THE IMPORTANCE OF CLARIFYING ONE’S LOCATION AND ONE’S AUDIENCE.
Why I identify myself as part of the “conservative” rather than the “liberal” church (whatever those terms mean anyway!)
One cannot be all things to all people and it is important to locate oneself with respect to one’s intended audience.
I am aware that we live in a pluralistic world where many religions and atheistic systems claim to represent truth. Similarly, within Christianity, many expressions of the church (Catholic, Orthodox, Reformed, Mainline Liberal, Pentecostal, etc.) claim to be the most faithful expression of the body of Christ.
The part of the Christian church to which I belong is the conservative, evangelical church (and I am aware that the very words “Christian”, “conservative” and “evangelical” will trigger varying levels of positive versus negative response).
This is not the place to argue for the validity of what is behind these words, it is merely the place to acknowledge my location.
Therefore, when it comes to practical examples, arguing from my lived experience, and proposing specific change, I will be envisaging the conservative evangelical church.
The validity of my location is a bigger argument, that requires a more complex process and a deeper engagement, which is beyond the immediate scope of this essay.
CLARIFYING THE USE OF THE WORD “CONSERVATIVE.”
Firstly, I need to clarify the way I am using the word conservative. A typical dictionary definition of conservative is “averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.” In popular understanding conservatism is a negative value because it’s wrong to resist positive new developments and to hold onto negative old ways. But there are at least two unacknowledged assumptions, linked to binary thinking, operating here.
The first assumption is that that there is no ultimate truth and holding onto the past, in the light of progress, is self-defeating. When this belief is combined with the other popular belief in evolution and progress, then “conservative” becomes a dirty word, opposing new, beneficial benefits in society.
These huge assumptions are questionable, yet are being smuggled into the public sphere without intellectual and moral accountability.
FIXING THE USE OF AMBIGUOUS TERMS.
Eschewing seductive hype for a more scientific and ethical approach, if we argue that both truth and lies exist then some things from the past need to be conserved and others need to be jettisoned or adapted. Similarly, this means that some forms of evolution and progress are beneficial and others may not be. Weak muscles can evolve into stronger ones if one goes to gym, but the cells in these same muscles can also evolve into a cancerous state.
Terms like progress and evolution, as well as labels such as conservative, liberal, fundamentalist, intolerant, tolerant, open-minded, and dogmatic are extremely ambiguous and need to be carefully defined, therefore. One also needs to be clear about one’s deeper beliefs and agenda. Finally, one needs to demonstrate integrity in the whole “package” or system. Integrity suggests honesty and consistency with respect to all the elements in your beliefs and behaviour. What you propose on the outside should be matched by what is on the inside and what you claim should be liveable (epistemological integrity, i.e. rational coherence) and lived (existential integrity, i.e. non-hypocrisy).
THE BIBLE’S CONCERN FOR INTEGRITY.
The Bible demonstrates a concern for this kind of integrity, as scriptures demonstrate: Psa 51:6; Psa 26:2-4; 1Ch 29:17; Joh 4:23-24; 2Co 1:12; Joh 1:47; Rom 2:28-29; Psa 32:2.
THE WAYS IN WHICH I SHARE THE HIGH ENGAGEMENT WITH SCIENCE AND CULTURE, TYPICAL OF THE LIBERAL SIDE OF THE CHURCH.
In terms of my engagement with and use of science and culture I am not typically conservative. I am immersed in both and I try and exercise strict discernment in order to enjoy and make use of those aspects that reflect God’s creation and to reject and oppose those that don’t.
For some parts of the conservative church this will sound compromised, worldly and dangerous. However, the methodology of extreme separation from the world and the creation of a sanitized Christian subculture is, I believe, ironically very worldly (in its inner motivation and method) and is ultimately unbiblical (and therefore ultimately leads to more evil than good). As this is such a contentious issue I will be writing on it extensively, in order to avoid unnecessary offence and stumbling.
For the moment, I suggest examining the following Scriptures (of varying degrees of direct relevance) to show that the Bible treats the subject in a complex way. Scripture recommends a balance between separation from the world (i.e. the demonic worldly culture) versus engagement with and cautious use of the ambiguous world, versus free enjoyment of God’s good creation in this world.
[A key part of my further writing will entail clarifying the various Biblical meanings and contexts of the words translated “world” in English, as well as the varying levels of sin versus righteousness and coming Kingdom of God versus dying demonic kingdom that currently exist in our world.]
BIBLICAL VERSES URGING SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD.
1Jo 2:15-16; 2Co 6:14-17; Rev 18:2-4; 2Co 7:1; 1Ti 5:22; 1Pe 2:11; 2Pe 1:4; Jam 1:27 Joh 15:19.
BIBLICAL VERSES URGING DISCERNMENT AND SUGGESTING CAUTIOUS ENGAGEMENT WITH THE WORLD.
Joh 17:14-18; Rom 12:2; 1Co 7:31; 1Co 10:23-24; Rom 14:22-23; 1Co 5:9-10; Gen 2:16-17; Heb 5:14
BIBLICAL VERSES RECOMMENDING HOLY ENJOYMENT OF THE WORLD.
Gen 1:31; 1Ti 4:1-5; Act 11:7-9; Tit 1:14-15; Col 2:20-23; Neh 8:9-12; Deu 26:9-11; Rom 14:16-18; Luk 7:34-35; Mar 7:18-23.
THEREFORE…THE VALIDITY OF CAUTIOUSLY USING THE TERM “CONSERVATIVE.”
The above Scriptures show that the liberal enthusiasm that wholeheartedly embraces culture and all the things of this world is naïve and misplaced. Therefore, when forced (by the current state of understanding) to choose between liberalism and conservatism, I identify myself as a conservative and not as a liberal Christian.
While I understand that there is a negative connotation in the word “conservative”, and that the part of the church to which I belong has often been guilty of inappropriately holding onto the past and resisting the future, (Just like it happened with Jesus – Lk 5:36-39; Mar 7:7-8), and this done with the same mean spirit that operated in the Pharisees, it is also the part of the church that really does believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Bible is the Word of God and the Church is made up of the people of God. And, most importantly, one cannot be a Christian in any kind of truly honest, logical and Biblical sense, without valuing these three things.
INEVITABLE OFFENCE.
I am aware of how offensive this sounds. If you do not believe in God it will offend you. If you believe in another God than the Christian God it will offend you. If you call yourself a Christian but don’t believe it’s necessary to have a conservative view of Jesus, the Bible and the church, it will offend you.
I get you; I used to find this very offensive too.
That is why you are being invited into a respectful, intelligent conversation. I am inviting you to prove me wrong. Honestly, if this is not true, why would I want it?
THE SOLUTION OF RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE.
However, if you reject this point of view but you can’t really explain why, and you aren’t willing to dialogue and change, then it is you, not me, who is conservative in the worst sense of the term (i.e. rabidly fundamentalist, dogmatic, and intolerant).
The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. (Pro 18:17)
