, but by love, thankfulness, and a new heart with new desires; we are then motivated by relationship and not legalistic fear. In substance, that is all absolutely true.

Just not the part about “religion” being bad.

Under that definition, it is bad, but that is not what the Bible means when it talks about religion.

The word “religion” appears about 5-7 times in Scripture, depending on your translation. The Greek word underlying it carries the idea of a set of beliefs and their accompanying lifestyle; piety; devotion; being bound to a set of beliefs and displaying how they affect you in your daily life. Nothing wrong with that, is there? “Religion” as a concept is never used in a negative sense in the Scriptures. There is only one text where religion is dealt with in a didactic or prescriptive sense, and it’s a whopper—James 1:26-27.

True Religion vs. False Religion

“If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.”
--James 1:26-27, English Standard Version

What’s he talking about? There’s false religion and true religion? We better define some terms. Thankfully, he does that pretty concisely for us. He tells us that true religion:

-is pure and undefiled before God the Father (read: not a bad thing)
-consists of good works aimed at the least of these (orphans and widows)
-is characterized by a holy life (keeping oneself unstained from the world)

There is nothing wrong with any of that. God the Father beholds it as pure and undefiled. But what about false religion? God finds false religion to be impure, defiled, and worthless. What characterizes false religion?

False religion is characterized by self-deception and conceit (“If anyone thinks he is religious… but deceives his heart…”). This self-deception and conceit is revealed in that the person believes themselves to be religious (devoted, pious, spiritual, etc.), yet their behavior betrays that supposition because they lack self-control (failing to bridle their tongue; self-control being a fruit of the spirit), and their words are evil (James 2-3), revealing that their heart, in fact, is evil (Luke 6:45—“For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks”). This person believes themselves to be religious, but, in all reality, they are not. They are a hearer of the word and not a doer (James 1:22-25). They’re a whitewashed tomb with dead men’s bones on the inside. This false sense of religion is what Jesus hates.

The dichotomy of the New Testament is not religion versus relationship, it is true religion versus false religion. One is pleasing to God, and the other is worthless to God.  True religion and false religion possess two different hearts: when we have true religion, our religion is the result of a regenerate, thankful heart; when we have false religion, our religion is motivated by self-deception, pride, and conceit. As Christians, our religion is not a means to an end; we do not perform good works in order to gain favor with God. On the contrary, our religion is motivated and driven by relationship.

Conclusion

Take a deep breath…
Exhale.

That wasn’t so bad, was it?

Someone might say, “Isn’t this just nitpicking?” You may look at it that way, but the problem with using lingo like this is that when people open up the actual Bible, not the unwritten book of Evangelical Christianese, it gets confusing for them when concepts that are spoken of exclusively in a negative sense from pulpits today (ie: religion) are actually spoken of, in their purest sense, in a positive way in the Scriptures (ie: … religion). It’s important that we don’t alienate Biblical concepts for the sake of maintaining language that makes us feel good inside (see: “the warm and fuzzies”) and leave Christians who are sincerely seeking to understand these issues confused by the Biblical text.

I don’t expect that because I have written this article that these phrases will suddenly disappear, nor do I expect that everyone who has read this article is now magically persuaded. I do hope that this has given you pause to consider how this new phraseology, while perfectly well-intentioned, may be opposed (and even detrimental) to the advancement of Biblical understanding, even if in substance the underlying ideas are correct.

Of course if you just skimmed the article and you’re good and mad, then please make sure you share the article so all your friends can see how wrong and/or dumb I am. Thanks!

‘Til next time.