The last week or so I have read prophecies on Facebook that are dangerous and theologically wrong. They have provoked the following thoughts. I am not going to nitpick the details. Rather I want to start with two basic points before I pursue some further thoughts.
1) There have been numerous attempts to date when the world will end and Christ will come again. All were mistaken. It is wiser – and more faithful – to leave the decision to God. We should not distract ourselves from doing the things we can do by devoting so much time, effort and thought to these speculations. Instead of figuring out when Christ will return, should we not spend more thought and effort figuring out how to make our society more just and less racist and then to work for that, just to name two things?
2) The other point is subtler, but theologically damning. When we attempt through interpretation of scripture and correlations with certain events such as moving the US embassy to Jerusalem (one of the things I read), we are, in a backhanded way, limiting and defining what God can do. We are demanding that God follow our interpretation. We are attempting to tell God what to do. We are limiting divine sovereignty. In pursuing these lines of interpretation we are, so to speak, “creating” our own God. We are placing our “God” before the God of the first commandment. Moreover, we are replacing trust in God – which is what faith is, not assent to doctrines – with a roadmap.
Maybe it´s just because of what shows up on my Facebook newsfeed and what I read, but what I read or hear about Christianity in the media often frustrates me. The Bible demands a more inclusive faith than what the media often depicts as Christian. The Jesus we meet in the Gospels dines with outcasts, lifts up outsiders as part of the beloved community, and rejects the lure of empire for an alternative kingdom based on love of God and neighbor. Similarly, not all Christians believe in the infallibility of the Bible and reject science and evolution, for example. I, for my part, believe in Jesus Christ and not in a book. I also do not reject or fear insights from the natural sciences or the social sciences or literary studies or philosophy or history, just to name a few. I do not because the God whom I trust created all of the gifts we humans have that lead to these insights. Why should I be afraid of a gift that God gave us?
To be quite honest, I simply cannot understand why a Christian rejects all these things and clings exclusively to one book. The Bible is indeed the foundation of the Christian faith. It is the source and the record of the faith of innumerable persons who have gone before us. It developed and grew to become the book we have before us. The Holy Spirit, however, cannot be confined to the covers of a book. Although I am not a charismatic as that is understood today, I share their faith – and the faith in the Orthodox tradition – and the faith of historical Christianity – that the Spirit still works in the world in many and mysterious ways– and sometimes, amazingly enough, in us.
However, not only what I read about Christians frustrates me. Much of what I read from Christians frustrates me as well. I assume that every Christian has good reasons for what she or he believes and has personal experiences that confirm these beliefs. Even if we do it unconsciously, we all give our ideas and beliefs a “reality check.” We tend to drop ideas that do not, in some sense, “work.” If we do not, we have fallen off the edge of the cliff and have landed in the black box of ideological thinking in which we are no longer susceptible to arguments, facts and new insights that could cause us to re-think some idea or belief.
Inevitably, we land in this black box when we do not consider arguments, facts and insights, which do not correspond to or support the ideas and beliefs we already have. This is one crucial reason why Christians need to have serious contact and conversations with other Christians who do not share their theology – and I do not mean just other Protestants. Orthodoxy and Catholicism offer much for thought and reflection. We neglect the wealth of these traditions at our own peril. Our protestant arrogance leads to a very narrow-minded understanding of Christianity. This is the fundamental insight of the ecumenical movement: We learn from other Christians to understand and to live our own faith better. In this spirit we then debate and continue to disagree on many important issues.
Our listening should not stop here. We also need to listen to what other believers – be they Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Baha’i, Jain or whatever –have to say. The same applies to unbelievers, agnostics or atheists as well as. Some of the most aggressive and angry criticism of religion has led to some of the best theology because this forces us to re-think some issues that we thought were settled.
In dogmatic terms, we can never know where or how the Holy Spirit will work.
Put in terms of personal faith, no one can truly grow in faith when she or he never leaves the trains of thought that are comfortable.
As important as the concrete community of faith where we worship is, we must go beyond those familiar walls – whether they are made of wood, brick or words. When we stay in our comfortable little black box – or bubble, if you will – we cannot grow in faith. Period. We may be very involved and do a lot – but we are then just running in circles and not getting anywhere. We are not growing; we are stagnating very actively.
Finally, one thing above all else hurts and offends me: The claim of some Christians that they have exclusive rights to what is “Christian” and “evangelical.” It is arrogant. It is self-righteous. It is wrong. This claim is not just offensive, but statistically inaccurate. Christianity is a broad and diverse faith tradition, practiced by billions around the world. When we look at the United States alone, there are millions of African Americans, Latin, White mainline Protestants, Catholics of diverse backgrounds, and many other ethnic groups that comprise a far greater percentage of American Christians than Whites who attend so-called “evangelical” churches.
Conservative evangelical Christians are not the sole defenders of Christianity. However, many Trump supporters argue that their religion, their version of protestant Christianity, is under attack and that the President will save them from the secular drift of American life. They point to themselves as the sole defenders of their faith tradition, with Trump as their champion. I beg to differ. Followers of Jesus are a diverse lot in a country with many faith traditions. All of us can debate the “Christian” response to any number of issues, but we can no longer accept the erroneous conclusion of Trump and his supporters that they alone speak for Jesus. It is not that simple – unless you stay in your black box.