A friend described a recent discussion he had with a co-worker who he often speaks with about faith, religion, the bible, etc. In this particular conversation, he said they were talking about a couple of different passages from the gospels. Which passages does not really matter for the purposes of this post. What the passages led to in terms of the frank discussion that ensued is what matters more because it reminds me of the underlying theme of Cows In the Pews And the Atheists Too and for that matter, most of what I prefer to write about.
My friend, let’s call him Tom, said it wasn’t the first time he’d noticed that this brother, let’s call him Fred, had a tendency to refer to various commentaries about “religion” from a number of different authors when they talked about the actual meaning or understanding of passages that either of them brought up. And what struck Tom this time was that rather than offer any of his own thoughts about this passage or that, all Fred seemed to mention were excerpts from the books he’d read over the years. Nothing wrong with that… That’s how most people go about learning any subject. It makes sense to consider what others with the right “credentials” think about an important subject like God, His word, faith. I get that. Here it comes… But…
In this particular conversation, Tom shared his observation with Fred and said he was hoping to hear his understanding rather than the thoughts of the various authors he had read. Suffice it to say, I think that’s kinda where the conversation ended. That’s not to say it ended contentiously or badly, it just wound down from there once Tom put Fred on the spot by wanting to understand Fred’s convictions about his own beliefs. I should explain at this point that Fred was raised a Baptist and ascribes to most of the tenets and doctrine associated with the Baptist denomination.
I’ve had numerous conversations and dare I say, relationships that ended at exactly the same point. As long as things are discussed on a non-threatening, philosophical, even superficial level, things go along relatively smoothly. As soon as the discussion becomes more probing or more pointed, people tend to get a little guarded when asked deep questions of the heart. In the case of Fred, I think Tom caused him to reflect on the extent of his own understanding of the Word of God and he might have realized at that moment that much of it wasn’t his own, but rather, other peoples thoughts.
Just beyond reach… It’s like being on a journey and never getting where you’re going because if you’d stop and think about it, it’s because you don’t know where the journey leads. People tend to get lost in the details, as it were, as if pondering God, His word, His Son, are all of such a mysterious and deep “philosophical” topic that the average Joe, or Fred in this case, can’t see the forest through the trees, as they say.
The result is a conversation that seemingly never goes anywhere. I mean, you can spend hours upon hours talking with someone about “religion” (I can’t stand using this misnomer, but will here for simplicity); comparing notes, thoughts, experiences, what have you, so long as any specific stance or “position” doesn’t come up.
As in the case of Tom and Fred, Fred espouses a position of faith predicated mostly on passages from the gospels due to his Baptist indoctrination. In his mind, everything on either side of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John timewise, points forward or backwards to the gospels. I realize that’s a very broad brush. Fred might not agree with how I’ve expressed it, but from a pragmatic standpoint, that’s how the conversation has played out between Tom and Fred. When Tom attempts to offer a different view or understanding of scripture, Fred responds with an understanding that consists of what he’s learned from his pastor and writings from various Christian authors in defense of his “position”.
Obviously, human nature plays into it. Fred wants to, dare I say needs to, defend his position. Otherwise, he might be faced with the realization that he’s been off the mark.
My friend Tom holds a dispensational view of the bible. That is, parts of the bible are for us and parts of the bible are to us. I hope that by now you understand that that is my “position” as well. It certainly is the foundational truth we both believe makes it possible for anyone and everyone to unlock the supposed “mystery” that is the Word of God. It is not just and forever beyond our reach…
When Tom and Fred talked about the dispensation of the grace of God as dispensed by Paul, the Apostle to the gentiles, to the gentile nations, Fred called Tom a hyper-dispensationalist. In effect, with one statement, Fred dismissed and simultaneously marginalized any notion of dispensational truth Tom brought to the discussion. In doing so, Fred shut the door on considering scripturally a dispensational view of the content and context of the word of God.
Tom and I both find these experiences disheartening to say the least. We are both instructed of God to “preach the word” and “to do the work of an evangelist”. And we’ve both had very similar experiences when finding, and in many cases, taking opportunity to share our sound, biblically based view of the Bible. By and large we find most people, first of all, don’t know, second, don’t want to be called out for not knowing, and in truth, don’t want to know any more than what they already think they know.
You wanna talk about something that’s just beyond reach… It’s this: How do you get the average person, whether a believer or non-believer, to not only hear the non-religious gospel of the grace of God, but really listen. Sorry if that’s a bit clichéd, but really listening to someone, on one hand, is the simplest of notions, while on the other hand, it has truly become a lost art. Not too many listeners out there these days…
However, it is what God would have us do in our walk in Christ in this life. That is, we are to “…find faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also” (II Tim 2:2).
