Sophistry
I was listening to a thing on the radio about racism.
It was pretty solid, and the guy laid out a very damning history of the federal governments intentional complicity in creating a geographically racist society. It was good scholarship, gave insight to public policy, and taught me a lot. It was everything I love about liberalism.
Then a lady called in. She explained that she was a white woman in a mixed race marriage and asked a blunt question--Do you belive that it's possible for a black person to be racist?
In response he questioned the underlying assumptions, redefined the term, sidestepped, and then moved on. He wasn't as absurd as he could have been and he said some good things, but he still refused to respond to a direct and simple question from a woman who had obviously experienced personal pain. It felt like nuance being used as a dodge. Like sophistry.
It was everything I hate about liberalism.
We do this in the church too.
Ask Christians who've been leading anything for more than a week about hell, or temptation, or fear, or sex, or money and we provide a sound bite answer. We dodge the pain and paradox and replace it with a smug superiority that lasts until the Panera leaves our breath. It is an intellectual reach around.
Here is my challenge to the three people who read this blog:
Take a look at some major question that keeps dreamers up at night and refuse to accept a sound bite answer. Look for evidence. Really look at the bible for answers. Gauge human experience. Be rigorous.
I believe that the church and only the church can rescue the broken heart and world, but we need to renew the evangelical brain to get there.
It was pretty solid, and the guy laid out a very damning history of the federal governments intentional complicity in creating a geographically racist society. It was good scholarship, gave insight to public policy, and taught me a lot. It was everything I love about liberalism.
Then a lady called in. She explained that she was a white woman in a mixed race marriage and asked a blunt question--Do you belive that it's possible for a black person to be racist?
In response he questioned the underlying assumptions, redefined the term, sidestepped, and then moved on. He wasn't as absurd as he could have been and he said some good things, but he still refused to respond to a direct and simple question from a woman who had obviously experienced personal pain. It felt like nuance being used as a dodge. Like sophistry.
It was everything I hate about liberalism.
We do this in the church too.
Ask Christians who've been leading anything for more than a week about hell, or temptation, or fear, or sex, or money and we provide a sound bite answer. We dodge the pain and paradox and replace it with a smug superiority that lasts until the Panera leaves our breath. It is an intellectual reach around.
Here is my challenge to the three people who read this blog:
Take a look at some major question that keeps dreamers up at night and refuse to accept a sound bite answer. Look for evidence. Really look at the bible for answers. Gauge human experience. Be rigorous.
I believe that the church and only the church can rescue the broken heart and world, but we need to renew the evangelical brain to get there.