What Would Jesus Do? — The Question That Fuels Institutional Christianity — by David Yeubanks

It was the proverbial Christian catch-phrase of the ’90s, and it’s still going strong. You see it practically everywhere you look: on bumper stickers, fish emblems for automobiles, t-shirts, banners, hats, bracelets, necklaces, Christian television — and virtually everywhere else imaginable in church world. It’s sounded over the loudspeakers of concerts, conferences and radio, and printed in the educational materials of many churches and youth ministries. It is the question that almost literally fuels Institutional Christianity itself.

A note on terms. For those unfamiliar with my verbiage here: by “Institutional Christianity” I mean, essentially, the modern-day church system — largely identified by its buildings, denominational and clergy designations, programs, static routines and Sunday services, and the mission to advance such organizations and structures as frequently and in as many places as possible. In other words, it is “Christianity” as most of the world recognizes it: a religious institution, or a system of them. Real, biblical Christianity (in my view) is something far more simple and organic — a global, spiritual community of believers in Jesus who find their identity in Him, not in meeting places, programs, denominational titles and religious rituals. This is not to say it’s wrong for Christians to meet in a building; only that buildings and programs should never be the focus, for they do not define, embody or validate true Christianity as Scripture teaches it.

I say WWJD is the question that fuels institutional Christianity because anyone who observes the church system can quickly recognize its fascination with titles, catch-phrases, and externally imposed methods to invoke a religious response. Rather than the simple, inward motivation of the Holy Spirit — actions that flow spontaneously from sincere love and faith — catch-phrases like WWJD prompt people to act on the presumption that their identity and acceptance by God is wrapped up in religious activity. WWJD also leaves Christians to determine on their own what they presume Jesus might do, rather than recognizing that a living relationship with God involves real, two-way communication rooted in love, faith and obedience to a living Lord. All in all, WWJD amounts to an external regulation of conscience that requires no actual influence from a living Lord.

Equally striking is that the institutional church’s reliance on the question of what Jesus would do demonstrates something many who walk with the Lord outside the four walls have been saying for years:

The institutional church system, in concept, serves a dead Jesus.

“What?” you say. “How can you say such a thing? WWJD is such a good, positive, righteous statement! Surely all Christians should intend to pattern their lives after how Jesus would do things — isn’t that what Christianity is all about?” Well… in a word… no. That’s not what Christianity is all about. Not even close.

While there is nothing wrong with observing the life of Jesus and desiring to live as He lived, WWJD tends to engage that pursuit by presumption and not relationship — and there is a huge difference. Presumption is self-determined; relationship involves living, direct communication with the Father. Moreover, the reality of living as Christ desires is impossible without His grace and His direct involvement in our lives. It is my earnest opinion that “What Would Jesus Do” is a question that, ideally, ought never to be uttered by a sincere follower of Christ, because it isn’t truly representative of those who believe He is alive and ruling their hearts. Please think this through with me. What Christian — who accepts that Jesus is alive and has made His temple within the very lives of His people — doesn’t already know what Jesus is doing and desires to do, because He is Lord, Savior and intimate friend? WWJD is a question asked by those who would act as though their God is dead, inactive and silent; who inadvertently presume He is unable to communicate His active will to His own people. It quietly implies that one doesn’t already know, and so must ponder and imagine, on his own, what Jesus might do if He were here — implying that Jesus isn’t here, that He’s been gone for 2,000 years, and that we cannot possibly know what He would do today, so we are left to our imaginations. Do you believe Jesus is alive and desires active, intimate relationship with you? That He will lead you and make His will known? Or is that impossible to really know — are Christians only left to educated guessing about God’s will? Is this just semantics, or one of the most important questions we can consider? Is Christ our living Lord and closest friend, or merely the historical figurehead of a religion we call “Christianity”?

Given what real, living relationship with Jesus is, I could never see myself asking the relationally-void question, “I wonder what Jesus would do?” My question would rather be, “Lord, what do You want to do through me here?” or “Jesus, what are You doing?” or “Lord, what is Your will in this?” My expectation would be that Jesus will respond to my prayer according to His will — that as a Christian I ought to be able to discern His voice and the leading of His Spirit. “What Would Jesus Do,” by contrast, is not a prayer at all, nor a statement of submission to the Headship of Christ. It doesn’t even address Him personally; He is merely the indirect subject of a question answered by individual presumption. Someone who doesn’t even know Him could do as much.

Anything less than submission to, and communication with, a living Lord amounts to dead religion, in my view. If we respond to situations merely according to some religious principle, pattern or presumption — instead of in response to a living relationship with Christ — we are missing the mark and being ruled by vain imaginations, the clever concepts of men. Israel did the same thing in the Old Testament. They pursued what was right in their own eyes; they followed their own imaginations of what they presumed would please God — WWYD, What Would Yahweh Do? And how did God respond? He set aside their imaginative worship and stretched out His hand of salvation to people who never even sought Him.

The trouble with imaginations is that they presume we can decide on our own how God would or should want things done, instead of entreating God Himself to lead us as He wills and commands. This is, in fact, the basic definition of “organized religion”: man’s methods and reasoning about how to reach God. Scripture does not call us to imagine how Christ might do things; it calls us to lay down every proud notion — the vain imaginations — and bring every thought into the obedience of Christ. WWJD operates on a deceptive premise: that you can decide for yourself what Jesus would do, leaving the matter of obedience to Christ out of the picture entirely.

This is not to say that imagination, in and of itself, is evil — God gave us the ability to dream, create and even do good with our imaginations, when that good is enacted from a pure heart in love with Jesus and submitted to His authority. But we’re talking about what the Bible calls vain imaginations, a significant distinction: vain imaginations involve the pride of man, carnal wisdom, and self-righteous religious presumption.

Certainly some will argue that much “good” is done in the name of religion, and there is a measure of truth to that — but note it is done “in the name of religion,” not necessarily “by the command of Jesus.” Whether a deed looks good or not doesn’t prove it was Christ-led, any more than an atheist giving a neighbor ten bucks for gas proves that atheist is being led by Jesus. ;) The problem I’m pointing at is when imagination replaces reliance on the Holy Spirit — presuming instead of following His lead. Christ in us is what separates us from the world and its good deeds, because it reveals that we are His hands and feet, moved wholly by Him. The institutional church, on the other hand, is too often fueled by its own imaginations. Too easily it loses sight of being the hands and feet of Jesus (except to the end that those surface “good actions” might increase its numbers), and sometimes even shuns those who dare to follow the Lord’s leading without the consent of church hierarchy. There is a prescribed formula it wants followed; those imaginations dictate everything from action to doctrine, and while it may hold an appearance of godliness on the surface, it denies the power of the Gospel — because it removes the Lord from His throne and elevates itself over the will of Christ. And let me say the next part carefully, because I don’t mean it as a slur: the word anti-christ doesn’t only mean opposed to Christ — it means in the place of Christ. Any mindset that quietly sets our own imagination where the living voice of Jesus belongs has, however unwittingly, stepped into that place. To relate to the living Christ as though He were absent is — in the soberest, most literal sense of the word — to stand in His stead. I don’t write that to wound a single soul; I write it because I think we have to feel the weight of it.

In the institutional church system, it is these concepts themselves that are meant to motivate Christian service — not purely the work of the Holy Spirit. The thinking goes that if Christians aren’t motivated enough to serve God, they need help through inventive schemes, colorful images and catchy phrases. Forgive my bluntness, but I find that a weak substitute for the real thing. If a believer isn’t moved by Christ’s grace, he isn’t moved. If works don’t flow from a sincere response to God’s grace, they are just dead works — nothing more. They might earn a pat on the back down here, but they don’t impress a God who is pleased only with sincere faith in response to His mercy. The word “witness,” in the original language of Scripture, is not a term about slapping bumper-stickers on your car to help you “share your faith.” There is no call for that kind of “evangelism” in Scripture. I’m not saying it’s a sin to put a sticker on your car (grin) — just, please, let’s not confuse it with the “evangelism” or “witness” the New Testament actually describes. The term witness, literally translated, speaks of one who is a martyr for Jesus — who has suffered for believing the Gospel and proclaims it boldly regardless of any threat. Its more general use in the New Testament means proclaiming the Gospel, His death and resurrection — not out of duty, but because we are literal witnesses to the active saving grace of God. We are not called to “witness about our faith”; we are called to be witnesses, and to testify of the Gospel. WWJD is not the Gospel, nor even a demonstration of faith in the Gospel. I’ve seen Mormons wear the bracelets and try to do what Jesus did. WWJD is not evangelistic, nor does it constitute “witnessing” for Christ — let alone being a witness for Christ.

And this is all without pointing out that millions of dollars have been made on this little “Christian” catch-phrase (and I use the term “Christian” loosely there). Once I visited a website selling WWJD bracelets and couldn’t even find a reference to the Gospel story — just a page selling bracelets under the guise of “witnessing.” Folks, these are glorified rubber bands with four letters on them, and sometimes a bit pricey; if you’ve got the cash, they sell fancier ones in silver, gold and diamonds. One site advertised “a fashionable way to keep the faith.” Fashionable? At that point it isn’t about encouraging evangelism or excitement about Jesus — it’s about making money off of well-meaning people. Does that really sound like the kind of motivation we’d receive from Christ — to hand over our hard-earned cash so we can act as though our Lord is still dead and just make educated guesses at how He’d have us live? Think about what we’re really saying when we sell the idea of imagining what Jesus would do. If it’s all come to this, we might as well ask the bigger question: Why, With Jesus Dead? Why pretend to serve a God we don’t even believe is alive to speak to us and lead us?

“What Would Jesus Do” tells the world that we don’t know — and only kills their hope further, because if we who are supposedly saved by Him don’t even know, what hope is there for them? It tells the world we don’t really believe He is alive and able to speak today. I cannot stress enough that this is the way people speak concerning the dead. My own father, for example, passed away in January of 2001 from cancer. We were very close, and I loved him dearly. Often I find myself wondering what he might do in a given situation — I remember how he handled certain things and try to imagine how he’d respond to what I’m facing now. If I slapped a cute label on that, I might call it WWDD: What Would Dad Do? But the thing is, Dad isn’t going to tell me what to do, because Dad has gone to be with the Lord. He is not present, nor does he speak to me. As far as this natural world is concerned, Dad is gone. So I act on my presumptions of what I remember of him. I am inspired by his memory, but I am left only to imagination — something I ultimately control — to act upon.

Some who pattern their lives after “what Jesus would do” no doubt have a sincere love for the Lord — just as I have a deep and sincere love for my departed father. They have read the Bible, they know the things Christ did in the first century, and they try to pattern their lives after presumptions of how Jesus might act if He were alive today. Do you see the problem yet? In asking “What Would Jesus Do?” they overlook the vital fact that Jesus is alive today. There should be no cause to wonder what He might do if He were here, because He is here. Religious concepts like WWJD do not encourage true relationship with the Lord — they tend to sidestep it. And so it goes with just about every facet of church world: principles, points, laws, steps, rules, formulas, rituals — all aimed at some result of self-assured righteousness, but all void of any real requirement of personal communication and obedience to a living Christ who stands as the only Head of His body.

The concerning thing is how convincing these little concepts are. They draw the masses in, and most have no idea they’re being distracted from the very relationship with Jesus that they could have. Notice how people swarm to hear celebrity preachers, how they can’t seem to get enough of the latest books, videos and programs to help them overcome personal struggles, financial lack, even sin — always looking for a new “key” or a new routine (usually one that sidesteps the cross). Ministry staff schedules fill with counseling sessions as people wait for a pastor or prophet to give them the word of God for their situation. So dependent are they on all of these things, because they all want to know: What would Jesus do — if He could speak to me about my situation? The sad thing is, most won’t be told what they really need: to stop waiting on the next sermon or seminar and to seek Him themselves and find out. It’s time to wake up and realize that Jesus is not dead — He is alive! We ought rather to ask, What is Jesus presently doing, and what is He saying?

Jesus Christ — the living Lord, the Creator of the universe — lives in our hearts! Think of the magnitude of that reality. WWJD amounts to little more than catering to religious presumptions about a God we can control with imagination, rather than yielding wholly to a living King who alone is the Head of His Church, and to the Holy Spirit who provides conviction, counsel and comfort. Jesus purchased us with His precious blood, and owns us completely.

His purpose is to live through us with His life! This is why the institutional church’s approach to relationship with God is so flawed: it teaches that God saved us “because He has a wonderful plan for our lives,” and that the plan is worked out through finding meaning in rules, rituals and religious performances. Church, then, becomes something we engage in to “have our needs met.” But that’s a distraction from the truth. If we can sincerely say we have been crucified with Christ, then we must acknowledge that we are dead — dead to the Law and dead to sin. This life we live, therefore, is not about us and what we need. It is not about God’s wonderful plan for our lives — God saved us because He has a wonderful plan for His life. We are His body, not our own. The institutional church wants to present a Gospel that is seeker-sensitive, that feels good, that puts men on a pedestal and softens the offense of the cross. But the truth is that none of us deserve God’s grace. He gives it freely of His own choosing — and if we believe His truth, we must acknowledge that His blood sealed the contract of ownership. We are not our own any longer if we claim to be His. We do not get to decide or imagine “what Jesus would do”; we belong to Him, and it is He who lives in us.

Scripture boldly says (Revelation 19:10) that “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” While believers run around looking for “a word” from God, they neglect the reality that the Prophet — Jesus Christ, by His Spirit — lives inside them. Moses himself testified of the day when one Prophet would speak the counsel of God to His people (Deuteronomy 18:15; Acts 3:22; 7:37). That Prophet would not be a man, but the Lord Jesus Himself. He declared that the Law and the prophets were until John the Baptist, and from that time forward the Kingdom of God has been preached — a New Covenant, with a King who is its sole mediator: Christ the Lord.

Christianity is not a matter of wondering how Jesus might have liked to do things if He were walking the earth today — that’s just dead religion. Too often, though, the focus is drawn onto the shepherds and their programs rather than onto the Great Shepherd Himself — sometimes deliberately, but often, I think, simply because it’s the only model they’ve ever known. There can be a quiet fear that if people become too dependent on Jesus, they’ll become less dependent on the organization — and less inclined to pour their resources into feeding the machinery of organized religion, in exchange for simpler, more meaningful ways of drawing together and meeting one another’s needs. But like it or not, the Lord has already spoken concerning shepherds who only feed themselves, and the sheep need to wake from every deception and realize they have but one Shepherd (Ezekiel 34; John 10).

At the very least, we ought to redeem the meaning of WWJD — say, Walking With Jesus Daily. At most, we ought to scrap it altogether, along with every fascination and fabrication of man that sets itself between the Lord and His body. In these days, Christians must sharpen their discernment, because these kinds of distractions are not small matters. I hope this short article has helped a few realize that something so apparently minor as WWJD can become an enormous obstacle to the reality of the Gospel. It is truly the difference between life and death. Would to God that we might never again utter the words “What Would Jesus Do,” but instead embrace the reality of His life in us.

A word, years later. I’ll be honest: I wrote this one hot. When something stirs me, I can slip into a kind of holy rant, and the young man who wrote this swung a heavy brush. In revisiting it, I’ve softened a few of the sharpest edges — not to water anything down, and certainly not to build a comfortable “safe space” for anyone (this message is meant to disturb) — but because I’ve come to believe I’d rather persuade than merely provoke. If a thing is true, the Holy Spirit is more than able to press it into a heart with exactly the weight it needs, and a person’s own conscience will hear it as strongly as it must, whether or not I shout. So take the strong parts as strong — I mean every one of them. But hear the heart underneath: most who wear a WWJD bracelet, and most pastors inside the system I’ve described, aren’t cynics or con men. They’re sincere people doing their best inside the only model they were ever handed — as I once was. I don’t write to wound them, but to point every one of us, myself first, back to the living Lord who is nearer than any slogan could ever say.