A Bona Fide Apologetic: Part 1

At a time when most spiritual conversations are charged with the electricity of suspicion, many of us are asking how we can lovingly tolerate the religious beliefs of our neighbors, while at the same time remaining true to ours. On one hand, we don’t want to be Christian Bin Ladens, believing our goal is to conquer the world for our God, no matter how many people we have to alienate, hurt, or destroy in the process. On the other hand, we don’t want to scrap the missionary thrust of our faith and act as if those who don’t know Jesus as Lord don’t need to. We want to be good neighbors, and whenever possible live at peace with those around us, but at the same time we want to be good disciples and remain faithful to the great commission. Can we do both? I believe so. What follows are some suggestions to help us pull it off.

First, as we engage in spiritual conversations with folks with whom we disagree, we must give them the benefit of the doubt. When someone says something we believe to be wrong, instead of immediately stamping the word heretic on his forehead and stomping off, or pronouncing him to be the evil spawn of Satan, we should withhold our judgment and keep listening. Even if they say something that sounds totally foolish, we should give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that in reality they are smarter than they sound-at least until they give us irrefutable evidence otherwise. I begin here for two reasons. First, for a people saved by grace, there is no other place to begin. Second, I’m trusting (hoping?) you will give me the benefit of the doubt as you consider what you’re about to read.

My thoughts here are based upon a couple of assumptions I have about faith. My first is that faith is not a choice. Everybody has faith. Don’t believe the propaganda of skeptics who would have you believe that faith is only for the weak-minded. Everyone, and I mean everyone, has put his or her faith in something. It takes just as much faith to be an atheist as it does to be a Christian. It takes just as much faith to believe that this world is purposeless, random, and therefore meaningless as it does to believe that this world is the creation of a purposeful God who has grand intentions for it.

I find it helpful to evaluate the faith we already have by breaking it down into two different categories. First, there is the content of our faith-what we believe. Second, is the quality of our faith-how we believe. (I owe this distinction to Brian McLaren whose thinking in the book Finding Faith has stimulated and influenced a great deal of what you’re reading here.)

When evaluating the content of our faith, the result can be one of two kinds of faith: right faith or wrong faith.

This statement reveals my second assumption about faith, which is that there are some things in this world that are true whether we believe them or not. This means that it’s possible for our faith to be right or wrong. Take the question of God’s existence as an example. He either exists or he doesn’t. Based upon our answer to the question: Do you believe in God? Our faith is either right or wrong. What about the identity of Jesus? Was he the Son of God as he claimed to be? Or was he a brilliant kook, a messianic pretender with a flair for public relations (at least up until the point he gets himself crucified) or was he an innocent teacher of wisdom who would be mortified to find out that his overzealous disciples started a world religion by exaggerating his legend? Again, depending on whom we believe Jesus to be, our faith will either be right or wrong.

Most, if not all of our discussions about faith typically focus on its content. We love to talk about what we believe and why. When we share our faith with those whose faith is of a different sort, what we’re usually doing is seeking to convince them that our faith is right and theirs is wrong and they need to change. To most evangelical Christians, especially those whose heritage is rooted in the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement, the content of our faith is very important. In fact, for most of us weaned on Restoration Movement rhetoric, making sure our faith is “right” is an irrepressible obsession.

Many of our neighbors, however, don’t necessarily believe that the content of a person’s faith is all that important. That’s why you’ve probably heard the following spiritual slogan reverberating throughout our culture: “It doesn’t really matter what you believe, as long as you are sincere.” In a culture desperately trying to be politically correct, making this statement, while at the same time smiling and gently nodding your head in the manner of a knowing Tibetan guru, is proof positive that you have reached the pinnacle of religious enlightenment. Or at least it was until September 11th.

On that day, when sincere hijackers, as a result of their religious convictions, started flying planes full of people into buildings full of people, this politically correct slogan, steeped in the virtue of tolerance, was judged and found to be wanting. Rather than do away with it altogether, the pundits have added another qualifier which makes this statement-and those who believe it-safer for us all. You’ll be glad to know that we’re still free to believe whatever we want as long as we’re sincere and as long as our beliefs don’t cause us to hurt other people. It doesn’t matter if you want to be a Christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, a Muslim, an Atheist, or a Muggle as long you are sincere about it and as long as you promise to leave the rest of us alone.

In other words, the content of our faith doesn’t matter. All that really matters is its quality. Overstated? You bet. Completely without merit? Not so fast. There may be a kernel of truth hiding somewhere in the hyperbole. What we believe matters, but it is not all that matters. The quality of our faith counts as well. So much so, that I want to torque your thinking a bit by suggesting that in the long run quality trumps content. In order for that last statement to make sense, I need to define what I mean by the “quality” of our faith.

I’ll get into that in the next post.

Continue to part 2.

Comments

  1. Oh, a cliff hanger. And one that might have people spitting coffee at the Screen! You are my hero!!!

    I am dealing with a “Content” issue in my house. My brother says we see the same ideal but from different locations. While he says this I am thinking “And from different sides of right and wrong.”

    Cant wait for the next one…

  2. Wade,

    I’ve been reading your blog for a few months now. Very good post. I especially enjoyed the disticintion between the content and the quality of faith (realizing that you cited McLaren). Very important and has lots of implications. Glad that you are going to flesh out “quality”.

    Jim Martin

  3. Do you think people are actually buying this stuff? Seriously, one of the best posts I’ve seen. You have a unique gift my friend. I’m just glad you are using your powers for good and not evil. Peace.

  4. David U says:

    Wade, great post…..as usual! Keep me coming, brother.

    Your friend,
    DU

  5. Thanks so much for this new “series” Wade.

    I can’t wait to hear more about your take on “quality” of faith, rather than “content” because I think about these things a lot and have a lot of discussions with people around me about them.

    This has been a very puzzling issue for me for the past several years as I’ve engaged with people very close to me who are in “different places” than I am and I keep trying to figure out how to better think about and address some of the areas of our differences.

    I hope you will address how the quality of our faith is related to grace, i.e., is there some “point” at which the [lack of] “quality” of our faith would cause us to cease to be under grace? That is one of the biggest things that is bothering me of late in loving those near me who “don’t seem to have it all together” and are very “haphazard” about their faith, if that makes sense. It worries me to no end, more than whether the “content” of their faith is “correct” enough or not.

  6. So who is winning in the Right vs. Wrong game of Faith Pong?

    Look forward to the coming posts.

  7. Hmmm … this discussion’s already deep and it hasn’t gotten to part II yet. Is it wise to add another dimension; one of time? To propose that we can plop right down secure with our faith right where it is in content and quality – and over time discover that others have been questioning both facets of their faith? Working and praying to enrich them? And growing closer and closer to God as a result?

    Maybe not yet.

  8. “So much so, that I want to torque your thinking a bit by suggesting that in the long run quality trumps content.”

    Ok, I’m fully torqued by this. Looking forward to seeing what you mean.

  9. Are you going to deal with “set theory” like McLaren does in MORE READY THAN YOU REALIZE? If so, I suggest you check out a book called WHO IS MY ENEMY? by Rich Nathan. You may already have it, but I think the two of them combine to make some really neat graphs… er… points.

Trackbacks

  1. […] A Bona Fide Apologetic: Part 2

    Filed under: Gospel — Wade @ 10:18 pm

    Part 1 . . . I want to torque your thinking a bit by suggesting that in the long run quality trumps content. In […]

  2. […] A Bona Fide Apologetic: Part 3

    Filed under: Gospel — Wade @ 11:47 am

    Part 1 Part 2 As the following graphic shows, thinking of our faith in terms of good and bad as well as right a […]

  3. salguod.net says:

    Wade Hondges on Faith

    Another excellent series of posts from Wade Hodges, this time on faith. In three parts, Wade asks what’s more important, the content of our faith (the ‘right’ faith) or the quality of our faith (good faith or bad)? really good…

  4. […]

    Set Theory

    Filed under: Gospel — Wade @ 11:35 am

    In a couple of previous comments, John has mentioned “set theory” and how it applies to evangelism, etc […]

So, what are you thinking?