How Should We Treat New Challenges To The Christian Faith?
HOW SHOULD WE TREAT
NEW CHALLENGES TO THE
CHRISTIAN FAITH?
It seems to happen every year in the popular press, often during the Christmas holidays. But more recently, the Easter season has been the designated time to break the bombastic news. Amid the twists and turns, expect the story to emerge in a similar manner—often as a news flash, promising exciting new evidence, scholarly opinion, and perhaps even photos or DNA testing.
In recent years, believers have been challenged with many questions. Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalene? Did Jesus father one or more children? Was Mary supposed to be the appointed leader of the church, but was denied that right by the male leaders? Was Judas Iscariot not really the betrayer of Jesus, but Jesus' key disciple? Was Christianity the invention of a Roman Emperor, centuries after the time of Jesus? Most recently, were Jesus' bones really discovered in his family's burial tomb? Was this proven by DNA tests?
Conversely, these objections can arise in other forms, too. Besides books and media presentations, the objections could more simply emerge from a newspaper, email, a discussion over coffee, or in other casual talks with friends.
Perhaps the majority of Christians would beunbothered, responding by simply rolling their eyes and making comments about the current state of prejudice against believers. But others may react fearfully, as if their faith were in danger of crumbling at any moment. This latter response seems to be an initial reaction, rarely based on actual studies of the claims themselves.
How ought Christians to respond to ideas which, if they were true, might undermine their faith to various extents? We will propose some general suggestions that might be utilized during the process of evaluation. These ideas can be adjusted or applied as needed.
1) Divorce the challenge from our emotions. By analogy, believers who react with immediately elevated emotions may seem like the new car that accelerates from 0 to 60 in six seconds! Too often, these emotions are completely unwarranted in terms of the data, as indicated a few days or weeks later, when everything has calmed down and returned to normal. After all, how many sensationalistic claims have been made over the years? Have any of them been devastating? This is one clue.
Even if it initially appears like there may be some substance to the claim, there is still no reason to connect one's emotions to the issue. Many researchers have noted that this sort of emotional quandary is linked, not to the challenges themselves, but to the things that we say to ourselves about the challenges. For example, if we tell ourselves such catastrophic things as, “Oh no, what if my faith is misplaced?” or “What if the Bible is wrong?” such statements will often cause very strong emotions. These feelings can actually arise mere moments after the errant thoughts.
So we need to begin with more calming thoughts. True, a challenge may have been proposed. Now let's study the claims that are being made.
2) Know the basis for Christian Theism. Jousting with the various challenges to faith presupposes that we know at least the basic reasons that undergird thatbelief structure. Too many Christians attempt to counter critical views without having done their own homework, only to become part of the problem when they also seek advice and counseling!
Part of knowing the basis for Christian Theism involves working from the center out. In other words, the closer a doctrine or area of practice is to the foundations of Christianity, the more it needs to be buttressed. Correspondingly, questions on periphery areas of the faith do not need to be treated with the same sort of diligence as attacks on indispensable doctrines. After all, Christians differ with each other on some of these same points! But it is no coincidence that our cardinal doctrines are also the best-grounded beliefs, often established by multi-faceted cases. We must remember that since the center holds firmly, we should rest securely.
3) Think through each critical premise in light of an overall strategy. When we do respond, we should think through each portion of our opponent's argument, giving the most weight and attention to the areas of the opposing position that are the most crucial. For instance, which of the opposing premises, if successfully challenged, would count most heavily against the entire critical thesis? Another relevant, though somewhat less important question, concerns which assertions are the most open to counterattack?
Second only to knowing the basis for Christian Theism, we should also understand and use some of the basic principles of critical thinking. Some scholars exhibit an almost uncanny knack for dissecting opposing arguments and exposing their most crucial weaknesses. This trait can often be learned and should thus be cultivated. One way to do this is to study the tapes, books, and articles of those who debate well. The experience can be similar to watching a chess match. What overall strategy is being pursued? Why did they make certain moves? Were there still better arguments at their disposal? In short, there is nosubstitute for knowing the data and then being able to use it effectively.
As already mentioned, we likewise want to defend most clearly those areas that are most central to our own thesis. It is at this precise intersection of challenging our opponent's chief arguments as they most impact the heart of Christian theism that we make our strongest stand. This is where we both pour on the relevant data, while employing the best argumentative techniques.
4) Restate the total case. When we are finished with our critique, we should put the pieces back together. In discussions of this nature, many people lose focus on the most crucial elements and often feel that they have lost contact with the “real” points being made. Therefore, we can encourage everyone involved by restating and clarifying the chief points in favor of Christian Theism, as well as the best critiques against the opposing position.
In sum, divorcing critical challenges from our emotions is a prerequisite to treating the actual questions. Then there are no substitutes for knowing our own position and for having the basic tools involved in digesting and dissecting an argument. These tools provide the basis upon which we build our counter-challenge, aiming for the most crucial and vulnerable premises of our opponents' position. The result should be a carefully-reasoned, final case that clearly showcases the truth of Christian Theism.