A Preacher and an IRS Agent both had a flight from Denver to DC. They were flying Southwest Airlines, which uses open seating: passengers board and choose their seats in the order they check in.
The Preacher was attending a conference in DC entitled Pastoral Evangelism in a Postmodern World. He was one of the first people to enter the plane. As he boarded, he passed a nursing mother and thought to himself, "I'm glad I checked in early." (In reality, his assistant had checked him in.) The Preacher walked to the back of the plane because he knew the front was more likely to fill up. He settled on a window seat a few rows from the back, but not too close to the lavatory because that also gets crowded. He placed his briefcase across the middle seat in the hopes that it would deter anyone from sitting there. As he saw the plane start to fill up, he knew someone would be sitting on his row, so he pulled out his iPod to signal: I'm not interested in chatting. After all, he had a speech at the conference to prepare for, and it wasn't like he was going to develop a meaningful relationship on a three hour flight. By the time a middle-aged woman sat in the aisle seat on his row, he had his earphones in. As he scrolled through the playlists on his iPod, he felt some satisfaction in how much he'd kept in touch culturally. He picked a playlist with Sufjan Stevens, U2, Bon Iver, and some other indy artists. Yes, he was hip, cutting-edge, relevant. The Preacher then leaned back his seat and polished up his speech.
The IRS Agent was attending a conference in DC on new tax rules for the upcoming fiscal year. The Agency had closed some loopholes, and they were training their agents to crack down on audits this year. By the time he boarded the plane, it was pretty full. Between researching March Madness and filling out bureaucratic paperwork, he hadn't remembered to check in online. He took the first open seat he saw, which was a middle seat between the nursing mother and an overweight man. The IRS Agent was a pretty big guy, so squeezing in was tough. He crammed his briefcase underneath the seat in front of him. He had planned to review some new tax rules, but with no elbow room he decided that would be too much of a pain. He was silent at first because he felt intruding and awkward striking up a conversation with strangers. But after take-off, he got bored and turned to the heavy guy next to him and asked, "What do you think about the Broncos this year?" By the time the flight descended onto DC, they'd determined that Jay Cutler would win the 2009 MVP.
Which man better understood the Gospel?
Bookmark/Search this post with
Unfortunately the answer is
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 06:09 — Christine Dattilo (not verified)Unfortunately the answer is neither. The preacher, it's obvious. The IRS agent - was humble and engaging - but he didn't share the gospel. Somehow we need to combine both the sharing the gospel along with a humble and caring attitude.
I agree with Christine. It
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 09:35 — Tim Sharpe (not verified)I agree with Christine. It seems like the better questions to close this article is: "which one is less of an ass?"
Yet I will confess that I see in myself many of the same selfish, concave attitudes that the "preacher" displays. I pray God's gracious Spirit will continue the work He has begun in causing repentance for these things.
Mr. Sims's post is obviously
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 11:26 — Mark Traphagen (not verified)Mr. Sims's post is obviously meant to evoke the parable of the Good Samaritan, with the Preacher as the self-righteous Pharisee or scribe, and the IRS agent as the despised Samaritan.
Christine and Tim reject Mr. Sims's (implied) answer to his question because it did not fit a soteriological definition of the gospel. Yet the irony is that his (implied) answer sounds more like Jesus's than theirs!
Perhaps the problem comes from Mr. Sims asking "which one understood the gospel better?" For many in the Reformed camp, that triggers a systematic theological, soteriological definition. But Jesus didn't ask "which of the three understood the gospel best?" He asked, "Which of the three proved to be a neighbor?" That might have been a better final question for Mr. Sims as well (with the substitution of "two" for "three" of course!)
This raises another question however. Does Jesus' parable have nothing to do with the gospel? Was he just preaching VeggieTales moralism until Paul (and John Piper ;-) could come along and tell us what the gospel really is?
Thanks for the comments!
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 11:42 — Sims, Alex (not verified)Thanks for the comments! Y'all make very good points. In candor, I didn't know what question to ask at the end. I wanted to explore the idea that if we don't enjoy our neighbors (even to the point of treating others as more important than ourselves), perhaps we've missed Jesus' teachings - no matter how seemingly in touch we are.
I liked Alex's
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 15:28 — Glenn Lucke (not verified)I liked Alex's question.
Christine: you say the IRS agent didn't understand the gospel because he didn't share it. Do you believe that one must share the gospel with each conversation partner in order to be deemed one who understands the gospel?
Alex didn't ask which person better *communicated* the gospel, he asked which one better UNDERSTOOD the gospel. You seem to suggest that if he didn't explicitly communicate the content of the gospel then he doesn't understand it any better than the aloof preacher.
Again, I like Alex's question. The preacher may know some variant of the Gospel, but in this parable he doesn't demonstrate that he understands it. He calculates his actions to create distance and barriers between himself and other images of God. The IRS agent seeks to involve himself in the affairs of the images of God around him. Embrace, not exclusion, shows better understanding of the gospel.
GL: That's what I was after;
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 16:19 — Mark Traphagen (not verified)GL:
That's what I was after; you just said it better.
Your clarification that "understand" doesn't have to mean intellectually or verbally only is very helpful. If we really understand the gospel, we will love our neighbor, whether or not there is an opportunity to verbally communicate an evangelistic message. I do realize, though, that that runs athwart of much teaching that Christians receive. But it seems to me that Jesus was very happy with such a conception of the kingdom message he was preaching (again, witness the Parable of the Good Samaritan).
This story reminds me of Tony
Wed, 02/25/2009 - 22:09 — John Muether (not verified)This story reminds me of Tony Campolo's wise rule for air travel. When a passenger next to him strikes up a conversation, Campolo has two answers to the question, "what do you do for a living?" If he is feeling conversational, he says that he is a sociologist. If he has work to do and can't be disturbed, he replies, "I am a Baptist minister."
Nice post Alex. However, I am
Thu, 02/26/2009 - 00:44 — Gary Peil (not verified)Nice post Alex. However, I am still not convinced that Jay Cutler will win the MVP.
I believe parables are only
Thu, 02/26/2009 - 19:26 — Linc Ashby (not verified)I believe parables are only worth considering if the response is varied. Such was the obviously the case in Jesus' day. Some loved 'em. Some hated 'em. And that is not at all meant to be a put down to those who have criticized what Alex has written. I'm just pointing out that when you say something worth saying you're probably going to have at least a few detractors. Someone wise once told me, "there's no such thing as a leader without a dagger in his back." Again, such was the case in Jesus' day. I must side with Glenn's interpretation on this - the key word here is "understood" not "preached". At the same time, St. Francis of Assi's oft quoted maxim - "preach the gospel all the time and use words when necessary" (or something like that) - deserves as much as critique as it does proclamation. Simply put, words are necessary to preach the gospel, but not to understand it, especially when the application of the understanding comes in relationship to our neighbors. So kudos to Alex; I think he's definitely written something worth chewing on. Finally, with three young children I know I also speak for my wife when I say I long for the days of flying where my only concern was whether or not my aisle mate was going to want to chat with me.
There are people who
Mon, 03/02/2009 - 17:50 — Roger M (not verified)There are people who re-energize by conversing with others. There are those who re-energize by being alone.
Is your desire to make small talk (with someone you wont see again) really an indicator of your understanding of the gospel or is it merely an indicator of personality?
gamma said "The IRS agent seeks to involve himself in the affairs..." I agree that he didn't create barriors or have the attitude of the pastor. Still, he only struck up a converstation because he was bored and because he didn't have room to work. That doesn't sound like a great understanding of the gospel. If he'd gotten on the plane sooner, he'd be just like the pastor.
Thanks again to everyone for
Tue, 03/03/2009 - 08:46 — Alex Sims (not verified)Thanks again to everyone for the helpful and insightful comments! I deeply appreciate them.
To be honest, knowing nothing besides what is stated in the parable above, I’d assume that the preacher is more likely going to heaven than the IRS Agent. That said, I think there’s a sense in which the preacher completely misses the gospel.
Roger M insightfully says that if the IRS Agent had checked in earlier, he’d have acted the same way. That may be true, but it raises the question: why didn’t the Agent check in earlier? I would contend that he didn’t check in earlier because it wasn’t a big deal to him where he sat because he wasn’t hung up on having the best seat or being un-intruded.
Maybe the Agent was just bored or even lazy. Fair enough, but he wasn’t intended to be perfect. My thought was that if he were a flawless hero in the parable, the contrast wouldn’t expose the preacher as much as it was intended to. My take is that even the lazy and bored Agent exhibited the gospel better than the Preacher, who took care to give himself the best seat.
My criticism for the Preacher isn’t that he liked alone time or his iPod. My criticism is that he valued himself above others. He looked out for #1. He made sure he was one of the first people to board; he took the best seat; he valued his alone-time above cordiality towards other people; and he leaned his seat back (which is brutal for anyone behind you who’s remotely tall, let alone Glenn’s height:).
By contrast, even the Agent’s boredom had redeeming value. He fought his boredom by enjoying his neighbor. He didn’t show any concern with checking in early or sitting in the right spot because he wasn’t self-focused.
An even better contrast would be Jesus, who had it ALL but gave it up to be killed on a cross because he treated us as better than Himself.
“If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.”
(This is all for discussion; I don’t pretend I know all the applications or answers, and I’m TERRIBLE at applying this.)