It has been a long, long time since I have posted. I have been overwhelmed with my academic endeavors much of the past year, and have embraced the breaks I have gotten. However, this post is a product of passion. I am frustrated with many in the Church I interact with, and incredibly disappointed with some of my encounters over the last year. And thus, I must speak out in some way. (I warn this is an act of passion because I will rant and possible over-react. But so be it).
I will speak of a few encounters (of course without mentioning names) of which I have been disappointed by the impression either the Church or common American Christian culture has made on some people I care about deeply.
In the first, I sat in on a class of a professor at Liberty I really enjoyed and admired. His Biblical knowledge seemed to be quite impressive and his godly teaching as well. However, as I sat in on the lecture, all I heard was prideful bashing of the "liberals." The liberals seemed to end up being defined as those who don't agree with Independent Baptist ideals and Biblical interpretation. The second involved a conversation with a friend who used to live on my dorm, which involved him accusing my professor at seminary being "unfit for ministry" because of a Christian liberty he participated in. The last was a conversation in which I was accused of being a "pinhead liberal" who was not worth associating with because I claimed that as much evil has been done in the world in the name of Christianity as in Islam. You have got to love friends.
It is not these encounters that upset me. It is the larger picture I see, and the overwhelming experience I have had especially at Liberty. It seems that many Christians are on the defensive. They are scared, of anything and everything that is not what they believe. This is not just in issues of orthodoxy, such as the nature of Christ, but in political views and incredibly difficult issues. But there is not room for a dialogue. No room for discussion. The door is locked. The problem with always having the door locked is that you never know who you are keeping out, maybe even the truth, or Christ himself. And you do not know who is inside, perhaps the Devil himself.
But we are arrogant as American Christians. The little theology we know is all there is. What has been refreshing at Gordon Conwell is an openness to listen, to be wrong, to perceive the remote possibility that we could possibly be wrong in something. But anyone who is a Democrat, or believes in evolution, is automatically thrown out of the discussion. Not just their view on that subject either, but the entirety of their ideas with them.
The problems with this defensive approach to our beliefs are many. For one, it proves we have little faith in our beliefs. The more you protect something, the less you believe it can stand on its own. Also, it alienates others from the Church. It causes division upon division. It paints the picture that the world sees of narrow-minded Christianity. In a pluralistic world, the voice of Christianity is almost always rejected not because of its claims, but because of the attitudes of its proponents.
Certainly, there is a lot a stake here. For to be open to another's beliefs is difficult. Where do you draw the line? Where is there a break between orthodoxy and heresy, between something that is permissible and something that is destructive and cancerous. I can't say exactly. My appeal is not for a change in my friends views. In the last year, mine have hardly if at all changed. What I am asking for is for someone to listen. For people in the Church to be willing to hear what another person has to say without rehearsing their prepared response in their head, without their pre-scheduled polemics and counter-arguments. The Reformers fought violently (sometimes sinfully so) for their beliefs, but they heard the other man's words. If the Church is to avoid the corruption of its past, it members cannot blindly listen to only their pastors and teachers as authorities and avoid all others. That is how the Church supported the corrupt practices of the papacy without outcry for centuries.
I find it ironic that those in Evangelical Christianity who are so quick to call Mormans and Jehovah's Witnesses ignorant and brainwashed are the same people who would never read a commentary or theologian they knew they would disagree with, who do not question the stances of their Church or denomination. What is to keep them from ending up down a path of deception as well? As for most of us, only the grace of God has kept us on the right path; but we have not done our part whatsoever.
Surely, the Gospel is at stake. But it seems to be at stake either way, for it seems often our minds are close to Jesus but our hearts are far from Him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Thanks for your rant, John. You're not alone and your not out of line. I've had many of the same thoughts over the years, especially since I was once one who would have spewed my own anti-liberal polemic. The thing is, people only know what they have been taught and they will only learn from someone they respect.
Knowing this, I have realized an irony in my own life where I am accepting of all but those who are not accepting. I am willing to enter into conversation with all but those who are not willing to enter into conversation with others.
I say all of that not to correct you or to invalidate your feelings, but to say you aren't alone. The oft-quoted phrase from Ghandi seems appropriate encouragement here: "Be the change you want to see in the world."
Peace.
PS The part of your post about GCTS was a bit unclear. It sounded like you were saying both something good and bad about it. I have found GCTS to be an incredibly open place with plenty of freedom and encouragement to explore and discuss.
this is quite good. i totally agree.
This is a thoughtful post. I think you are going to enjoy Josh Harris's new book. He is writing on humble orthodoxy. I think he will take these very ideas you are speaking of to task.
I think the most interesting statement you made was that sometimes those who stand on the side of being defensive, don't see how the spirit of unbelief is revealed in their own heart.
The Gospel is because it is, not because I say it is. The Gospel doesn't look worse or better because of me or my arguments for it. (well maybe i can make it look worse at times;-))
I really do appreciate your frankness.Your heart for people to be more teachable for God's Glory is provoking. I would encourage, be on your guard against falling into a self righteous attitude towards these brothers/sisters in your life that have shown poor doctrinal discernment. We were all once there (especially me), only by God's Grace, He changes us.
Anyway, good post! keep them coming friend!:)
Great post!
Except you're totally wrong, so I hate you now. I kid, I kid.
But seriously, you make great points.
I consider myself to be more level-headed than most. I came into this election (I know you weren't talking politics, but here goes) open to vote for anyone. I don't vote Republican as a religion, but have historically voted for them, nonetheless.
Usually it came down to not having done any research before actually standing in the polls, so I reverted to the 'safe' choice.
This year was the first time I did some serious research. I was close to voting non-Republican several times, as some of the alternative candidates had good things to say that I agreed with. While most were making empty promises, others appeared to have an actual plan.
My enthusiasm for voting for them, however, turned into disappointment, though, as their stance on abortion did not jibe with mine.
Because I view abortion to be one of the few actual moral issues that candidates campaign on, it usually means I end up voting Republican. I can deal with crappy economic policies, because life's not about the money. I can deal with socialist government, because I know who my King is. But I can't deal with supporting immoral stances on what I believe are moral issues.
So I don't discount everything someone says if they're off on one thing. I do believe, though, that a poor foundation can result in problems in the house.
If I appear to be rambling, it's because this comment box is so small, and I can't see the context, but onward to something else you said.
"The more you protect something, the less you believe it can stand on its own." - Not necessarily. Sometimes we are supposed to protect something as a matter of principle or obedience. The first example I thought of was my wife. Do I believe she can take care of herself? Of course. But as her husband, it's my duty to protect her from things that would harm her.
As for considering sources of ideas or information we aren't familiar with, here's my view.
As the only source of absolute truth, we must first give our mind to that, before other works. If we are thoroughly grounded there, we can be free to read anything, because we will be able to discern what is true and what is not.
I myself have been guilty of avoiding certain authors because I knew I would not agree. I would guess that this is because I haven't felt strong enough to due to a lack of time spent in the Word.
I'll stop now. Be blessed!
John, you know me, the closet fideist. When we believe on faith, which is supra-rational, we are "untouchable" or above the possibility of threat of other or false beliefs. As Christians, we are not blind among the blind, trying to figure out what to say in an antinomal, "postmodern" world. We have faith, and the certainty of faith, which affords us the freedom to give our ears and selves in love to other people, selflessly. We can listen to our liberal friend talk about the Freedom of Choice Act, and not feel the need to defend our worldviews with a vicious polemic. Rather, we are free to ask questions, and be somewhat disinterested. We are not disinterested in the sense that we think abortion is a non-issue, but rather because we expect for the faithless to act faithlessly. You don't lead a blind person by just describing that which they cannot see, but rather you lend them your hand, and set the example. If we don't want to produce paranoid and weak-minded christians who think that validity is only conferred on a belief by consensus, then we are doing it right as "Western Christians". I would rather produce Christians who are missionally-minded, who travel light and are strangers in an alien land. People who don't expect to be able to convince the pagan toward belief because of vain eloquence or exegetical prowess. People who understand depravity and dependence upon the Spirit. When we think that the world will go to shit if we don't say this or that right, we think much too highly of our own importance. The world is already shit, and we are on a mission of reconciliation and redemption. We ought to act like it.
Great post, John. As a Democrat who believes in Evolution, I think you're right. Seriously, this is excellent. You are in a unique position to have your voice heard here, because you've experienced so much of the kind of Western Christianity you're talking about.
amen and amen.
Post a Comment