The American Evangelical Jesus

It was a cool Providence for my lesson on Sunday to tie in so nicely to Kyle's sermon on the importance of doctrine.

I started a series on Stephen Nichols' Jesus Made in America: A Cultural History from the Puritans to the Passion of the Christ. Nichols talking about the common (although far-from-universal) weakness among evangelicals in terms of theology and Christology-- the historical causes and cultural manifestations. In a word, Nichols is trying to describe why it's important for Kyle to do a sermon on doctrine, why we struggle, and why it matters. (Nichols is focused on the American Evangelical Jesus-- rather than the broader topic of an American Jesus, as developed in prominent books by Fox and Prothero.)

As C.S. Lewis once said (paraphrasing), "We're all theologians. The only question is whether we're good or bad theologians." More broadly, we all have a Christology. The question is the extent to which it's accurate. And it's interesting to consider the relevance of whatever theology or Christology we bring to the table.

We started by briefly considering how:
-OT heroes saw God;
-the Israelites (including the prophets) anticipated the Messiah; and
-we and others see God, Jesus Christ, and the Spirit-- and where those views come from

Then, we wrestled with why it matters. It impacts evangelism, discipleship, the pursuit of abundant life; our priorities, prayer, spiritual intimacy. We need to consider this if we are to learn from history. (For example, how could both sides in the Civil War use Scripture to justify their views?). Finally, it is obvious that the view one has of their Object of worship should be as accurate as possible.

We often put God in a box, trying to demystify the Mystery. A.W. Tozer noted that we limit God in describing as infinite-- since we cannot conceive of the term. More broadly, we are called to more fully understandable the incomprehensible-- and yet it is a goal we cannot fully (or even closely) reach.

In trying to figure Him out, (self-identifying) Christians end up in some common errors-- insisting on God as Unity rather than Trinity; failing to see Jesus Christ as fully Divine and fully Human; "resolving" unresolvable tensions (e.g., grace vs. works, pre-destination vs. free will), or unbalancing what must be kept in balance (e.g., emphasizing God's love but not His justice and wrath toward sin).

As Matthew Henry once quipped, God made us in His image (Gen 1:27) and we like to return the favor.

So, enter Nichols-- with four areas in which he sees American Evangelicals being prone to significant flaws.

1.) Americans and Protestants (or more specifically, Evangelicals-- or even more specifically, those in the Independent Christian movement) are relatively averse to (church) tradition. We “reflexively harbor suspicions of tradition…This leaves [us] more vulnerable than most when it comes to cultural pressures and influences. In the absence of tradition, we tend to make up a new one...” The good news is that we avoid bad traditions; the bad news is that we often miss out on good traditions. It's the classic baby/bathwater, wheat/chaff problem.

2.) Adherence to sola Scriptura (sola) which results in a naïve hermeneutic: “American evangelicals, when they dip into tradition, tend only to find Luther’s sola Scriptura principle. [But their] use of this principle not only denigrates tradition but results in a naïve hermeneutic and theology…it naturally follows that all of [their] beliefs naturally flow from the pages of Scripture” In other words, me and the Spirit in my closet can interpret the Scriptures perfectly well-- an extreme (perverse) view of "the priesthood of believers", with little (necessary) role for others and little need for tradition or history. As Kyle said in his sermon, it's the difference between seeing Scripture as the ultimate authority or the only authority. This is not a surprising outcome in America, given our penchant for individualism and our passion for democracy.

3.) An “objectivist” epistemology—the pursuit of knowledge is assumed to be “neutral”: “our ideas or beliefs are not held as our ideas or beliefs but as the ideas or beliefs”. Given individualism, democracy, and modernity, this is not a surprising outcome. (Interestingly, post-modernism can provide a healthy corrective here-- promoting due humility when it comes to interpreting texts.)

4.) An emphasis on pietism-- devotion over doctrine, practical application and personal experience over theology. The opposite error is certainly common too. But an overemphasis on pietism must be a temptation in any time and place. Beyond that, the American “can do” spirit contributes further.

An overview of Nichols' book:

Ch. 1-4’s history: ch. 1’s Puritans; ch. 2’s Founding Fathers; ch. 3’s 19^th C (frontier, Victorians, Civil War); ch. 4’s 20^th Century modernism

Ch. 5-8’s contemporary applications: the American Jesus in ch. 5’s music; ch. 6's film; ch. 7’s consumer culture; ch. 8’s politics

Stay tuned for the next two weeks!