Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Why Jen Hatmaker Gets Contextualization Wrong

Why Jen Hatmaker Gets Contextualization Wrong

Last updated on: February 8, 2018 at 7:19 am by Brad Vaughn

Why Jen Hatmaker Gets Contextualization Wrong 2018-02-08T07:19:22-07:00 Brad Vaughn

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Sadly, people like Jen Hatmaker give us poor examples of contextualization. In her recent interview with Peter Enns, she cast aside nearly every principle of biblical interpretation.

Credit: jenhatmaker.com (fair use)

Because interpretation is the first step of contextualization, various comments on the podcast superficially resemble statements I and others make about contextualization.

Hatmaker’s Appeal to Jesus

To give a little context, Hatmaker and the podcast hosts were discussing how she came to believe that Christians should affirm same-sex marriage and welcome LGBTQ people into the church as they are.

She explains why she finally took this position. She says the turning point came when she studied “Jesus’ teaching on fruit.” She concludes,

Basically, Jesus is like, “Ok, well, some things are hard to understand, some things are confusing, people are confusing; there’s conflict. When you are not sure, when there’s something, be it a relationship or a person or a doctrine, whatever, that feels ambiguous or it feels contentious or there’s tension around its interpretation, look to the fruit. Like the fruit is going to tell you the truth. Because ultimately, however you slice it, a good tree is going to bear good fruit and a bad tree is going to bear bad fruit. And there you go. There’s a clue….”

The above paragraph is breathtaking in its disregard for Scripture. Where in the world does Jesus say anything like this? She would likely equate my objection to her comments with a blind or uninformed acceptance of traditional teaching. However, one need not accept everything “tradition” teaches to see the gross flaws in her use of the Bible.

Defining Fruit without Faith?

Before I examine her method of interpretation, consider what she then says. He compares “the fruit of the non-affirming Christian tree,” i.e. people who affirm traditional biblical teachings about homosexuality, etc. She points to:

“broken families, folks kicked out of their churches, …. self-hatred, self-harm, and depression, crushing loneliness, separation from God self-imposed…”

By contrast, Hatmaker celebrates the fruit of “the affirming Christian tree.” By this, she describes

“gay men and women [as] thriving and welcomed and affirmed and leading, using gifts to build the body of Christ and to serve the world well. The fruit was so universally good. There was just so much joy and life and health there. And I just couldn’t deny it.”

The problems with her reasoning are legion.

Public Domain

1. She utterly misunderstands the meaning of “fruit,” treating fruit as the mere consequence of certain actions. What she calls “rotten fruit” is also the natural consequence of sin! To use the “fruit” argument, she ought to see that the “fruit” of sin argues against such behavior.

2. Her argumentation is a bit disingenuous. How so? She merely compares the worst consequences that result from her opponents’ actions with a flurry of (supposedly) positive results from her side.

3. Hatmaker begs the question by subtly assuming her conclusion.

What she calls “fruit” from “the affirming Christian tree” is either assumed or too general to be called Spiritual fruit. Descriptions like “thriving” and “using gifts to build the body of Christ and to serve the world well” merely assume the conclusion that is up for debate. No doubt the Jewish leaders in Jesus’ day would have said they were serving God pretty well before Jesus came along and disrupted their “thriving” work.

In effect, fruit is severed from the Spirit and root of faith. Next, I’ll highlight two ways that she defends her views.

True Words Applied in False Ways

First, she makes positive sounding or true (enough) statements but applies them in false ways. For instance, she says,

“There has never been unanimity on anything ever” (in church history).

“None of us obey [the Bible] on its face.”

God “invites us into a spirit of inquiry.”

The result is

“greater inclusion and compassion and wholeness and health… humility and curiosity.”

“Internally, [being] in partnership with the Holy Spirit [leads to being] free, strong, nourishing.”

Such word plays are common techniques people use to appeal to emotion rather than make an argument. After all, who could not want “humility” and “freedom.” The problem comes in how she applies her terms.

Words have meaning. What is the consequence in a day where evangelicals are increasingly anti-intellectual (in that theological training and rigorous study are seen as “extras” or unnecessary “abstraction”)? The church becomes vulnerable to brutish appeals to the heartstrings without respect to the mind.

The Experience of “Rediscovering” the Bible

Second, Hatmaker and her interviewers take refuge in experience.

Enns summarizes Hatmaker’s process. He says her experience helped her “rediscover the Bible.” She found that various parts of the Bible could “connect with [her] experience” and “connect with our circumstances.”

Hatmaker concurs with Enns and adds,

Experience matters. Experience is how everybody in Scripture ever came to God. Experience is giving us a different story [compared to the chaos produced by the evangelical church], which is “This is a wonderful road to be on in partnership with the Holy Spirit.”

The podcast sinks to a new low when the other cohost, Jared Byas, says Hatmaker’s remarks remind him of John’s words,

…where he says, “That which we have seen and that which we have heard we proclaim to you.” It’s experience-based. That’s what we are proclaiming…is our experience. And in a lot of ways that is the good news; that is the gospel.

These comments are breathtaking. How do they possibly embrace such a reader-response type approach to the Bible? In part, such conclusions are the consequence of faulty reasoning, particularly the sort that is born false dichotomies.

For instance, Enns appeals to his Jewish mentor Jon Levenson, who claims that Jews see the Bible as a book to be solved whereas Christians regard is as a unified message to be told (in which case there is no room for ambiguity).

Such is the way of most every false dilemma. They ignore logic and exclude what we have all learned from “experience.” To say the Bible has a united message does not logically require it not have passages that are unclear to us. This is a classic non-sequitur.

Hatmaker’s approach to Scripture is not biblically faithful. It is not culturally meaningful from a Christian perspective. And, friends, it is not biblical contextualization.

* This post is about contextualization and specifically biblical interpretation, not homosexuality and gay marriage. Please let your comments reflect the correct focus.

For those interested, the above comments come after the 30-minute mark in the interview found here.

Previous Post

February 7, 2018

“Holiness, holiness is what I need.” Really?

Next Post

February 9, 2018 Why Jen Hatmaker Apparently Thinks I'm Going to Hell

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atonement Biblical Theology Book Reviews China Chinese Church Chinese Culture Chinese Language Collectivism Contextualization Culture (General) Ecclesiology Evangelism Gospel Honor & Shame (Face) Interpretation/Exegesis Justification/Righteousness Missiology Mission Methods One Gospel for All Nations Other Practical Contextualization Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes Resources Romans Salvation (General) Saving God's Face Seeking God's Face The Cross in Context Theological Contextualization Theological Education Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: In John's Gospel, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead after he had been in the tomb for four days.

Select your answer to see how you score.

TRUE FALSE

Books by This Author Books by Brad Vaughn

See All Titles »