Leaving Evangelicalism, Checking in (Nearly) Halfway

Last updated on: May 26, 2015 at 2:39 pm by Kyle Roberts

Leaving Evangelicalism, Checking in (Nearly) Halfway 2015-05-26T14:39:38-05:00 Kyle Roberts

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.

Last week, I published the third of a seven-part series which I’ve called “Leaving Evangelicalism.”

I thought it might be beneficial to pause, now that I’m nearly mid-way through the series, remind readers (and myself) of what I’ve published, offer a few off-hand reflections, and then invite continued discussion in the comments section.

Here are the first three topics, with links:

1(a) The Foundations are Breaking Up

In this first post I laid out the context for my increasing discomfort with the general tenor of Evangelical theology and the way Evangelicalism itself is often driven by a desire for epistemological and theological certainty. The Evangelical landscape is marked by strong solid lines of theological and doctrinal affirmation, who is in and who is out, who God “is,” and declarations of “God’s will” regarding complex moral questions. I expressed a wish that the “post-foundationalist” move within philosophy and theological method had taken a stronger hold within Evangelicalism. Alas, it appears that it (mostly) has not.

1(b) Beyond Certainty

Here I extended the initial conversation by suggesting that the ideal (and idol!) of certainty be replaced by something more humble like “confidence.” Or, since psychological certainty is an inescapable aspect of the human condition, perhaps we should move to thinking in more emotive (and spiritual) categories like “conviction,” which have a long spiritual and religious pedigree–but which can come without the trappings of modernist, propositionalist thinking.

2. Seven Problems with Inerrancy

This post generated the most attention of the three so far, hitting the proverbial “nerve.” Although the internet loves numbered lists, so that might have something to do with the success. But it does seem to be the case that the conflict within Evangelicalism (and the reason why many head for the exit door) lies with an unwillingness of many of its leaders to come to terms with–that is, be honest about–the flawed nature of its sacred text. I appreciate Scot McKnight’s response to the post, in which he raised a good question: How do we move “beyond the problems” of inerrancy toward a constructive approach to the Bible which affirms its place as sacred Scripture and its role in forming Christian faith, church, discipleship, etc. I responded to McKnight’s question with another blog post:

Five Metaphors for a Constructive Approach to Scripture

Here I put forward, trying out the “metaphor” theme, a few approaches to Scripture which I felt offered positive ways to relate to the Bible as Christian scripture, and therefore as authoritative for theology and life, but which did not depend (in any way) on the problematic construct of inerrancy. I drew from N.T. Wright (Shakespeare Play / “Fifth Act”), Brian McLaren (Library), Kierkegaard and the Pietists (Love Letter), William Abraham (Sacrament), and Kenton Sparks (“Believing Criticism”). A well-established post-evangelical theologian, who is working on metaphor and theology currently, emailed me to commend me for the list–though he rightly pointed out that #5 (believing criticism) is not really a metaphor. In retrospect, I could have simply used Spark’s own metaphor of “Adoptionism,” borrowing from Christological categories. But overall, I think the first thing that should be done is a replacement of “inerrancy” with “inspiration.”

3. Christian Universalism. Or, What if God Gets What God Wants?

With this post I reached the mid-point of the series. I haven’t seen a whole lot of online conversation on universalism within Evangelicalism since the Rob Bell / Love Wins controversy. Maybe there’s been some lingering fatigue over the Bell’s Hells controversy, but I wonder too if the conversation is most centered on the nature of Scripture, epistemology (certainty or humility), the meaning of the atonement, the Bible and sexuality (LGBT) and so on, rather than on the direct question of universalism–which has to do with speculation about the future. But the question also has to do with the nature of God, and increasingly, it seems, people are not comfortable with the concept of God put forward in traditional “eternal judgment”-based theologies.

Overall, there are quite a few links between epistemological humility, the nature of God as love, and epistemic humility that run through these three topics. That will continue as the series moves forward into discussion of atonement, patriarchy and sexism, sexuality and identity, and science and human origins.

I’d be interested in hearing your feedback/pushback and any other comments, questions, or stories related to “Leaving Evangelicalism.”

photo credit: <a href=”http://www.flickr.com/photos/52193570@N04/5356662124″>Fate</a> via <a href=”http://photopin.com”>photopin</a> <a href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/”>(license)</a>

Previous Post

May 25, 2015

A Book Recommendation for Memorial Day: Migrations of the Holy

Next Post

May 27, 2015 One Step Leads to Another: FIFA and the Corruption Pyramid

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month December 2020 November 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 December 2018 July 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 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

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz