Progressive Christianity

Some months back the Twitter algorithm started dropping a number of progressive and liberal Christian pastors, academics and "influencers" in my feed.  Not sure how or why that happened.  I suppose I clicked on some religious content and so Twitter decided I needed to see more.  Or Elon's takeover disrupted the algorithm.  In any event, I began to wonder down a number of Twitter rabbit holes and following all sorts of people and issues.  It has all been fascinating, in a weird sort of way.

Being from a conservative, autonomous, nondenominational church, I was somewhat ignorant to all of the conflicts and controversies that exist in the larger Protestant landscape.  Typically, I have been focused on our congregation and not really caring about what John MacArthur thinks, or the SBC, or Beth Moore, or Tim Keller, or....  But Christian Twitter has so much to say!

Progressive Christian Twitter has really opened my eyes to the other side of the spectrum and has allowed me to observe, digest, and contemplate all that Progressive Christianity is about.  Sadly, it is the different side of the same coin as their rival, Christian Nationalists.  Simply, it is an attempt to align a theology to a worldly political ideology.  Sadly, they are often blinded by their self-righteousness and belief of their moral and intellectual superiority to see that they are attempting to fashion a god and a religion out of their political world view.  

A quick note about conservative Christianity and the emergence of Christian Nationalism.  I am saddened that so many conservatives and evangelicals have leapt head first in support of Trump, often minimizing his lack of personal integrity and morality.  Too many have turned a blind eye to his very public failings and have elevated him in ways I find discouraging.  Some have made statements like, "Donald Trump is the best thing that has happened to the American church since, maybe Jesus."  Even worse is that many have taken to the pulpit or have turned their pseudo church service into pro-Trump, pro-Republican campaign rallies.

Welp...time to log off for today. pic.twitter.com/DAUUYZT4AO

— Lecrae (@lecrae) February 6, 2021

  

And, although I understand many of those conservative Christians and their frustrations with the culture, the media, and the very real gas lighting that led them to embrace a character like Trump, it still is wrong.  It is wrong for the exact same reason that Progressive Christianity is often wrong.  It is not based on Scriptural truths or supported by sound Biblical doctrine.  Its error is that it attempts to elevate a cultural and political end through the means of Christianity.  Too often, Christians find themselves in social media spaces arguing, demeaning, and name calling, trying to discredit other Christians in the name of Christ.

Most times when I get on Twitter and see both sides trolling each other, I can't help but think of the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector.  As you recall the Pharisee prays to God thanking God for how righteous he is compared to others, while the tax collector beats his chest in shame and asked for forgiveness.  The irony is that both sides probably see the other as the Pharisee, which is exactly who they are.  The parable is a great illustration of how tempting and blinding self righteousness can be. 

It is also important to see and understand the obvious issue.  It is that political ideologies and theologies are often interrelated and influence the other.  I would bet that nearly all progressive Christians consider themselves politically progressive or liberal, and vice versa.  But what many don't see, both progressives and conservatives, is that the political ideology tends to be the master and the theology becomes the servant.  This is where the breakdown occurs.  As Jesus states, "one cannot serve two masters," so, theology inevitably serves the political. This happens for a number of reasons, but the most compelling reason is that political operates within the tangible world and has immediate impact or affect on our lives.  

Now back to progressive Christianity...

Simply put, progressive Christianity is a rejection of the traditional Christian understanding, beliefs, and practices.  The progressive rejection of  traditional views is due in large part to the fact that many of the traditional views are contrary to the progressive political and social beliefs, especially in the areas of sex and gender.  Progressives view the traditional understanding and beliefs as one of the causes for oppression, injustice, and inequality, as defined by the political left. Progressives also see the excesses, short comings, and hypocrisy of those within the conservative Christian community as an indictment against traditional Christianity.  More recently, progressives have seen the political involvement of conservative Christianity with the likes of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and the aforementioned embrace of Trump as further reason to reject traditional and conservative Christianity.

With that being said, progressive Christianity is more than just a rejection of the old, but an attempt to embrace and celebrate the parts of Christianity they esteem.  Progressive Christianity promotes the concepts of inclusion, equality, justice, empathy, and compassion.  But the devil is in the details, or in this case, the definitions and context, along with the scriptural foundations. I do not doubt the sincerity (at least not always) of progressives pursuit of such virtues.  I do, however, think they often use these words in ways that align more to a political and policy position than to a scriptural position.  For example, affirmative action is touted by many progressives as a way in which justice and equality can be met, and therefore, aligning with the Christian ethic, and compelling Christians to accept.  Just because a stated goal of policy appears to be righteous, does not make it so..    

A particularly often used tactic of progressives is making a policy position emotionally appealing by sounding morally right, regardless of the real outcome.  I am reminded of my one of my favorite Proverbs, "There is a way that seems right to man, but in the end it leads to death."  Progressive Christians purport to support policies that fight oppression, injustice, and inequality, without much regard for the impact those policies would actually bring about.  For example, providing "health care to all" sounds amazing, but there are some major downsides to that policy which will effect many people all across socioeconomic demographic.  But that doesn't matter when you have convinced yourself of your moral righteousness.  

Progressive Christianity positions and values are clearly linked to the current cultural ethos and therefore are fluid.  In other words, as the culture shifts in terms of what is accepted, celebrated, and shamed, so does progressive theology.  It is similar to the progressive view of the Constitution and how it should be interpreted. Instead of seeing a concrete standard that is immoveable, they see a relative position that is dependent on a host of variables.  So, when the 14th Amendment prevents discrimination based on race, progressives understand that to mean "it depends on which race and in which context", as opposed to a concrete standard.  Similarly, twenty years ago, both progressives and conservatives understood marriage to be between a man and a women, but the cultural view changed, and so did the progressive theology regarding marriage.  The same is true of gender roles, and gender in general.  

Challenging Authority

To create a systematic and coherent theology out of the progressive ideology, progressive Christians turn their attention to a reconsideration, reinterpretation, and reimagining of the Biblical text and its authority.  In fact, it was one of my first observations of many progressives is the manner and method they use the scriptures to support their position.  There seemed to be some common threads and I want to comment on each separately.  But before I do, it is important to understand that how Christians derive meaning form the Bible is an important, yet complex endeavor.  One needs to approach the scripture with large dose of humility and prayer.  But most important is the willingness to check your preconceived notions at the door, which is almost impossible.  But we must!!!  In any event the reading and making sense of the scripture requires us to do so with a mind and heart that are committed to obedience, along with a method that is consistent and considers a number of factors (text, context, purpose, history, etc). And, to be fair, many conservative and mainline Evangelicals apporach the Scriptures in a self-fulfilling manner that is equally incorrect.

Authority or perceived authority is the root of most human conflicts through out history.  We first see it in the Garden of Eden when the serpent deceives Adam and Eve.  It's a constant, if not the main theme, of the relationship between the Hebrews and God.  We see it when Satan tempts Jesus.  The Pharisee's were always questioning Jesus' and his Apostles' authority. Our hierarchical nature wants to know who is in charge and why?  We want to know the extent of the authority and consequences of not following it.  When we do not like a policy, a system, and belief one of the first things we want to do is challenge the authority that rendered it.  

For Christians, in all shapes, sizes, makes and models, the Bible has always been a source of authority.  It provides direction as to what, when, where, who, and how authority is to be used.  But not always clearly explicit, often leaving room for interpretation.  For ages, Biblical authority has been a source of contention, dating back to Constantine, the Arian Controversy, and the Nicene Creed. Actually, it began even before that, as we see in Paul's epistle to the church in Galatia as he warns them not to accept any other Gospel. In addition, Christianity has developed long held traditional views about some matters that are not clearly defined or articulated in the Bible.  For example, almost all of Christianity worships on Sunday, but that is never dictated or commanded by Jesus or the Apostles, and, at best, it is loosely implied.  Moreover, the Reformation really opened the flood gates for Christians to view the Christian religion as a list of menu items, in which the choose and pick what they want out their faith.  Can I get the "pick up and carry my cross daily," but hold the daily, and can I get it with a side of convenience.  My point is that issues with authority in the church have been around for time immemorial and they continue.

Progressive Christianity's attempt to diminish Biblical authority seems to be largely, and interestingly, focused on gender and sexuality.  The reason is that the Biblical teaching on both of those issues falls outside of the current progressive political ethos.  Moreover, because many mainstream and conservative Christians refuse to accept the progressives beliefs about gender and sexuality on the basis they are contradictory to the Bible, the battle naturally turns to the Biblical interpretation of those issues in particular.  So, for Progressives to prove conservative Christians wrong, the natural place to start is to weaken the very foundation of Biblical authority conservatives claim.

Whereas  most of the Evangelical and conservative Christian world believes that the Bible is both divinely inspired and is without error, Progressives balk at the inerrancy aspect.  In other words many progressive Christians see the Bible as inspired to a certain extent, but certainly not totally true or factually correct.  Inconvenient stories of the Creation, the Flood, or the Ten Plagues, which science claims are inaccurate or wrong,  makes it hard for many progressives to embrace   Or, God's vengeance and retribution haunt many progressives, as they do not wish to follow a God who is involved in the killing of so many people (they certainly are hard to understand). To deal with the dissonance, progressives retreat to a position that merely states the Bible contains narratives and stories that ancient and unlearned people wrote to best understand the world they knew.  For the aspects of the Bible they find repugnant, distasteful, or outside of their ideological bubble, they just assert the portion or aspect of the Bible is not true and rationalize why they wont accept that portion. 

But once you open that door, it is impossible to close it.  And that is the rub.  Many progressives offer no real criteria or, to use a fancy word, hermeneutic, in how the distinguish what is true, when the Bible has authority, and when it does not.  Essentially, it allows one to play loose and fast with the authority of scripture and ultimately rely on one's current emotional state or cultural ethos to determine what they feel to be true.  Obviously, this will eventually erode every thing.  If the Creation story or Flood is not true, what prevents one from asserting the same about the Virgin Birth, Jesus's miracles, or His resurrection.  Certainly all of those are contrary to science and face criticisms form academia.

    

Interestingly, the New Testament is replete with examples of the OT being used as means to prove the truth of Jesus and the Gospel.  In fact it is used as the main source of conversion throughout the NT. Both Jesus and his Apostles quote scripture and reference them with reverence and honor and NEVER claim any of scriptures as being wrong or not truthful.  Just read through these passages and how often Jesus and  the Apostles rely on the OT to build the Church.

We do find, often, that many times man attempts to reject the word of God in favor for their own preconceived notions.  Check out Jeremiah 41- 43.  Essentially the remnant of Judah asks Jeremiah to pray to God for and answer as to where they should go, and promise to follow whatever God reveals through Jeremiah.  When Jeremiah relays that God has commanded them to stay, they call Jeremiah a liar.  We are often like the remnant of Judah, when we don't like what were told, we ignore it or challenge the validity and authority of what was said.

Jesus vs Paul et al.

One of the common threads of progressive Christianity is to pit Jesus against Paul and other Apostles, but mainly Paul. They might not see this way, but it is essentially what they do.  Now I have no problem with elevating Christ's teachings over everything else.  But, what progressives do is a slight of hand trick by attempting to claim that some of Paul's teachings are in contradiction to what Jesus taught, implied, or meant.

Again, the main issue here is Paul's teachings on gender and sexuality.  Paul's comments about the role and function  of women in the church in his letter to Timothy and to the Corinthians cause many progressives to search for ways to minimalize and rationalize why Paul is wrong or misunderstood. Just a quick side note, I have spent some time reading progressive literature and beliefs regarding gender, and they all fall short and are all based on assumptions and context that disregards the actual text itself.  Likewise, Paul's indictment of homosexuality (here too) also makes progressives squirm and eager to find other interpretations.

Similar to the progressive's attempt to weaken the authority of the Scriptures, they attempt to weaken Paul's authority.  You will hear progressives claim that they follow Jesus and not Paul, or that Paul's statements were merely his own bias and do not reflect Christ's teachings.  The problem is that they don't have much to go on regarding Jesus's teachings on gender or homosexuality. To cope with this obvious omission, many progressives will retreat to vague inferences of Jesus's ministry to make some pretty far-fetched claims.  Jesus had ample opportunity to address these issues in plain language, especially during his Sermon on the Mount, but he does not.  Unfortunately for progressives, Jesus did not say, "You have heard it said that 'A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.' But I say, a man may be united to another man or a woman to another woman. If he has ears let him hear"   

Jesus's teachings are certainly powerful, true, and life-changing.  His teachings provide deep and broad aspects on the conditions of our hearts and minds, but he put his Apostles in charge of the details and logistics of his Church.  Read Matthew 16, John 13-17, and Acts 9.  Jesus gave a task to his Apostle to build his Church and Paul's statements about gender and sexuality should be understood as coming from God, through his Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Unless, you don't like what it says, then justify your refusal to accept it.

 

Redefining Love

Eventually, progressives will manipulate and distort very foundation of Christ's teaching: love.  Love, as defined by the scriptures, both Jesus and his Apostles, is the willingness and the action of denying yourself to help another physically or spiritually.  It is not just a feeling. It is a feeling that compels one to action. And our command is to love God and to love others.  Love for God is accomplished through our obedience that comes from a sincere faith, which manifests itself in the life we live.  Our love for man is accomplished by how we serve each other both spiritually and physically.  Progressives turn agape love into acceptance and affirming LGBTQ people, or advocating for certain policies, or better yet, virtue signaling on social media.

Jesus provides us with a parable that explains how we are to love.  The Good Samaritan is one of the best examples of how Jesus's teachings can penetrate on so many levels.  As most of you know, this parable was in response to question from a lawyer wishing to know who exactly is their neighbor in the "Love your neighbor as yourself".  Jesus answer's not just the "who" but also the "how".  I know the lessons on this parable are near infinite, but I want to point out, that the parable is about how an individual should respond to a person in need.  The Good Samaritan did not advocate for a policy change or demand a response from the government, advocate cancellation of the Levi and Priest who ignored the person.  No, the Samaritan "took pity" on the victim and that compelled him to action.  Not to be seen, not to be celebrated, not to change the world.  Just to show compassion and mercy to one who needed it.

Progressives turn agape love into a worldly approach of acceptance.  To the progressive, a person shows their love by affirming and not judging.  I will say, that I think there is some room for this approach, but both Christ and his Apostles teach of a love that is truthful, convicting, and transcendant of the temporal world.  It is a love that corrects, refines, and sharpens.  When the rich, young ruler wants to know how to get eternal life, Jesus doesn't tell him he is doing a great job.  Instead he tells him what he doesn't want to hear- that he has to sell everything and give it all to the poor.  But the interesting part of this scripture is that before Jesus says that, the scripture says that, "Jesus looked at him and loved him."  And how did he love him?  By giving him the truth. 

The truth, however, should be presented simultaneously with grace and mercy.  The truth, does not take into consideration feelings or rationalizations we make ourselves.  But grace and mercy do.  The Gospel of John said Jesus came with truth and grace, and this is the foundation of agape love and the Gospel.

Most Progressives hate, or at least attempt to discredit,  1 Corinthians 6, because it states that homosexuals will go to hell.  Now, I aready know that the word "homosexual" didn't appear in the text until the 1940's.  But I also know, that the word used there meant "homosexual."  But I digress.  What I love about that scripture is that he lists a number of characteristics that are rightly said to be evil, and in verse 11, he says, "that is what some of you were."  They changed because someone explained that what they "were" was not correct, and following the truth would change them into a new creature.

Almost the entirety of the New Testament is discussion about spiritual life and death.  To be spiritually alive, one is changed by the Spirit and no longer lives how they once lived, in the "futility of their thinking."  Paul tells the churches over and over again to put to death the worldly and be changed.  Paul does this because of his love for them and consequently tells them the truth.
  

Jesus: Original Social Justice Warrior? 

CHRISTIANS SHOULD BE ADVOCATING FOR FAIR AND EQUAL PAY FOR ALL WORKERS, for their rights, protections, and advocating for those unable to work.

CHRISTIANS SHOULD BE ADVOCATING FOR CITIZENSHIP for undocumented day laborers, who our economy is increasingly built upon the backs of.

— Dr. Kevin M. Young (@kevinmyoung) September 4, 2023

Centrism is not Christlike.

Being apolitical is not Godly.

Following Jesus is not about sitting on the fence or walking down the middle. It’s about the radical pursuit of mercy, justice, liberation and love through the power of the Holy Spirit.

— Zach W. Lambert (@ZachWLambert) August 1, 2023

 

I appreciate the progressive's affinity for our Savior and for His Love, and the love He demands of us. We should all want to praise, honor, and glorify Jesus and aim to reflect His love in our heart. However, progressive's like to turn Jesus into a social justice warrior in the political framework and context of  21st Century.  They attempt to create a Jesus that is concerned with American political disputes and advocating for policy positions.  The New Testament does not support a Social Justice Warrior Jesus, in the same way it does not support a American flag waiving, 2nd Amendment protecting, capitalist Jesus. It does support a Jesus that is less concerned with the temporal and political world around him, and focused entirely on his Father's Kingdom, of which he reigns. 

The equating of policy positions as a means of demonstratging Christ's love is little more than rhetorical trick.  Progressives like to claim that their positions will "help" the oppressed, downtrodden, and marginalized and therefore are refelective fo Christ's love.  However, policies regarding health care, immigration, crime, education, economics are loaded with opportunity costs and trade-offs and are rarely a straight line to compassion for the down trodden. The problem is that political policies dealing with complex problems often come with unintended consequences and tend to create more problems than they solve.  But progressives frame these issues in simple black and white terms and ignore the many potential problems that will arise from various policy positions. In reality, many progressives view their policy advocacy as meeting Christ's requirement for loving their neighbor and absolving them of personally carrying the burden of their fellow man. 

It is interesting that Jesus is silent on many issues that were prevalent in His time.  Slavery, homosexuality, race, immigration, misogyny are never directly confronted. Jesus never makes any political claim or pushes any political agenda.  In fact, he makes certain to stay out of political argumnets, noting that they are a distraction to his kingdom and his purpose.  He avoids a trap set for him by the Pharisees when asked about the poll tax by famously stating to give to Caesar what is his and to God what is God's. When visited by Nicodemus, a memeber of the ruling Sanhedrin, he refrains from political discourse but instead explains how an individual must be reborn. Just before his execution, he and Pilate have a conversation about political authority and Jesus makes certain that worldly authority is not his purpose.  Simply put, Jesus came to call sinners to repentance and to follow him.  

Many progressives will argue that Jesus did challenged authority and the oppression of the Jewish religous leaders.  That is true.  Jesus's criticism was that these leaders corruptly used their authority and position to ensure their power and promote their self interest.  Here again, his issue with the Jewish rulers was not political authoirty, but spiritual abuse.  Jesus replaced these religous leaders with twelve ordinary men with instrcutions to preach the Christ and to make disciples.  What he doesn't tell them is to rebel, riot, revolt, or push any political agenda with either the Jewish leaders or the Roman government.  Instead he instructs them to courageously speak the truth and demonstrate the Spirit's power.  Moreover, as the Apostles went about their work and converted thousands to the faith, they instructed the Church to honor and respect governments, and more importantly to deal with oppression and persucution with joy!  It is clear that followers of Christ, had little interest in political or worldly affairs.

When progressives push political policies by claiming Jesus would support them, they are distorting the purpose of his ministry.  Did he care about the oppressed, the sick, the disadvantaged, the rejected?  Certainly!  But his method of compassion and helping was not to be done by government policy or bureacracy, but by individuals and his Church.  Did he reach out to the oppressed, abandoned, and despised of society?  Yes, he did.  But his interactions were not without revealing the truth and demanding repentance. In fact, truth is the cornerstone of justice.  Without truth, there can be no justice.  

Progressive Christian's attempt to fashion a theology out of their political ideology mirrors the same mistake many Chrisitan nationalist make, the belief that political victories will lead to a cultural purification.  Politicalization and partisan ideology only corrupts the Christian and the church and that is true of progressives as well.  I just don't think they are objective enough to see through their sef righteousness.