Being Right vs. Being Righteous

We need to eat apples, and not oranges. We need to read the newspaper, and not magazines. We need to wear a watch, not carry a pocket watch.

These previous three sentences all have something in common. Aside from the fact that they are things I generally do, the sentences present a problem. Each action seems to be set up as the opposite action of what follows, and thus the need for the other intensifies. But it is a mistake to do such a thing. It is, in fact, a logical fallacy to such a thing.

To be more specific, these sentences present false dichotomies. For instance, why not both? Or why not neither? This kind of bad thinking often creeps into the way we do church as well. I've heard a specific false dichotomy running wild in Christian circles recently. It's the idea that to present a winsome picture of Christianity to those not in the faith, we need to worry more about being righteous than about being right. We need to be good people, we don't need to be concerned with telling other people they're wrong.

Well it's a nice sentiment, but it's garbage. Why not both? It's like this crowd denigrates a reasonable method to share the faith just to buttress their case for their own. This act is intellectually lazy and morally weak.

Being right about certain theological truths is absolutely essential. Paul demonstrates this when he gets raving mad about the abuse of the gospel that Galatians are prepetrating. "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?" (Gal. 3:1). His pain and anger proceeds later on, "How I wish I could change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!" (Gal. 4:20). Paul cared about the message. Paul cared about being right, and he cared about people even in his anger. And he wasn't nice about the message being distorted.

The sentiment about exclusively being righteous is wrong because it assumes that if Christians are just a bunch of nice people to a bunch of people that are not Christians, then people will magically accept the truth-claims of Christianity. This might happen, and I hope it does. But it's a bit delusional to think that we shouldn't worry about getting the message right, especially if it contradicts someone else's worldview.

Newsflash for Christians: you have a vastly different worldview than secularists, naturalists, postmodernists, New Agers, and other eastern worldviews. You'd be foolish to think that merely being nice is going to influence people to believe in Jesus. Paul opened his mouth when others developed a different worldview. We shouldn't be any different.

My consistent question then becomes, why not both? Why can't we be both right and righteous? Why is there a false dichtomy? What is wrong with winsomely explaining one's own view of the world, God, and human liberation? Christians can love people too and have them over to dinner. I don't think most people will mind either. Let's do both.

And for you other Christians (the false dichotomy crowd) that are worried about all us Christians telling other people about the Gospel, stop hijacking Christianity.