Who is “the example”?
Several months ago I preached a message from Peter where I spoke to the word “Hupogrammos”, a Greek word that is only used once in all of scripture. I explained that this word literally meant “underwriter”, and compared this to an insurance underwriter. While I don’t think I went on to explain due to time limitations (but what does appear in my sermon notes), is what I hoped would be evident. The underwriter is not normally someone the world sees in the purchasing or subsequent referencing of the insurance document. We see the salesman and may even come into contact with others in the “agency” but in most cases never see the actual “underwriter”.
While several other Greek words are translated “example” in the New Testament, this particular word, I pointed out, was unique. While preaching this message I used an analogy of a laser printer. Since in my former life (I guess I should “clarify” here, not literally my former life, just back in my business days) I was in the laser printing business I warned that my advanced knowledge of laser printing (over the average listener), was going to require that I over simplify the example to attempt to make it understandable, and that this alone was often dangerous, particularly given that no analogy is ever perfect.
In this analogy I explained that the print cartridge was self contained but that it essentially was the core of the printing process. I further explained that the “light” source (or laser, in this case) was separate from the print cartridge but was the power source that “charged” the print drum which then rolled over the toner magnet allowing the toner to transfer to the print drum and finally to the paper. I explained further that in this process (which can not be seen by those outside the printer) many things could happen to cause the toner to not be transferred and fused to the paper properly, causing the print to either be “fuzzy” or in some cases not even legible. I further (and here is where I need to clarify) said that the copy was what the “unsaved” world sees. This I said is the “example” the world sees and that when we as Christians make professions of Christ “the light” that lives in us, that there is a very real danger that those looking on would have a very warped perspective of who Christ (our “light” and literal “example”) really is. I went on to say that it is “only to the extent that this light is perfected in us” that the world every see a representation of who Christ actually is, and that it is obvious that this “extent” is never perfect.The warning obviously was meant to shake those of us walking in error and yet professing the Christian faith into a reality check of the responsibility we have and the danger there is when we do not “walk worthy” (Eph. 4:1) and when we don’t live our lives in “meekness and fear” (James 2).
I should point out here that this clarification is directly from my sermon notes, but that there is no dvd of this message due to errors in recording that morning (and several mornings before and after that time). This fact alone has made this response even more important and significant. In the future I will attempt to have the video available at this link for your review and to show where I may have misspoken or not been clear in my explanations.
The bottom line is, while I diligently tried to make a clear distinction between that which the world could see (the laser paper print), and that which is the ultimate source of that print, “the (laser) light”, I may not have made that as clear as I had hoped. Thus, allow me to clarify, if it was unclear beyond the person that heard me say that we, in and of our selves, are “the example” (the hypogrammos) to the world. We are, at best, a very dim representation of “the original and only real example”. I hope it is obvious from this writing that it was not intended that we are the “actual example”, and that the “light” (Jesus Christ) is the only perfect example ever in this world. Jesus Christ is the light of the world. In an effort to be perfectly clear and leave do doubt as to where I stand, allow me one more attempt and say it this way; Jesus is the Hypogrammos (the underwriter), the example. We are at best some fuzzy copy (facsimile representation) of who He is in us, and until the day of our glorification (our last breath as Christians in this world) this example will, by nature of these fallen lives we live, and the fallen world we live in, never be the perfect example of our Savior, no matter how the world might view it.
In conversations beyond the sermon message that I preached, I probably further complicated the issue by taking a devil’s advocate position in trying to make the point that the world sees us as the “example” of Christianity. Indeed even the Greek is in the active, present, which equates to action on the part of the example in the present tense. It is often this preacher’s point that the world does not (and indeed, cannot) see the reality, and often does equate what they see in those professing Christ, to be the “example” of the Christian faith. For those that hope to preach the gospel effectively, I and many preachers much greater than myself, believe that we must (at least mentally and at times by the painting of verbal pictures) drag the hermeneutics out of the sterility of the theological laboratory and into the world in order to begin to understand what the world is seeing both in the text and in this case in us. We do this only (and in order) to see these things as the world sees them and thus hopefully be more effective at bringing understanding to the world of the truths of the scriptures. Yes, particularly in texts like this, this methodology can be dangerous and the preacher treads on very thin ice especially when judged on the technical precision of each word spoken. I, with total understanding of this, went into this precarious path with my eyes wide open. I could have chosen not to, and you have to decide if you would prefer these kinds of difficult passages addressed in this manner or not. I am sure that within this forum I will have no personal impact on one’s preferences, but I do hope to have an impact on those seeking to have an understanding of the larger context as well as the challenges found in the text.
I understand that those looking on with purist eyes will often hear the error of the world in the verbiage chosen. I further understand that any preacher can (and this preacher, I am sure, will ) misspeak and be rightly accused of technical error, if not actual substantive error. I further understand the responsibility and the harsh reality that one day I will be judged by the ultimate Judge on the words and methods I have chosen in trying to bring clarity to the Word of God. When found in error (directly or by word choice), I will be the first to use this forum to bring correct understanding.
In the end I hope that what is found here is a more clear line to what was intended in the first place to be disturbing. While I did not hope my words would be distracting and take the focus away from the power of the message, in at least one case they did and for that I have been disquieted and felt it prudent to bring this clarification.
RETURN to HOME PAGE OF CFC
