Posts tagged ·

truth

·...

Evangelism is weird

8 comments

Most churches, now, have outreach activities. Some Christian bodies are geared uniquely towards evangelism, too. Alpha courses have grown in popularity, as have other introductory courses to the Christian faith.

weird-worldview

Photo: Chris Downer, re-used under CC License

Churches (and therefore Christians)  should grow in all three directions of the famous “in-up-out” triangle. Growing in community and being inwardly edified, worshipping up towards God and reaching out towards the NYCs (not-yet-Christians).

This approach, sadly, dissociates three essential parts of growth. Sure, we should have personal spiritual growth in order that we may reach out, etc. – but we sometimes forget that when we are reaching out, we are simultaneously growing inwardly. (And, yes, it is also simultaneously an act of worship – but the permeating nature of worship is not  the point of this post)

Alpha courses (and I’m taking this example because it’s the only one I roughly know of) have “facilitators”. Outreach events have speakers. And in the relationship between them and the seekers/recipients of the free beverage/food/whatever else, is akin to a teacher-student relationship. And as such, it leads to expectations that the teacher “knows it all”. In such events, the role of the “Christian” is to state and to answer, whilst the role of the NYC is limited to listening and asking questions which will find a rebuttal. Ironically, in such situations, the Christian is the one who is quick to speak and slow to listen.

All this leads to three undesirable effects:

1. It forces the creation of three rather artificial categories of people: the NYCs, the Christians, and the Christian leaders – i.e., those who have reached enough enlightenment to talk about their faith with others.

2. It discourages the less confident from participating in outreach activities. And when they do participate (out of a sense of oughtness, more likely than not) they put on a persona – because they are forcing themselves not only to do outreach, but also to be the type of people who do outreach: confident and knowledgeable.

3. It gives off the image of people who are sure of their entire worldview. Of course, being firm in the hope that is set before us – the hope of redemption and salvation – is great, and I’m sure it is the case for most, if not all, who get involved in any form of outreach. But do we have the same confidence in, say, the End Times? Hell? Predestination? Creation? Why the Psalmist is sometimes angry with God? The necessity of attending church? I know I don’t. Don’t get me wrong – I do have a bit of an idea about how to answer these questions; but I’m nowhere near as sure of them as I am of salvation.

Of course, it’s not deceitful to be ready to answer questions with our opinions on such matters. After all, we hold the views that we outline in our answers. But from the NYC’s perspective, it can be very off-putting: they are at a place where they are ready to re-evaluate their worldview. That is to say, their current metaphysical stance is shaky at best. And all we offer them, in appearance, is a pre-fabricated, solid, indigestible worldview. That can be appealing to some (although I believe it is a twisted perception, and it can be damaging to approach Christianity with such expectations); but, crucially, it can be threatening to others, and off-putting to many. Threatening, because it cannot possibly coexist, or draw on, the current worldview the NYC hasn’t quite brought himself to shed; off-putting, because how are people who have a fragile worldview meant to identify with people with an apparently solid one?

Evangelism is weird because, when I try to help people understand and embrace Christianity – and therefore me as a Christian – I pretend to be more confident of  my answers than I am. Evangelism is weird because when I should be celebrating the Truth, I bring other statements to the same level. Evangelism is weird especially when it fails to truly listen.

The Christian View

3 comments

What’s the Christian view on homosexuality? What’s the Christian view on female leadership? What’s the Christian view on war?

ChristianView

Texture from Premium Pixels, where it comes with a very permissive free license

Sometimes, people ask these questions with a genuine desire to understand the worldview of their Christian friends. Sometimes, people ask these questions to be able to judge and label specific groups as homophobic/antiquated/liberal/hippies. People tend to be far too ready to answer these questions.

For the more controversial cases, some will call it the “Biblical view” – cunningly suggesting that those who do not hold the same view are automatically Bible-shunning heretics. In doing so, they are using the Bible to shut down a conversation, where it could be use to spark one. Others will suggest that the issue at hand is “secondary doctrine”. But calling something secondary is making a statement: you wouldn’t expect a Catholic to think of transubstantiation as secondary doctrine.

The three questions that I have started this post with have different levels of dissension within the mainstream Christian church. Same-sex marriage has been welcomed by Quakers and others, but adamantly fought against by some Evangelicals. Anglicans are a divided house when it comes to female episcopate. Quakers would see pacifism as part of their identity, but C.S. Lewis points out there is such a thing as just war. I would never dream to seriously suggest that Quakers, Evangelicals, Anglicans, C.S. Lewis, or Catholics aren’t Christians.

Does that mean that, in a post-modern way, there is no ultimate truth? Certainly not! Jesus says of himself he is the truth. Singular truth. There is no doubting, then, that there is one single truth. Some will say the Bible, as originally given, is the ultimate authority on matters of behaviour. But that is assuming that our access to the “original Bible” is unbiased and, somehow, superior to others’. Isn’t that both a display of pride and of judgement of others?

What then? Are we to shirk away from making any absolute statement? By no means! If you feel it is the case, do say that women should or should not be in leadership in the church. Do say that the Bible is against homosexuality, or is pointing towards acceptance of homosexuality. After all, what you believe may well be the truth! But in all cases, be prepared to listen to the other point of view; and in no case declare a view to make its holder non-Christian. Exclusion from the body of Christians is Biblical, but it always happens in conversation with the potential non-Christian. 

What is, then, the Christian view? It is a submissive worldview that sees Christ as King and Saviour. I am unwilling to restrict the Christian worldview by elaborating further on this. Yes, the Westboro Baptist Church share that view (I think). As do Christadelphians, Unitarians, Mormons, Anglicans, Catholics, Evangelicals. This minimal approach might not allow us to dissociate ourselves from those who seem to behave in a way that seems so unloving to us (although it does not mean we should seek to worship with them – other criteria come into play there); and so it might not be quite as comfortable. But it will, I’m sure, bring us closer to the truth.