Opting Out of the Christian Faith

People coming to faith in Christ, people walking away from their faith, people out-growing the version of church or Christianity they grew up with, people exploring, people opting out; none of these things are new or novel. What perhaps is, in our contemporary Christian context, is the publicized advent of these events. Especially when one considers the obsession (at least in some quarters) for a glamorous and alluring type of Christianity modeled cat-walk style in mega-churches. One that celebritizes singers, songwriters, and preachers, who themselves then curate social-media profiles followed by thousands (and hundreds of thousands). When folk such as this step away from their faith it becomes a press-release statement, as much a stage-based moment as their Christian ministry has been.

In recent weeks we’ve had a couple of these publicized announcements followed by the inevitable reactions one would expect in the world of social-media and in the world of consumer-Christianity publishing. I know none of these folks personally and have no desire to judge them or pass comment on their particular journeys. With all sincerity I wish them Godspeed as well as God’s grace and peace. I have my own beliefs that it is in God that we (them included) live and move and have our being, and that the declaration of the Hebrew psalmist in Psalm 139:7-12 (see below) is as true for them as for anyone else; where can I flee from Your presence?

I do, however, want to highlight a couple of reasons one of these folks offered for calling time on the Christian faith and make some brief comments. Part of their Instagram post read…

“How many preachers fall? Many. No one talks about it. How many miracles happen? Not many. No one talks about it. Why is the Bible full of contradictions? No one talks about it. How can God be love yet send four billion people to a place [hell], all ‘coz they don’t believe? No one talks about it. I am not in anymore. I want genuine truth. Not the ‘I just believe it’ kind of truth.”

No one talks about it. Really? He’s mis-read the situation, surely? What bubble of the Christian world does he live in? Everyone is talking about these things! Aren’t they? Actually, not everyone is talking about these things. In certain contemporary church contexts ‘deeper’ issues of theology are rarely talked about. A clear statement of faith is produced that defines the boarders and discussion is dismissed.

I can well imagine this Christian minster feeling the need for robust conversations (very robust conversations) to be had in relation to each of these topics – over coffee, in church staff meetings, and in Sunday morning sermons – but finding that they are never addressed. They’re not glamorous topics that build organisation momentum or inspire people to greatness, so they are put to the side. As well, they are complicated topics and for many Senior Pastors (especially CEO types) fall in the ‘too hard’ basket. But for many people these are big issues that pastors in every context must address. Calling people to ‘just believe it’ isn’t enough.

In his book ‘A Churchless Faith,’ pastor and writer Alan Jamieson, points out that people who leave the Church have, on average, been congregants for sixteen years with 94 percent having been leaders. These people are not slackers who leave because they have been offended; rather they leave because of meta grumbles – deep rooted questions about the foundations of faith itself which are not being addressed.

Obviously, this is problematic. Left unaddressed, or worse when they are suppressed (which happens all too often), these issues become destabilizing. At best folk perceive the Church to have taken them as far in their faith journey as she can and opt out of a localized Christian community. Alternatively, they opt out of faith altogether.

Pastors (and everyone else), questions, doubts, suspicions and uncertainty are part-and-parcel of authentic Christianity. In fact, it is almost inevitable that there will come a season where these things serve as the primary catalyst for spiritual growth in one’s journey of following Jesus. What’s unfortunate is that the modern church doesn’t always make space for people to doubt or to question or to be suspicious. Organisational church growth tends to require unwavering commitment to the vision, the values, the mission and the culture of ‘the house.’ This tends to mean cultivating an environment of momentum, alignment, excitement and anticipation; an ‘atmosphere of faith.’ The demand therefore tends to be for uniformity and conformity. This becomes a pretty challenging context in which to ask big questions about faith, the nature of the church, Christian spirituality and what it means to follow Jesus. Questions and doubts can be wrongly interpreted as a “lack of faith,” “a bad attitude,” “divisive,” or even a clear indicator that someone is “backsliding.” This is problematic on so many levels. No topic should be off-limits, and space needs to be made to address the theological issues that are being wrestled with in our contemporary context. (You can read more on this here). 

Pastors (and everyone else), if you’re not sure where to start when it comes to thinking through some of these topics – have a look at these links. On miracles, this or this. On hell, this, or this, or this. On suffering this. On the Bible this, or this, or this. 

Finally, I think it is worth pointing out that what inevitably becomes a kind of minor Christian celebrity status for gifted singers, songwriters and preachers who are privileged (or perhaps inappropriately burdened) by the bright lights and big crowds of the main stage needs to be carefully managed. And by carefully managed I don’t mean stage managed by an artist development liaison officer; I’m talking about robust pastoral care. Most young singers, songwriters, and preachers promoted to the main stage are aware that they are their based on their gifts, talents and abilities rather than character, ministry experience and faithfulness to a long obedience in the same direction. Pastoral care is required in order to ensure their holistic development. But more is required than the character development championed by the adage ‘gifting will get you there, but character will keep you there.’

Character development is good, but more is required than gifts and character. Vocational Christian ministry needs to be appreciated as a professional vocation as it historically was (along with medicine and law). Too often though, professional contemporary church ministry parallels professional sport, a paid profession where skill and natural attributes bring you into the role. Instead (without discounting skill and natural attributes) it should be appreciated as a profession where professional training brings you into the role – theological training, professional ethics, a body or required knowledge etc. This won’t fix everything, but it should give rise to vocational Christian ministers more than capable of navigating issues such as those highlighted by this recent Christian minister opting out. Instead he’d be able to help others navigate these topics.

*Psalm 139:7-12. Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,” even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you.

Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers

Yesterday I read, “A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” a joint statement signed by both Pope Francis of the Catholic Church and Sheikh Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar. I found it bold, honest, and hopeful – certainly attributes necessary in our world today. It is the product of inter-faith dialogue between one of Christianity’s senior leaders and one of Islam’s senior leaders and is well worth having a look at. Reading the document, I also found myself reflecting on what sometimes feels like a very fragmented Christianity. 

Someone I was talking to recently mentioned that Rotary International is the largest organisation in the world providing and financing humanitarian services around the globe. I commented, “surely the Christian Church provides more humanitarian services than Rotary?” His response; “Perhaps, but the Church isn’t one organisation.” Touché. Jesus declares that it will be by our love for one another that the world will know the Church to be Christ’s disciples, but the Church often feels very divided.

In our Western context (and elsewhere), for better or worse, we’ve a plethora of options in relation to the local church we choose to attend. Seven or eight Great Traditions have evolved over the centuries and a multiplicity of denominations and non-denominational branches exist within each. Even within denominations there is a wide-range of local church expressions with different churches celebrating different cultural values and methodologies of church. Too often, as folk already thoroughly discipled as consumers, our choice to fellowship in a particular church community can subliminally (though irreverently) feel like a consumer choice that is quickly followed by a form of confirmation bias or post-purchase rationalization. This form of rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to the choice we have made for option A (our church), while simultaneously amplifying the negative attributes of option B that we didn’t opt for (the church down the road). There is no need for us to do that. More, when I do that (or you do that), it has the potential to be a form of anti-Christ. It has the potential to go against the way of being in the world that Jesus calls us into. We need to be careful here.
   

Unchecked, post-purchase rationalization within ‘church world’, especially among pastors and leaders can lead to the development of epistemic bubbles and echo chambers, (something I covered over a few pages in my final doctorate project, which if you like, you can read below and find references for). Epistemic bubbles come about when informational networks form but omit certain voices from the conversation. In my doctorate project, which is contextualized to Pentecostalism, the examples I offer in relation to epistemic bubbles focus on the way in which Pentecostalism has tended towards a relational tribalism that, historically, has omitted conversation partners such as the theological academy, the ever evolving historical and theological perspectives of Church history over the centuries, and current and varied ecumenical points of view. More specifically, as Pentecostalism has evolved as a ‘contemporary’ methodology and expression of church, there tends to be a singular set of voices guiding conversations pertinent to faith and practice – that of the various mega-church pastors who lead relational networks and speak at each other’s conferences, seminars, retreats and events. The conversation is thus very one-dimensional with perspectives, practices and opinions continually recycled and re-enforced rather than challenged to adapt and evolve as might be necessary.
   

More insidious than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers are formed when, in addition to relevant voices being disregarded, potential conversation partners are actively discredited. Whereas an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outside voices. One shouldn’t be naïve in thinking this is not a reality within church contexts or the Christian community more generally. There are many possible scenarios, you’ll be familiar with some no-doubt; Protestants who are anti-Catholic, ‘small’ church folk who are against mega-churches, pastors with no formal theological training pre-supposing that those with theological training should be viewed with suspicion, charismatics who see deeper teaching as cerebral nonsense, exegetical preachers who see Pentecostalism as hocus-pocus. And each of these could be reversed. More damaging than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers have the potential to become cult-like, with members isolated from outside voices that are labelled as malignant and untrustworthy, with the framework of trust being narrowed to exclusively insider voices.

When this shift to a narrow set of voices occurs, the Church ceases to function as a genuine sub-community (an expression of the Kingdom of God) within the wider society. Rather than existing as a community of peculiar discourse with practices of memory, hope, and pain that keep healthy human life available in the face of all the ‘virtual reality’ now on offer in dominant culture, local churches runs the risk of becoming a separated sphere of existence with their own dominant culture, set of beliefs and behaviours that members must submit to in order to belong. The church thus becomes its own empire rather than a subversion of empire and a prophetic sub-community of alternative consciousness.

All of this being a long-winded preamble from which to note; to the extent that the Church and the Christian community fails to cultivate unity within her own diversity – putting aside such artificial dualisms as faith versus reason, science versus Scripture, intellect verses heart, spiritual verses material, Catholic verse Protestant, contemporary versus traditional, worship versus Word, my local church versus the other church down the road, and a thousand and one other such possibilities – it will also fail to be known by its love for one another. Further, if love for one another is problematic, you can be sure that love of neighbour will be difficult and love of enemy neigh on impossible. Though hoping to exist as a catalyst of healing and a broker of peace in the world, the Church – inappropriately divided rather than beautifully diverse – will likely perpetuate as much brokenness as what it does restoration.

Colossians 3:12-17
¹² Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. ¹³ Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.¹⁴ And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. ¹⁵ Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. ¹⁶ Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts. ¹⁷ And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

_______________________________

Below is a ‘cut & paste’ from my final doctorate paper, a couple of pages on epistemic bubbles and echo chambers. It may not make total sense disconnected from the rest of the project, but at the same time, might be of interest.

_______________________________

The Fruit and Consequences of Relational Tribalism

In the early days of Pentecostalism, relational tribalism was enacted via the voluntary association of faith missions and outreach projects – breakaways from established church structures and traditions. In the current contemporary context, tribalism is evidenced in the voluntary association of various leadership networks that associate around shared cultural values, modes of worship and methodologies of church – creating further insular subsets within and across Pentecostal denominational structures. It is not uncommon for pastors and churches to prefer participation in network events run by the mega-church ministries they aspire to become like, rather than gatherings organized by the official denomination or movement to which they belong.

In terms of fruitfulness, the tendency towards relational tribalism strengthened Pentecostal conviction and focus as the movement emerged and institutionalized in the first half of the twentieth century. Where other traditions viewed Pentecostalism with suspicion, like-minded cohorts allowed Pentecostalism to develop in its own identity while hedging against contrary voices. In a sense relational tribalism allowed Pentecostalism to find its sense of identity.

It must also be acknowledged, however, that relational tribalism is a strong contributing factor to the negative consequences of each of the other defining markers discussed in this paper [you’d have to read the whole paper for this to make sense]. A greater degree of ecumenical association and engagement with the varying perspectives of other Christian traditions in matters of theology and doxology throughout Pentecostalism’s history may have tempered or mitigated these negative outcomes. Foremost among the undesirable characteristics of relational tribalism is a narrow and even insular perspective on matters of faith and praxis that can lead to both arrogance and ignorance.

Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles

In his essay Escape the Echo Chamber, philosopher C. Thi Nguyen suggests two specific ways in which communities wrap themselves within impenetrable networks of intellectual like-mindedness that are ultimately unhealthy: via epistemic bubbles and through the creation of echo chambers.[1] Nguyen defines epistemic bubbles as “informational network[s] from which relevant voices have been excluded by omission.”[2] Within Pentecostalism, relational tribalism fosters an epistemic bubble in which discussions of theology, doxology, ecclesiology, and the like, tend to exclude other relevant and wise voices. Broadly speaking, the theological simplicity inherent in Pentecostalism excludes such conversation partners as the theological academy, evolving historical perspectives of church history and varied ecumenical points of view. More specifically, within the relational networks of contemporary Pentecostalism, there tends to be a singular set of voices guiding conversations pertinent to faith and practice – that of the various mega-church pastors who lead these networks and speak at each other’s conferences, seminars, retreats and events.[3] [The conversation is therefore very one-dimensional].

More insidious than epistemic bubbles, echo chambers are formed when, in addition to relevant voices being disregarded, other conversation partners are actively discredited: “where an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outsiders.”[4] In their book Echo Chamber, Kathleen Jamieson and Joseph Cappella describe an echo chamber as cult-like, with members isolated from outside voices that are labelled as malignant and untrustworthy, with the framework of trust being narrowed to exclusively insider voices.[5] While Pentecostalism has at times given rise to cult-like movements, it is not the intention of this paper to portray contemporary Pentecostalism as a cult. It should be noted however that, given the need for control embedded within pragmatic methodologies, the general lack of deeper reflection that comes with a bent toward theological simplicity and the propensity towards epistemic bubbles found in relational tribalism [again, you’d need to read the rest of this paper for that to totally make sense], Pentecostalism should be aware of the potential of echo chambers developing and the dangers inherent to such chambers. When the perspective of the mega-church pastor begins to function as the voice shaping faith and practice within contemporary Pentecostalism, it is only a matter of time before other voices begin to be disempowered and discredited to the detriment of Pentecostalism.

When this shift to a narrow set of voices occurs, the church ceases to function as a genuine sub-community (an expression of the Kingdom of God) within the wider society. Rather than existing as “a community of peculiar discourse with practices of memory, hope, and pain that keep healthy human life available in the face of all the ‘virtual reality’ now on offer in dominant culture,”[6] the church runs the risk of becoming a separated sphere of existence with its own dominant culture, set of beliefs and behaviours that members must submit to in order to belong.

In The Prophetic Imagination, Walter Brueggemann likens this establishment of a dominant culture requiring submission, to Israel’s movement away from the radically alternate way of being in the world that had been established under Moses and as a return to the pre-Mosaic imperial paradigm [Egypt], as reinstated under the kings of Israel.[7] This shift began under David but is more clearly evidenced in the life of Solomon: “the entire program of Solomon now appears to have been a self-serving achievement with the sole purpose being the self-securing of the king and dynasty… a program of state-sponsored syncretism, which if course means the steady abandonment of the radicalness of the Mosaic vision.”[8]

Brueggemann refers to this embrace of syncretism as the paganization of Israel, though in the context of a discussion about contemporary Pentecostalism, the metaphor serves to describe the potential for a secularization of the church.[9] In this instance, the size, reach and affluence of a large contemporary church, the culture and routinization of the church (which congregants are expected to buy into),[10] and the manner in which senior leaders are seen as God’s elected officials, serve to create a “controlled static religion in which God and his temple have become part of the royal landscape, in which the sovereignty of God is fully subordinated to the purpose of the king.”[11] The church thus becomes its own empire rather than a subversion of empire and a prophetic sub-community of alternative consciousness.

When the church becomes an empire, the less desirable traits inherent in relational tribalism tend to surface and flourish: theological errancy, ignorance, deception, blind-spots, self-righteousness, over-demanding expectations within the church, defensiveness, divisiveness, and a suspicion of any other opinion of, or expression within, the Body of Christ. All-in-all this amounts to a failure to reflect Christ’s wish in John 17 that his followers would be known by their love for one another. Thus, a re-imagined Pentecostalism needs to be mindful of the paradox that the church is called to difference – to be a peculiar people – at the macro level (i.e. in relation to the empire and the systems of the world) but not to tribalism at the micro level (i.e. within the Body of Christ).

---

[1] See “Essays,” on Aeon website, C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber” https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult (accessed July 30, 2018).

[2] Ibid.

[3] This tendency is seen in the work of contemporary Pentecostal pastor Paul de Yong, the pastor of LIFE church in Auckland, New Zealand. His latest book, God, Money and Me, includes ten endorsements of the book, its aims, perspectives, and conclusions. However, they all come from fellow mega-church pastors who are regular speakers at de Yong’s conferences (and him at theirs). There are no endorsements of support from recognized theologians or trained economists. See; Paul de Yong, God, Money and Me, (Auckland, NZ: Life Resource International, 2017), 3-6.

[4] See “Essays,” on Aeon website, C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber” https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult (accessed July 30, 2018).

[5] C. Thi Nguyen, “Escape the Echo Chamber,” refereeing to Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella¸ Echo Chamber; Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010).

[6] Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), xvii.

[7] Ibid., 24-25.

[8] Ibid., 23.

[9] Ibid., 24.

[10] See discussion in chapter three, Pragmatic Methodologies, in relation to this.

[11] Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination, 28.

On Books and Strategies for Reading

Have you ever thought to yourself, “I wish I read more,” or, “I’d love to be more of a reader,” or, “so many books, but so little time,”? If you have, I've got a couple of suggestions in regard to how you might become a more proficient and prolific reader. 

Firstly, I’d encourage you to start thinking about books as you do various Netflix or television shows. Picture a book as a series and the chapters within the book as episodes.

Secondly, select three books that you’d like to read. Think of them as three different television shows that you’d like to have on the go. Maybe get some recommendations from friends in regard to something they’ve read and thought was top shelf – just like you do with Netflix. Of course, don’t (when starting out) choose three ridiculously large or complicated books, rather choose something with approx. 200 to 300 pages in it and ten to twelve chapters.

Thirdly, pick a night of the week that your “show,” your book, is going to be on. Let’s say one on Monday, one on Tuesday and one on Thursday, and then choose what time your show starts each night (appreciating that it’ll be an hour long) – let’s go with 8:15pm.

Fourthly, be aware that reading is a discipline, far more so than watching television. It takes energy, effort, and concentration. Reading is in one sense a muscle that you have to exercise and develop. When you first start there might be some heavy lifting, but you will grow stronger. Commit to your hour reading each night, with each book. Don’t worry if at first you can’t complete a whole chapter in the allotted time, a whole episode, you’ll become a faster reader by simple perseverance.

Fifthly, if one of your books gets really good – feel free to binge read.

Sixthly, if you commit to the discipline you’ll get through between ten and fifteen 250-page books every year, between one hundred and one hundred and fifty books every ten years. And that’s not accounting for the improvements you’ll make in terms of becoming a stronger reader every month that goes by, nor for the occasional binge read. 

"Books shape us, dynamically molding our minds and souls. You are never the same person when you finish a book–even one that is read purely for escape or entertainment. A.W. Tozer has aptly stated that “the things you read will fashion you by slowly conditioning your mind”. What it means is that what we read matters and directly affects what we become. We are fortunate with the wealth of books at our fingertips.  - Scott Larsen

Identity Foreclosure, Questions, Doubts and Postmodernism

To be God’s people is to be those who wrestle with God. It is to work out one’s salvation with fear and trembling. It is to be people of faith, of hope, of trust, of doubt, and of suspicion. It is to have answers. It is to have questions. Of all the places to wrestle with one’s faith, the church would ideally be that place – often it is not.

A big part of maturing from adolescence into adulthood is the questioning of beliefs, assumptions, and perspectives held by one’s elders. Moving into adulthood, young adults don’t tend to simply follow the prescribed paths of their parents, teachers or pastors, rather, they explore other possibilities, different perspectives, and alternative values. The final result of this period of searching may well be a decision to retain much of what they have received from an early age, though some things may be deleted, updated, or reframed. What is essential in this process is that the choice to accept or adapt that which has been inherited, or to adopt other perspectives, comes about through their own weighing of perspectives and wrestling with life’s complexities. This is an exhilarating part of being roughly 17 – 27 years of age - when this process unfolds. Done well, it is also a process that helps the church to continually re-contextualize the gospel in line with the questions, issues, and concerns of the day.

Ironically though, churches are not always a context where young adults feel able to navigate this process. Too often church culture is orientated around believe, behave and belong - especially for young adults who’ve grown up in the church. Christian kids tend to come of age surrounded by authority figures who champion very clear ideals around what one must believe and how one must behave. Often their self-esteem is dependent on the approval of these figures and they experience an unusual pressure to conform to the expectations of others. They are often denied the “moratorium” or leeway in adolescence to delay adult commitments, they prematurely embrace a set of values that was forged for them rather than by them.

Psychoanalyst Erick Erikson suggests that when individuals skip this critical stage of identity formation (or only partly engage) the result is a form of identity foreclosure. Individuals who have undergone identity foreclosure can be highly successful in many areas of life. However, they do tend to exhibit a number of potentially destructive psychological traits. They are less self-reflective than others. They are often mentally rigid, tending to see the world in terms of simplifying narratives that are beyond question. They are incapable of incorporating new values or perspectives into their worldview. They have difficulty cultivating warm and intimate relations even among some of their closest friends and loved ones. They have little patience with ambiguity and little intellectual curiosity in unfamiliar ways of thinking. They seek refuge in overarching meaning structures that are uncompromising and total, various forms of religious propaganda essentially. They are often deeply concerned with maintaining authority structures and upholding traditional religious values. People with foreclosed identities are thus naturally drawn toward fundamentalist communities. And, in an insidious feedback loop, fundamentalist communities produce people with identity foreclosure. This is obviously not helpful.

With this in mind, our postmodern context and its predisposition toward questioning, doubt, suspicion, and deconstructionism offers both challenges and opportunities.

In terms of challenges…

Today’s adolescences and young adults transiting into adulthood have more suspicions, more doubts, more questions than ever, and, given their connectivity and access to technology and information – are asking harder, deeper and more challenging questions of the church and of faith than ever before. On top of that, they’ve been exposed to a such a plurality of ideas in regard to any particular topic that sifting through the information is incredibly challenging. They’ve knowledge and information but need help in terms of wisdom.

At the same time though, the church, often feeling threatened by deconstructionism, is doubling-down in its cries for faith, belief, and trust – and actually working to squash down the questioning of young adults. Partly because the church (understandably) doesn’t want young people to “lose” their faith, but also partly because many pastors and leaders are themselves products of fundamentalist communities who’ve their own challenges in regard to identity foreclosure and, plain and simple, don’t know how to address the complexity of some of the issues millennials are bringing to the table. They know they love Jesus though and that Jesus is the hope of the world, the way, the truth and the life. Surely this should be enough for millennials (and it is), but it isn’t – not served up like that. And thus, in attempting to squash the questioning in order to help young people preserve their faith, they actually end up driving young people away. Perhaps not from their faith in Jesus, but at least from the church.

The church needs to become the place where young adults can come to wrestle with their faith, to work out their salvation in fear and trembling, to doubt, to question and to be suspicious. Not the place they have to avoid as thy seek to wrestle with their faith and work out their salvation.

In terms of opportunities though…

What is exciting in our postmodern world is that “older” folk are bravely attempting to ask questions and re-evaluate the parts of their faith that earlier in their life they may have had questions about but instead learned to tow the party line. Of course, rather than being exhilarating, as it often is in one's twenties, it can be daunting and overwhelming. At least at first. To question “fundamental” beliefs can be a disorientating and difficult process, and often one where participants feel a mixture of guilt and incredible instability. Guilt for asking or doubting, and instability as one is questioning things that they have perhaps felt like they’ve built their life on. Take encouragement from the psalms though - they are a mixture of orientation, disorientation, and reorientation. We should expect this cycle to be embedded within our lives as disciples. Unfortunately though, fundamentalist upbringings tend not to make space for this and the process can be scary at first.

When we can make our church communities contexts in which doubt and suspicion doesn't disqualify but rather is expected, and where big questions are wrestled with over time, they have the potential to be incredibly life giving. Places where on the other side of big questions young and old begin to experience a sense of being born-again-again, as faith in Jesus, the good news of the gospel and the great hope we have as Christ-followers comes alive in in the midst of lives toughest questions and challenges.

It’s discipleship as a lifelong journey rather than a 3 step program, with 5 main points, 7 quick keys, and 9 irrefutable laws, outworked over 40 days of who-knows-what.

My reflections interwoven with ideas from...

Ronald E. Osborn – “Death Before the Fall”
Erik Erikson – “Identity and the Life Cycle”
John Van Wicklin, Ronald, J. Burwell and Richard E. Butman – “Squandered Years: Identity Foreclosed Students and the Liberal Education They Avoid”

Christian Spiritualities: Mystics and Others

Here is a John Crowder video I chanced upon the other day. I smiled from start to finish for all sorts of reasons.

Crowder is a self-professed modern day Christian mystic whom I know very little about and my purpose in posting the video is NOT to get into a discussion about the merits for or against John Crowder. Rather, it serves to help illustrate Christian spiritualities and how they interplay. Ideally in a healthy way via community, though often in an unhealthy way via tribalism. Something we've been looking into at church recently.

First of all, consider the helpful illustration from Christain Schwarz' book "The 3 Colours of Your Spirituality."

In sum, he suggests people relate to God via the "world" (creation, relationships, beauty), via the "Word" (gospel, cross, Jesus, bible), and via the "Spirit" (various, I guess you could say, unmediated experiences of God). It's limited and flawed but still a helpful tool. It's important to know your home base, that which comes most naturally for you. For me it is "world," as you can see from my test results which I've included in the graphic. As well, it is helpful to know the pathways that come most naturally to you. You can then also consider the pathways either side and the pathways opposite. Though in reality, they all mix together and we're all a bit of everything.

John Crowder's video is a helpful illustration here as it is classically "mystical." He's not quite "sacramental," nor is he exactly "enthusiastic Holy Spirit," but rather, a more mysterious place in the middle. The "sacramental" side of me loves his celebration of life as a joy and gift and a signpost to God, the fatigued "Holy Spirit enthusiast" side of me is a bit skeptical of the laughing revivals etc, though I can see how the "Holy Spirit enthusiasts" out there could find some life in what he is saying. And then, the "doctrinal" side of me, the opposite of "mystical," worries about what exactly he is and isn't saying. How cool is that! The closer you are to "mystical," either on the "enthusiastic" side or the "sacramental" side, the more you might enjoy what John has to say. The more of a "doctrinal" or "scripture driven" type you are, the more you may be troubled.

Learning to learn from one another, help one another, understand one another, and balance one another is surely better than righting off anything that is different to you.

Bible Reading: Less is More

Psalm 119:105
Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light unto my path. 

There is no debate that, as Christians, we are to have some sort of a relationship with the bible. The question though is: what sort of relationship?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This Word then becomes flesh and dwells among us; Jesus Christ. And in regard to Jesus Christ, the Word, the Son of God, we read that God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. (John 3:17).

So Jesus, the Word of God, comes not to condemn but to save.

At the same time, we have this other thing often referred to as the word of God; the bible. And yet for many, the relationship with this word of God is often one of condemnation, guilt, and confusion. Not because they're reading and finding the text a source of rebuke or challenge or correction. Rather, it is because they are not reading it and feel guilty.  

And rightly so! Right? After all...

Bible reading is like breakfast, you may not remember what you had, but it keeps you going…

A bible that is falling apart is usually owned by someone who isn’t...

Dusty bibles lead to dirty lives…

Really?

I'm not so sure.

For lots of people, myself included, this picture is a pretty good representation of what I understood a relationship with God to look like when I was growing up. 

 The Quiet Time

The technical term was: The Quiet Time.

Supposedly, a relationship with God was outworked via a weekly small group, Sunday church, and one's own daily "quiet times." If asked how many “quiet times” you’d had in the last week, the correct answer was seven. Anything less than seven likely meant one was backsliding. Though in saying that, six was often acceptable with Sunday church letting you off the hook when it came to the "Sunday quiet time." 

January the 1st was the most exciting day of the year when it came to "quiet times." Partly because you could almost guarantee the last half of the previous year would have been a "quiet-time-dessert-of-nothingness." Obviously less than ideal. More than that though, January the 1st meant new stationary! A fresh start with a brand-new journal, new highlighters, new pens (black, blue and red), and if you really wanted to take things up a notch, maybe even a new translation of the bible. It was like the first day back at school for the year and you were ready to write nice headings and underline everything. 

Ideally a "quiet time" was quiet, 30 - 60 minutes long, distraction free and uninterrupted. One would likely be following some sort of bible-in-a-year plan and the reading of the text would be devotional. One would read waiting for a scripture to "pop," for the logos word of God to become a rhema word of God to you and your life and situation. Bible reading would be followed by prayer. 5 minutes per day the first week, 6 minutes per day the second week, 7 minutes per day the third week etc. You'd get stronger and stronger, CrossFit Prayer, though CrossFit hadn't been invented. You'd pray for your church, pray for your family, unchurched friends, the future, The Prayer of Jabez etc.

There is not necessarily anything fundamentally wrong with any of this. At times I've found this practice to be incredibly life-giving. It's intentional, it's God-honoring, it's a discipline, it refuses to squeeze God into the margins, it prioritizes the bible as important in one's faith journey and helps one to become familiar with the bible. I've experienced God speaking to me directly as a passage of scripture I'm reading has indeed "popped" and come to life for my situation circumstances.

At times though it is nothing but a source of guilt, condemnation, confusion and "tick-box" religious duty. 

One feels guilty when they miss a quiet time.

One feels guilty when after a week they are 4 chapters behind in the bible-in-a-year plan, when after a month they are 28 chapters behind, when after 3 months they are 180 chapters behind, and when after 6 months find themselves once again struggling away near the end of Leviticus knowing that the book of Numbers comes next! Oh well. there is always a fresh start in January and all my new pens and highlighters have been lost anyway. And once again there is a sense of failure. 

One feels guilty when they read but nothing goes "pop."

Without too much effort the process becomes condemning rather than life-giving. And, all too often, completion of the "quiet time" is more about appeasing one's conscious (tick off the religious duty for the day), than it is actually about connecting with God in some meaningful way.

On top of this, we've two other realities to consider. Firstly, the whole "quiet time" idea is built around reading and some people just aren't readers. And then secondly, of all the books to try and get non-readers to read, we give them the bible. Ancient Near East and Greco-Roman literature may not be the easiest to tackle! The bible is a tricky book! What’s average Joe reader to make of Leviticus, Job, Ezekiel, Revelation?

The bible is thousands of years old.

It was written in Hebrew in the Ancient Near East. 

It was written in Koine Greek in the Greco-Roman world. 

It was written by a whole bunch of different authors, to a whole bunch of different people, for a whole bunch of different reasons.

It is full of ideas, stories, turns of phrase, and imagery that meant a particular thing, to particular people, at a particular time. 

All of which is really important information in trying to work out what the Bible is getting at sometimes.

The bible is a tricky and complex and challenging book. The bible is hard work.  

The old "quiet time" doesn't really include much space to sort through issues of genre and socio-historical context. Proof texting becomes a lot easier. Find a verse and let it "pop" out to you in order to prove whatever you'd like to prove. 

Take Philippians 4:13 for example. I can do all this through him who gives me strength. A great verse for Tim Tebow before he plays NFL, a great verse as you run into an exam you haven't studied for, a great verse as you launch a new business venture, a great verse as you set out to hitch-hike through war-torn Syria. (Of course no one would ever do that, but if they did, you can bet they'd be the kind of person to quote Phil 4:13). 

It's a great verse but it has nothing to do when any of these things. It's about Paul having learned to find contentment no matter if he has a lot or if he has nothing. Riches or poverty, he can live in all circumstances in a God honoring and righteous manner, through Christ who gives him strength.

Proof-texting can be incredibly dangerous. After all, the bible is so big, so vast, so complex, and written over so many centuries in all sorts of contexts, that you can find a "proof text" for pretty much whatever you want. Indeed, throughout human history wars have been fought, slavery institutionalized, woman treated as property, capital punishment celebrated, and ethnic cleansing enacted all based on the misuse of the bible. A verse or passage of scripture supposedly went "pop" for someone and away they go. 

And so we give this hard, difficult, tricky, ancient book to people who don't really read books at the best of time, not since school, not even a novel, not even the newspaper, and wonder why it sucks the life out of them and fills them with guilt rather than serving as a life-giving way of connecting with God. 

In fact, if you've read this far in this blog post, you are doing better than most people do these days. The internet has destroyed reading. People click from one link to the next, to the next, to the next, to the next. Slow, careful, deep reading is a lost art. Personal reading is at an all-time low, and thus we shouldn’t be surprised that Bible reading is for many at an all-time low.

Well actually, personal reading isn’t at an all-time low. 

I exaggerate. 

The truth is that by-and-large mostly through history humans have been illiterate.

In fact, for the most part Christians haven’t historically had access to their own Bible let alone the possibility of “quiet times” where they could read four chapters a day and get through some Bible-in-a-year reading plan. Christians only started reading the bible "personally" in the 1500’s and even then it took a hundred years and more before Christians started to own their own bible. (And then look what happened... but that's a different story). 

This should be an instant source of comfort. Especially to those who aren't readers, but also to those who find the practice of a "quiet time" to be draining and guilt-laden rather than life-giving. There are other ways of relating to God and relating to the bible. It hasn't always been "quiet times" and it hasn't always been all about reading. We've 1500 years of Christian history without individual bible reading. The point of which isn't to do away with individual bible reading (necessarily), but rather to think more carefully about how we can relate to the bible in life-giving ways. 

More than ever Christians need to be "bible literate" but we should perhaps realize the pathway to bible literacy across the board isn't likely to be more individualistic bible reading. Especially when we consider that we are all wired to connect with God in different ways. 

We won't go into it in great detail, but numbers of different Christian authors have looked at the ways in which different people are wired to connect with God. Christian Schwarz in his book The 3 Colours of Your Spirituality offers nine different pathways that people find meaningful in regard to relating to God. We shouldn't be surprised that different folks on different pathways find they each relate to the bible differently. And the church should make space for this! 

Scripture-driven: These folk love the idea of the "quiet time." This will be incredibly life giving to them, energizing and rewarding. If you are a scripture driven person, and you are still reading this post, you might have found yourself protesting the whole way through. "Quiet times" will be your thing.  

Doctrinal: For doctrine orientated people, they'll appreciate the idea of adding in commentaries to their reading, adding in resources that explain how various traditions have wrestled with scripture and come to make sense of it. They'll be wanting to find "truth" in the bible that is meaningful to "life." 

Rational: Rational type folk tend to start with "life" and then have questions for the bible in light of their experiences of life. They search for "truth" in light of "life."

Sharing: Sharing people are more interested in telling than in reading. They love to share with others that which they have learned and come to a revelation of.

Mystics: For the mystic the bible can be a frustrating barrier to connecting with the Divine at times. An unnecessary intermediary. Mystics can be loose cannons though. Here the bible as God's word becomes a healthy anchor point in life. 

Sensory types and Enthusiasts: Less reading and more experiencing, doing, and engaging suits the sensory and enthusiastic types. Why would you lock yourself away in a room for a "quiet time?" Roll your sleeves up, get out and be the light of Christ in the world, or find the light of Christ in the world.

Sacramental: For sacramental type folk, they are more interested in having communion, sharing a meal, being in nature. "Why more learning about the cross and communion? Have communion, don’t you see that until you take communion it's naught but ideas? As you take communion it comes alive!" They laugh at folk who sit in their rooms reading about the heavens declaring the glory of the Lord and instead buy a telescope and go camping. 

The long and the short of it all is that we’re not all going to relate to the bible the same. We do have to figure out how we are going to relate to the bible though. 

So rather than just more individual "quiet time" type bible reading, here are a few bullet point ideas that might help you in your relationship with the bible. 

1.      We worship Jesus not the bible.

The bible is not a member of the Trinity. The bible is not God. We are followers of Christ not of the bible. Certainly the bible is a great gift to the church in its serving as a signpost pointing to the Word of God that is Jesus. We follow Jesus.

2.      The bible is the word of God that points us to the Word of God.

The bible is helpful in that it points us to Jesus, Jesus who is the inherent, infallible, holy Word of God. Sadly though some people miss Jesus in how they follow the bible. The bible becomes a weapon, a way of crushing others, a heavy weight, a burden, a self-help manual, keys to success and motivation

3.      It’s about bible living not bible reading.

The question is not, have I read four chapters of the Bible today? The question is, have I loved God with all my heart and soul and mind? Have I loved my neighbor as myself? This is what it is all about and you know enough of the bible to get stuck into that for the rest of your life. This in itself should do away with guilt and condemnation. You don’t have to tick the box of 6 or 7 “quiet times.”  Try and tick the box of “doing my best to be like Jesus in the world.”  Of course, you won’t always be able to tick this box. We all blow it from time to time. Find grace and forgiveness in these moments though, not guilt and condemnation.

Having said this, we of course need God’s word to be continually shaping our lives. Of course, of course, of course.

4.      Read the Bible in community.

The Bible wasn’t written to you, nor was the bible written to me. It was written for us but not to us. It was written to particular communities, at particular times, and for particular reasons. These communities would wrestle together to make sense of God’s word to them. Academics, laborers, stay home mums, business people, teachers, teenagers, the elderly, those experiencing heartache and loss, those thriving in life. Scriptures were always worked out in community. 

So, if you are not a reader or not someone inclined towards the scripture-driven or doctrinal pathway, then it is really important to be in a church community that is scripture-driven and has a passion for sound doctrine.

For you though, your bible “reading” may in fact end up being a lot more "bible listening" (as others preach and teach and explain), "bible watching" (as you look at how others in your church community live out the bible in their lives), and "bible conversing" (as you talk with others in your community, ask questions and wrestle with the text together).

It's not all about reading! Listening, watching and conversing maybe the pathway forward for you when it comes to bible literacy. 

Some super spiritual type people might like to declare that this is problematic as you’ll only ever have “second-hand revelations of God” rather than “first-hand revelations of God.” They might declare you to be cutting corners. Don’t worry though, this is stupid for a couple of reasons. Firstly, unless you a reading in Hebrew or Greek you’re already relying on the work of others and it is already second-hand. You have already cut a corner. Secondly, if something is a revelation to you, it is a revelation to you! Any revelation you have is always a first-hand revelation to you. Otherwise it wouldn’t be a revelation.

5.      Less is more, join the “slow Bible” movement.

If you are going to read in community, well the reading gets a lot slower. It is always faster to do something by yourself, of course. It isn’t always better for you though. Inviting others into the conversation will slow it all down, but at the same time has the potentially to bring it all alive.

Invite a couple of friends into conversation. Read the same book of the bible together. Meet up for coffee to discuss.

Invite an expert into the conversation. It is pretty easy to get your hands on really good commentaries. Academic. Pastoral. Everyday life application. You can decide how deep you want to go.

Obviously, this is more reading so it isn’t going to be for everyone. If you are a listener or a watcher or a conversationalist, try to listen to those that read deeply etc.

More reading slows it down. Here though, please understand that less is more. Don’t try to get through the bible in a year. Stop. Try to get through a couple of books of the bible each year and add in an appropriate commentary on each book. Add in some appropriate conversation partners. You’ve got years of doing this ahead of you so slow down.

Tom Wright has a series For Everyone that’d be a good and easily accessible entry point. A basic commentery on every book of the New Testament by one of the world's leading biblical scholars. All written for the everyday reader though. Buy them as a set, buy them one-by-one. 

Maybe rather than a commentary, read a couple of books about the bible. A little bit of understanding of how it works can be a game changer!

Try The Drama of Scripture by Bartholomew and Goheen helps you to understand the big story and narrative arc of the bible. It is excellent. Or perhaps The Bible Tells Me So by Peter Enns. Enns is laugh-out-loud funny and looks at the dilemmas that come with some of the tricky bits of the bible and the unfortunate ways we have tried to work our way around them. The New Testament Story by Ben Witherington is a great introduction as to how we even came to have the New Testament. Them, Us, and Me by Jacqueline Grey is helpful with the Old Testament, what does that have to do with our lives today? A great book. 

Less is more!

Join the slow bible movement.

After all, anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.

6.      Don’t mistake the bible as a flat text, not all is equal.

Give privilege to the Gospels, the stories of Jesus, the Epistles to the church.

7.      Always read in light of Christ.

8.      Remember that the goal in our reading is that we’d be more like Jesus.