Why is it that some in the conservative Christian circle have such a hard time with people who call into question long-standing doctrines and traditions? I don't understand... Shouldn't we constantly be seeking to question and probe what we believe, how we think, and how we act? Shouldn't we constantly try to be more and more like Christ? The purpose of questioning and criticizing is not to destroy. The purpose is to build.
It's like a football team (or any sports team for that matter). When I played high school football, we watched film from games and from practice almost everyday. We didn't watch it to confirm that we were always doing the right thing. We didn't watch for fun - God knows it wasn't fun. We watched film to try and get better. We tried to figure out what we as a team and as individuals were doing wrong. Then, after noting the mistakes, we would apply what we learned from the film to practice, and hopefully this would affect our game. For us, it worked quite nicely, seeing as we went undefeated and won a 2001 5A State Title (quick plug for Mesquite HS).
Shouldn't the church do something similar? Shouldn't we take a step back every now and then to see if we're doing the right things, believing the right things, and placing our faith and trust in the right things? If we don't, then the church is headed in a very unsafe direction. We could very well set ourselves up for failure.
In his book Velvet Elvis, I think that Rob Bell says it well. He explains two types of faith. One type of faith is compared to a brick wall, which he calls Brickianity. In Brickianity, Christians have a hard set of beliefs that are essential to their faith - a system that cannot be compromised. What happens, though, if the brick wall they build starts losing some of the bricks? For instance, what happens (this happened to me when I came to college) if one day you learn that the battle of Jericho most likely never happened, and you believe in a scripture that is completely historically and scientifically accurate? Or worse, (this one is purely hypothetical and kind of silly) what would happen if all of a sudden we found indisputable evidence that Jesus had a real earthly dad and his name was Earl? One by one the bricks fall out and the walls of Brickianity come crashing down.
Rob Bell goes on to explain a different kind of faith - a faith that he compares to a trampoline. In this kind of faith, Jesus is the foundation, or the mat, if you will. The mats are held up by springs, or different sets of doctrine and belief, if you will (and you better). If you have flexible doctrine, if you don't see yourself as always being right, then when your faith is challenged there isn't as much of a problem. Let's look back at scripture as an example. When I learned that the Bible might not be completely historically and scientifically accurate, my view of scripture was forced to change. I don't necessarily hold to that view anymore. I do, however, hold scripture in a very high esteem. Scripture is the authoritative and inspired word from God for Christians. For me, the springs stayed in line, but they changed and it's okay. My faith wasn't destroyed. When we have a faith that is open to questions and a faith that is ready to be challenged, then we can jump on the trampoline and be secure that the mat will not fall.
I think that the church needs to be willing to accept the challenges that people give it. We are coming into an age when more and more people are questioning the church's way of doing things socially, politically, ecclesialogically, theologically, etc. It's time for people to stop being so offended when others question and challenge their faith. Who are you to think that you've got all the right doctrine and belief? Odds are that 99% of Christians over the 20 centuries of Christian history would disagree with you on at least five different things that you believe about Jesus. Who are you, oh man, to say that you have God figured out? Do you have your own God in a box? I, for one, believe that God is much bigger than my belief (that's an odd statement isn't it?). I believe that I'm at least a little wrong on most things concerning the God of the universe. God is God, we are not. Let's have some humility.
So, rather than taking offense at challenges, stop and listen. Rather than lashing out, respond in Christ's love. That doesn't mean we have to agree on everything. It just means that we as a church need to work together to try and figure out the best way possible to follow Jesus in our own day and age.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Straight-up? I think a lot of people bristle at well-thought-out challenges, even those in love, because they have something to lose.
If the status quo changes -- and it often should, sometimes on a massive scale -- some people would, among other things, have to get new jobs, or lose a source of ego-stroking. That's threatening.
Best,
Brant
Another point. If your view of God is like a brick, then you've already created parameters of your understanding of God. Now I'll never tell you that any one person can possibly know everything there is to know about God, but you can always learn more. If your view of God is like a brick though, then your ability to grow in knowledge and understanding of God has already been capped off. But with the "spring" faith your understanding can always grow and shift and change and evolve (dare I use that word.
I'm so glad you've finally posted this. It sure takes precedence over the boo-hoo for Marc blog. On a more relevant note, I think it is important to remember where the leaders of today's churches came from. As far as they are concerned, they are a wave of change. I pray that we can look back on our own dissatisfaction with the same vigor we have now. May we never become comfortable or pleased with our present situations.
First, let me say that I have read Bell's book and overall... agree with his premise here... but here's something to think about. It is not just the church's vernacular that lands us at the idea of bricks, or rocks. God himself added this into his own gospel. His own word to us. He is the one who chose to use terms and pictures like "building your house on the rock" my addition to this conversation is if we are to build our lives on the "rock" of Christ there must me some things about him that don't change. That aren't fodder for our imaginations, intellects, or challenges. So what are they? What things are not negotiable?
Post a Comment