Cautious Christianity v. Kingdom Christianity

I blogged about risk-taking in my last post, When Safe Sucks.  I’ve decided to camp out around this subject of risk-taking for a three-part series because I think it an important subject for Christians.

I think it important  for Christians because Christians, are, on the whole, one of the most conservative and cautious groups of people I know.  Maybe you can think of  a more cautious group.  Perhaps the financial consultants for AARP are more cautious. I don’t know.

It puzzles me though that the Church doesn’t produce more risk-takers. Think about it. You can only enter the kingdom of God as a citizen if you are willing to lose your life (i.e. to save it). (Matthew 10:39).  Kingdom citizenship is an all or nothing proposition. Jesus said, “No one, after putting his hand to the plow and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:62).

And yet, after risking it all to enter the Kingdom, once inside Christians are subjected to the culture of cautiousness that permeates the Church, and they begin to play it safe.  They opt for cautious Christianity over Kingdom Christianity.

I understand why it happens.  So much of morality is premised on restraint and moderation that it’s easy to see caution as a common denominator and virtue and therefore, its opposite, risk, as a vice.

But risk, like money, is amoral. It can be used for good or bad, to save or destroy. And to disavow it, like taking a vow of poverty, can be to place a roadblock on the path of one’s destiny. Sometimes the only way forward is across a dangerous stretch of road, or through a raging river. Unfortunately, too many Christians have stopped on the bank, having forgotten how to risk it all to go forward.

Christians should be known as the greatest risk-takers. They have the promise of a Divine Enabler (Philippians 4:13), a Divine Indweller (Romans 8:11) and a cosmic safety net (Romans 8:28).

When’s the last time you risked something for the kingdom of God? GS