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
How 9Marks Can Rise Above Shameful Theological Debates

How 9Marks Can Rise Above Shameful Theological Debates

Last updated on: January 22, 2022 at 11:30 am by Brad Vaughn

How 9Marks Can Rise Above Shameful Theological Debates 2022-01-22T11:30:01-07:00 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.

This is part three in a series responding an article from 9Marks titled “Nothing To Be Ashamed Of: Penal Substitutionary Atonement In Honor-Shame Cultures.”

In Part 1, we saw how the writers, Samuel and Sequeira, misrepresented Jayson Georges, founder of honorshame.com. In Part 2, we saw how 9Marks used strawman arguments. This series corrects the false impressions conveyed in the 9Marks article. At the same time, the series spotlights ways we need to improve theological debate.

Credit: Public Domain

In this post, I continue describing four more characteristics of unhealthy theological discussion. By avoiding the following tendencies, 9Marks can rise above the shameful ways of debating that plague the church.

3. Treating others’ ideas as your own

When reading 9Marks’ criticism, I several times felt as if I were reading a summary of my own work, especially Saving God’s Face, which the 9Marks article considers “a somewhat careful and more balanced approach to using honor-shame categories, although not without problems.”

After complaining against writers of honor-shame theology, they essentially regurgitate what I and others have preached for years! For instance, they write:

Sin is the failure to honor God’s lordship by distrusting him and disobeying his commands (Mal. 1:6, Rom. 1:18–21).

Shame is the human experience of dishonor and alienation from God (and one another) that results from sin, specifically, because we stand objectively guilty, under the sentence of condemnation due to dishonoring of God and violating his commands. Those who live in sin and rebellion will face eschatological shame—they will stand condemned in the final judgment and experience God’s eschatological wrath.

Amen!

In the gospel, Jesus, God the Son incarnate, bears the guilt and shameof all those who have dishonored God and are deserving of eternal punishment and shame. He stood in the place of his people as a substitute to reconcile sinners to God; to credit the honor of his righteous life as a gift of grace through faith to those who recognize that they stand ashamed before a holy Trinitarian community.

Precisely! I’ve argued extensively for this in several places, including Saving God’s Face and, more concisely, in “How Christ Saves God’s Face…and Ours.” So, if we agree, why then do they treat the views of their “opponents” as if they were not their views?

Samuel and Sequeira repeat this error elsewhere. In the section “Cultures are not that simple,” they detail various nuances of honor and shame, especially how they function in human cultures. Once again, I and others make this exact argument in numerous blog posts and publications.

For a robust treatment on the subject, see my Themelios article “Have Theologians No Sense of Shame: How the Bible Reconciles Objective and Subjective Shame.”

4. Cherry-picking Sources

In order to honor those with whom we debate, we ought not to cherry-pick the sources we use in opposing others’ views. The 9Marks article primarily disputes a book published 19 years ago, a short blog post drawing from an article written in 2005, and an independently published “Beginner’s Guide” written to introduce practitioners to the broad ideas of honor and shame.

Credit: Flickr/barnimages

Why not interact with more recent publications? Why write as though a two-decades-old book is representative of those writing on the topic today?

I’ve already shown how 9Marks misrepresented Jayson’s blog post. But now my question is, “Why not interact with his more thorough writings?” By nature, blog posts often are snapshots of ideas, without scholarly elaboration. Furthermore, the original article dates back to 2005.

5. Theologize from fear

This is a serious problem in the evangelical community (of which I belong). So many books and blogs use fear to shape people’s theology. The typical formula for theologizing from fear goes something like this:

Public Domain

What if people believed idea A?

Idea A might lead to Z.

Therefore, we should not believe idea A.

Another more subtle way is to gradually intensify one’s wording and accusations. For instance, observe the exaggerated language that spans the 9Marks article.

Are these re-interpretations of the atonement faithful to the Scriptures? We contend that they are not. In fact, we believe that these reconstructions empty the cross of its power (1 Cor. 1:17). We present our argument on three fronts, …

We are not free to impose extrabiblical worldviews on Scripture in order to reshape its message in ways that better fits our context. The cross does not come to us as a raw and uninterpreted event, giving us the license to infuse it with new meaning in encounters with new cultural contexts….

“We must not adjust the message of the cross to conform to a cultural framework. To do so is to pervert and distort the gospel of Christ. … Reconstructing the gospel into cultural categories in the name of “contextualization” is an affront to the design of divine offensiveness.”

If you are a reader of a trusted ministry like 9Marks, you will be alarmed. To repeatedly come across such language will firmly sow suspicion and fear into one’s mind, unconsciously hijacking one’s rational thinking.

Samuel and Sequeira own words reveal how they see the discussion. They say, “We present our argument on three fronts…” Are we really at war with each other? Should we immediately assume a combative position?

(Much research shows the power of metaphors to subtly influence an audience. Here is a summary of my favorite study.)

6. Arguments from Misplaced Authority

The 9Marks article uses another tactic (to continue their battle metaphor) that undermines our search for truth. Before offering their assessments of honor-shame writers, Samuel and Sequeira ask,

Are these re-interpretations of the atonement faithful to the Scriptures?

“…faithful to the Scriptures” ––– yes, that’s the criteria I want us to apply! I welcome that standard.

They add,

We must read the Bible on its own terms and in its own categories and framework.

Absolutely! That’s why honor and shame are so important for a robust biblical theology.

Unfortunately, the 9Marks post does not engage with my and others’ use of the Bible. Instead, they cite John Stott to defend the “inner-biblical” logic of atonement.

… the inner-biblical and apostolic interpretation of the atonement is penal and substitutionary. Penal substitution is, in John Stott’s words, “the heart of the atonement itself.” It is the “center of the atonement,” the “linchpin” without which one cannot make sense of the other images that the NT authors use to describe the atonement: redemption, sacrifice, victory, reconciliation, justification, etc.

Whether Stott is right or not is beside the point. If we want to argue about what the Bible says or does not say, then use the Bible.

Confusing Background and the Bible

Finally, they subtly appeal to their own backgrounds as though authoritative or determinative for the debate. In their introduction, they say,

We, the authors, were born, raised, born again, and currently live and servein what may be appropriately labeled as honor-shame cultures….

… As pastors in an honor-shame context, we respectfully disagree with such approaches.

Later, they add,

…We present our argument on three fronts, followed by some reflections on how we think the atonement should be presented in cultures like ours.

The continued reminders that they are from “an honor-shame context” is a rhetorical device with consequences.

First, they effectively confuse biblical authority with personal authority stemming from their identity as people from a traditional “honor-shame culture.” Being from an “honor-shame” culture adds nothing to the message of the Bible itself. After all, their fundamental argument concerns what is or is not biblical.

What’s more, they speak as though everyone else doesn’t grow up in cultures shaped by honor and shame. They explicitly admit this when they state:

Even a cursory study of social mores in English Victorian society or the antebellum US South reveals a different picture. For a more contemporary example of the West’s honor and shame dynamic, consider the phenomenon of Internet shaming and social media. Consider also the complex sub-cultures within larger communities. To be a high school student in America today is to live within an “honor-shame” culture.

To some degree, all human cultures are honor-shame cultures. What makes a culture an “honor-shame culture” is the mass sensitivity people in a culture have to honor and shame. That heightened sensitivity has pervasive effects on how a community functions.

Accordingly, if someone in an American junior high or from the US South were highly sensitive to the honor-shame dynamics around them, they too could speak with as much “authority” as do Samuel and Sequeira. In any case, no one’s cultural background changes what the Bible says.

Wisdom from Proverbs

Much more could be said about the 9Marks article and ways that we, as Christ’s followers, need to improve the tone and content of our dialogue. Proverbs is a storehouse of wisdom. The book repeatedly offers instruction for gaining honor and avoiding shame. One example comes from Proverbs 18:13, which says,

“If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.”

Let us seek to understand others in order that we may learn from one another. Let’s commit to doing our best to represent others fairly and debate with a spirit of generosity. When we do, we will obey the apostles’ commands:

“Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.” (Romans 12:10)

“Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood….” (1 Peter 2:17)

Previous Post

August 28, 2019

9Marks’ Strawman Argument Against Honor and Shame (Part 2)

Next Post

September 4, 2019 Open Letter of Gratitude for 9Marks’ Response

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

Which king had dreams interpreted by Daniel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ahasuerus Nebuchadnezzar Darius Belshazzar

Books by This Author Books by Brad Vaughn

See All Titles »