Progressing to What?

It was a warm August morning and I had just dropped the kids off at school and was making my way into the office when my phone buzzed. A text from Tim Stratton about a quote he had posted on Twitter (or X now I guess) came through.  The quote was pulled from something I had said on the same platform a day before in a spirited but cordial debate with Michael W. Austin on the meaning of progressive Christianity. This quote, pulled from the context of the previous day’s conversation sparked another series of online debates with Randall Rouser (known as the Tentative Apologist on X).  Throughout the day we would go back and forth on what the quote meant, whether it was falsely dichotomous, and the definitions of Progressive and Conservative Christianity. Throughout the debate my position was only solidified.  The two concepts of Christianity, progressive and conservative, cannot both be true. One is closer to the right way of following Jesus and the other is exactly the opposite. However, the problem lies in the terms.  What exactly is Progressive Christianity anyway and, for that matter, what is meant by Conservative Christianity? (check out how Progressive Christianity has become the new cultural Christianity here: The New Cultural Christianity) The terms Progressive and Conservative are thrown around so much in the politisphere that we (falsely) assume they are political terms rather than ideological or philosophical terms. When we discuss Progressive and Conservative Christianity we are not speaking of voting for a Democrat or Republican or a person that might have more progressive or conservative political opinions but rather, how each sect views the reality of Christian living in our cultural context. For any discussion or debate to be fruitful we must come to an understanding in terms, and while there are many branches of both Conservative and Progressive ideologies, I think we can narrow down the core of the beliefs in both systems to a few propositions. Interestingly, the conversation on Twitter reached a stalemate precisely because of an inability to do so. In fact, the refusal to provide a working definition of Progressive Christianity is a feature, not a bug, in the system itself. I was chided for invoking postmodernism in my original quote but, as far as I can tell, a commitment to allowing each individual to define for themselves what progressive means and the refusal to recognize the dichotomous belief structures inherent in the progressive and conservative systems is rather postmodern. That is to say that relativism, to an extent, seems to be embraced by one side. Whether individual Progressives would rebuff the idea of a generalized definition of the movement is of little to no importance. In order to have a cogent conversation on ideas and theology one must provide definitions or refuse to use the word at all. To that end Tim and I have provided working definitions. As we discuss these working definitions it is important to note that these are not the only categories of Christian thought. To assume so would be providing a false dichotomy. However, they are opposing philosophies of Christian living. One could be neither a progressive or conservative Christian in some sense, indeed, some might be conservative or progressive moralists that believe in a Theology or Christological heresy (i.e. – Mormonism) or, like Brett Weinstein, an atheistic moralist that sees the moral law of Christ as a useful heuristic for human thriving. In this sense, we are not necessarily talking about salvation issues in the sense of metaphysical theology, but objective ethical issues based on the life and teaching of Jesus Christ. With this backdrop in mind consider these definitions:

Conservative Christianity – Christian living and discipleship bent on obeying the historically orthodox understanding of the Moral Law of Christ, that is, everything Jesus said, taught and exemplified as well as his handpicked apostles.

Moral Law of Christ – The objective morality and spiritual discipleship taught by Christ and his hand picked apostles and understood by the Church as such for thousands of years.

Progressive Christianity – Christian living and discipleship bent on progressing beyond the historically orthodox understanding of the Moral Law of Christ. Seeking to move beyond historical biblical definitions of sin, the atonement, and holy living.

In an episode of FTMonthly I glossed this pursuit of discipleship as the “Gospel of Self-Actualization.” Any Christianity that seeks to progress in this manner is at odds with historic Christianity, and, in many cases, it is the self-described progressives that admit this whole heartedly. Rethinking historical definitions of sin, particularly sexual sin, is part and parcel of the movement. If one gets the metaphysical theology right but misses the boat on God’s design for creation in regards to sexual sin and identity, then this form of Christianity is decidedly different than any that came before it. Conservative Christianity seeks to

conserve

that which has been historically understood as Christian Living, or, the Moral Law of Christ. That is not to say that this pursuit of the Law of Christ is earning or even maintaining salvation, however, it is pursuing true and life changing sanctification. How can one be truly sanctified if he has a faulty understanding of sin in his own life? And how can progressive interpretations of sin and morality coexist with conservative interpretations of sin and morality? A false dichotomy this is not. In many ways, one could say that progressive Christians do love Jesus (as Randall Rouser has said) but that their love of Jesus is a Jesus of their own making whereas conservative Christianity seeks to love the Jesus revealed in scripture and understood throughout history. This is also not to say that I, personally, do not love my progressive brothers and sisters or that I believe all Christians with progressive beliefs are non-Christians. Only that progressive Christianity, at its core, is something entirely different than historical orthodox Christianity. All individual Christians have a propensity to live inconsistently from their own theological system. It is not the same to say that I struggle with sinful living as it is to say the living I am doing is not sinful at all. I am living my truth, my reality, and love is the lens by which I view all things. And by love, I mean affirmation of lifestyles other than fundamentalist or conservative lifestyles. The difference, ultimately, is between taking the Bible seriously and arriving at different theological positions and seeking to reimagine the entire moral framework of scripture to fit inside one’s own cultural context. When conservative theologians speak of twisting scripture, this is what we mean. Sure, there are liberal theologians who treat scripture seriously and arrive at (at least what I believe to be) incorrect theological positions, but progressive Christianity takes the opposite approach. I have spilled much ink on topics covering these progressive ideas in the church (See: Homosexuality parts 1, 2, 3, 4; Identity, Anti-Christs) and to claim they are not diametrically opposed to the historic understand of the Moral Law of Christ is either disingenuous or miss-guided. Again, these are not the only two categories available to the Christian, but they are the most prominent in our culture (see: Progressive Christianity as the New Cultural Christianity). If the word Christian means Christ-Follower, then a true Christian is one who possesses essential Christian doctrinal beliefs and has a personal love relationship with Christ and strives to follow him and obey all that he commands (Matthew 28). All of this is not to say that Progressive Christians are deserving of ire or hatred, but that, as self-professing Christians they should be called to a higher calling, to live in a manner worthy of their calling (Ephesians 4:1). A gospel of self-actualization has no ability to offer that dynamic adventure in Christ. My personal issue is not with self-described progressive Christians that have been misled into believing the Moral Law of Christ is something that it is not but with those supposed Christian leaders that mislead them into living lives in contravention to the orthodox understanding of moral living. Some of the markers of a progressive church, as I have seen them are such:

• 
  
  • 
    
    • 
      
      • 
        

        • Prone to shy away from the exclusivity of Christ. They may encourage a belief in Jesus, but often deny sin-nature and bristle at the idea that he is the only way to salvation.

        • Tend to endorse historically and biblically defined sinful behaviors as holy by reinterpreting scripture under a novel hermeneutic, usually a hermeneutic based on a 21^st American definition of love.

        • Often deny biblical authority and/or inerrancy, especially when it comes to difficult passages regarding sin and morality.

        • Use unorthodox interpretations of scripture regarding sin, the need for salvation, and holy living.

This progress away from the historical understand of the Moral Law of Christ

might

still bring one into faith in Jesus, but the gospel shared from this platform is often no gospel at all. The claim that we all come to scripture with our own biases is correct, but the scripture is living and active and has the capability to cut through those biases if we let it. Putting on the lens of self-love and actualization intentionally obfuscates the truth and actively resists scripture’s goal of dividing the heart. It callouses us to sin, removes conviction, and softens the consequences of sinful living. As Trevin Wax says in his book The Thrill of Orthodoxy, “Drift is natural; discovery is supernatural.” We can be confident that if we approach scripture with an open heart to its teachings and a reliance on the holy spirit that God will reveal himself and his ethic to us and he has. As I am fond of saying, “new” theology is rarely good theology.  Even the reformation sought not to introduce

new

theology but to re-form the church into its historical theological roots. Yes, times change and sometimes our understanding of how we ought to live may change with it, but we must ensure that our change is supernatural rather than natural. Spiritual rather than fleshly. A reversion back to Christ rather than a progression beyond Him. Any system that encourages a believer to progress towards oneself rather than towards the law of Christ is not Christianity by definition. In this sense, I believe my initial quote stands.  Conservative Christianity and Progressive Christianity cannot both be true. One is the correct way of pursuing Christ and one is not. Which one is it? I’ll leave that up to you to discern with the help of the Holy Spirit.

NOTES

Wax, Trevin, and Kevin J. Vanhoozer. “Page 185.”

The Thrill of Orthodoxy: Rediscovering the Adventure of Christian Faith

, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, 2022.