Jan
08
2010
In Defense of Proselytism: Talking Points for Brit Hume
The furor surrounding Brit Hume’s encouragement to Tiger Woods to convert to Christianity shows us that the prevailing sentiment of our culture is adamantly opposed to the idea of evangelism.
As Christians, we must recognize that before we can make a robust defense for the Christian faith, we may have to clear the air by making a case for evangelism in general. After having listened to some of the remarks made about Brit Hume, I have compiled a list of common objections to “proselytism” and why each of them are unpersuasive.
Objection #1: “Brit Hume’s remarks indicate that he thinks Christianity is superior to Buddhism.”
Response: Of course, he thinks Christianity is superior. Otherwise why would he remain an adherent to the Christian faith?
In the same way, I would expect a Buddhist man to think that his religion to be superior to Christianity. If the Buddhist doesn’t consider Buddhism to be superior, then why not convert to whatever religion he thinks is superior?
It is not arrogant to believe that your religion is superior to others. We should assume that religious people believe their faith to be superior.
Furthermore, if you believe no religion is superior to another, you are putting forth a viewpoint that you believe to be superior than the “religious superiority argument” you condemn. Thus, you fail to live up to your own demand.
Objection #2: “Christianity looks bad when Christians talk this way. Christians should not publicly and actively proselytize people of other faiths.”
Response: If Jesus calls us to make disciples of all nations and to preach the gospel, then Jesus is calling us to evangelism/proselytism. The issue is not about the way Christianity looks before the world. The question is whether or not someone can be a faithful follower of Jesus Christ and not evangelize.
To the person who says, “It’s arrogant to proselytize”, I say, “I consider it more arrogant that you think I should followyou in this area rather than Jesus Christ, who I claim as Savior and Lord.” It is the height of arrogance (and prejudice) to tell a Christian, “You should not follow Jesus Christ in this area.”
Objection #3: “Brit Hume implied that Buddhism is deficient in some way.”
Response: The assumption behind this objection is that all religions are equally valid. But that assumption is not so easily proven.
Do we really want to argue that no religion has any deficiency? That every religion is equally good (albeit in its own way)? Such a view is very disrespectful to the adherents of other religions. Buddhists know that they are not Christians. Christians know that they are not Muslims. By assuming that every religion is equally valid and good, you are downplaying the significant differences between these faiths.
Don’t patronize people and act like their differing views don’t matter. They do. They know they do. We know they do. Let’s agree on the fact that there are substantial disagreements and leave aside this nonsense that we all believe the same thing.
Objection #4: It is arrogant for Brit Hume to assume he believes in the only true religion and to try to lead people to the Christian faith.
Response: Is it? Most people in the world today do not believe that all religions are equally valid. In fact, most people believe that their religion is the correct one.
So by saying that it’s arrogant to insist your religion is right… well, that’s an arrogant statement too. You’re telling me that the majority of the world is wrong and you are right. Sounds oppressive. It’s also ethnocentric and prejudiced to believe that we in the enlightened West have figured out that all religions are the same and the poor, mindless Christians, or Muslims, or Hindus, or Buddhists across the world are still in the dark, thinking they have the only light.
Objection #5: Brit Hume’s attempt to evangelize Tiger Woods shows how exclusive and narrow-minded fundamentalist Christians are.
Response: Actually, no. True evangelism takes place because the call of salvation is radically inclusive. We are to call all people everywhere to repentance and faith: people from every tongue, tribe, and nation; people of every color, ethnicity, and background; yes, even people who claim other religious identities.
The truly narrow-minded, prejudiced Christian looks at a Buddhist like Tiger Woods and stays quiet about Jesus. Their silence says this: Jesus isn’t for you.
On the other hand, the evangelistic Christian recognizes the radically inclusive call to salvation. It is because of the exclusive nature of Christianity that the offer of the gospel is so radically inclusive. Christ calls all people everywhere to repentance. Forgiveness in Jesus Christ is available for all… even Buddhists like Tiger Woods.
22 Comments
[...] not be allowed what they are doing in condemning christians and their message. (ht’s to: gospel coalition, denny burk, and justin taylor) [...]
Do you realize how much of a put-off it is to hear Christians speak as if their religion is superior? I’m sure it is…to THEM. It was all this superiority that does not stand up under closer scrutiny that caused me to convert..from Christian to Pagan. Wake up and realize that not everyone thinks the Bible is the only word of truth and that only certain people can be “good” and “right”. You all put me off so much I cannot even express it in words.
Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech appears to have been satanically melded to give American Christian evangelists a weapon against persons of other spiritualities — in *their* heads, anyway. I think England’s concept of allowing people to “soapbox” at their leisure at the town square and equating door-to-door sales of religion to an invasion of privacy is an outstanding example of compromise. Essentially, it is both harrassment and discrimination to permit proselytizing: harrassment because it is nothing more than a sales blitz, and discrimination because it allows people to denigrate others based on spirituality. (As an example, “Your religion isn’t real, your God is false, we’re the only ones who have the One, True God and the One, True Religion.) This is the computer age — the age of Google and Bing — people can look up information about religion whenever they want; aren’t we past the age of “convert or die”? Evangelists are now televangelists: anyone interested is free to tune in, anyone disinterested should be allowed to tune out.
You said it very well Sharon.
Yeah, and that’s why England is in such great shape, in every aspect!
“Do we really want to argue that no religion has any deficiency? That every religion is equally good (albeit in its own way)? Such a view is very disrespectful to the adherents of other religions. Buddhists know that they are not Christians. Christians know that they are not Muslims. By assuming that every religion is equally valid and good, you are downplaying the significant differences between these faiths.
Don’t patronize people and act like their differing views don’t matter. They do. They know they do. We know they do. Let’s agree on the fact that there are substantial disagreements and leave aside this nonsense that we all believe the same thing.”
To say that all religions are valid is not equivalent to saying that all religions are the same, nor does it assume that any particular religion doesn’t have deficiencies. It is acknowledging that any particular religion, by virtue of the fact that it is chosen by an individual, is valid for them.
Of course people have differences in opinion when it comes to faith and those opinions of course matter. We can accept and acknowledge those differences and still acknowledge that each person’s faith is important and valid to them.
If I acknowledge that your faith is different than mine, but it is obviously important and valid to you, how is that disrespectful? On the contrary, it is respecting your faith by NOT trying to alter your beliefs or practices. What would be disrespectful would be if I told you that BECAUSE your faith is different than mine, your faith is invalid.
And that is exactly what many forms of proselytizing does.
[...] A variety of commentators reacted strongly. A number of Christian bloggers have been tracking the controversy. Justin Taylor had a post on ‘Brit Hume, Tiger Woods, and Jesus Christ’ that includes a later interview that Bill O’Reilly conducted with Hume. The Vitamin Z blog observes ‘You Can Disagree With Brit Hume If You Like, But Just Don’t Do It Like This’ and points out the self-contradictory lines of reasoning that were being invoked to condemn Hume’s words. The Gospel Coalition blog has a post by Trevin Wax entitled ‘In Defense of Proselytism: Talking Points for Brit Hume’. [...]
I have no problem with Brit encouraging Christianity. Christianity is true and it teaches us how to love, so we should spread the good news about it. However, I do have a problem with Brit’s focus only on “forgiveness” alone. He seemed to imply that Tiger had to switch to Christianity to get “forgiveness.” Instead, he should first focus on the fact that Tiger needs to repent and live to love again. The lesser important aspects of faith should be mentioned, but only after the more important aspect of repentance. Brit didn’t even mention repentance!
Christianity is not at all about mysteriously recieving forgiveness and eternal life by saying or believing the right words. It is about living a life of love. It is about repentance, first and foremost. Brit did not make that clear. What Brit may not understand is that Christ offers forgiveness to all, not just to Christians.
Scripture says, “to those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger… first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favoritism. (Romans 2:7-11) Also, 1 Timothy 4:10 says Christ “is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.” I never heard these gospel truths in a single gospel presentation in my 15 years as a Protestant. Many Christians play Scripture-twister around the bold truth of these passages, probably because forgiveness and salvation by “faith alone” is a lot more comfortable for them to believe in. Nonetheless, repentance toward a life of love is the single most important part of the gospel.
Faith is important, but a life of love is even more important. See 1 Corinthians 13:13: “And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” The single, ultimate command in Christianity is to love God (Matthew 22:34-40), which is like loving your neighbor (Matthew 25:40). Love comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, a sincerity in what you believe. (1 Timothy 1:5) Faith alone can only do so much for you. Many Christians today “believe in Christ” and will still go to hell because they fail to love their neighbor as they love themselves. The Bible teaches that in James ch. 2. See also John 8:30-35 where Christ himself warned believers that they had to abstain from sin or else they would not be with God forever. If we want to live with God, we must walk as Christ did (see 1 John 2:6).
Just like a believer can go to hell because of his deeds, someone can sincerely claim *no* belief in God and still be with God if they walk as Christ did, living in love with a pure conscience and showing the true loving character of their heart and mind. Just like someone can trick himself into thinking he is a Christian based on his faith alone (but still go to hell based on his deeds), someone can trick himself into thinking he is not a Christian based on his faith alone (and still go to heaven because of his deeds).
God forgives unintentional sins regardless. See Luke 23:34 along with John 14:10-13. On the other hand, we all have the law written on our hearts, and have no excuse when we intentionally sin against it. See Romans 2:14. The ultimate requirement of the law is love, and love exists both inside and outside the law (Matthew 22:34-40). We all have the ultimate law, love, written in our consciences. God alone knows Tiger’s conscience. God is the only One that can say if Tiger knows Jesus is the Christ, so only God can judge Tiger if he rejects that. However, Tiger most certainly knew that adultery was a failure to love his wife and family (and he has essentially admitted that). Nonetheless, Brit only told Tiger to convert for “forgiveness”, but didn’t even mention what counts the most: repentance!
“Christianity is not at all about mysteriously recieving forgiveness and eternal life by saying or believing the right words. It is about living a life of love.”
Beautifully written, Jason! Would that more people would actually PRACTICE their faith rather than PREACH it.
Kudos to you!
Jesus tells us to practice AND preach. It has never properly been one or the other (Matthew 5;16 and 28;20)
Thanks Julie
With regard to repentance and forgiveness: a Buddhist would have to convert to repent. Think about it: repentance involves a drastic revision/repuditation on a moral basis; conversion would be necessary to even have a world view and a frame-work for repentance. Conversion is not “getting religion”; a Buddhist already has religion. (See Acts 26:18)
Jim,
A Buddist may be able to repent without converting, or he may not be able to. It depends on the person. Repentance is when someone turns from what they know to be sin. That is all. Many Christians try to paint the world with a broad brush and proclaim who is an “unrepentant sinner” and who is not. When it comes to love, treating your neighbor as you treat yourself, judging repentance is relatively easy to do. When it comes to other matters of faith though, it is nearly impossible to know who has a pure conscience before God and who doesn’t.
God doesn’t reveal everything about Himself to everyone in the same ways. For instance, many cultures don’t even have the Bible yet! However, the single, ultimate command in Christianity is to love. That is “the sum of the law.” The command is to love God which is like loving your neighbor (Matthew 22:34-40). In fact, it is *exactly* like loving your neighbor (Matthew 25:40). Even non-Christians have the sum of the law written on their consciences (Romans 2:15). Love comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, a sincerity in what you believe. (1 Timothy 1:5)
There is a difference between intentional sin and un-intentional sin. See 1 John 5:16 and also the “deliberate sin” mentioned in Hebrews 10:26. We all have un-intentional sin. “We all stumble in many ways.” (James 3). James isn’t talking about intentional sins there. He is saying we all have un-intentional error in our thoughts and our lives.
We must, however, avoid intentional sin. That is sincere repentance. You have no way of knowing what any particular Buddist knows is a sin. For all you know, the Buddhist who rejects Christ has not done so intentionally. You have no way to know. Only God knows that, so only God can truly judge if a person has repented.
Matters of faith are a lot harder to judge people over than matters of action, love towards their neighbors. We can judge the truth, and we should. But we cannot always judge people’s sincereity concerning how they respond to it.
News Flash: Not everyone buys that Christianity is true or that you have to be Christian to learn how to live and love. Lots of people find that who believe in nothing. That attitude is what makes me sick and want to have nothing to do with anything Christian.
Christianity is true, whether you buy it or not. We are told that there will be people who have your attitude. That doesn’t excuse us from sharing, passionately.
What everyone responding so hatefully seems to overlook is that Brit Hume was sharing his faith because he is excited about what it has done for him, in the same way anyone shares what they are excited about. Forgiveness is a central theme of Christianity, and it has obviously made an impact on Hume – a good thing he would love for Tiger Woods to experience.
I only share my faith to any degree if people ask..I dont go around promoting it. And I dont buy that Hume was just expressing his faith. I remember as a child certain other children at school going around telling the rest of us we had to be “saved”. Its only when you get mature enough to think about those things that you can not be traumatized by wondering if you are going to Hell if you dont practice a certain religion.
Once again I am tired of “Christianity is true”..it is only true to Christians, not the rest of us..I think some people have never dared think for themselves and are afraid to come out from under what in some cases, amounts to brainwashing. I grew up in a Christian church..I have read the Bible..my only sibling was a minister. I was given the ability to think for myself about what is true so stop trying to shove your religion down everybody elses throats.
Maria,
That depends on what you mean by “true”. For instance, 1+1=2 is true. If you thought 1+1=3, then I suppose you could say that 1+1=2 is “not true” for you. However, I wouldn’t buy that argument. I think 1+1=2 is true for everyone. No matter how sincerely you thought 1+1=3, you would still be wrong.
I think of Christianity the same way. If Christ really was the Son of God, and really did die forgiving us on God’s behalf… then that is true. I’m not judging you. Only God can do that, and only God knows what truth you have come to understand. So only God can judge the sincerity of your conscience. But I can proclaim the truth, any truth, and I will.
Just because you disagree with me does not mean one of us “doesn’t think for himself.” It just means we disagree. That is all. I understand your frustration though. Way too many Christians judge other people when they have no business doing so.
[...] Trevin Wax had some interesting comments and talking points on the situtation over that The Gospel Coalition Blog [...]
[...] In Defense of Proselytism: Talking Points for Brit Hume [...]
[...] another well-crafted article, Trevin Wax shoots down 5 possible objections against Mr. Hume’s outspoken opinion regarding the [...]