Starting Points: Part 1

The many Christian students I interact with in my travels can be divided, roughly speaking, into two camps:

1. Those whose starting point is God and his revelation in nature, Scripture, and Christ.

2. Those whose starting point is their own experience of religion and faith.

#1 is more "objective," #2 more "subjective." 

The 1's tend to ask, How do I fit into God's story?

The 2's seem to ask a rather different question: How does my belief in God fit into my story?

* * *

Recently I talked at length with a student who is in the process of deciding which of the two positions above he will embrace.

In a certain way, he appreciates #1 because it requires a strong commitment to Scripture and truth. 

But honestly, he says, #1 feels cold and brittle, lacking in compassion for gays and minorities. 

In his view #1  disrespects other religions, strips him of his own self-determination, and aligns him with a conservative Christian camp that he has come to disdain.

So he finds himself drawn increasingly to #2: his starting point will be his own experience, his own story, his own judgments. 

God, however, is still very important to him.

In the course of our conversation I said something to this thoughtful young man that probably sounded quite extreme: lurking in the background of #2 is atheism. 

I'll say more about that next week.

Life of the Mind, Part 4: Responding to Former Evangelicals

Recently I've been engaged in conversation with several intellectuals who've departed the evangelical* faith.

Here are three accusations that emerge in their blogs, emails and oral communication. They say that evangelicals are . . .

1. Overly certain of their beliefs -- that is, of being too cocky about knowing "the truth."
   
2. Low on IQ: One former evangelical theology professor, a truly brilliant academic and now a professing atheist, said derisively that there is no such thing as the "evangelical mind."
   
3. Driven by fear. Supposedly, evangelicals cling blindly to the Bible and historic doctrines, insulate themselves from contrary ideas, and condemn opponents -- all due to the sheer terror of possibly being wrong.

Unfortunately, it's common for such accusations to be delivered in rhetoric that mocks, disses, snickers, scorns, insults -- though this is not always the case.

And: picks on worst-case examples, with little actual argumentation provided.

Disappointing, indeed.  

* * *

Responding to Ridicule

In terms of content, I have room to reply only to #1 above: I find it ironic to be accused of being "overly certain" by critics who, themselves, are indisputably certain of their accusations.

More to the point:

• When Jesus was mocked he said very little or remained silent. 

• When we are tempted to strike back against personal insults, let us remember Romans 12:17: Do not repay evil for evil.

• The NT teaches us to "love our enemies." That being the case, the least we evangelicals can do is show the utmost in respect to former like-minded believers.

* Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, informally defines an evangelical as someone who "takes the Bible seriously and believes in Jesus as Savior and Lord."