Theology-lite Church

I make it a policy to avoid negativity. One of the factors that dictate the content of my sermons is that they should not speak of other faith traditions in disparaging way. I have had other preachers in my pulpit who only lasted one out of three services. That was because they didn’t believe me when I said, “We don’t talk badly about any other church.” They either failed to believe me or they just could not help themselves.

But over the past years as I have served a church in Memphis, something has been happening on Sunday mornings that is driving me nuts. As I prepare for worship I leave the radio on to the same station that was the alarm that woke me. On this particular station, which I chose because it is a strong signal and doesn’t fade, there is a fundamentalist preacher on (Same one every week) who is preaching against something. He is preaching against people who disagree with his theology, his view of science and his world view. I find it interesting because I have yet to hear what he is in favor of. And he rarely mentions Jesus. If one is going to be a fundamentalist at least preach about Jesus. He is my role model (Bad example) to keep me positive.

This poor guy is so tied up in his theology and rules and defending them against all comers that he doesn’t have the time to talk about Jesus and love and grace and forgiveness. This guy is the poster child for not being a fundamentalist.

My particular brand of protestant Christianity (Read denomination) proudly proclaims that we are not encumbered by doctrine or a doctrinal statement. That should work well in our current culture where being a “none” is very popular. A “none” is a person who describes him or herself as spiritual but not religious. A “none” is a spiritual person who is unencumbered by church theology and is making it up as they go. A great way to go since that way I can design my own God who approves of everything I do or fail to do. Instead of, as the Bible says, being created in God’s image, one is able to create a God in one’s own image.

Early in my life as a clergyperson I would occasionally field phone calls from people who, for varied reasons, wanted to know what my church believed about the second coming of Christ, or baptism or abortion or salvation and on and on. They would generally become hostile when I said we have no doctrine and no stated beliefs on any of those subjects. Before angrily hanging up on me, nost intimated that they thought me a gutless liar unwilling to stand up for what I believed. More than once I was told, “If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.”

We say that we have no doctrine but when asked, the average clergy of my denomination will rattle off a pretty substantial list of the things one needs to believe or least accept. Unfortunately, like most groups who envision themselves as open and accepting, we tend to only be accepting of people who think like we do. Those other stupid people are, at best, to be tolerated. Like most groups the rule is: if you are smart you believe what we believe and if you don’t, you are stupid. We have an unwritten doctrinal statement and we are very protective of it.

I did attend a seminary (Not one of “ours”.) that taught systematic theology. They knew exactly what they believed and taught it well. Of course, me being me, I didn’t agree with their theology and spent much of my seminary class time arguing with my professors and classmates. It was very stimulating. And my professors were awesome Christian gentlemen who made such discussions a joy to engage in. (Yes I know about ending a sentence in a preposition. I just don’t care.) There is some things good to say about systematic theology. It helps one be consistent in one’s belief system. It causes one to have some foundational theology upon which to build a belief system. (That sentence could have been simpler but I didn’t want to end it in a preposition.)

Being a part of a doctrine-less church has its pitfalls and shortcomings. One is that we are inconsistent in our theology. We tend to believe things that, if true, are diametrically opposed to each other. Another is that we sometimes lack a foundation for our belief system and that causes us to wander and be open to believe the next best thing that comes down the pike. We lack a systematic method to measure and filter a new thought or theological concept. We lack a measuring stick, a foundation, when we see the Bible as a book that can be discounted when it fails to agree with what we choose to believe on this particular day.

It seems to me that if we have any basic and foundational theological concept it is that we have to be nice, agreeable and accommodating. Several decades ago we dropped any reference to sin and canceled hell around that same time. Our theology is constantly in flux; God is ever changing and right and wrong is a matter of opinion. As one very popular author said, love wins. That conclusion is based on a rather shallow and syrupy concept of love. Love, when seen through the lens of the God of the Bible, is a love that challenges and disciplines. It is not always nice but it is always loving.

I like being a part of a theology-lite church. But it is a dangerous place to hang out. One must really pay attention if one is to survive as a part of this church.

Copyright © 2015, William T. McConnell, All Rights Reserved

Bill McConnell is Senior Minister at Lindenwood Christian Church in Memphis, Tennessee and is a Church Transformation consultant and a Christian Leadership Coach. He is a frequent speaker at Church Transformation events. His latest book on church transformation is DEVELOPING A SIGNIFICANT CHURCH and is available at Westbow Press.

He can be contacted @ bill45053@gmail.com. Connect with him on Facebook @ William T. McConnell or on Twitter @billmc45053 or visit his Amazon Author Page @ Amazon.

Nice

As a child, several times a day my mother admonished me to be nice. I have always done my best to be nice. Nice is good and I like nice. When looking for volunteer and paid staff, one of the characteristics that top my list is nice. I call it, “Plays well with others.” Nice is nice but nice is not the ultimate positive trait. 

We live in a culture where the most widely accepted but seldom verbalized definition of Christian is: A Nice Person. I must smile when I talk to a person who verbalizes that they do not believe that Jesus was really the Son of God and that he was certainly not born of a virgin and that Jesus didn’t physically rise from the dead and I say, “Then you are not a Christian,” and they get completely bent out of shape. “How dare you,” they say, “claim I am not a Christian? I am a good person.” I didn’t say they weren’t a good person, I said they weren’t a Christian. They also haven’t told me anything that would make me suspect they are Muslim. Some of the nicest people I have met didn’t claim to be Christian and some of the most unpleasant people I know declare a faith in Christ. 

Generally speaking, for the past 2000 years, a Christian has been consistently been defined as a person who places their faith in the reality of Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, and the risen Savior. For Christians, Jesus was seen as the way to God. About a century ago it became the common belief that all roads lead to God and it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you believe. 

Like many things in our culture, the definition of a Christian has shifted. Now this is more like it (fresh off the internet): “A Christian is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. “Christian" derives from the Greek word Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach. There are diverse interpretations of Christianity which sometimes conflict. However, "Whatever else they might disagree about; Christians are at least united in believing that Jesus has a unique significance.” The term "Christian" is also used adjectivally to describe anything associated with Christianity, or in a proverbial sense "all that is noble, and good, and Christ-like." It is also used as a label to identify people who associate with the cultural aspects of Christianity, irrespective of personal religious beliefs or practices.” 

So, it seems I was wrong. According to modern definitions one can believe just about anything one wants and still carry the label “Christian” as long as one is considered nice. So, I wonder, does the God of the Bible qualify to be called a Christian in these days? Let’s look at the attributes of God described in scripture:

Infinite
Wise

Sovereign
Infinitude
Omniscient
Trustworthy
Loving (Contrary to some popular thought, being loving is not always being nice.)
Just
Immutable
Merciful

Eternal
Good
Gracious
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Self-sufficient
Righteous
Capable of Anger
Holy
Almighty
King of Kings
Lord of Lords
Jealous
Wrathful 

In compiling this list of attributes I consulted many resources. Even so, I am sure this list is not exhaustive. But no matter where I looked, I never saw God described as nice. Some will, of course, say, “The God of the Old Testament is not the same as the God of the New Testament. You need to look at Jesus.” And there is no doubt that Jesus gave us a deeper and clearer view of God. After all, Jesus did say: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” (John 14:9) So, the question is, was Jesus nice? My answer is a resounding, NO. He was merciful, loving, forgiving, unreligious, powerful, kind (different than nice), encouraging, confrontational, insightful, an excellent teacher, a great friend, a loving son, courageous, blunt, funny, and many other things. But he could be anything but nice. Nice did not define who Jesus was. If you want to palm Jesus off as nice, I suggest you check with some of the people who had interactions with him. 

Jesus had a conversation with a rich man about how to become a part of the Kingdom of God. This rich man was a good guy. He kept all if the commandments, which is more than I can say for myself. Jesus did not say, “Way to go, you have it made.” Instead we read: Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth. (Matthew 19:21-22) If Jesus had been a modern “Christian” he would have chased the man down and told him, “Hey, nobody’s perfect. You’re doing well enough.” That would have been the nice thing to do. But he didn’t. 

Or, Jesus talking to the religious people of his time said things like this. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.” (Matthew 3:7-8) He called them a bunch of snakes. There is nothing nice about that. There is much truth and reality and righteousness in what he said but it couldn’t possibly be called nice. 

My point is that being Christian is much less about nice and much more about truth, righteousness, holiness and mercy. Telling someone the truth so they have the possibility of knowing and loving God is much more important than being nice. Jesus said, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32) Sometimes telling the truth doesn’t sound nice. But if we are ever going to come to experience the true freedom that comes from knowing Christ, we are going to have to know the truth.  

Nice is great but it is not the ultimate good and it is not the definition of Christian.

 

Copyright © 2014, William T. McConnell, All Rights Reserved

An Astute Observation of the Obvious

One of the most insightful and interesting articles I have read in recent years appeared in the January 2010 edition of the Portland Monthly. In the article, Christopher Hitchens was interviewed by Marilyn Sewell, the recently retired minister of the First Unitarian Church of Portland. Sewell is a former teacher and psychotherapist and the author of numerous books, Sewell, over 17 years, grew Portland’s downtown Unitarian congregation into one of the largest in the United States. She describes herself as a liberal believer.

 

Mr. Hitchens described himself, among other things, as an atheist and has been identified as being a prominent exponent of the "new atheism" movement. He and fellow high profile contemporary atheists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett have often been referred to as "The Four Horsemen" and the "Unholy Trinity".  Hitchens is a secular humanist and anti-theist, and describes himself as a believer in the philosophical values of the Age of Enlightenment. His main argument is that since the concept of God or a supreme being is a totalitarian belief that destroys individual freedom, free expression and scientific discovery should replace religion as a means of teaching ethics and defining human civilization. Christopher Hitchers’ 2007 book God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything made him arguably the nation’s most notorious atheist.

I will quote just a segment of the interview. The interview, in its entirety, is worth a read or a listen.

Sewell: The religion you cite in your book is generally the fundamentalist faith of various kinds. I’m a liberal Christian, and I don’t take the stories from the scripture literally. I don’t believe in the doctrine of atonement (that Jesus died for our sins, for example). Do you make any distinction between fundamentalist faith and liberal religion?

Hitchens: I would say that if you don’t believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and Messiah, and that he rose again from the dead and by his sacrifice our sins are forgiven, you’re really not in any meaningful sense a Christian.

Why does it take a non believer to tell us such an obvious truth? Why is it that we, the people who make up this thing we call the church, have such a difficult time defining what it means to be a Christian? I believe the problem is less theological and more sociological. It has more to do with the cultural moral “good” that drives our culture. It is the ultimate good of being open minded, accepting and acceptable that drives our religious and intellectual community to have such a fuzzy understanding of what it means to be a Christian. It is that, much more than our understanding of God, that drives us and, I believe, confuses us.

Mr. Hitchens has made what I would call an astute observation of the obvious. Christianity is founded on the belief that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, lived on this earth, died on a cross to pay the price for our sins and, on the third day, rose from the dead. Not believing in these things means you are not, “in any meaningful sense a Christian.” Instead of getting our shorts in a bunch, or entering into a long winded philosophical discussion, or calling him narrow-minded and stupid (Which he obviously isn’t.) perhaps our response should be “Duh, no kidding.”

Some of the basic beliefs of Buddhism are:

1. Buddha is our only Master.
2. We take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha.
3. We do not believe that this world is created and ruled by a God.

Frankly, I don’t believe those things: For whatever reason or reasons. I can’t say those are really good or bad things, I just don’t believe them. Thus, I can tell you, I am not a Buddhist. That was easy.

There are many things about Islam that are problematic for my belief system. These are just a few:

1. On the Last Day, resurrected humans and jinn will be judged by Allah according to their deeds. One's eternal destination depends on balance of good to bad deeds in life.
2. Warriors who die fighting in the cause of God are ushered immediately to God's presence.
3. "Enemies of Islam" are sentenced immediately to Hell upon death.

Since I don’t believe these things I would not even consider considering myself Islamic. Not a liberal Muslim or a conservative Muslim. Just not a Muslim.

I may consider myself to be a moral person; a good person; a nice person; a godly person. But since I reject some of the very basic tenets of different faith systems, I don’t consider myself to be a Buddhist or a Muslim. They don’t seem to mind and I don’t mind.

So, why is it, I wonder, that there are such a large number of people around the world who reject some of the very basic tenets of the Christian faith and yet insist on being labeled and accepted as Christian? Many of these people would be deeply offended by what I have written and would condemn me as being a narrow-minded fundamentalist.

I confess. I don’t get it. I don’t believe what people of other religions believe and I am not offended that they don’t accept me as a Buddhist or Muslim. I don’t think they should. Truth is, if they did accept me as a Muslim or a Buddhist, I would wonder what they were thinking.

My only guess as to why I have come to such conclusions is that I am a Christian who thinks too much like an atheist.

Copyright © 2010, William T. McConnell, All Rights Reserved