A few weeks ago we began a new series entitled “Confessions of a Skeptical Pastor.” In the first post, I described my tendency of being inherently skeptical and I talked about why I tend to be particularly skeptical of new or novel claims like the ones often made from within what I referred to as “post-evangelical” theology. In my second post, I began the process of working through each of primary features of post-evangelicalism as I’ve come to understand them:
Rebuke of Certainty/Embrace of Doubt.
Distrust in Orthodoxy/Embrace of (an Historically Unorthodox) New Orthodoxy.
Rejection of Biblical Clarity & Inerrancy/Embrace of a Different Kind of Authority.
Distrust of Historical Biblical Ethics/Embrace of Modern Progressive Ethics.
Suspicion of Scriptural Means for Ministry/Embrace of the Pragmatic or Post-Modern.
In the last post I only had time to address the first half of the first claim (apparently I write blog posts the way I preach), so we now turn our attention to the second half: The Embrace of Doubt.
Some Common Ground
Let’s begin with what I assume will be some mutual agreement. The post-evangelical lecturer Peter Rollins once described why he thinks Rob Bell, another leading post-evangelical figure, has gained such a following. He said that Bell “put his finger on a doubt and a questioning that was in that [evangelical] community but wasn’t able to be expressed.” I think that in many cases this can be largely true. Let me explain.
I think it’s probably been the case that from within evangelicalism we have often failed to respond to the doubts of our congregants in the way that the Scripture would have us respond. That is to say, it’s probably true that many people who have doubts about claims of certainty in biblical interpretation, the inerrancy of the Scriptures, or a particular area of biblical ethics have found their questions met with a dismissive or defensive response. I think that part of the reason this happens is that many from within the church have lacked the training or broad knowledge in a particular topic to be able to navigate these questions without demonstrating a certain sense of insecurity behind their beliefs. And these insecurities have, I think, driven evangelicals to act harshly at times toward those who doubt.
One way this can play out is to arrogantly assume that something must be wrong with the person doubting simply because they’re experiencing doubt. It can often come across as suggesting that “their faith must be lesser than my faith and therefore less adequate,” or “their response to the gospel must not be as faithful as my response, which would never ask that question.” But what does the Bible say about how the church should approach those who doubt?
Have Mercy on Those Who Doubt
After repeatedly warning a church about false teachers who had crept in unnoticed, the author of Jude adds, “And have mercy on those who doubt” (Jude 22). This was certainly a timely reminder for that congregation. Whenever false teaching gains a platform, certain doubts and questions are inevitably bound to follow. But why does he instruct them to respond to those doubting Christians with mercy? Doesn’t James say that “the one who doubts is driven and tossed by the wind”? Yes. Doubt can be a ferocious storm in the life of a believer. This is precisely why it requires mercy. But what does it look like to have mercy on those who doubt?
The Glorification of Doubt
Answering that question is, I think, partly where we run out of common ground. I can completely understand why there has been such a reaction against the insecure responses of many toward those who doubt. What I can’t understand is the alternative response becoming the glorification of doubt itself. Now, going through seasons of doubt in which you seek out answers to your deepest questions and objections to Christianity of course has the effect of leaving you stronger on the other side of it. But the problem becomes when remaining in uncertainty becomes a pillar of wisdom. We often hear about the “new discovery” that “dwelling in the uncertain territory of doubt is a surprisingly vibrant and affirming way of life,” and that the position of doubt is “enriching and beneficial,” and that it is to be “celebrated.”
Writing from his own perspective of the problem, evangelical theologian Owen Strachan writes,
“Doubt is the inerrant principle of the post-evangelicals. Doubt is the new ‘truth.’ The sum and substance ... is that doubt is good, doubt is what makes faith come alive, doubt frees you from the trap of red-faced literalistic evangelicalism. But doubt receives so much praise ... it’s little wings cannot bear it aloft any longer. Doubt is not truth; that makes no sense.”
In other words, the post-evangelical interpretation of having mercy on those who doubt has actually been, from my perspective, to glorify doubt. It’s not just having mercy on the doubter but affirming the doubt itself and leaving the doubter to believe that either there are no good answers to their doubts of God’s revelation or that seeking answers to remedy those doubts is somehow unsophisticated and intellectually dishonest. Neither one of those things are actually true, and neither one of them reflect the way that Jesus approached doubt, to say nothing of how the rest of the Scriptures collectively inform our faith. There are several reasons to avoid this way of thinking.
Philosophically Wrongheaded
First of all, as I normally do when it comes to the theological claims of post-evangelicalism, I feel the need to point out that this view of doubt is self-defeating. This is, I assume, what Strachan means when he says that “doubt is not truth; that makes no sense.” Again, the self-defeating nature of post-evangelical claims is a big part of the reason behind my skepticism. If doubt is to be glorified above certainty, what that necessarily means is that any doubtful claim we make has to be doubted as well. In other words, any claim that doubt is to be embraced more than certainty can only even be made if the person doesn’t doubt that this is true and is fairly certain about it. Without a high level of certainty behind the claim, about which you apparently don’t really doubt, you can’t even make the claim! I’ve never understood how this works.
Practically Wrongheaded
This is just not the way we talk about doubt in nearly any other practical area of everyday life. First of all, just on strict pragmatic grounds, I don’t see anyone applying this in their daily work or school. Engineers don’t build bridges this way. Governing officials don’t make decisions this way. Students don’t take tests this way. We don’t apply it anywhere else. Additionally, I don’t see anybody who has argued this statement from within post-evangelicalism recently embrace doubts related to, say, the growth rate models for COVID 19. Or the scientific consensus behind global warming. Or even the political arguments against Donald Trump. There doesn’t seem to be much of an embrace of doubt that he’s not a great president from within progressive Christianity. I don’t say this to make any kind of positive or negative statement about President Trump, but rather to demonstrate that those who glorify doubt the most from within Christianity seem to value it the least in their own political opinions.
I recently asked a friend of mine who pastors in the Czech Republic, the most atheistic country in the world, what his perspective was on all of this. He has observed this largely American post-evangelical movement from overseas, and simply said in response, “Americans. They need to know that the burger has exactly 867 calories. But they glorify in doubt. Yeah, right.”
Biblically/Theologically Wrongheaded
While believers are called to have mercy on those who doubt, there is never an attitude in Scripture that doubt itself is a positive good that is to be sought after and embraced. And this isn’t how Jesus viewed or responded to doubt.
Two Kinds of Mercy
In other words, we are to have mercy on those who doubt because Jesus had mercy on those who doubted. As his followers we are to be shaped by the gospel in such a way that it drives us to look more and more like him. The gospel of Jesus gives us a new approach to doubt. It makes us merciful.
But Jesus was merciful toward those who doubt in a couple of different ways. One instance in particular shows us how the gospel transforms the way we respond to doubt. On the evening of Easter Sunday, the disciples had locked their doors for fear of the Jews, knowing that as followers of Jesus, they might be arrested as well. There was palpable fear in that room. And yet Jesus walks through the locked door with a physical resurrection body and offers them peace. Unfortunately, Thomas was out getting groceries or something, because he missed the whole thing.
Now, I’m usually pretty disappointed if I leave the room to get something to drink while watching a game and someone scores a touchdown or hits a home run while I’m gone. So I obviously can’t imagine what it must have been like for Thomas to miss such an occasion. There’s no real reason to attach something negative to him being gone from the room at this moment. He could have been gone for any number of good reasons. The point of the text seems to be simply that he missed the most powerful and important moment in human history up to this point. But when he hears about this clear revelation from Jesus, Thomas doubts. He famously says, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.”
Now, as a quick aside, some from within post-evangelicalism try to head us off at the pass here by arguing that this narrative isn’t really about Thomas’s doubt and Jesus’ response to his doubt, but rather Thomas’s lack of gratitude and the receiving of a new gratitude. Admittedly, I don’t really understand the argument. While I’m certain that Thomas was grateful for what was about to happen, to say that this doesn’t inform the reader about Jesus’ approach to doubt is to remove it from not only contemporary scholarship but also Christian scholarship down through the ages. And this passage really does create a problem for the post-evangelical perspective on doubt, as we’re about to see. Anyway, back to the story.
Eight days later, Jesus does the same thing. He walks through the locked doors with a physical resurrection body and now offers Thomas this revelation even in the midst of his doubt. Here we see the first kind of mercy that Jesus extends. He doesn’t cast Thomas out or decide not to reveal himself to Thomas. He comes and offers him the same grace he’s offered the others, because they were in just as much need of his grace and mercy as Thomas. And here we see that the kind of mercy we need to extend to those who doubt is one that recognizes that none of us are believers in Jesus because we figured out what someone else didn’t or had a higher degree of faith than anyone else. It was sheer grace. We aren’t saved because of the strength of our faith. We’re saved because of the object of our faith. So we must never arrogantly assume that if others doubt, they must not be as strong and there must be something wrong with them but not with us. All of us needed the mercy of Jesus, and so we must give mercy to those who doubt.
But this isn’t the only kind of mercy Jesus gives. Another way that Jesus is merciful to the doubter is by not leaving him in his doubts or glorifying his doubts. Jesus does not say, “Thomas, you know, I’d have you come over to me and feel my pierced hands and side, but if I did that, you wouldn’t be able to discover how vibrant and affirming it is to dwell in the uncertain territory of doubt.” What he actually says is, “do not disbelieve, but believe.” He calls him out of doubt and into faith in the certainty of the resurrection. On another occasion, when someone approaches Jesus and says, “I believe, help my unbelief,” Jesus does not discourage this inclination from that person to be helped in the midst of doubt. Jesus offers him clear revelation of himself. Jesus calls doubters out of their doubt. He doesn’t glorify it at all. Why does Jesus do this? Because it’s merciful. And conversely, I would argue, it is incredibly unmerciful to leave people in their doubts. It’s incredibly unmerciful to simply offer a listening ear with no answers or no call to believe the gospel. Jesus does not do this.
For what it’s worth, the banner picture of this post is intended to be a word picture of how unmerciful this actually is in the life of the church. Telling people that their doubt is to be celebrated is like handing a sparkler to someone who’s drowning instead of giving them a life preserver. It not only fails to help them, but it unmercifully tells them to celebrate what James says is “like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind.” This isn’t a time for sparklers. It’s a time for active help.
Doubt Your Doubts
Rather than glorifying our doubts, let me offer a different, older, more historically-grounded strategy. Doubt your doubts. Be skeptical of your skepticisms. Man, especially to the degree that the claims that are causing you to doubt the gospel happen to also be new or novel claims, you have good reason to doubt them. Why would someone leave historical orthodox Christianity after not having the opportunity to inspect the certainties behind their beliefs only to then pivot to a brand new version of Christianity that won’t even acknowledge that it has (obvious) certainties and that calls it a “gotcha game” when you ask any tough questions about those certainties? Bring your doubts out and examine them. Let others ask hard questions about them. It’s not just evangelicals who seem to be plagued by insecurities behind their doubts.
Or, put more eloquently by Tim Keller,
“The only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly is to discern the alternate belief under each of your doubts and then ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it. How do you know your belief is true? It would be inconsistent to require more justification for a Christian belief than you do for your own, but that is frequently what happens. In fairness, you must doubt your doubts… If you come to recognize the beliefs on which your doubts about Christianity are based, and if you seek as much proof for those beliefs as you seek from Christians for theirs––you will discover that your doubts are not as solid as they first appeared.”
