British philosopher, debater, and writer Christopher Hitchens died on December 15 from cancer. Lauded as one of the world's top intellectuals, Hitchens had venomous attacks for people across the political map. But perhaps he is best know for his atheistic views (e.g., his book God is Not Great).
Hitchens promoted himself as an "antitheist," which he described as more than an atheist - someone who is happy that there is no evidence for God. (I find evidence all over the place - evidence that he chose to interpret a different way. So, his claim is not that there is no evidence for God, but that there is no evidence for God that he was willing to accept. That creates a convenient, self-fulfilling worldview.)
I take no glee in his passing. I have no smug quip. I believe Hitchens is no longer an atheist or an antitheist, but it's a tragic realization. Nothing to gloat over.
I hear so many skeptics today echoing Hitchens' view about religion, that any belief system is ultimately just a mechanism to control people, to take away their individuality and freedom to think for themselves. So many people parrot these ideas. To be fair, there are some pockets within the Church (past and present) where you can accurately level this charge.
But it's not generally accurate. It's not an accurate description of thousands of churches today, and it is especially not an accurate description of the Christianity Jesus gave us. Wherever the church has tried to exercise this kind of control, it has done so by departing from the words of Christ. We can only do as Hitchens describes by contradicting Jesus.
The Christianity Jesus taught was very much the opposite of this charge. He taught His disciples to bear witness, to extend the offer of salvation by grace through faith, to consider the reasons for faith, and to come to Him of one's own accord. But He also taught them to "shake the dust off your feet" in response to those who reject the Gospel. Rather than try to control them, let them be! Likewise, when the Jews refused to accept Paul's teachings, he let them be and turned to those who would listen. This is hardly an effort to control anyone's thinking. John 6:66 is a prime example of people leaving Jesus because discipleship demanded too much, and Jesus did nothing to try to stop them, manipulate them, or control them.
For those who do choose to believe, Paul talks about loving one another, praying for one another, helping one another, even appealing to one another when they are caught in sin. But if people persist in rebellion, he doesn't advocate trying to control anyone. Rather, he tells the churches to disassociate with them until they are willing to repent and be reconciled. The goal is voluntary reconciliation. People are left with the freedom to pursue their lives contrary to the teachings of the church (just not allowed to bring that willful rebellion into the fellowship). The hope is always to be reconciled, but the fact that this is a hope shows that people are not being controlled or being stripped of their individual responsibility to think for themselves.
"Unity" is a common theme in the teachings of the New Testament, which is something we need when we have differences, not when we are being controlled and de-individualized. Paul taught grace for others who hold different opinions on the minors (see Romans 14), allowing God to be the change agent rather than trying to enforce that change ourselves.
The charge that Christianity is a controlling organization is an impossible change within the evangelical church, because there is no overarching hierarchy or authority (other than Christ). There's absolutely no mechanism to exercise control at that level. Clearly Hitchens did not spend enough time talking with church leaders of evangelical churches to see just how uncontrolling most those churches are. (I restrict this to evangelical churches not to suggest that other churches are controlling, but just to stick with what I know best.) Sometimes, it would be convenient to be able to have that control - we really need more children's church workers!
Hitchens' error is tragic for himself. His tragedy has been multiplied to all those who repeat his charge against the Church. Too many, I have seen, repeat his accusation without ever bothering to find out for themselves whether or not it's generally true.
No comments:
Post a Comment