Are Christians more opinionated than other people, and do we hold our opinions as far more sacred? It’s a hard question for me to answer, because I’ve pretty much always been a Christian. And, I’m both cynical and opinionated.
I don’t know why I’ve suddenly started noticing it lately. Maybe it’s because I read a lot of blogs run by Christians who often take aim at “dodgy” theology, or politics, or whatever. Just like my blog. Or maybe it’s because the most commonly used phrase in the sermons I hear is, “While many think of it this way, it’s not actually…”, most often used in relation to how a popular Christian subject is understood by the masses (spiritual gifts, for example).
The thing is, there is a lot of dodgy thinking and acting going on out there. But how much should we be looking to correct it? The balance is a hard one. Yes, I want to speak out when I see people like Benny Hinn conning people, but should I go after Left Behind as well? I have. Sure, I think Calvinism is dodgy doctrine but do I need to speak out on that? In what context? Should I, as I wondered on a friend’s blog, just leave Hillsong alone?
I remember someone (cant remember who) saying we should always provide a better alternative to the problem we have identified rather than attacking it. Or maybe that idea is wrong, and we should identify which things fall under the “important enough to speak out against” and only speak out against those.
Christians of course, are well known for speaking out against things, particularly the Christian right. The Christians left (yes, I’m going to call it that), claims higher ground but in my eyes is often guilty of aiming the guns elsewhere – specifically at the Christian right.
I don’t claim anything near an authoritive voice on this issue. It’s just something I’ve been thinking about. Maybe I’m just promoting vague positivity and warm fuzzies, I don’t know. Or perhaps I should just try to be nicer.
I’ll rank the ‘go-after-them worthiness’ of those you mention according to me…
1. Benny Hinn
2. (tie) Hillsong & Left Behind
3. Calvinism
-d-
Great post. Love your blog Rhett!
About the time Al Gore invented the internet, I stumbled across a plethora of websites dedicated to slagging off Bill Hybels. It shocked me as at that time I believed Hybels was seated at the left hand of the Father (I still like him a lot). It was my first exposure to the “conspiracy theory, guilt by assocation, straw man” world of the internet thought police. I realised there were whole sectors of Christian thought that were obsessed with discrediting other sections. At one stage I even thought to create a kind of family tree of supposed heresy. Robert Schuler is the positive thinking heretic, and Rick Warren is tainted by the fact he spoke at a Conference Schuler was at, Erwin McManus wrote a book and Rick Warren wrote the foreword so they’re all going to Hell in a handbasket together. Even John McArthur was tainted in one rant because he believes in Pyschiatry – I think thats what it was anyway and quoted a scientific source in a sermon. So the McArthur groupies (many of whom have psychiatric problems – oops did I just do what you’re talking about?) must also be guilty by association even as they take on other heretics like Bill Hybels, Rob Bell et al. Anyways it made me feel jaded and gave me the same heart check it is for you.
I do think there is a scriptural line. False teachers v the Paul/Apollos rivalry or the Peter/Paul debate. Like most lines in Christ following, though I think its mostly about the heart: do I put others down to make myself feel more powerful? Thats a fine line where mixed motives cover over many an intemperate thought.
I try to take a deep breath more often these days.
Perhaps you should aim first at going after people performing under the banner of Christianity who are causing actual suffering and then, once that’s sorted out, figure out whether or not to deal with the other annoyances.
I would rank people like Benny Hinn pretty highly but I would probably rank the actions of the Catholic Church even higher – especially around the issue of contraception in third world countries.
Thats an interesting viewpoint Damian. When I apply my personal Christian worldview through the lenses of scripture, reason, experience and tradition I get:
Benny Hinn: heretic, swindler, lover of money
Catholic church: mistaken but earnest in application of a shared biblical value ie the sanctity of life – hugely tragic consequences because of the size of the catholic movement, but not my right to villify unless I become a Catholic
But I appreciate the point you’re making and the perspective from which you form it. Really highlighting the difficulty of forming an objective position on the issues Rhett is raising. Yes you can form a view influenced by objective considerations, but the starting points are nearly always subjective.
Great comments. Yeah Brett, I’ve noticed you’re a bit of a Hybel’s groupie. Do you like Rick Warren?
You’re right Damian, and in fact there is biblical backing for what you say. I think it is Paul who tells us not to judge non-believers.
But it always get’s complex. War, for example. I think we NEED to be judgemental of warmongers, Christian or not. Abortion is another issue (I don’t wan’t to start a debate on that here though, really), as well as domestic violence.
The Catholic church thing is a really tough one. I agree with you on the contraception issue, but as you would know there is a history of evangelicals bagging the Catholic Church which is really unhelpful. There seem to have been moves lately towards building some bridges so it is kind of a case of treading lightly. I don’t know if that is right or wrong but there you go.
I say go for the jugular wherever and whenever possible!
Though some people might not think so (and since I sit in the camp of calling out stuff fairly regularly), allow me to say that I actually pick my battles (real ones as opposed to humorous comments about things like the new Hillsong album) with a lot of thought behind why I’m doing it and how I am going to play it out. Almost always, the battles that I engage, I do so because I see it somehow destroying people’s lives in some way.
Left Behind? Yes, because the politics it leads to is directly impacting the lives of different people groups.
Calvinism? Usually only when a Calvinist picks on my friends and misrepresents the Arminian position.
Benny Hinn, Todd Bentley and many others? Most definitely yes. I’m going for the jugular. I don’t care what others think.
Hillsong? I think it’s,worth asking questions from time to time, but apart from the bland, theologically light music and some excess, I don’t see a need to pick a huge fight.
Almost always, I make myself accountable in those fights that I do pick and do my best to be diplomatic and hear the other side, giving it the benefit of the doubt where possible.
But sometimes, trying to rip out the jugular (metaphorically speaking) of something that is tearing people’s lives apart is, quite simply, the only method that works.
I don’t know if I would be the same if I didn’t have a sizable audience – but would I be doing what I’m doing if I wasn’t like that? Probably not.
I don’t mind Rick Warren. His book “The Purpose Driven Church” was something that influenced me in my formative years. Mainly because it challenged churches to ask “Why?” rather than simply say “Because”. I think I have had more exposure to Hybels as a leader and respect his focus, character and longevity, whereas with Warren it has more been the Purpose Driven paradigm that has had some influence. But I am very much a synthesist, picking up ideas from all over and seeing how they might relate to each other rather than a locating my praxis in just one person/approach. I’ve probably got as much out of Peter Drucker (Managing Non Profit Organisations) and his idea of the product of NPO’s being “transformed human lives” and Peter Senge’s Systems Thinking as I have from Hybels. And Hybels himself is a synthesist extraordinaire, reading voraciously across the management and devotional spectrum.
Oh and those heretics suck (just to get this comment back on track).
Sorry Rhett, I didn’t mean to imply that you should just target Christians. My comment was meant only within the context of cleaning shop.
There are lots of other terrible groups out there and I think that if you bring everything back to the question of suffering it can add some clarity.
If you rank any movement, organisation or ideology by how much suffering it causes modern-day Christianity as a whole is a pretty minor player.
Sure, Hinn disillusions a bunch of Christians and some people lose money or even miss out on proper medical treatment because of him but when I weigh the suffering caused by Hinn compared to the suffering that results from the preaching of the completely irrational belief that God gets quite irate whenever a sperm is wasted in countries like Africa, Hinn is only a minor player in the game of suffering.
But I understand your dilemma if you are trying to balance an understanding of scripture alongside the outworkings of the beliefs that are formed by the various interpretations.
You may not agree on some of the finer details of scriptural interpretation but anyone who’s human should be able to recognise suffering when they see it. The question is; does an ideology take precedence over human (or even animal) suffering?
“But I am very much a synthesist”…
Aren’t all keyboardists?
Damian, those are some interesting thoughts…
Where would you say your concern for human suffering comes from in that you are an Atheist evolutionists. Forgive me for simplifying things terribly here, but do you see the moral compass as having evolved? And isn’t evolution all about survival of the fittest, might is right etc? How does concern for others suffering coming into you worldview?
Rhett,
Ummmm, I don’t even know where to start with that question. That’s quite a disconnect we’ve got going here. I’m going to have a bit of a think about how to bridge that gap and get back to you when I have a bit more time. Perhaps this would make for a good topic all on it’s own in case other Christians have the same questions about the relationship between atheism, evolution and morals.
Stay tuned.
Thanks, I look forward to it.
Or maybe it’s because the most commonly used phrase in the sermons I hear is, “While many think of it this way, it’s not actually…”, most often used in relation to how a popular Christian subject is understood by the masses (spiritual gifts, for example).
Hey this is a real thinker of a post. I think servant’s boldness in “going for the jugular” on topics (e.g. the Florida revival stuff) is pretty admirable and, as jonesboy pointed out, not without Biblical precedent (2 Tim 3:16, James 5:20 etc).
However, I feel that some people go to far in their rebuke-fest – unfortunately these are the Christian groups that probably get the most media attention and vilification (e.g. Westboro Baptist).. much like extremist Islam elicits the most flak I suppose.
When there’s a difference in interpretation on something like spiritual gifts, Calvinism/Arminian, emergent/propositional, I think a lot of Christian opining (mine included) focus too much on truth and too little on love. I think it defeats the purpose if say I beat up a fellow Christian into the ground on a doctrinal issue – even if I was right, it probably just ends up a poor reflection of Christlike behaviour…
My rule of thumb is that at the end of the day, after reasoned discussion, one can always agree to disagree rather than force some crusade of correction.
Great thoughts Lemingz. I do think presenting a better option rathering than going on an attack-fest is a better option. In terms of leading people, I guess that is what real leadership is about: leading people to a better place, rather than simply moaning about how things are.
OK Rhett, I’ve finally finished trying to ‘bridge the gap’ in our understanding of atheism, evolution and morality. Have a read and let me know if anything is not clear.
And then you can perhaps engage on the issue of suffering safe in the knowledge that you are talking to another moral being
Cool, I’ll have a read… I wasn’t saying you weren’t moral… you clearly are, I’m just wondering what drives that?
Sorry Rhett, I didn’t mean to hijack this thread… it’s just that the question you asked opened a lot of doors and it would have been painful to read as a comment. And I get asked that question a lot by people who struggle with how people can get their morals outside of a “moral law-giver” so now I’ll have somewhere to link to.
Back to the topic: How do you see suffering as a standard by which to target the abuses of Christianity as you perceive it? It seems to me that many Christians would rather go after the likes of Hinn because of the embarrassment he causes rather than the wrong he’s doing in the world. (I’m not defending him here believe me; I think he’s a total dick and a self deluded – or possibly, intentional – charlatan)
Now worries Damian, I’m enjoying the conversation over at your blog.
I’m not sure I quite understand what you mean, but I think you have hit the nail on the head when you say that many Christians go after Hinn because of the embarassment factor.
I have been guilty of this with people like Brian Tamaki. I think many of us who see ourselves as moderate thinking Christians would like Christianity to percieved that way, not in the way it is projected by the Hinns and Tamakis of this world. That’s why we get all excited by guys like Bono and Rob Bell and also, I think, why we latch onto concepts like social justice as the driving force behind what we believe. It’s good PA.
I probably haven’t answered your question.. could you be a bit more specific?
I go after people like Hinn and Bentley because they destroy people’s lives and use the name of God to do so. I also openly (on the radio) condemn people like Mugabe for the same reason.
I advocate for the Palestinians for the same reason.
I am also passionate about situations like Darfur and other poverty related issues around the world… and not simply because these are cool “social justice issues” and it’s great PR, but because I value humanity and I see a clear call for Christianity to stand up for the poor and oppressed, however that might express itself.
I do so because I believe that’s what Jesus was about, so in my quest to be more like Jesus, I advocate in these areas – even when it rips my heart apart to see things I would rather blissfully ignore.
… and to add a qualifier – I was passionate about these and raising my voice about such things well before Rob Bell came on the scene and before I took any notice of Bono. I have gravitated towards these guys because they largely share my world-view – not because I think they’re cool.
One only needs to ask my old Pastor what would frustrate me and you’ll find I’ve had the same driving motivations for the last decade… they’ve just taken better shape, found more outworkings and voice, and seem to have become more of a norm amongst a wider bearth of Christians since.
Though, one doesn’t have to do much study to show that there has always been such tensions within Christianity – between those who get alongside and do their best to serve the poor and advocate for those being manipulated and abused by religious oppressors, and those who participate in such oppression.
That’s a great description of your position servant, makes sense – even if someone was to disagree about whether people/groups in your targets are worth the effort, your reasoning can’t be faulted too much.
An interesting aside perhaps could be that some organisations have done exactly as servant has described and become more aware and active about such things, when they may have been passive observers or worse still, participants in the past. I would say Hillsong are a great example of that – while some like to deride their actions, their work both in Australian communities & now more globally which could be labelled social justice show a strong desire from their leadership down to make a positive difference.
and that’s what I’d say is my qualifier to Rhett’s original question – am I trying to make a positive difference or am I just finger-pointing and ranting for the sake of it or to bring others down/me up??
actually, I recently wrote a feature article for the next issue of Soul Purpose on that very topic… using your voice…
god to know others are having similar considerations to me
Ben – cool!
Frank – when I said, “That’s why we get all excited by guys like Bono and Rob Bell and also, I think, why we latch onto concepts like social justice as the driving force behind what we believe.”, I think that you have placed yourself in the “we” category and thus felt the need to defend your views. But really, you should be aiming higher. I put you in the “Bono and Rob Bell” category. In fact, I should have said, “Like Bono, Rob Bell and Frank Ritchie”.
Back yourself, bro!
That’s a high honour!… and I don’t think I could ever see myself being in the same camp as those guys.
I just watched a doco on Darfur that I need to review for Filmguide and I’ve finally been able to wrap my head around that situation properly – geography, people groups etc. Up until now the whole situation was pretty hazy in my head.
My blood is boiling about the whole thing. It showed pictures of the atrocities being committed and explained how things like rape are used as weapons of warfare. Anyone who gets involved with this stuff because of any perception of “cool” needs to watch that doco and let the issues get implanted in the heart where they will rip us apart.
We sent a small gift to our sponsor child in the Philippines and her family was really happy to get it because it meant they could buy her some shoes….. shoes for goodness sake. We don’t know how good we’ve got it.
I’ve also just been reading up on Watoto’s work with child soldiers in the north of Uganda…. there’s just so much that should break our hearts
No, you did a pretty good job there. Although I can’t see why you need a good PA system
The gist of my question about suffering is that if you were to somehow measure “suffering” (say, as kilograms) and pile up the suffering caused by Benny Hinn compared to the suffering caused by pressuring people not to use contraceptives in countries with food shortages and Aids epidemics do you think the “weighing” of suffering is a better method of choosing your targets within Christianity? As opposed to the embarrassment or scriptural integrity factors?
Please note once again that I’m only talking within Christianity rather than many of the other, possibly far worse, issues in the world.
(Frank, I don’t know much about the background of the Darfur conflict – perhaps a succinct overview of the situation might be a good topic for The Humanitarian Chronicle?)
Good thought, Damian. I’m not doing any papers next semester for Carey as I decided I wanted to devote some efforts to the HC, so will make an explanation of Darfur a priority
Frank – it IS a high honour. Honestly, I gotta say bro, I like you so much, if that Jesus guy had never existed…
Damian – gee, that’s a whole other can of worms. Especially if you take the view of some Christians (including me) that the condition of sin is causing the world to deteriorate (another reason Im not all in with the social gospel) and at the end of the day there’s not a whole lot we can do about that it becomes complicated. What SHOULD the priority/s of the church be?
I’m hesitant to open this back up again because I feel we’d just come to a nice closing but I’m unfamiliar with this concept. I’ll understand if you want to address this at another time but I would be interested to know:
- Is the deterioration a person thing or a whole planet thing? Or something else?
- How is this deterioration measured? (it seems we are far better off now than ever before in the history of humanity)
Well, as I’d just been reading them, let me paste here what the Wesleyan Methodist articles of religion say…
“We believe that humanity’s creation in the image of God included ability to choose between right and wrong. Thus individuals were made morally responsible for their choices. But since the fall of Adam, people are unable in their own strength to do the right. This is due to original sin, which is not simply the following of Adam’s example, but rather
the corruption of the nature of each mortal, and is reproduced naturally in Adam’s descendants. Because of it, humans are very far gone from original
righteousness, and by nature are continually inclined to evil. They cannot of themselves even call upon God or exercise faith for salvation. But through Jesus Christ the prevenient grace of God makes possible what humans in self effort cannot do. It is bestowed freely upon all, enabling all who will to turn and be saved.”
I’ll try to elaborate in a future post. But basically, my understanding is that because humans are naturally inclined towards evil (that same wanting to do right but not being able to thing I was talking about on your blog), the detrioration is a whole planet thing, but caused by human sinfulness. I guess what I am reacting against here is the idea which is becoming increasingly popular that if Christians work hard enough to make thing on earth like they are in heaven, things will be great. I don’t believe that is actually achievable.
But that’s not to say we shouldn’t work for the good of people and the earth. It just affects how we prioritise.
Gosh, we’ve gone a far way from the original post aye! oh well.
Yeah, I’m happy to call it a day but I would like to hear you expand on that concept at some stage. Especially around how you would measure this ‘deterioration’. Original sin is an interesting topic too.
rhett, i liked your synthesist joke…
Thank you AJ.
Damian, I liked your PA joke…
Thank you Jonesboy.