3 Beliefs Some Progressive Christians and Atheists Share

[Originally published on thegospelcoalition.org]

“Listen. I gotta break it to you . . . I’m post-Christian. . . . I don’t believe it anymore. I don’t believe any of it.”

These are the words former Christian minister Bart Campolo recalls speaking to his famous evangelist father, Tony Campolo, after leaving the faith of his youth. He explained that his journey to secular humanism was a 30-year process of passing through every stage of heresy. In other words, his theology “progressed” from conservative to liberal to entirely secular.

He predicted that in 10 years, 30 percent to 40 percent of so-called progressive Christians will also become atheists. Progressive Christianity is tough to define, because there isn’t a creed or list of beliefs that progressive Christians officially unite around. However, progressive Christians tend to reject the historic biblical understanding of marriage and sexuality, and generally deny or redefine doctrines such as the atonement and biblical authority.

As a result, Campolo believes that for the most part, progressives have already abandoned Christianity, simply redefining terms in an effort to hold on to some semblance of their faith. He believes the generation behind them will recognize the shallowness of this new theology—and, with nothing invested in remaining a Christian, they’ll basically say, “Let’s just call it what it is,” and leave the faith altogether.

De-Conversion Stories

The trajectory Campolo identifies isn’t difficult to spot. Husband-and-wife Christian recording duo Gungor recently made headlines when Lisa described her husband’s year-long conversion to atheism in a Buzzfeed video titled, “I Stopped Believing in God after Pastoring a MegaChurch.” The video highlighted the couple’s spiritual evolution from faith to “heretical” to unbelieving . . . and back to belief. Although Lisa’s own atheism lasted only a day, the faith she and Michael have finally come to embrace looks little like historic Christianity. After stating he no longer feels “spiritually homeless,” Michael identified himself as an “Apophatic mystic Hindu pantheist Christian Buddhist skeptic with a penchant for nihilistic progressive existentialism.”

CONTINUE READING AT THEGOSPELCOALITION.ORG

Loved this article!! Thank you for all the research you are doing on the progressive movement. Looking forward to more of your writings!

Alisa,

I discovered your blog via your article at The Gospel Coalition. It was an excellent piece, and right on the mark. I had heard about the Lisa Gungor video, and Derek Webb's recent declaration of atheism, and it is all quite sad. Your analysis is perceptive and fair.

However, I did go back and listen to your talk, "Almost the Real Thing: How Progressive Christianity has Hijacked the Gospel," and I need to push back a tiny bit.

https://www.alisachilders.com/blog/almost-the-real-thing-how-progressive-christianity-has-hijacked-the-gospel-alisa-childers-podcast-15

Your talk was a great title. I know it was a few months ago, but one thing still really puzzles me. When your Tennessee pastor questioned Young Earth Creationism, in terms of the earth being created in six-24-hour periods, along with the historicity of Adam and Eve, I got your sense of "disillusionment," or however, you would put it, but it was stunning that it was at those points that you began to go down that trail of doubt.

You are correct to distinguish between the age of the earth, and the historicity of Adam of Eve, as very different issues, but I was still perplexed. Furthermore, it is important to note that there are some rather smart believers out there, who nonetheless, embrace Young Earth Creationism.

Had you not ever read any of C.S. Lewis' works? In the Problem of Pain, chapter 5, particularly pp. 77-85, he specifically observes that from a literary standpoint, he did not think that Genesis was giving us an historical narrative, in the journalistic sense, of an historical Adam and Eve.

More than a few evangelicals have since taken Lewis to task for that, and the question of how Adam and Eve fits into history is very much a live debate today, but it is important to remember that Lewis was and is still probably one of the most influential Christian apologists to have ever lived. I am not aware of anyone in the 1930s or 1940s who would have challenged Lewis on this.

But for Lewis, there was no slippery slope for him to question the deity of Christ, the Trinitarian nature of God, etc. He was thoroughly conservative and orthodox… far from being a "progressive Christian."

So, I totally get the problem of doubts coming into play, even in a church context. Your proposed solution of offering a "safe place for people to ask tough questions and process their doubts," is right on the money. Amen, sister.

But there is also a problem to consider from the other direction, and that there are a surprising number of Christians who would like to insist on a rather restrictive set of beliefs when it comes to being an orthodox Christian. In other words, it would appear that that is a growing number of Christians who are all too willing to throw C.S. Lewis under the bus.

Progressive Christianity is sad, but such hyper-orthodoxy is just as sad. A lot of folks are "progressive Christians," without knowing it. But likewise, there are a lot of folks who are "fundamentalist Christians," without knowing it, too.

The hyper-orthodox among us tend to be thorns in the side of those who are drawn to "progressive Christianity," inadvertently pushing them over the edge. If you ever get a chance to re-give your talk elsewhere, you might want to somehow work that in, with a bit more clarity.

Keep up the great work. It is very needed. We particularly need more women like you, stepping up to the task! Thanks!

Well, I do think that Rachel Held Evans has at least some grounds for being annoyed by the TGC piece.

For example, the observation that the Bible "takes slavery for granted" is a tough pill to swallow, but if you read Southern evangelical writers of the ante-bellum era, Rachel Held Evans does make a good point here. A lot of Christians over the years have appealed to "inerrant" Scripture as the basis for accepting racial-based slavery. Yikes.

That being said, it is apparent that Rachel Held Evans is not prepared to go the full Bart Campolo route, and completely jettison the resurrection of Jesus, among other things. She has enough love for the Scriptures, that I do not really see her doing that. So, she is going to push back on the TGC article with some passion behind it.

But I do wonder about consistency. For example, the YouTube atheist and "street epistemologist" PineCreek, takes your blog's intro video testimony to task. See starting at about the 7:25 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkIR_upKrTs

In summary, PineCreek is asking, in as nice a way as possible, "why bother?" …. "If what you believe is not true, then let yourself drown."

I have not seen PineCreek "go after" Rachel Held Evans, but he has some pretty tough things to say about one of Rachel's heroes, former Biologos scholar Peter Enns. Enns is a great scholar, but he really has latched onto the post-conservative narrative, in the past few years:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkIR_upKrTs

From an atheistic perspective: If Christianity has all of these problems, then why bother with it?

My point here: Do not be surprised by the "progressive Christian" pushback, but it is worth asking the question as to what prevents a progressive Christian from becoming an atheist. The line that is drawn just seems sort of arbitrary.

Thanks, Alisa, for in your own way, raising that question.

Hi Clark, I've seen the Pine Creek thing on my testimony, and although I understand why he analyzed it the way he did, that five minute video is not my whole story. It's very much a summary, and deeply metaphorical. (His assertion that I should let myself "drown" could be looked at from a few different angles.) I absolutely affirm that if Christianity is not true, I will abandon it. I would never want to base my life on a lie. However, in my study, I have concluded that Christianity is, in fact, true. It was the evidence that led me there, not some kind of blind faith.

That's great, Alisa. Likewise, it is the evidence that leads me to faith as well. Unfortunately, not every Christian sees it that way, and it partly contributes to why we have so-called "progressive Christianity" in the first place.

Keep up the great work!

Alisa, I'm sure you've seen some critiques of this article. This is the best one I've run across so far. I think Pete Enns makes some good points that I think you must address if you are writing a book on 'progressive Christianity'.
[The Bible For Normal People] Episode 70: Pete Enns – The TGC Doesn’t Really Get Progressive Christianity and Atheism
http://podplayer.net/?id=59643198 via @PodcastAddict

Eric Thanks for sharing the peat and like it was very well done

Hi Eric, I listened to Pete's podcast, and of course I have some strong disagreements. But I appreciate his charitable tone. I'm out of town right now, but I'll respond to it when I get home and post it as a podcast. Thanks for sharing it.

Hi Alisa, having read your post and listened to Pete's podcast in response, I think many are interested to explore the areas of your "strong disagreements" further, when you respond to his response. Like you, I think Pete's humble and gracious spirit throughout is much appreciated. The clarity, carefulness and level of thinking Pete provided in his response was helpful. I found it powerfully created more light than heat on this important topic. I, for one, am looking forward to how you engage his thoughts and evidences, hopefully sooner than later.