That the best a large slice of Christianity can do in response is ratchet up the emotion (Sam Harris got enough death threats from Christians (!) that he wrote another book in response), says a great deal about the failure to teach our youth (and I’d add adults) so that their faith is built on a firm, intelligent, and appropriately sophisticated foundation. Were this the case, there might be far fewer facile, shallow churches creating facile, shallow members.

The call is not to learn more about how to respond to atheism, the call is to offer truth, depth, love and acceptance, which many atheists do far better than many churches (much like the well known local bar comparisons).

We are right to consider what God wants us to tell an atheist, but sometimes we need to ask what God is telling us through an atheist.

I appreciate your comments and I would agree with Tom that Pastor Warren’s heart is in the right place, but I have serious doubts about his understanding of how we should approach unbelievers and what we should say when we do. First, what Tom says is quite right – likely the applause Rick got was because he was saying things they thought were in agreement with Islam.

Here’s just one bit of what the Koran teaches about Christianity, including the divinity of Christ and the Holy Trinity:

“They are unbelievers who say, ‘God is the Messiah, Mary’s son.’ For the Messiah said, ‘Children of Israel, serve God, my Lord and your Lord. Verily whoso associates with God anything, God shall prohibit him entrance to Paradise, and his refuge shall be the Fire; and wrongdoers shall have no helpers.’ They are unbelievers who say, ‘God is the Third of Three. No god is there but One God. If they refrain not from what they say, there shall afflict those of them that disbelieve a painful chastisement.” S. 5:72-73

What I said about Rick taking one aspect of Jesus’ actions and teaching from a few accounts in the gospels, and not taking that into context with the rest of the New Testament, can be demonstrated quite clearly through the above passage from the Koran and then contrasting it with this passage from St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:14-15:

“14Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial[b]? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?”

Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes, but even the tax collectors and prostitutes were members of the Jewish nation and not necessarily unbelievers – they were sinners, but even they possibly (and probably) believed in the Lord. So, how do we reconcile Jesus’ actions in those gospel stories with the words of St. Paul in regards to unbelievers, that I quoted from 2 Corinthians?

We should all think about that, because the example Pastor Warren gave to the Muslims at the ISNA conference does not appear to at all have been what he seems to think it was. This is what happens when we look exclusively to some actions of Jesus in the gospels and then take them out of context by overlooking or ignoring what the rest of what the New Testament has to say. It’s *all* God’s word, not just the four gospels.

The article suggests that Pastor Warren came across to the members of the ISNA as someone who simply believes that Jesus was a prophet who set a good example and that he was following him because of that good example (doing good works, showing love, etc). Maybe it would come as a surprise to Pastor Warren, but Muslims also believe that Jesus was a prophet who set a good example and did good works – they would agree that he should be emulated, along with Mohammed who they consider a prophet that supersedes Jesus. So, what’s the difference? I’m sure they wondered that too.

When we are in the presence of unbelievers, especially those who actually deny the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, etc, it is incumbent upon us as believers to do more than just portray ourselves as good deed doers who follow the example of Jesus out of love – because it denies the gospel, the incarnation, etc. What that audience needed to hear is not just that our good works are the result of Jesus’ example of love toward others, but that they are result of faith in Christ crucified for our sins – Christ as the Son of God. Without the message of the gospel in there – Christ crucified for our sins – the example of Jesus as someone who loved others and did good deeds has no power at all. History is full of gurus, sages, good deed doers, and self-proclaimed prophets.

Again, I appreciate your comments, and while I do not doubt Pastor Warren’s intentions, I must respectfully disagree with his approach.

What Christians have struggled to do is to figure out how to be openly and confidently Christian when partnering with non-Christian groups with whom they believe they have common cause. The result of the social gospel movement was often “liberal” churches bent toward universalism; the result of many of the political partnerships was frequently young people disillusioned with the Christian faith because they wanted to be accepted by their political partners who were more far more committed to political change than the churches to which they belonged; and the result of the backlash against the first two has resulted in Christians who have retreated to their own ghetto where they can bemoan the de-Christianizing of society. The further result of all of this is the general mess in which so many churches find themselves today– uncertain of what it means to be the body of the Crucified One in the world and, since his body, necessarily related to and called to love all others.

Pastor Warren’s heart, at least, seems to be in the right place. I have not read a transcript of his speech, so I cannot comment on what he said. However, if the reaction of the crowd reported in the articles is correct, he may have accomplished less than he intended. Apparently they applauded when he said things they agreed with– a not unusual response for any crowd. However, it is also typical of Muslim reaction to Christianity, which it sees as related, but inferior to Islam. In Islamic understanding, every child is born a Muslim. They do not always remain so because they are corrupted by inferior faiths. When a Muslim crowd applauds a Christian pastor, it isn’t his Christian message they’re applauding, it’s the Islamic message they hear him saying… or maybe just that they were tired of being cajoled by their conference leaders into giving more money. One mistake Christians should not make is assuming that the majority of Muslims are as little committed to their own faith as many Christians are. They may not know all of the doctrines of their religion, but the ties that bind them to it are very strong.

A Christianity that has come through the current identity-relatedness crisis will not be a “deeds not creeds” Christianity. Neither will it be a doctrinal ghetto. It will, instead, have discovered again how to be the body of the Crucified One for the life of the world. Whether Pastor Warren can help in reaching this destination remains to be seen. I hope he’s up to the challenge.

Considering yesterday was the anniversary of the presentation of the Augsburg Confession, it seemed an even more relevant post.