unapproved oranges

over at mike duran's fine decomposed blog, he's been discussing all things theologique. in an effort not to pirate his blog, i'm going to put some thoughts which have congealed since yesterday's blog on ignorance. (quotes below are for those who are not aware of the discussion)

my question to mike's statement about defending the faith:

It's bumper sticker theology for many:

"God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

Of course, ask them how they know God said it, and they'll probably shrug or retreat into less than convincing arguments of a more personal nature.

my initial question:

so what then in a convincing personal statement mike? how do we know God did what He did if not via personal relation?

mike's reply:

People can "validate" all kinds of weird things "via personal relation." Someone has a vision of Krishna, the angel Moroni descends and confirms that Christianity is wrong, an inner voice says "your wife is the devil." How can any of these be disputed if all personal revelations are valid?

The fact is, Christianity is built first upon solid historical evidences -- the creation event, the Jewish people, prophetic accuracy, the historical Jesus (He really lived, died and was resurrected) and the reliability of the biblical documents -- before it becomes "personalized." Personal experiences must have an objective plumbline, or else every experience is valid (including the voice that says my wife is a devil). It is these "objectives evidences" which I believe most Christians are sorely unable to defend. Great questions, suz!

which led to my next question:

okay, we believe the creation event is fact, the documents legit, that His word is His word because it is His Word. but try selling that bill of goods to a nonChristian. i think the more "endearing" approach, precious though it may be, is to say, my life was crap before. now it is still crap but heavenly bound crap. (not the prettiest faith arguement, granted, but you see where i'm going).

the folks don't care about apologetics. out on the street i've never once influenced a soul with my vast biblical knowledge. but i can talk to them about their fear, or doubt, and win their hearts in friendship.

again, eating unapproved oranges.

one unsaved person once was vascillating, in church no less, and i said to her, listen, the Creator of the Universe has just taken up your case. she converted. but that was IN church. would that argument work out? i don't know.

mike replied:

suz, you're right, people aren't won over by head knowledge. But neither are they compelled to believe by ignorance and naivette. While changed lives are a tremendous evidence of the power and validity of the Gospel, they are inadequate to sustain a long-term defense. Why? Scientology transforms lives. Neo-paganism transforms lives. Buddhism transforms lives. Does a life transformed by an unbiblical belief system validate that belief system? If so, then Christianity is far from unique.

Consider that the defining tenets of Christianity are rooted in historical events -- namely the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. In fact, the apostle Paul suggested that if Christ was not raised from the dead, our faith is in vain (I Cor. 15:14). Therefore, it is a linchpin to our beliefs. If there's no evidence for the resurrection -- and I emphasize evidence -- we're screwed. Faith is not purely a matter of "heart" or "personal revelation." It must be grounded in fact or else it is presumption.

I suppose people can choose to believe the earth is flat... but they must do so amidst overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Likewise, people can choose to reject the claims of Christianity, but it is our job to articulate those claims with skill and vigor. Of course, we cannot force people to believe by simply touting the facts. But the inability to articulate those facts will most surely persuade no one.

now to my thoughts of the day:

i'm sure there are a great many thinking men out there (including women!), but i was not "won" to Christ by compelling arguments. i was not won because He created the earth and i was finally "convinced" of this. no theological argument had anything to do with my conversion. do not hear me saying there is no place for right theology. we all need to know the bible and the creeds. we all need to know what we believe and why. just hear me out on this.

the flowers testified. the hope of beauty in a life of darkness is what finally moved me to Christ. sure there was that tear streaked trembling walk down the church where the pastor said,

if you don't accept Christ now and he returns at noon, you'll burn in hell.

i consider that one manipulation, not a free will act on my part. so i don't count that fakey conversion experience. i am told by my sister we got saved another time, but since i don't remember it, i'm counting that as a fakey conversion experience. (not that she is lying, but i meet people all the time who tell me, i got saved on june 15, 1989 at 3:34 pm. i don't remember these details of my conversion. at all.)

what i do remember is, attending bible studies, hearing the stories, but they didn't make the change. they were cushions on the seats, if you will. i was there for the people. it has always been about the people for me.

i was hooked on drugs and alcohol. my life was utterly out of control. one night a christian rock band opened for a heavy metal band called armored saint. i went with my hooked on cocaine boyfriend and someone else, i can't even remember who.

that night i saw some of my christian friends, and was powerless to be in the life they had. they were smiling, happy. they constantly tried to tell me about God, but i couldn't hear it. i needed change. i needed some way to get a grip on my life, in my life.

they left the concert before the metal band, so we crossed paths on the street and as i entered the smoke filled room, there was another christian friend of theirs who stayed for armored saint. we talked, he was my lifeline in that place of despair.

shortly thereafter at a bible study, i got filled with the holy spirit. there was no conversion event before that that counted for anything. i was lost while found. what manner of conversion is that if i can hear the theological arguments and not have life changing power filled experiences with God? none that mattered to me.

so my life changed then. the drugs and alcohol lost their power. i quit them cold turkey. while it was not all roses, i found christian boyfriends to be worse than unsaved, but that is life.

but i remember that moment and consider it my point of conversion. it was the power of God, not the arguments that won me. i needed life change, not a book of stories and the right theological arguments.

most people are probably locked in despair as i once was. most people are probably not looking for the right doctrine or acceptable dogma. they want life change. power. God to come and make things right.

so i can't yield on this mike, though i believe God can make a way where there is no way. and, i'm not saying there is no room for theology AFTER the true conversion expereince, i'm just saying, it didn't change my life before. it was powerless. God was the only One who could effect change in my life.

so i think approaching evangelism with this persuade the masses from the intellect is the wrong approach for a great many souls. i think the power evangelism (to coin a phrase from my beloved pastor john wimber) comes first, then the book learnin'.

at least that is how it worked for me. and in revelations it does not say, by the blood of the lamb and all the right doctrine. it says, by the blood of the lamb and the power of their testimony. they overcame.

i think there is more to the personal testimony of grace and truth, and power than is acknowledged here. and we are amiss to overlook it.