Anyone who reads these long soliloquies (which occasionally resort to the use of strange words) or who knows me, knows how I speak a lot about choices. As in, picking this over that or going in one direction or another. Life is flush with choices. I think few of us actually spend much time considering how many or how significant our choices actually are. Most are probably subconscious or instinctual, requiring little reflection. While some are major, far fewer rise to the level of existential … as in impacting our lives at the most fundamental level.

A central thread in these blog posts is whether or not to choose belief in the Christian story. Of course, it is only one story of many that purport to explain all of reality. Living in the modern or post-modern era with ready-made access to the multitude of cultures and belief systems, it’s kind of like standing in line at the local smorgasbord or grand buffet. Where to begin? Which among so many options do I want choose? After all, I only have so much room to imbibe. In the end, we may sample a wide array of foods, each in small quantities. Or, we can pass on most, instead concentrating on a select few.

Of course, I believe that any honest person will recognize that we make existential choices either through default or intention. Something must govern the forces by which we live our lives. Such an honest person will also recognize that, realistically, the options are relatively few. Put simply, there’s nothing all that new under the sun when it comes to this kind of thing. Sure, there are many nuances, some large and some small, but basically it’s not too difficult to list the options.

In that sense, all of us believe. We may spend a ton of time considering those beliefs or we may not. But, all of us believe. We have to believe in something or else we can’t function. The atheist must believe there is no theos (Greek for God), no supreme deity that is of a super(Latin for above or beyond)natural reality. A true atheist is definitely a true believer! The agnostic is one who can’t commit to either belief in the supernatural or belief that the supernatural is not real. (The “a” in agnostic or atheist is the negation and the “gnostic” comes from the Greek gnostos meaning “known.”) In other words, the agnostic believes that he/she just can’t know what is ultimately true about reality. This, of course, is a strong belief.

While having no monopoly on the concept, many Christians call themselves, “Believers.” I imagine Moslems are very similar. When I was well-parked outside of the Christian worldview, I was largely unaware of this distinction. I don’t suspect the term is used constantly within Christian settings, although it is certainly a feature in some. It refers to those who buy into the standard orthodoxy of the triune God, as well as Christ’s role and our role in the whole scheme of things. (As an aside, in my anti-authoritarian years, of which I still maintain some elements, “orthodoxy” had a bad name. It sort of connoted that I was incapable of making up my own mind. I’ve since relaxed my stance on that quite a bit.)

If I haven’t bored you yet with all of this, I’m just about getting to the reason I’m writing today. I’ve entitled this piece, “To Believe or Not. To Follow or Not.” Up to this point, I’ve tried to briefly make the case that we all believe and all follow, whether we know it or not. So, in that sense, the title is somewhat senseless. However, I want to now focus specifically on what we can generally call Christianity, whether you buy into that framework or not.

Fascinatingly, Jesus continues to be highly popular while (at least in the West), Christianity may not be so. These days, you just don’t get many people saying, “Oh, that Jesus. What a jerk. I can’t stand his principles. His teaching is a bunch of bunk. He’s just crazy. Or inept.” Etc… On the other hand, in many circles … especially in academia, much of the media and (in the U.S.) on the coasts and urban centers, “Christianity” doesn’t elicit a whole lot of positive reaction. Instead, the reaction might range from bland indifference or lack of exposure to abject repulsion. While I don’t want to go into all of the reasons for that here, suffice to say that some of that is well-deserved. And, some of it clearly is not.

Despite one set of trends away from the Christian mindset in America, there are other trends that move in the opposite direction. And, one of those trends is at the basis of this piece.

And it is this: By all measures, what is turning people away from Christianity (aside from the scandals and cultural forces that reject objective truth) is the fact that many people crave more than mere belief. They crave substance … the shapes and hues that bring vitality to their beliefs. After all, if belief is the attempt to be all things to all people, then it is of no substance at all. And, Christianity in America is working hard in some respects to be all things to all people. You can be some things to all people or you can be all things to some people but you can’t have it both ways. Think about it.

A lot of people believe that Jesus was/is a good guy. That his teachings (the selective pieces of which they are aware) reflect sound ideals. In keeping with that perspective, other good people like Gandhi and King cited Jesus’ example as foundational to their life’s work. Many of these people reject the traditional “church-going” model for how they apply those beliefs.

Another significant group of people profess belief in a particular subset brand of Christianity like Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Methodism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Pentacostalism, and so forth. The majority of these people dedicate some portion of their regular lives to church attendance (be it regular or irregular) and some portion of their income to the church or some specific charity. On the other hand, some will identify as “Catholic” or “Christian” but that distinction and stated fact of belief has little or very modest impact on how they live their lives.

In other words, Belief does not necessarily translate into a whole lot of action. So, what is a belief that requires very little actual movement? I’d say it’s pretty benign. I would argue that “benign” and “existential truth” are pretty much mutually exclusive, in reality.

All of which is a REALLY long way of getting to my answer the other day to someone who asked me what I would call my set of beliefs. Of course, I did not make up this answer but appropriated it because it makes sense.

To answer, “I’m a Christian,” is to trigger all sorts of subtle responses, each conditioned upon some aspect of the term that resonates as either positive or negative, depending on all sorts of things. For starters, it basically says I identify with Protestants, not Catholics, which is largely true but oh such a limitation on the reality. Most Catholics will answer, “Catholic,” not “Christian.” For others, saying I am a Christian may mean I’m an “Evangelical” (which can translate as “born again,” “zealous,” or politically right wing, depending upon the listener).

Which is why my intention is to always answer, “I follow Jesus.”

In some ways, this is a show-stopper. If for no other reasons, it is not a common response and, therefore, requires some thinking to interpret its meaning.

I like this response for three main reasons. First, it cuts through a whole lot of institutional layering that can easily be grounds for distraction from essential truth. Institutions are inherently self-protective, as are bureaucracies, and while we need them in order to be civilized, they create their own truths aside from that which caused their founding.

Second, it elevates the centerpiece of the whole belief system to primary status. To say, “I’m Christian,” can mean dozens or even hundreds of things. In fact, a whole lot of Christianity is not necessarily focused on Jesus, which might seem counterintuitive to many.

And, third, it substitutes what can be a pretty passive verb “Believe,” with a very active verb, “Follow.” In fact, belief may not really require a whole lot of action where follow certainly does. Crassly, I can sit on my butt and believe but I can’t sit on my butt and follow.

Any ensuing dialogue must then be about who and what Jesus is and what it means to follow him. And, those are the questions that can define a life. Their breadth and depth brooks no quarter. We cannot say “I follow Jesus” and take a back seat. To follow means just that. Wherever he/it leads. That is the path of the pilgrim. That is the path of the disciple. In fact, I could just as rightfully answer, “I’m a pilgrim.” Or, “I’m a disciple.” The pilgrim is on a sacred journey and the disciple is one who invests most everything in following a teacher. Both of these terms clearly express a reality that says the status quo is not acceptable. I will not stand unchanged. Transformation is not only possible, it’s the purpose.

Of course, all of this is much easier said than done. Admittedly, I’m a poor example. I’ve now long abandoned my prior conviction that Jesus was a good guy, even a great moral teacher or enlightened being. None of those come close to describing who he said he was and how his followers reacted to him. No, the reality of Jesus leaves me no choice. Yes, I believe, because (among other reasons) it’s the only answer that makes sense of everything else, as bizarre as that may seem. But, I follow because he leaves me no alternative, thank God. At the very beginning of his ministry, he didn’t say, “Here’s what I ask you to believe.” He bluntly just said, “Follow me.” And, they did. Over the months and years that followed, and well past his death, they kept learning what it meant to follow him. And, now, I am one as well, as completely unlikely as that should have been.

To Believe or Not? We all believe in something and I choose to believe what I do about Jesus and the reality he describes. To Follow or Not? I must every day make that choice … confounding and treacherous and liberating as it is.

Simply, I follow Jesus.